The French Foreign Ministry’s announcement of a meeting between Jean-Noël Barrot and Seyyed Abbas Araghchi—coming right after the Iranian foreign minister’s participation in the session of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons—marks a sensitive juncture in diplomatic calculations. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, stressing that Iran uses every opportunity to articulate its positions explicitly—including on the crimes of the Zionist regime in Palestine and Lebanon, nuclear issues, and other international dossiers—explained that the trip is not simply a response to France’s invitation, but a platform for Iran to assert its demands and set out its principled frameworks.

The significance of the meeting lies in its timing: a moment when the West, and especially France, is aware of the accumulated mistrust and mental fatigue among Iranians and is compelled to reconsider its behavior and narrative-building. If Paris genuinely wants meaningful dialogue, it must prove that it has moved beyond the dysfunctional patterns of the past.

Ending the Fabricated Narrative of the “Need to Contain Iran”

An examination of Western conduct shows that European and American policymakers have long constructed a fabricated narrative—“containing Iran”—through which they have simultaneously supported the crimes of the Zionist regime and diverted public attention away from the core crisis in Gaza.

Trump’s insistence on military action against Iran, the West’s push to impose snapback, pressure to eliminate Iran’s enrichment and missile capabilities, Western media’s narrative about Saudi mediation, and claims about Iran’s role in regional tensions all fall squarely within the framework of entrenching this conceptual falsehood.

The West must understand that this narrative no longer convinces anyone. The global demand today is not “containing Iran” but holding the Zionist regime and the direct enablers of its crimes to account. If France is genuinely seeking confidence-building, the first step is to abandon this structural falsehood and put an end to the organized campaign of Iranophobia.

Negotiations for the Sake of Negotiations: A Strategy That No Longer Works

The historical record of Western engagement shows that negotiations were never meant to solve problems, but rather to buy time and condition Iran’s economy.

While sanctions have in practice led to soaring inflation and economic pressure on the Iranian people, the West has simultaneously exploited social disruptions, empowered terrorists and separatists, and helped create confusion in Iran’s foreign relations—all to maintain multi-layered pressure.

But circumstances have changed. Iran is no longer prepared to play the “pressure-for-negotiations” game and has stated clearly that any talks must be based on mutual respect and free from extortion. The West must recognize that the old path is closed and that its double-standard policies can no longer be imposed on Iran.

Defining De-escalation Correctly—and the West’s Responsibility to Act

A key element of the analysis is the West’s flawed conceptualization of “de-escalation.” By reversing the roles of plaintiff and defendant, the West has sought to portray Iran as responsible for regional problems and, by instilling a sense of guilt, smooth the path to extracting concessions.

But the real meaning of de-escalation is clear:

Real de-escalation begins when the West:

condemns the aggressions committed by the United States and the Zionist regime against Iran,

lifts all sanctions and accepts verification of their removal,

respects Iran’s rights to enrichment and defensive capabilities,

compensates for the damages inflicted, and

reins in the Zionist regime.

By contrast, attempts to impose the old model of “negotiation in exchange for unilateral concessions” are doomed to fail.

Araghchi’s trip to Paris is not the start of a new diplomatic track but a measure of Western honesty in altering its behavioral paradigm. Paris cannot craft political prestige for itself or buy time for the West. What works today is acceptance of the new realities of power and security in the region.