Both men appeared to be making the same argument to critics within their own political camps: that diplomacy is most effective when backed by credible military force, not pursued instead of it.
The parallel messaging prompted analysts to suggest that, despite rising tensions, both sides may still view diplomacy as preferable to war.
International relations analyst Amir-Ali Abolfath wrote on X that Ghalibaf's statement, Vance's remarks and Iran's release of an Iranian-American prisoner together offered "a glimmer of hope" that both sides could return to managing tensions within the framework of an agreement "whose fate hangs by a thread."
Reform-leaning news website Rouydad24 likewise described the prisoner's release as evidence of "the opening of an important diplomatic channel amid an exchange of fire."
US President Donald Trump also welcomed the move, writing on Truth Social that "the United States appreciates this gesture of goodwill by Iran."
‘Talking is not compromise’
Ghalibaf issued a public statement on Wednesday defending what he described as the course pursued under Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei's guidance, arguing that negotiations with the United States remain compatible with military preparedness and resistance.
Rather than presenting diplomacy and military readiness as opposing choices, he argued they were complementary tools for safeguarding Iran's national interests.
"War and negotiation are two methods of protecting the national interest," he said, insisting that negotiations are "part of safeguarding national interests, not synonymous with compromise."
He warned that treating either military confrontation or diplomacy as the sole solution would amount to "a strategic mistake," adding that officials have a duty to prepare "for war, diplomacy, or both," depending on the course set by the Supreme Leader.
"We must stand firm on the achievements secured through the MoU until the nation's rights are fully realized," he wrote.
Hours later, Vance struck a remarkably similar tone in an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan, rejecting the idea of overthrowing Iran's government through US military force.
He argued that diplomacy, backed by military pressure, remained the preferred way to manage the crisis, and criticized "warmongers" pushing for conflict.
A well-funded covert campaign, Vance claimed, was seeking to derail negotiations and any agreement with Tehran.
Hardliners push back
The renewed defense of diplomacy triggered an immediate backlash from Iran's hardline camp, where many have argued since the recent military confrontation that the Tehran-Washington understanding should be formally declared dead.
Kamran Ghazanfari, a member of parliament, accused President Masoud Pezeshkian and Ghalibaf of lacking the courage to acknowledge that the agreement had collapsed.
"Whether they call it war or not, the third war has effectively begun," he said, arguing that the negotiating team should publicly admit that talks had reached a dead end.
Hardline journalist Davood Modarresian likewise criticized Ghalibaf's statement, saying it contained "no sign of change or apology" and faulting him for continuing to advocate negotiations despite what he described as Washington's abandonment of the agreement.
Hardline political activist Masoud Barati challenged Ghalibaf's description of negotiations as a form of struggle.
"Calling negotiations a form of struggle gives primacy to negotiations," Barati wrote. "If negotiations have failed to secure Iran's achievements, why insist on continuing this approach?"
Conservative rivalry deepens
The latest dispute reflects a long-running rivalry between Ghalibaf and former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, both prominent figures within Iran's conservative establishment.
In recent months, lawmakers aligned with Jalili and members of the ultraconservative Paydari Front have intensified criticism of Ghalibaf, arguing that negotiations with Washington should be abandoned altogether.
Their influence, however, appears to have weakened after losing two key leadership positions on parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee.
Adding to signs of growing pressure on the hardline faction, lawmaker Majid Nasrpour told Khabar Online in comments published Thursday that "some hardline members of parliament have been summoned by the relevant authorities and seriously warned over their remarks."
