Iranians are a subtle people. They are used to things not being what they seem, and to words not meaning what they appear to say. Still, it must seem odd that just when some Western leaders have been rattling sabres louder than ever (see Lexington), Western diplomats suddenly proposed, on March 6th, to resume suspended talks with the Islamic Republic over its vexed nuclear programme. It must seem equally strange that Iran's leaders, who in February bluntly barred the UN's nuclear inspectors from visiting a particularly suspect site, now suddenly say they are welcome to a tour.

The obvious conclusion is that tough talk on both sides has masked quieter efforts to reach a compromise. A year ago Iran broke off negotiations with a contact group that includes the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany, angered by what it called their narrow focus on nuclear proliferation. In the interim Iran has spewed bellicose rhetoric while accelerating uranium enrichment. Its biggest snub was the denial of access to a military base at Parchin, south-east of the capital, Tehran, where the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, says it may have tested detonators suitable for nuclear bombs. Recent satellite images shown to the agency by Western intelligence services are said to reveal signs of a belated clean-up at the site, raising further concerns.

Yet in other respects Iran has continued, grudgingly, to co-operate with the inspection regime. In February Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, reiterated that the Islamic Republic “has never and will never” pursue nuclear weapons because it considers them sinful. Iran's nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, also suddenly deigned to answer a letter, sent to him in October by Catherine Ashton, the EU's foreign-policy chief, requesting renewed talks with the six-nation contact group.

Less publicly, Iran has shown that it is beginning to be rattled by increasingly punitive international sanctions. It has, for instance, sharply increased imports of grain, in what looks like an effort to pre-empt future food shortages. Its officials have also dropped their tone of bluster about the economic impact of sanctions, with even President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad quietly admitting that they hurt.

He is right. Controls on international financial transactions, which already badly squeeze Iranian traders and have fuelled galloping inflation, have tightened again in recent weeks. Electronic transfers to or from Iran using the ubiquitous global SWIFT interbank network will soon be suspended, in effect blocking the movement of any money except cash. Iran says it will accept payment for goods in gold, non-Western currencies or via barter, but these are not long-term options. Big Asian customers for Iranian oil, including Japan, Singapore, India and South Korea have begun trimming imports from Iran, and the EU is set to cut off Iranian imports entirely by July. Insurers also now balk at covering shipments of Iranian oil, adding yet more cost and complexity to a trade that Iran relies on for the bulk of its revenue.

Perhaps what Iran needs is a face-saving way to climb down. This may explain a recent efflorescence of bravado in official statements. The foreign ministry, for instance, advised Iran's enemies to “bow before the grandeur and dignity of the Iranian people”. Mostafa Mohammad Najjar, the interior minister, declared that Iran had recently dealt those enemies a “slap in the face” and a “punch in the mouth”.

These statements referred not to some martial triumph, but to the supposedly impressive turnout of Iranians for parliamentary elections on March 2nd. The polls, to elect 290 members of the majlis, or parliament, to a new four-year term, were the first nationwide vote since the disputed presidential elections of June 2009 which led to a vicious political clampdown.

This is why Iran's leaders were so keen to paint the holding of new elections as a national victory. Given that candidates are sifted in advance for loyalty to the regime by a council of senior clerics, and that most of the opposition had declared a boycott, the outcome was essentially foreordained. Conservatives of varied factions won a big majority of seats.

To Iran's real decision-makers, which is to say to the court surrounding the Supreme Leader and to his security chiefs, the only number that mattered was the turnout, which they declared to be 64% . Few but the regime's blindest supporters believe such figures: a text-message joke in Tehran quipped that 80% of Iranians had sat on their couches, amazed to see 70% of Iranians voting.