Iran International
The prospect of an interim agreement between Tehran and Washington has exposed deep divisions in Iran, with some officials presenting it as diplomatic progress while hardliners warn it could cross the Islamic Republic’s red lines.
US President Donald Trump said on Friday he was heading to the White House's Situation Room to make a final decision on an emerging deal with Iran, after saying parts of the arrangement had been agreed.
The remarks came one day after the US military struck an Iranian drone facility near the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards reportedly responded by targeting an American base in the region, believed to be located in Kuwait.
In Tehran, lawmakers aligned with Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf — who is also leading Iran’s negotiating team — reacted positively to reports of progress, while hardline factions sharply criticized the negotiations.
Fada-Hossein Maleki, a member of parliament’s National Security Commission, spoke of “significant quantitative and qualitative progress” in the talks and claimed that “most proposals of the Islamic Republic have been accepted.”
According to Maleki, Iran’s main concern is “Trump’s unpredictability.” He also said Ghalibaf’s recent trip to Qatar focused on frozen Iranian assets and had produced positive results for Tehran.
By contrast, National Security Committee spokesman Ebrahim Rezaei criticized concessions in the negotiations during a televised interview. “Why should we even commit to the United States not to build a nuclear weapon?” he said.
Another lawmaker, Ruhollah Izadkhah, accused Ghalibaf of sidelining parliament. “Apparently, they intend to keep parliament shut so they can reopen the strait,” he said, adding: “The people will not allow it.”
Abolfazl Aboutorabi, another lawmaker, claimed that Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei’s “red lines” regarding the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear issue and compensation demands had been violated in the talks.
He accused Washington of trying to deceive Iran by offering “a lollipop” — referring to a proposed $300 billion reconstruction fund without binding guarantees — in exchange for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. He also predicted that the United States would attack Iran again after the World Cup and US congressional elections.
Parisa Nasr, a market specialist, accused the negotiators of “surrenderism”. Writing online, she said: “First they turn Iran’s strategic assets into bargaining chips; then they effectively transform these into burned cards and worthless leverage; and finally, by arguing that ‘we have no winning cards left,’ they drag the country from one pit into another colonial surrender agreement.”
Doubts about a lasting agreement
Some Iranian social media users argue that even a signed agreement would not prevent future war. Others fear that if a temporary arrangement evolves into a durable settlement, hopes for political change inside Iran will fade significantly. Many in this camp believe Trump has abandoned the Iranian people and left them alone.
Saeed Mohammadi-Jazi, a trader and financial analyst, wrote on X that within a few months either a comprehensive agreement would be reached — ensuring the survival of the current system — or the region would face a “big and final” war that would determine the fate of the Islamic Republic.
Another user wrote: “A real nuclear agreement seems unlikely. Both sides will use this temporary calm to prepare for the next round of conflict — a conflict that may resume within months.”
Some ordinary users have also criticized Washington for negotiating with the Islamic Republic.
One user wrote on X: “A temporary Iran-US agreement — if it is signed — will not end Iran’s crisis. A regime emerging from this war will be weaker externally but stronger internally, and financially integrated into the global economy without the slightest accountability for what it has done.”
“The people who came into the streets in January and were killed were used as bargaining chips in this equation and then discarded once the deal was completed,” the user added.
A nation suspended between war and peace
Many Iranians are following developments minute by minute with growing anxiety. Ordinary citizens say the prolonged atmosphere of uncertainty has become more exhausting than anything else.
Sima, a Tehran resident, said the feeling of living in a “neither war nor peace” situation has affected every aspect of her life and the lives of those around her.
“So many times we thought a deal was close, and then within hours everything suddenly changed, and the threat of war escalated again — like last night’s clashes in the Persian Gulf and Bandar Abbas,” she said. “I truly felt again as if I could hear planes and missiles above my head. Fortunately, so far, neither side has said these clashes mean the ceasefire has collapsed.”
On Iranian news websites, reports on gold and currency prices continue to dominate headlines. Amid soaring inflation and political instability that have weakened the national currency, many Iranians have turned to buying foreign currency and gold. Yet a temporary agreement could sharply reduce the value of those investments if markets suddenly fall.
Morteza, a Tehran-based engineer, said he converted all of his savings intended for buying a home into US dollars several months ago. Although he believes an agreement — especially one leading to sanctions relief — could improve the economy, he says the uncertainty keeps him awake at night.
“When I was a child, after the end of the Iran-Iraq war, many people — including my father — suffered huge losses when Iran accepted the ceasefire resolution,” he said.
Tehran’s unveiling of a towering statue depicting the Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling before pre-Islamic Persian King Shapur I has renewed criticism of the Islamic Republic’s appeal to nationalist sentiment following the June war with Israel.
For over forty years, the theocracy purged ancient Persian history from schoolbooks, replacing it with post-Islamic narratives. But after the 12-day conflict with Israel, officials have turned to the distant pre-Islamic past to rally a divided society.
From murals of ancient kings and soldiers to patriotic songs added to Shi’ite mourning ceremonies performed before Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran now embraces imagery once deemed heretical by its own revolutionary ethos.
'Kneel before Iran' campaign
Tehran’s Revolution (Enghelab) Square was the scene of an unusual spectacle on Friday as officials unveiled a massive bronze statue depicting Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling in submission before Sassanid King Shapur I, commemorating Iran’s victory at the Battle of Edessa (260 AD).
The event was held under the slogan “Kneel before Iran,” part of what authorities describe as a campaign to project “national unity and historical pride” following the June war with Israel.
Tehran Mayor Alireza Zakani, a staunch ultraconservative, said on X: “Enmity with Great Iran can only end in kneeling before this historic nation.”
Municipal official Davood Goodarzi said the installation would be accompanied by visual displays depicting “other victories of Iranians over foreign aggressors,” including the defeat of British forces by local commander Rais-Ali Delvari, Mirza Kuchak Khan’s resistance against Russian troops, and Surena’s triumph over Rome at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BCE.
The goal, Goodarzi said, is “strengthening concepts such as national dignity, social unity, and Iranian identity.”
The statue, he said, would remain temporarily at Revolution Square before being moved to a city gateway “where it will stand as the first emblem of Iran before diplomats and foreign visitors.”
Unveiled women were allowed to attend the unveiling ceremony—an uncommon scene at events organized by Tehran’s ultra-hardline municipality.
The turn to the pre-Islamic past
The sharp reversal also recalls remarks once made by Khamenei. In a 2011 speech, he asserted that “all the great military victories of this nation came after Islam,” dismissing pre-Islamic accounts as “things that are not documented.”
In 1987, he had said that prophets triumphed over kings such as Cyrus and that “nothing remains of these monarchs in history but names remembered with derision.”
Nevertheless, pro-government social media accounts have now gone so far as to circulate posters equating Khamenei himself with Shapur, showing him standing with a staff as Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump kneel before him. The caption reads: “You will kneel before Iran.”
'Hypocrisy'
Pro-government figures have hailed the move as a patriotic success. Conservative political reporter Hossein Saremi posted: “Today’s grand Iranian gathering showed that people and the state share one essence: Iran itself. Nothing can take our homeland away.”
Others, however, called the spectacle “hypocrisy.” Journalist Gholamhossein Pashaei wrote on X: “Every year you close Pasargadae to stop people from celebrating Cyrus Day, yet you unveil Shapur’s statue in Enghelab Square with drums and fireworks during Fatimiyya (mourning period)!”
Dissident commentator Hamid Asafi called the ceremony “a perfect snapshot of the Islamic Republic’s contradictions.”
On Telegram he wrote: “A week ago they closed Cyrus’s tomb out of fear of the crowds, and now they glorify Shapur in the same breath. The Islamic Republic fears living history but poses for selfies with its corpse.”
He added: “They know people no longer respond to rosaries and sermons. That’s why they’ve brought history back to the stage—in a controlled costume. If they can’t erase the past, they’ll try to own it.”
The irony deepened as UNESCO formally recognized Cyrus’s Charter as one of the earliest human-rights documents.
President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on X: “Iran, the cradle of dialogue, justice, and coexistence, can still inspire peace today.”
Users swiftly replied, questioning how such pride could coexist with a government that blocks access to Cyrus’s tomb each year to those wishing to visit it on his birthday.