Summary
Iran is experiencing a period of acute strain marked by economic instability, political infighting, and social tension.
While officials signal conditional openness to diplomacy on the nuclear issue, they reject concessions under pressure and emphasize sovereignty and deterrence.
Regionally, the country is deepening ties with Eastern partners such as Russia while managing complex relationships involving Syria, Hezbollah, the Gulf states, and global powers.
Domestically, governance is hampered by clashes between the executive and hardline legislators, eroding public trust, and unresolved cultural flashpoints—particularly around the hijab, women’s rights, and digital freedoms.
Beneath all these dynamics lies a severe economic crisis that is undermining livelihoods and social cohesion, challenging the system’s ability to maintain legitimacy and stability.
Reading the Iranian press in recent days reveals a country in profound turmoil: intense economic pressure, persistent internal power struggles, and a diplomatic posture aimed at defending national dignity vis-à-vis the West while increasingly leaning on partnerships in the East.
At the surface, the discourse remains focused on the nuclear issue. Beneath it lies a regional layer—Russia, Syria, Lebanon and Hizbullah, the Gulf states, and the United States. At the deepest level are the most corrosive pressures of all: the currency crisis, the erosion of social capital, battles over the hijab, and the broader struggle over the status of women.
Nuclear Issue and Relations with the West / IAEA
The period following the “12-Day War” continues to shape Iran’s relations with both the West and the International Atomic Energy Agency. The message conveyed by the press is consistent: Iran is open to diplomacy but refuses to “stand trial” for attacks on its nuclear facilities.
Although limited engagement with IAEA inspectors has resumed, Iranian officials repeatedly stress that access is highly restricted and excludes the main sites—Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow—where sensitive materials and equipment remain. Mohammad Eslami, head of the Atomic Energy Organization, argues that because the Agency failed to condemn the attacks and lacks guidelines for such situations, it has no right to demand inspections. From Tehran’s perspective, any inspection of bombed facilities requires a new agreed framework. The earlier “Cairo Agreement” with the IAEA, which served this function, was annulled after European states triggered the snapback mechanism.
The line is unambiguous: Iran does not reject negotiations outright, but insists that “what could not be achieved through war cannot be completed at the negotiating table.” Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi reiterates that Iran’s nuclear issue has no military solution and that talks can resume only if the United States fundamentally changes its approach—toward dialogue based on mutual interests and mutual respect. Until then, Tehran maintains its stockpile of enriched uranium, framing it as a bargaining tool rather than a liability.
Foreign and Regional Policy
Araghchi’s visits to Minsk and Moscow are portrayed as part of an “accelerating Tehran–Moscow–Minsk axis” formed in response to Western sanctions. The signing of a 2026–2028 consultation program with Sergei Lavrov is described as a new roadmap, marking what is characterized as a qualitative upgrade in relations under a comprehensive strategic partnership.
At the same time, a note of caution appears in the commentary. Analysts warn that Iran cannot afford to become merely a tactical instrument in Russia’s confrontation with the West. They also point out that, despite recent growth, trade with Russia still lags far behind Iran’s economic ties with China, Turkey, and India.
On the Syria–Lebanon–Hizbullah axis, the discourse oscillates between pride and unease. Hizbullah is depicted as a symbol of legitimate resistance and the cornerstone of Lebanon’s defense against Israel. Abdullah Safi al-Din, Hizbullah’s representative in Tehran, is quoted as saying the organization is stronger than ever and will never disarm. At the same time, reports note complications surrounding the formalization of Iran’s ambassador in Beirut, interpreting procedural delays as evidence of Western pressure on Lebanon and attempts to dilute Iranian influence.
U.S. President Donald Trump is portrayed as seeking to reshape the global order while downgrading the Middle East’s strategic importance. Iranian commentators describe him as an “old child,” blending transactional instincts, neoconservative tendencies, and deep distrust of the establishment. His revised national security doctrine—placing Europe third, the Middle East fourth, and prioritizing China’s containment—is interpreted in Tehran as an admission that American supremacy is waning, further justifying Iran’s pivot eastward.
Tensions with the United Arab Emirates have also resurfaced over Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb. Tehran reacts sharply to what it calls baseless sovereignty claims, insisting the islands are an inseparable part of Iranian territory. Unusually sharp criticism is also directed at China after the Chinese foreign minister adopted Emirati language on the issue, a move interpreted as sacrificing Iranian sensitivities to protect Chinese economic interests in the Gulf.
Another episode involves Israeli attempts to link a shooting attack in Sydney to Iran and Hizbullah. Iranian media frame this as part of a strategy to perpetuate Israel’s “eternal victim” narrative and obstruct recognition of a Palestinian state. Once it emerges that a Muslim bystander subdued one of the attackers and that an ISIS flag was found in the attackers’ vehicle, Iran categorically distances itself from the incident and warns Australia against being drawn into a conflict unrelated to it.
Domestic Politics
Internally, political tensions are equally intense. A sustained power struggle is underway between President Pezeshkian’s government and hardline factions in the Majles. Having failed to secure the presidency, extremist lawmakers now resort to impeachment threats, repeated ministerial interrogations, and procedural obstruction to weaken the government. Commentators openly describe these efforts as deliberate attempts to paralyze governance, driven by a small but organized bloc seeking veto power over major decisions.
Criticism of the government also comes from reformist quarters. Pezeshkian frequently invokes the concept of vafaq (consensus), but critics argue that without practical implementation it has become little more than a moral appeal—sometimes serving as a pretext for postponing difficult decisions and conceding ground to hardliners. One reformist adviser warns that continual retreat only emboldens opponents, arguing that the absence of clear red lines invites escalating demands.
Majles Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf attempts to reframe the debate around governance rather than ideology. He identifies Iran’s core problem as hakmarani—governability—and calls for the development of professional governance expertise instead of what he labels politically motivated theatrics. His proposed model of “culture-based governance,” however, remains largely rhetorical.
Economy: Inflation, Budget, and Daily Survival
The economic crisis underlying all these developments is described in medical terms, with analysts likening inflation and currency instability to a systemic cancer. The unofficial exchange rate surpasses 129,000 tomans to the dollar, fueling widespread fears of hyperinflation and de facto dollarization.
Expert analysis focuses on structural drivers: unchecked liquidity growth, chronic budget deficits, and a politically constrained central bank. The persistence of multiple exchange rates is denounced as a guaranteed pathway to corruption, rent-seeking, and speculation. Economists call for a “fiscal revolution,” arguing that without correcting budgetary imbalances, economic stabilization will be nearly impossible.
In the short term, the government seeks to project responsibility. Pezeshkian’s proposed 1405 budget includes an average wage increase of 28 percent, alongside promises of targeted economic measures and channeling fuel-price reform revenues into food subsidy cards (kalabarg). Official rhetoric rejects a command economy and emphasizes commitment to structural reform, but public confidence in such assurances has largely eroded.
The social impact is stark. The rial’s collapse has wiped out middle-class purchasing power and much of retirees’ savings. Media reports highlight sharp price increases in dairy, rice, fuel, and housing. Government explanations—citing higher input costs and pledging tighter oversight—are widely perceived as symptomatic of a system struggling to control the consequences of its own policies.
Society, Hijab, Women, and Media
At the societal level, what the press terms a “crisis of social capital” continues to deepen. Senior officials, including Pezeshkian, openly acknowledge dissatisfaction with economic conditions. Former president Hassan Rouhani warns that internal erosion invites external exploitation.
The hijab remains a highly volatile issue. Hardliners are accused of weaponizing it against the government. Enforcement of the hijab law, delayed by the Supreme National Security Council, looms as a potential flashpoint, with officials fearing that full implementation amid economic hardship could further destabilize society.
A parallel struggle is unfolding over digital space. While the government promises free internet access, parliament advances “Sianat 3,” legislation that would transfer sweeping supervisory authority over the internet and social media to the state broadcaster. Critics note that IRIB itself suffers from a profound credibility deficit, raising concerns about concentrating such power in its hands.
The debate over dowry (mahr) legislation has also resurfaced. Even when the government voices reservations about capping dowries at 14 gold coins, it is seen as insufficiently assertive. Women’s advocates stress that mahr often constitutes one of the few legal safeguards available to women lacking economic security, warning that the proposed law weakens protections at a particularly vulnerable moment.
Culturally, the death of scholar Kamran Fani receives significant attention, symbolizing intellectual integrity and civic responsibility. His passing is juxtaposed with reflections on the decline of Lalehzar Street—once Tehran’s cultural heart—now increasingly overtaken by commercial speculation as cinemas and theaters give way to warehouses and retail outlets.
Conclusion
Taken together, Iranian press discourse depicts a country attempting to navigate a fragile balance between resistance and exhaustion. Externally, Iran seeks to project resilience, defiance of sanctions, and resistance to international pressure. Internally, it confronts deepening economic distress, political paralysis, and social disillusionment. The system appears increasingly challenged to provide credible answers to a society that is steadily losing trust, yet has not entirely abandoned hope of remaining engaged.
