The United States and Iran are moving steadily towards a deal to end the conflict that began more than three months ago, but it is clear that some Iranian factions are not satisfied with the proposals.
Hard-liners have harshly criticized state media regarding the details of the memorandum that were reported. Some rallies witnessed chants against negotiators.
Despite the disagreements, the administration is likely to have the final say.
US President Donald Trump indicated he would sign the memorandum on Sunday, his 80th birthday. However, there is still no confirmation from Tehran that a final document has been agreed.
Much of the rising dissent in Iran comes from a fringe group known as “Jebhe-e-Paidari” (Endurance Front), which sees itself as the custodian of the values of the 1979 revolution that overthrew the pro-Western shah before imposing an authoritarian regime rooted in Shi’ite Islamist ideology.
For the past few months, Iranian officials have sought to carefully balance negotiations with Mr. Trump while placating the country’s diverse political spectrum, including the Paidists. The inclusion of members of the group in talks with U.S. negotiators in Pakistan in April suggested that Tehran was trying to demonstrate internal solidarity.
But the extremist group has mobilized its members and media outlets to ramp up criticism of the deal and increase pressure on Iranian negotiators who are trying to extract concessions from Washington intended to weaken and possibly end the Islamic Republic.
Mahmoud Nabavian, one of the group’s prominent hardliners, said if Iran signs the deal, “we will effectively become a colony of the United States,” adding that the deal would mean opening up the Strait of Hormuz, which is important “for Israel as well.”
“If you want to enrich uranium, even in small amounts, for purposes such as producing medicine or electricity, you first need to get permission from the United States,” added Nabavian, who was also a member of the negotiating team.
It is also unclear when Iran will benefit from the release of frozen assets abroad or the lifting of sanctions, it added.
“The more we send signals of weakness, the closer we get to war,” Nabavian said in a television interview, looking at a document purported to be an agreement.
The agreement has not been officially announced.
Hardliners have mobilized protests against any deal, organizing a large demonstration in front of the Foreign Ministry on Sunday night and targeting Iran’s top diplomat Abbas Araghchi in open defiance of calls for unity.
In response to growing dissent in the media and on the streets, social media outlets representing Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei reposted a message he issued in March, urging the media to “seriously refrain from focusing on weaknesses.”
The Jawan newspaper, which is said to be close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), reported that some speakers at public meetings ignored Khamenei’s instructions and were “acting to sow division and division among the people.”
Participants at a rally in Tehran on Saturday demanded the resignation of Araghchi and Iran’s chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, according to videos on social media.
They recalled that early in the conflict in February, Khamenei’s father, the former supreme leader, was assassinated shouting “Ghalibaf, Araghchi – what about the blood of my leader?”
Ali Rabiei, an official close to President Massoud Pezeshkian, pushed back Sunday, warning against creating “artificial narratives.”
And Iranian media warns against letting disagreements turn into division.
“Unfortunately, the ugly insults leveled at some officials last night, carried out by a specific and very limited group and exaggerated by anti-Iranian and hostile media, are completely unacceptable even on that limited scale,” the semi-official Tasnim news agency said on Sunday.
“If there is criticism or protest, there are certainly reasonable and civil ways to express it,” he added.
Opposition to the deal with the United States has always existed within the Islamic Republic. The real question is whether they are strong enough to derail the impending signature and block future negotiations aimed at reaching a comprehensive agreement.
Iran’s Nezam (regime), which includes the supreme leader, president, foreign minister, speaker of parliament, and military, is focused on projecting unity in efforts to negotiate a diplomatic solution with President Trump.
But the Islamic Republic’s core forces, including state broadcasters, veteran conservative politicians and protesters who claim victory in the war against the United States and Israel, have stepped up efforts to oppose any deal, seeing it as an abandonment of war gains.
In contrast to the commonly believed narratives debated in Iran, the country has a unique and vibrant political debate. Diverse factions, representing different opinions and supported by their own media, are allowed to operate within the state apparatus as long as they do not challenge fundamental elements of the Islamic Republic, primarily the supreme leader.
Just as there are voices opposing the deal with Tehran in the United States and Israel, Iran has its own opposition. Although they have stopped short of directly challenging the supreme leader, these voices are now bold enough to even claim that Mojtaba Khamenei was tricked into blessing the deal.
But the regime remains in control. Opposition is strong and sometimes divisive, but decision-making power remains in the hands of a strong governing structure, and this war has failed to destroy it.
