Hardline lawmaker says negotiations have always benefited Iran’s enemies

President Donald Trump declared the ceasefire over after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired on three merchant vessels, but said negotiations would continue because Iran “wants to make a deal so badly.”

The contradiction suggests the memorandum may be doing something narrower than ending the conflict. It has failed to prevent renewed violence, but may still provide a structure through which Washington and Tehran can contain escalation, preserve communication and negotiate between military exchanges.

The latest crisis has already damaged one of the memorandum’s main objectives: restoring safe commercial passage through the Strait of Hormuz while the two sides pursued a broader agreement over Iran’s nuclear program and other disputes.

The question is no longer simply whether the ceasefire survived. It is whether the memorandum was ever a peace agreement, or a system for managing an unfinished war.

Experts who spoke to Iran International’s Eye for Iran podcast differed over whether the arrangement remains viable, but broadly agreed that both Washington and Tehran still have reasons to prevent the confrontation from returning to full-scale war.

Jonatan Sayeh, a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said Tehran may have calculated that it could test US limits, absorb a contained response and retain many of the economic benefits it secured under the agreement.

“That to them was a gamble that was kind of worth it,” Sayeh said.

From the IRGC’s perspective, the outcome may still fall short of its worst-case scenario. Iran was struck, but the broader maritime blockade has not been fully restored, Tehran can continue selling oil to China, and the confrontation did not immediately return to all-out war.

Sayeh also questioned claims that Iran’s civilian government had simply lost control of the Guards.

Tehran may instead be using a new version of its longstanding “good cop, bad cop” strategy, he said, with civilian officials seeking concessions while presenting the IRGC as an independent force they cannot fully restrain.

Historian and Atlantic contributing writer Arash Azizi said the attacks had not necessarily destroyed the broader framework.

“I certainly don’t think it was doomed to fail,” Azizi said. “And I don’t, in fact, think it has failed actually yet.”

Neither Washington nor Tehran appears eager to resume full-scale war, he said. That shared interest could preserve negotiations even after the immediate ceasefire collapsed.

Azizi said hardline pressure on President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi may also help explain the attacks. Factions opposed to the agreement could fear that 60 days of normal traffic through Hormuz would make it harder for Iran to reassert control of the waterway as a source of leverage.

Fatima Al-Asrar, a senior policy analyst at Ideology Machine, argued that the memorandum’s ambiguity may have benefited the IRGC from the outset.

She called it a “memorandum of undoing,” saying it postponed or weakened earlier US demands concerning Iran’s nuclear program, armed allies and regional conduct.

“The MoU gives you this kind of maybe false sense of progress, and I think it’s performative mostly,” Al-Asrar said. “It’s a truce, and that’s great, but it’s driven by short-term political wins.”

Rather than removing Iran’s capacity to threaten shipping, she said, the arrangement may have allowed Tehran to retain what amounts to a geopolitical switch.

Iran can reduce tensions when it seeks sanctions relief, oil revenue or diplomatic concessions, then disrupt the strait again when it wants greater leverage.

The consequences extend far beyond Washington and Tehran. Disruption in Hormuz raises shipping and energy costs and can affect fertilizer supplies and food prices across Asia and other import-dependent regions.

Itai Reuveni, director of communications at NGO Monitor, described the memorandum as a deliberately flexible answer to the immediate needs of all sides.

Iran wanted to stop US and Israeli strikes before they threatened the survival of the Islamic Republic. Washington wanted to avoid another prolonged Middle Eastern war. Israel had demonstrated its ability to strike Iran but also faced the costs and risks of a sustained campaign.

The agreement reduced the intensity of the war without settling the disputes that caused it.

“It seems to me that the line is always being pushed,” Reuveni said.

The United States, Israel and Iran may now be entering a prolonged cycle in which each side tests how far it can go without triggering another major war.

That may explain why military action and diplomacy are continuing at the same time.

The memorandum did not create a conventional peace process in which violence stopped before negotiations began. It created a framework in which strikes, threats, retaliation and mediation could unfold alongside one another.

The attacks in Hormuz have damaged that framework and increased the danger of miscalculation. Another round of fighting could be broader and more destructive.

But whether the memorandum is dead depends on what it was expected to achieve.

The ceasefire may be over. The managed confrontation it created may only be beginning.

Episode 111 of Eye for Iran is available on YouTube and all major podcast platforms.

“We have agreed to Iran talks, but the United States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that the ceasefire is over,” Trump said Friday, after renewed military exchanges raised questions over the future of a temporary memorandum signed last month.

Trump also told the New York Post that he had left instructions for Iran to be bombed at unprecedented levels if Tehran succeeded in killing him. “I’ve left instructions — if anything happens, to just literally bomb them at levels that they’ve never seen before,” he said.

The warning came as calls to target Trump and avenge Khamenei spread across official and religious platforms in Iran. Ahmad Reza Hajati, the Friday prayer leader in Ahvaz, urged anyone with missiles or drones to kill the US president and “purge the earth” of his existence.

IRGC commander-in-chief Ahmad Vahidi said punishing those who carried out, ordered or supported the killings of Khamenei and several Iranian military commanders would remain a “certain, legitimate and unforgettable demand.” Other senior clerics and hardline politicians also called revenge a national, legal or religious right.

Diplomatic contacts nevertheless continued. Axios reported that a new round of US-Iran talks was expected next week, possibly in Switzerland, while Al Arabiya said technical teams from the two countries were due to meet in Pakistan on Sunday, July 12.
The Trump administration is also pressing Iran to issue a public statement acknowledging that the Strait of Hormuz is open and pledging to stop firing on commercial ships, Axios reported Friday citing US officials.

Iran publicly disputed the accounts. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran had not requested negotiations with Washington, but had accepted a regional mediator’s request to visit Iran and discuss recent developments. He said the meeting took place Friday in Mashhad and that Iran conveyed its positions to the Qatari side.

As regional diplomacy continued, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was due to travel to Oman on Saturday at the head of a diplomatic delegation for talks on regional developments, particularly the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, state-run IRNA reported. The report gave no details about his planned meetings.

A source close to Iran’s negotiating team separately denied that preparations for new talks had been finalized, IRGC-affiliated Fars News reported.

Qatar and Pakistan continued mediation efforts, seeking to de-escalate tensions, preserve the diplomatic track and address disputes over the Strait of Hormuz.

The military warnings also extended to Israel. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on X Friday that the Israeli military was prepared “at all times for any scenario in attack and defense.” Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr warned that any attack on Iranian infrastructure would draw a reciprocal response and that Israel would not be spared.
Senior US officials said Washington had military options to ensure Iran’s nuclear sites remained inaccessible, Reuters reported Friday.

The day ended with both sides signaling readiness for talks while trading threats that left the prospect of renewed conflict firmly in view.

While the government continues to provide monthly cash subsidies and electronic food vouchers to a large share of the population, many families say these measures no longer come close to covering rapidly rising living costs.

An analysis by economic news website EcoIran comparing official food prices, a minimum nutritional basket and the minimum wage found that the salary of a married worker with one child is now enough to cover little more than the minimum monthly food needs of a three-person household.

The analysis estimated that an individual needed around 78 million rials in June to meet minimum nutritional requirements.

For households relying solely on the minimum wage, it found that almost all monthly income would be consumed by food purchases alone, leaving little for rent, utility bills, transportation, healthcare, education or clothing.

Unrelenting inflation

The squeeze comes as many Iranian families already spend between 50% and 70% of their income on housing costs.

Food prices have continued to climb sharply, with staples including red meat, poultry, dairy products, rice, eggs, cooking oil, fruit and vegetables increasingly out of reach for many households.

According to data cited from the Statistical Center of Iran, annual inflation currently stands at about 66%, while year-on-year inflation has jumped by roughly five percentage points over the past month to exceed 88%.

Food and beverage inflation has climbed above 130%, with some categories recording even sharper increases. Prices of red meat and poultry have risen by nearly 180% compared with a year earlier, according to Iranian market reports, causing demand to fall significantly.

Many Iranians say their personal experience of inflation is significantly worse than official figures suggest.

Economists note that inflation indexes measure a broad basket of goods and services, while lower- and middle-income families spend a much larger share of their income on essentials such as food, rent, transportation and medical care.

Dwindling middle class

Economist Kamran Nadri told Tejarat News that years of sustained inflation have inflicted lasting damage on household finances.

“Economic pressure on low-income groups and the middle class may be tolerable for a short period, but when it persists for years, it leaves broad social and economic consequences,” he said.

“Since 2018, following the United States' withdrawal from the nuclear agreement, Iran has experienced average annual inflation of around 40 to 45 percent,” Nadri said. “During that period, wages did not increase in line with inflation under successive governments, and the purchasing power of the middle class has declined markedly.”

Economists caution that even if Iran reaches an agreement with the United States and the risk of military conflict subsides, inflation is unlikely to fall quickly.

Political economy researcher Kamal Athari told ILNA that even under the most optimistic scenario—including sanctions relief and removal of obstacles such as Iran’s inclusion on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)—it would still take years for Iran to restore normal commercial relations with the global economy.

“Under such circumstances, inflation could eventually decline, but the process would not be rapid,” he said.

‘It’s all on Pezeshkian’

Growing concern over living standards has prompted renewed calls for additional government support.

Mohsen Bagheri, a board member of the Tehran Islamic Labour Councils' Coordination Council, told Khabar Online that wages, which were set in early April, should be revised upward in the coming months.

He also argued that the value of electronic food vouchers should increase, saying they have remained unchanged despite rising prices and earlier government promises.

The economic pressure has also become part of the wider battle over Iran’s political direction after the war.

Hardline critics who continue to advocate confrontation with the United States and Israel have blamed President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration for the deteriorating situation.

“Pezeshkian destroyed the country,” one hardline user wrote on X. “He created limitless inflation. He allowed us to be deceived by the enemy three times. Zero achievements, countless losses.”

Others have pushed back, arguing that continued calls for confrontation ignore the country’s worsening economic reality.

“Families are literally being destroyed, education, healthcare, housing, inflation, employment, and every economic indicator point to a bleak future,” one user wrote. “Yet some profiteers have forgotten the suffering of the people and keep calling for more war.”

Outlets from different political camps are warning of mounting pressure from inflation, falling purchasing power, unemployment and infrastructure failures, even as they sharply disagree over who is responsible.

Independent and reformist-leaning publications such as Sharq, Etemad and Tose’e Irani have focused on the rising cost of basic goods, reporting that food prices have surged far beyond wage growth.

They point to basic commodities such as bread, poultry and vegetable oil rising between 130% and more than 200%, while wages cover only a fraction of estimated household costs.

Even outlets close to the government, including ILNA and Etemad, have highlighted the growing gap between income and survival, noting that the minimum wage of around 16.6 million tomans covers less than 40% of the estimated 45-million-toman basic subsistence basket for an average family.

Beyond inflation and market instability, Iranian media have also focused on a worsening infrastructure crisis.

Severe rolling summer blackouts have returned, disrupting factories, increasing pressure on businesses and making daily life harder during peak heat.

The search for blame mirrors Tehran’s broader political divisions.

Moderate and reformist outlets such as Sharq, Etemad and Arman Melli emphasize structural failures, isolation and the economic toll of years of confrontation.

They argue that sanctions, conflict, damaged infrastructure and policy failures have intensified pressure on the economy.

Some commentators have warned of an “inflation bomb” and questioned whether decision-makers understand the “accumulation of public dissatisfaction.”

Earlier this week, Jahan Sanat published industrial analyst Alireza Mahdiyeh’s commentary under the headline “The sound of an inflation bomb,” citing Central Bank figures that he said showed the economy facing one of its worst periods in decades.

“Inflation has now reached even the price of bread,” he wrote. “Bread is still available, but more expensive than before. Yet inflation in bread does not give the baker more bread. It only means that what reaches people’s tables is smaller and less than before.”

Moderate outlets have also pointed to domestic policy decisions, including severe internet restrictions and blackouts, arguing they have damaged the digital economy and created widespread “hidden unemployment.”

Hardline dailies Kayhan and Resalat offered a different diagnosis, placing responsibility on the United States and Israel.

They argue that Washington’s declaration that the June interim agreement is “dead,” combined with renewed military pressure, proves that Western economic warfare is driving instability.

These outlets have also accused “economic saboteurs,” domestic speculators and merchants of manipulating currency markets and hoarding essential goods.

The proposed solutions reveal two competing visions for Iran’s future.

Hardliners have called for a “resistance economy,” including tighter controls on markets, action against price gouging and expanded rationing networks.

Moderate economists and commentators writing for outlets such as Donya-ye-Eghtesad argue that internal crackdowns cannot solve deeper structural problems.

They say economic stability depends on reducing tensions, restoring international trade, easing restrictions on businesses and creating conditions for investment and reconstruction.

But optimism remains limited as the damaged diplomatic process between Tehran and Washington offers little immediate relief.

As economist Mehdi Pazouki told reform-leaning Fararu, further escalation could push the country into even more dangerous territory.

“If Israel’s warmongering policies and the hardline approaches of certain actors inside Iran intensify, there is a serious possibility that we will move toward hyperinflation and the dollarization of the economy,” he said.

The message had been set in advance by the Friday Prayer Policy Council, which announced that weekly services nationwide would become “Fridays of Blood Vengeance and Revenge” until those blamed for Khamenei’s killing were punished.

The council said revenge was not an emotional response but a “strategic” and religious duty, explicitly naming US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Carrying out retribution against the principal criminals – particularly the criminal Trump and the child-killing Netanyahu – is an unchanging element of divine justice,” its statement said.

• 

  Revenge becomes Iran's language of unity after Khamenei’s death

It went further, saying every person or group with the ability to act had a duty to “rise for jihad” and carry out the task without delay. The council said banners calling for vengeance for Khamenei would remain beside Friday prayer pulpits until retribution was achieved.

The language was repeated across major cities.

In Mashhad, where Khamenei was buried, Friday prayer leader Ahmad Alamolhoda said retaliation must be seen by the public rather than remain an unfulfilled promise.

“Revenge and blood vengeance for the martyred leader must remain before the eyes of the people, and the people must see it with their own eyes,” he said. “Only then will real revenge have been taken.”

Saeed Jalili, the Supreme Leader’s representative to the Supreme National Security Council, told worshippers in Mashhad that revenge was a national right and a responsibility for officials.

“If you say Iran’s assets must be released, the greatest asset of our nation was its beloved leader,” Jalili said. “Today, the nation’s right is to defend this great asset through revenge, and it is the duty of officials to pursue it.”

Bushehr’s interim Friday prayer leader Yousef Jamali said worshippers would continue chanting for revenge until the United States and Israel were punished.

“We will stand alongside the officials and the armed forces and, God willing, bring the White House down on its occupants,” Jamali said. “Know that the sword of our revenge will fall upon the oppressors.”

In Rasht, cleric Rasoul Falahati linked revenge to the dispute over the US-Iran memorandum and navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

“Negotiating in the middle of a war is meaningless,” he said. “Under the recent understanding, we opened the Strait of Hormuz, but America fulfilled none of its commitments and instead moved to further reinforce its bases.”

He said Muslims and “free nations” around the world were ready to take revenge on Trump and Netanyahu and urged Iran’s armed forces to respond firmly to any further US action.

Tehran Friday prayer leader Mohammad Hassan Aboutorabi Fard also accused Washington of violating the memorandum and rejected any US role in the strategic waterway.

“We explicitly declare that under no circumstances will the United States be allowed to interfere in the affairs of the Strait of Hormuz,” he said.

In Qom, Alireza Arafi described revenge against those who carried out and ordered Khamenei’s killing as a legal and religious right that would not be forgotten.

Shiraz interim Friday prayer leader Adel Hajipour used almost identical language, saying the destruction of those responsible was a public demand.

In Malayer, Mohammad-Ali Arzandeh said Friday prayers would remain “Fridays of revenge and blood vengeance” until Israel was destroyed and those blamed for regional insecurity were eliminated.