Tehran divided over $2 billion plan to prop up rial

What they reveal much less clearly is what kind of change Iranians actually want, partly because answering such questions openly can carry serious consequences.

One, presented by Ebrahim Hajiani, a former director of the state-affiliated Iranian Students Polling Agency (ISPA), says the proportion of Iranians seeking "fundamental political change" has risen from 8 to 67 percent in two decades.

The other, supervised by Ali Rabiei, social adviser to President Masoud Pezeshkian, found that about 53 percent supported fundamental reforms, 19 percent wanted regime change and 13 percent favored minor structural adjustments. Only 9 percent supported preserving the status quo.

Despite their different methodologies and categories, the findings converge on one broad conclusion: dissatisfaction with Iran's political and social institutions is deep, and relatively few respondents appear content with the status quo. Hajiani's "fundamental political change," however, cannot automatically be equated with regime change.

The trust figures are similarly stark.

According to Hajiani, only 7 to 8 percent of respondents trust political officials, while trust in the three branches of government ranges between 25 and 30 percent.

Rabiei's survey found trust in the judiciary at just over 30 percent, against more than 54 percent who expressed distrust. The executive branch was trusted by just over 25 percent, while more than 59 percent expressed distrust. Parliament was trusted by 23 percent, with more than 59 percent saying they distrusted it.

The security institutions fare better. Hajiani found that 53 percent trust the regular Army, while both the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the police are trusted by 46 percent.

Both researchers describe the findings in terms of an institutional crisis. Hajiani speaks of a "crisis of authority" or "crisis of reference," while Rabiei identifies a "crisis of efficiency, trust and political representation."

Hajiani also identifies 2022, the year the Woman, Life, Freedom uprising erupted, as a social watershed, dividing Iranian society into a "before" and "after" in attitudes towards dress codes, family dynamics, religion and the role of women.

Rabiei, meanwhile, argues that a "broad social middle" still exists: a large segment of society that is dissatisfied but seeks reform, stability and gradual improvement rather than upheaval. He says this constituency is poorly represented in the media, political parties and state institutions.

His figures provide some support for that interpretation, but the conclusion should be treated cautiously. The surveys themselves illustrate why.

Hajiani says around 70 percent of those approached by pollsters do not respond. That raises an obvious question over whether those willing to participate are representative of those who refuse, particularly when questions concern the legitimacy of the political system.

Sharq newspaper has previously noted that refusals and evasive answers are particularly common on questions touching on the legitimacy of the government and political system.

In an environment where opposition activity can bring serious consequences, respondents may have reason to be cautious about openly expressing support for replacing the Islamic Republic.

That does not necessarily mean the polling itself is dishonest. Even a methodologically rigorous survey can produce guarded responses when the questions are politically sensitive.

There are other limitations. Neither of the reports as publicly presented provides sufficient detail about sample size, methodology or response rates to allow a full assessment of representativeness.

Their institutional connections also warrant caution: Rabiei is a presidential adviser, while Hajiani is a former head of a state-affiliated polling organization.

A potentially more consequential problem is harder to measure: who agrees to answer sensitive questions, how those questions are framed, and which findings ultimately become public.

That makes precise conclusions about how many Iranians want reform, fundamental change or the replacement of the Islamic Republic difficult to draw from these surveys alone.

Still, even research emerging from institutions connected to Iran's establishment describes a society in which confidence in political leaders is extremely low, demand for substantial change is widespread and only a small minority appears satisfied with the status quo.

President Masoud Pezeshkian added to that sense of a narrowing diplomatic opening this week, declaring that “talks are meaningless” while Washington maintains what he described as a naval siege and fails to honor its existing commitments.

Pezeshkian said Tehran would not negotiate under military pressure or abandon its seven conditions for de-escalation, a position that leaves little obvious room for compromise as the US builds up forces in the region and tensions around the Strait of Hormuz continue.

Veteran foreign policy analyst Ali Bigdeli, who has traditionally taken a relatively optimistic view of diplomacy with Washington, told Fararu on Tuesday that Iran-US relations had effectively returned to “square one,” with deep mistrust and uncertainty prevailing in both capitals.

He also warned that the increased US military presence in the region, combined with mounting economic pressure on Iran, raised the risk of miscalculation.

Hardline newspaper Kayhan seized on Pezeshkian’s remarks, calling for an immediate and complete withdrawal from Qatar-mediated diplomatic channels.

The English-language Tehran Times portrayed his refusal to negotiate under naval pressure as “a principled rejection” of unilateral Western coercion.

On Monday night, international maritime security agencies issued four attack warnings within four hours following new projectile strikes on commercial oil tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

Seven attacks on commercial vessels have been reported in the strait in the past week, according to maritime intelligence reports, which also describe direct radio warnings from the Revolutionary Guards Navy ordering some tankers to turn around.

IRGC-linked daily Javan highlighted the rapid succession of attack advisories and radio interdictions as evidence that CENTCOM’s naval presence has failed to guarantee freedom of navigation through the waterway.

But the same confrontation that hardliners portray as evidence of Iranian leverage is also generating warnings about its economic cost.

Economic daily Donya-ye Eghtesad argued that shadow fleets and off-radar transfers may allow crude oil to continue moving, but cannot reliably provide the raw materials needed by Iranian industry.

Once existing stocks of industrial inputs are exhausted, the newspaper warned, the combination of disrupted shipping and severed formal banking channels could push domestic industry into deeper decline.

Some Iranian outlets have increasingly focused on the possibility that a single security incident could upset the fragile balance altogether.

Moderate outlet Rouydad24 pointed to reports that American bombers were moved from RAF Fairford in Britain amid concerns about a possible Iranian or IRGC drone threat, as well as a US national security meeting last week with Iran and Yemen on the agenda.

The outlet warned that a single security incident could become a political trigger for escalation, sharply narrowing the distance between negotiation and confrontation.

Diplomatic channels have not disappeared, but harder positions in Tehran and Washington, an expanding US military presence, repeated incidents around Hormuz and growing economic pressure leave increasingly little room for error.

The emerging message from Iranian commentary is that a prolonged stalemate carries risks in either direction: deeper economic deterioration if it continues, and potentially rapid military escalation if it breaks.

President Masoud Pezeshkian initially rejected Paknejad’s resignation, submitted some time earlier because of “personal issues,” but accepted it after the minister again pressed to step down, deputy presidential communications chief Mehdi Tabatabaei said.

Paknejad’s departure, the first by a minister from Pezeshkian’s cabinet, followed weeks of Iranian media reports linking his position to disputes over sanctioned oil sales, major energy projects and management of Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries Company (PGPIC).

• 

  What can Iran’s new oil chief change under the US blockade?

Pezeshkian appointed National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) managing director Hamid Bovard as acting oil minister. The government has not indicated whether Bovard will remain a caretaker or be nominated for the post.

Export crisis raises questions

Several Iranian outlets had linked Paknejad’s resignation to disagreements with Pezeshkian during cabinet meetings over the oil ministry’s handling of sanctioned crude sales.

Other reported disputes concerned delays to major projects, including development of the South Pars gas field, and the network of intermediaries entrusted with selling Iranian oil and returning the proceeds while circumventing sanctions.

Paknejad left as Iran’s floating oil inventories were approaching exhaustion and questions mounted over around 80 million barrels handed to intermediaries, Rouydad24 wrote.

The website questioned whether “personal reasons” adequately explained the timing, arguing that replacing the official overseeing the sector would not resolve falling exports, foreign currency shortages, unpaid oil revenues and the opaque structure of sanctioned sales.

Eghtesad Online website similarly questioned why Pezeshkian accepted a resignation that had been pending for some time when Iranian oil exports had approached zero.

Billions at stake in trustee system

The use of trusted intermediaries to sell crude under sanctions has become a central controversy surrounding the oil ministry, with lawmakers and media raising questions over unpaid revenues and the allocation of oil.

One intermediary, Hassan Aghayari, owed several billion dollars, ILNA reported on September 13, citing a letter Bovard sent to a senior supervisory body while serving as NIOC chief.

• 

  Iran oil exports vanish as regional flows surpass prewar levels

The contract allowing Aghayari to sell oil was concluded on the minister’s order without approval from the sanctions-countering task force, Bovard wrote, according to ILNA. The oil ministry denied the report.

Around 80 million barrels were separately handed to four intermediaries following the Islamabad agreement, lawmaker Valiollah Bayati told Hamshahri newspaper. Hossein Shamkhani, son of former Supreme National Security Council secretary Ali Shamkhani, was among them, Bayati said.

More than 86 million barrels were allocated to trustees without guarantees, lawmaker Hossein Samsami said. Around 30 million barrels reached final buyers, leaving the status of more than 56 million barrels unclear, according to Samsami.

The accounts have raised questions over how intermediaries were selected, what guarantees were required and why further allocations went to people who allegedly owed money from previous oil sales.

Battle over petrochemical giant

Paknejad’s departure has also been linked to a dispute with Mohammad Shariatmadari, head of PGPIC, Iran’s largest petrochemical holding company.

The oil ministry sought to replace Shariatmadari with Hassan Abbaszadeh in July 2026. PGPIC rejected the move, saying it lacked the procedures required under stock-market regulations and board approval. Shariatmadari remained with support from the presidential office.

Paknejad was unwilling to remain as minister if Shariatmadari kept his position, Iranian media reported. Meetings ordered by Pezeshkian failed to settle the dispute, according to those reports.

Shortly before the resignation was accepted, editor of the oil-focused outlet Miz-e Naft Vahid Hajipourwrote on X that Paknejad had been given an ultimatum at a cabinet meeting over Shariatmadari’s continued tenure.

“Paknejad did not accept,” Hajipour wrote, adding that Pezeshkian consequently decided to end cooperation with the minister.

Political pressure

Political pressure offers another explanation. Parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf was angered by the removal of his ally Hossein Ghorbanzadeh from PGPIC’s board and Paknejad’s refusal to reinstate him, journalist Hatef Salehi wrote on X on October 1.

Ghalibaf subsequently pressed Pezeshkian to remove Paknejad, Salehi said.

• 

  Islamic Republic's 'slow meltdown' leaves it fewer ways out, analysts say

“If the oil minister is replaced in the coming days, the roots of the decision should be sought in Ghorbanzadeh’s longstanding friendship and relationship with Ghalibaf, not in the government’s strategy,” Salehi wrote.

The competing accounts leave no single explanation for Paknejad’s departure, placing it instead at the intersection of an export crisis, disputed sanctioned oil sales, a battle over one of Iran’s biggest companies and reported political pressure over control of key posts.

On Thursday, the end of Iran’s market week, the rial fell to another record low. Year-on-year inflation has reached almost 90 percent, with food prices rising even faster.

The deterioration comes as US sanctions and a naval blockade squeeze Iran’s sources of revenue. The blockade has severely constrained oil exports, while Washington on Thursday expanded sanctions into the automotive and rail sectors, targeting some of the country’s largest industrial companies.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has seized on the rial’s collapse as evidence that Washington’s pressure campaign is working, saying this week that it had driven the currency to its lowest level in history.

Iranian Economy Minister Ali Madanizadeh rejected Bessent’s assessment, telling the official IRNA news agency Thursday that predictions of an imminent economic collapse had repeatedly proved wrong.

“They want to create unrest and stress among the people so they rush to the currency market and the exchange rate increases; otherwise, these statements serve no purpose, and we will not allow this to happen,” he said.

The Central Bank has offered a similar diagnosis. It said Friday that the exchange rate was not “fully consistent with the economy’s fundamental variables,” attributing much of the gap to heightened uncertainty, psychological pressure and market expectations.

The bank announced Wednesday that it planned to inject $2 billion in banknotes into the market. So far, however, the intervention has failed to halt the rial’s slide.

‘The Central Bank shoots it into its own goal’

Hardliners have challenged the government’s explanation, arguing that sanctions and the war cannot by themselves account for the surge in the exchange rate and prices.

Nadergholi Ebrahimi, a hardline lawmaker, claimed in an online interview Thursday that the war had contributed no more than 25% to the recent rise in prices and accused government economic officials of deliberately fueling inflation.

Threatening to seek the impeachment of economic ministers, he accused them of waging an “economic sedition” that was reducing the public’s ability to withstand economic pressure and increasing dissatisfaction.

Hossein Samsami, an economist and hardline lawmaker, has also attacked the Central Bank’s handling of the exchange rate.

“Today, the currency is the enemy’s tool in an all-out economic war, and the measure of its success is the devaluation of our national currency,” Samsami wrote on X.

But he accused the Central Bank itself of helping drive that process by following an exchange rate he said was artificially determined by Iran’s enemies.

“The enemy passes the ball, and the Central Bank shoots it into its own goal!” he wrote.

Inflation approaches 90 percent

Whatever the relative weight of sanctions, war, expectations and domestic policy, their combined effect is increasingly visible in household finances.

According to the Statistical Center of Iran, annual inflation has reached 73.6%, while year-on-year inflation rose to a record 89.8%.

Food and beverage prices have risen substantially faster than overall inflation, hitting lower-income households particularly hard because they devote a larger share of their income to food and other essentials.

Accelerating prices have also eroded the value of government food vouchers introduced after subsidized foreign-exchange rates for a range of goods were removed amid a sharp depreciation of the rial and economic protests in December and January.

Although the government pledged to increase the value of the vouchers in line with rising prices, it has yet to do so.

Wages fall behind as prices surge

The pressure is also increasingly visible among salaried workers.

Videos circulating on social media in recent weeks have shown teachers and nurses saying low wages have left them with no choice but to resign after years in their professions.

Ali Farhadi, spokesman for Iran’s Education Ministry, dismissed reports of widespread teacher resignations as a “rumor” on Friday.

The dispute has become another front in the broader argument over the economic crisis, with government supporters alleging that expressions of discontent are being amplified to encourage unrest and critics accusing authorities of dismissing genuine economic grievances.

Samsami, however, has placed greater responsibility for the hardship on domestic economic policy than on Washington.

“The pressure imposed on people’s livelihoods by misguided economic policies is far greater than that caused by sanctions and the naval blockade,” he wrote, adding: “We are not at an impasse. By reforming our policies, we can control inflation even under these sanctions.”

Before trading closed on Wednesday, the final working day of the week in Iran, the Tehran Stock Exchange reached a record 7,766,000 points.

The market has risen 109 percent since the start of the Iranian year, while small investors poured roughly 4.7 trillion tomans, or about $19 million, into shares in a single day.

Iran’s prominent economic daily Donya-ye Eghtesad argues that the surge is not necessarily a sign of confidence. People are buying shares as political and economic risks rise, it says, while savers are also moving into gold, coins and dollars, all of which hit record highs on the same day.

The open-market dollar has passed 250,000 tomans, while measured in dollars, the stock market remains well below previous peaks.

At least part of the rally therefore appears to reflect a search for protection against the falling rial rather than confidence in the underlying economy.

Similar pressures are visible in consumer markets, where prices for cheaper mobile phones rose 33 to 42 percent in a month, outpacing the currency’s decline as import quotas, registration rules and fees hit lower-priced devices particularly hard.

Earlier this week, the government announced that the central bank would sell up to $2 billion in cash. The first $1 billion tranche is being sold through banks, with adults holding a national ID card allowed to buy up to $10,000.

The government’s own newspaper, Iran, warned that selling cash may slow the dollar’s rise but cannot reverse the underlying trend while inflation, budget pressures and political uncertainty remain unresolved.

Tehran’s prosecutor also ordered action against “market disruptors,” including online channels publishing exchange rates. Eyewitnesses on Ferdowsi Avenue, the capital’s main currency-trading hub, reported shorter queues and more sellers than buyers on September 30.

The respite was brief. On October 1, the open-market dollar rose 1.49 percent to 2,593,000 rials, its highest level in a year.

The central bank has been steadily raising the official exchange rate, from about 137,000 to more than 174,000 tomans this year, to encourage exporters to repatriate their foreign-currency earnings. Even so, the open-market rate remains much higher.

Because official imports are priced at the exchange-center rate, increases can feed through into the cost of imported goods. They also reduce the real value of the government’s electronic food-voucher scheme unless the state spends more rials to maintain it.

Hardline outlets including Kayhan and the IRGC-linked Javan portray the rial’s fall as part of Washington’s economic war. But their criticism is also directed at Iranian policymakers.

Kayhan calls currency sales a repeatedly failed policy and a waste of resources in wartime. It wants the government to reverse its economic liberalization and use judicial and security pressure to force exporters to repatriate their foreign-currency earnings.

The criticism exposes an argument within the establishment over how Tehran should respond: spend scarce foreign currency trying to contain demand, or preserve it while tightening controls over exporters and the domestic market.

That argument is becoming more urgent as the US blockade curtails Iranian oil exports, depriving Tehran of a major source of foreign currency.

Diplomacy could provide some relief, with Iran seeking access to frozen assets and an easing of sanctions and the blockade as part of negotiations with Washington.

For now, however, the clearest signal comes from the markets themselves. Stocks, gold and the dollar are all setting records. The simultaneous rush into them suggests that for many Iranians, almost anything that might preserve its value increasingly looks preferable to holding rials.