Tehran – 22.06.2026: There is broad consensus within the Iranian leadership on a new peace agreement with the US, but the hardest hardliners, especially the so-called “Concerned” (“delvapasan”), strongly reject it. In the major cities of Tehran and Mashhad, demonstrations took place against negotiators such as Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. These movements illustrate the tension within the regime to convince its most radical supporters to accept the agreement.
The hardliners are led by the Stability Front of the Islamic Revolution under former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili. They advocate resistance instead of compromises, citing recent confrontations between Iran and Israel and the US, and consider the agreement unacceptable. Nevertheless, their influence appears to be waning, as the Revolutionary Guards support the agreement and market it as a strategic success.
The Iranian leadership as a whole promotes the agreement as a geopolitical gain. State-controlled media particularly highlight the limited American concessions—such as the temporary passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the Supreme Leader, oversees the negotiation process in the background, even though he is not publicly present. Experts interpret this as a sign of the beginning marginalization of radical hardliners, especially in view of the upcoming parliamentary elections in 2028.
Public opinion in Iran is divided. Many doubt the durability of the agreement, especially since the US had already unilaterally withdrawn from the nuclear deal in 2018. Critics accuse both sides of failing to prevent wars. While some see the agreement as a symbol of diplomatic success, others perceive it as a dangerous concession. Protests in cities like Mashhad and Tehran reflect the rejection by conservative circles, who accuse the negotiators of betraying the martyrs who fell in the conflict.
There are concerns that economic benefits such as released funds could flow into paramilitary units or allies like Hezbollah. Moreover, the lack of commitment to improving the human rights situation is criticized. Society is dominated by mistrust and political polarization.
The regime faces the challenge of winning over its innermost hardliners to the agreement. The Revolutionary Guards act as advocates, but the public debate remains tense. Further political developments will influence whether the agreement contributes to the long-term stabilization of the region or intensifies internal tensions.
Internationally, the world community is closely watching the developments, as the agreement could have far-reaching effects on the dynamics in the Middle East. The coming months are crucial to assessing the future of this complex peace process.
Sources
- Le Monde
- El Pais