As reports of a final agreement between Iran’s regime and the United States grow louder, signs of a deep political crisis within the ruling establishment have also become more apparent. Disputes over the terms of a potential agreement have moved beyond closed-door discussions and have now spilled into street gatherings, official regime platforms, and media outlets affiliated with various regime factions.
On the evening of June 13, groups of hardline supporters of the regime held nighttime gatherings in Tehran and several other cities, strongly opposing the negotiation process and the officials involved in it. At Ibn Sina Square in Tehran, slogans such as “Ghalibaf, Araghchi, what about my leader’s blood?”, “Araghchi, have some shame, leave America alone,” “Death to Araghchi, dishonorable infiltrator,” and “Ghalibaf, Araghchi, resign, resign” dominated the gathering.
The anger of the regime-aligned protesters reached such a level that some speakers and participants accused government officials and the negotiating team of “treason” and attacked them with unusually harsh language. One protester outside the Foreign Ministry angrily insulted Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s regime foreign minister, blaming him for the country’s political deadlocks.
At the same time, several members of the regime’s parliament have joined the opposition to the agreement. Amirhossein Sabeti, a member of parliament, said that 16 lawmakers attended the protest gathering and claimed that the draft agreement is even weaker than the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) and ignores the “Supreme Leader’s red lines.” He warned that any retreat from the regime’s positions on issues such as the Strait of Hormuz would constitute “treason.”
In the same context, Mahmoud Nabavian, deputy chairman of the parliament’s National Security Commission, read portions of what he described as the final agreement between Tehran and Washington during a live media program. He claimed that under the proposed text, Iran’s regime would retreat from part of its influence and authority in the region and the Strait of Hormuz, a move he said contradicts the publicly stated positions of regime supreme leader Ali Khamenei.
Hamid Rasaei, a member of parliament, also attacked Araghchi over a social media post suggesting that an agreement was close. Referring to Donald Trump’s reposting of Araghchi’s message, Rasaei described it as evidence of a political mistake by the foreign minister and said: “Why do you publish a text that Trump welcomes?”
In contrast, some media outlets and political currents close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have expressed concern about the escalation of these conflicts. The state-run Javan newspaper, affiliated with the IRGC, warned in an editorial that some gatherings have become platforms for attacking the regime’s institutions and that speakers have even called for dissolving the Supreme National Security Council and taking action against senior officials. The newspaper spoke of the “seeds of division and discord” among the regime’s supporters.
As these disputes intensified, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, head of the regime’s judiciary, warned about internal divisions and called for preventing the infiltration of “ill-wishers” into the regime’s ranks. At the same time, he reiterated the regime’s complete distrust of the United States, a stance reflecting efforts by the ruling establishment to contain the internal crisis.
Meanwhile, Ahmad Alamolhoda, Ali Khamenei’s representative in Mashhad, attacked any optimism toward the United States and stressed that “No agreement will be acceptable unless it is approved by the Leader.” He compared relations between Iran’s regime and the United States to the story of “the mouse and the cat” and described any trust in Washington as deception.
At the same time, Hossein Shariatmadari, editor-in-chief of the state-run Kayhan newspaper and a representative of Ali Khamenei at the publication, attacked the government and negotiating team, asking on what basis Iran would give up leverage such as closing the Strait of Hormuz. His remarks reflected concerns among hardline factions about possible concessions in a new agreement.
These developments come as various regime officials have repeatedly warned in recent weeks about the dangers of “disagreement and division.” Iranian regime president Masoud Pezeshkian had previously called for avoiding the public airing of internal disputes, while a message attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei during ceremonies marking the anniversary of Ruhollah Khomeini’s death also emphasized the need to preserve unity within the regime.
However, what is now visible in the streets, parliament, state-run media outlets, and official platforms points to a different reality. Protests by forces close to the Paydari Front, counterattacks by IRGC-affiliated media, repeated warnings from senior officials, and efforts to contain the crisis all indicate deepening fractures within the regime’s power structure.
A Sign of a Deeper Crisis
The verbal and political war over a possible agreement with the United States is not merely a tactical dispute over negotiations; it reflects a deeper crisis at the top of the ruling establishment. Pressures stemming from war, economic deadlock, concerns about the consequences of concessions in negotiations, and competition among power factions over the future of the regime have now reached a stage where they are increasingly difficult to conceal. As a result, the closer the regime comes to making a decision on an agreement, the more visible its internal divisions become and the sharper the confrontation between rival factions grows. Many observers view this situation as a sign of the erosion of cohesion within Iran’s regime power structure.
