Iran International
A recent speech by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has energized hardliners who see it as a mandate to silence reformists advocating direct talks with Washington and nuclear concessions.
Khamenei on Sunday appeared to dismiss a manifesto by reformist groups which called for direct talks with Washington and suspension of uranium enrichment.
Hardliners were quick to interpret his words as a rebuke to the authors of the recent Reform Front statement and figures such as former president Hassan Rouhani and his foreign minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif, who also urge direct talks and diplomacy.
“Those who say, ‘Why don’t you negotiate directly with the United States and solve the issues,’ are superficial, because the reality is different," Khamenei said in his speech.
Analysts are divided over the implications. Dissident commentator Reza Alijani told Iran International that Khamenei’s stance reveals “a backward Cold War mindset” hostile to compromise, warning he is “gambling with the fate of the country and the Iranian people.”
Others argue the speech was more rhetorical than absolute. Ruhollah Rahimpour noted in a post on X that Khamenei has made similar statements even while Iran’s diplomats were actively engaged in talks.
The timing of the remarks, however, is significant. Just a week earlier, the Reform Front called for direct US negotiations, suspension of enrichment, and acceptance of full IAEA monitoring in exchange for sanctions relief.
Hardliners hailed Khamenei’s speech as a rejection of that appeal.
“The Leader’s wise remarks struck like a resounding slap against submissive reformists—against Rouhani, Zarif, (Mohammad) Akhoundi, Azar Mansouria and others,” wrote ultra-hardliner activist Alireza Aliyaninejad on X.
Ultra-hardliner defiance
Khamenei’s simultaneous expression of support for President Masoud Pezeshkian and emphasis on a united front against foreign enemies has complicated the picture.
Reformist-leaning figures and outlets highlighted the endorsement, while some ultra-hardliners such as lawmaker Hamid Rasaei insisted such support was merely pro forma.
Only hours after the speech, Rasaei suggested that parliament could oust Pezeshkian for incompetence, likening him to Iran’s first president Abolhassan Banisadr, who was impeached in 1981 despite Ayatollah Khomeini’s earlier backing.
The threat against Pezeshkian triggered backlash even within conservative circles.
Revolutionary Guards-affiliated media accused Rasaei of defying Khamenei’s call for unity. A Telegram channel believed close to the Guards warned: “This is a complete final warning—in the true sense of the word—to you and to all (ultra-hardliners) who, contrary to the explicit order of the Supreme Leader, engage in creating distractions and acting against national cohesion and unity.”
The Guards-affiliated Javan newspaper went further, calling for Rasaei to be prosecuted.
Green light for prosecution?
Judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei warned the Reform Front over its statement: “Those who, whether out of negligence or questionable motives, signed it should acknowledge their mistake and withdraw this disgraceful act. Naturally, the Tehran prosecutor will also carry out his legal duty."
Reformists rejected the accusation of betrayal.
“The Reformist Front’s statement is not an alignment with the enemy, but the voice of the voiceless who are worried about Iran. Judicial action against ‘opinions, criticism, and proposed solutions’ reflects a crisis in listening,” responded Azar Mansouri, the Front’s leader, on X.
The images, some first shared in early August on X by social media activist Sana Moeinni, depict scenes that appear to show everyday urban life in present-day Iran. They present a strikingly relaxed atmosphere, with diversity in clothing styles and subtle cultural symbols such as flags used in Shiite Muharram mourning ceremonies.
One photo shows a group of young men and women in casual, Western-style clothing gathered around a woman in Lebanese-style hijab seated on a large red armchair placed in the middle of a street.
Another depicts a woman and child riding a yellow scooter—an image that would have been almost unthinkable just a few years ago, when an unwritten ban on riding bicycles or motorcycles in public was strictly enforced.
Staged reality or social progress?
Critics argue that the images are staged. Diaspora journalist Amir Kalhor called them part of a coordinated propaganda campaign.
“This project, involving dozens of photographers, models, and production teams, is designed to project a fabricated, sanitized image of life in Iran under the rule of the Islamic Republic for international audiences,” Kalhor wrote on Instagram.
Supporters of President Masoud Pezeshkian, however, see the backlash differently. Kiana Poorhaghighi, a young pro-government activist, argued that opposition groups feel threatened because hijab enforcement has been a powerful rallying point.
“If the Islamic Republic acknowledges diversity of clothing, as seen in these photos, the opposition loses one of its strongest tools,” she wrote on X.
Alireza Ziloochi, who calls himself a tourism expert, said: "I still can’t figure out when I should say, ‘Bravo for this courage. Everyday acts of resistance matter. People need to get used to seeing these images,’ when someone posts a photo without hijab in Iran’s streets — and when I should say, ‘The reformist scoundrels have launched the regime’s whitewashing project, because otherwise the streets of the city aren’t like this at all.’"
The photographers have not been publicly identified.
‘Fragments of reality’
Some critics accused the photographers of “selectively highlighting fragments of reality” to suggest that Pezeshkian’s government has eased restrictions, while concealing the ongoing struggles women face.
A commenter argued that the photos “whitewashed” the reality of the Islamic Republic by showing unveiled women but not the harshness of the daily risks women take: “It’s a struggle that costs us—materially, emotionally, mentally, and even physically,” she wrote.
Others framed the issue in broader terms of personal freedom: “Our women’s clothing, whether veil or bikini, should not be imposed by the state. Women and men should decide for themselves. We do not need guardians.”
The reality on the ground
In May, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council shelved a new hardline bill mandating stricter hijab rules, reportedly out of fear of public backlash. Enforcement has not disappeared, but reports of women facing harassment, including fines and impounding of their vehicles, are not as common as before.
While unveiled women are now common in Tehran and other cities, most still carry scarves in their bags to use in banks, government offices, or public transport if ordered.
“You can say we are free only when we can go to the bank, tax office, or hospital without a hijab, and are not told at the entrance to cover up,” one user wrote on X.
Few women dress entirely as they wish: most avoid sleeveless shirts, shorts, or short skirts, opting instead for long sleeves and modest skirts as a compromise to avoid confrontation.
“[Having to wear] long-sleeved blouses, pants, and long skirts in 40-degree heat cannot be considered freedom of dress,” a post on X argued.
Change from above or women’s steadfastness?
Supporters of Pezeshkian credit his presidency with the apparent relaxation of enforcement in recent months. Others insist that it is women’s defiance—not government reform—that has shifted the balance.
“The fact that women today walk unveiled in Tehran or even ride motorcycles is neither the result of ‘reform’ nor the reformists’ achievement,” one critic wrote, pointing out these relative freedoms are not formally recognized as legal rights.
“Any change in this matter is the result of women’s resistance,” wrote feminist activist Zeinab Zaman.
Milani told Eye for Iran podcast that Iranian women are at the heart of today’s opposition.
“The Iranian woman who decides to walk in the streets of Tehran, Shiraz, Bandar Abbas, without a veil… that’s the most potent opposition to this regime,” he said.
Despite intensified crackdowns, women continue to defy compulsory hijab laws.
Public opinion surveys point in the same direction. A poll conducted last summer involving more than 77,000 people found that a majority reject the Islamic Republic and favor either regime change or a structural transition.
Milani said the most authentic expressions of opposition are found in cultural acts, not exile politics.
“It is the manifesto of the future of Iran,” he said.
Milani highlighted a recent production at Stanford University by acclaimed playwright Bahram Beyzaie, a reinterpretation of the revolution through the eyes of women. The play drew widespread interest inside Iran, with audiences requesting online access, while receiving little notice outside.
Awakening from a 'nightmare'
“Iranians have woken up from this nightmare,” Milani said referring to the Islamic Republic, “but now they need to get rid of the source of this nightmare, which is dogmatism, which is religious domination, which is velayat-e faqih. (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist)"
Milani’s remarks come as Iran faces one of its harshest crackdowns in decades. Rights groups say more than 1,000 people have been executed in the past year, many in public.
In Isfahan, authorities have begun ordering the confiscation of Baha’i homes and assets — a move the community’s representatives described to Iran International as “economic strangulation.”
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has upheld the death sentence of labor activist Sharifeh Mohammadi, and women’s rights defender Hasti Amiri has been sentenced to three years in prison after protesting executions and appearing unveiled in public.
The long shadow of 1953
Milani argues that Iranians have too often been trapped in emotional narratives of the 1953 coup orchestrated by the CIA and the 1979 Islamic Revolution, casting the monarchy and the Islamic Republic in black-and-white terms.
"The Shah was, at worst, an authoritarian leader. At best, he was a modernizer,” Milani said. “This regime, at best, is a pseudo-totalitarian regime. And at worst, totalitarian.”
The difference, Milani said, is that while the monarchy did not attempt to reshape private lives, the Islamic Republic has tried to engineer a “new man and woman,” reducing women to second-class citizens and criminalizing dissent.
Milani argued that younger Iranians are less interested in “black and white” narratives about 1953 that toppled the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh, and more focused on freedom, equality, and dignity in their daily lives.
The Islamic Republic has long invoked the 1953 coup to justify hostility toward the United States, while downplaying the fact that Mosaddegh’s supporters were outlawed after 1979.
In 2023, the CIA for the first time described its role in ousting Mosaddegh as “undemocratic.” Yet Milani says the coup cannot be reduced to CIA intrigue alone, arguing that Iran’s clergy were decisive in turning against Mosaddegh.
Iran's future in people's hands
Seven decades on, he believes the lesson is clear: Iran’s future will not be decided by nostalgia or in-exile politics but by the resilience of ordinary citizens.
“The future of Iran,” Milani said, “is in the hands of those women, those teachers, those citizens who refuse to live by this ideology. They are the opposition to this regime.”
“Iranian society is more represented by intellectuals who used to be religious and now go and kiss the feet of a Baha’i and say, I’m sorry for everything we have done to you,” he added. “That’s the future of Iran. Those women are the future of Iran. They are the opposition to this regime.”
You can watch the full episode of Eye for Iran on YouTube or listen on any major podcast platform like Spotify, Apple, Amazon, or Castbox.
“Suspending enrichment is the American prescription in this statement,” Khatami told worshippers at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla, according to state media.
He added: “Nuclear energy is the energy of the future, and people have repeatedly said nuclear energy is the nation’s inalienable right.”
Khatami also rejected the manifesto’s suggestion of direct talks with Washington, saying: “How can we negotiate with America, which martyred General Soleimani, attacked our country, violated all international agreements, and struck our nuclear centers?”
Iran’s Reform Front has urged sweeping political and foreign policy changes, including a temporary suspension of uranium enrichment, release of political prisoners, and direct negotiations with Washington in return for sanctions relief. The reformist push has drawn fierce backlash from conservatives.
“The Iranian people will never surrender to America — hayhat minna al-dhilla,” he said, invoking a famous phrase from Shi’ite Islam Imam Hussein’s sermon on the day of Ashura, which means ‘far be it from us to accept humiliation.’ The expression, rooted in Hussein’s rejection of submission to Ibn Ziyad in 680 AD, has come to symbolize choosing death with dignity over life in disgrace.
Citing remarks by Ali Khamenei last year, Khatami said: “The Leader has already said negotiations with America are neither rational nor honorable. This statement recommends dishonor, and the Iranian nation will not accept such a humiliating recipe.”
Khatami further denounced the reformist document as divisive, calling it a “black letter that translates Netanyahu’s words into Persian.”
He argued that Iranians had voted 47 times since the 1979 revolution and dismissed claims of repression of dissent, insisting that media and social networks were active and free.
A recent survey conducted by a Netherlands-based institute found that the majority of Iranians would vote for either a regime change or a structural transition away from the Islamic Republic.
