Iran is seeking to amplify unrest in France through online influence campaigns and alleged links to hard-left groups, The Times reported on Tuesday, citing researchers who accused Tehran and Moscow of exploiting student protests to weaken Western democracies.
The report also cited claims that President Emmanuel Macron blocked publication of a French government assessment of Iranian interference to avoid antagonizing Tehran.
The protests began last month over education funding and discrimination, before spreading and descending into violence in Paris and other cities. The Times said there was no evidence foreign powers initiated the movement.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said last week that the demonstrations had been exploited by hostile narratives from Russia, China, Iran and the US MAGA movement, according to the newspaper.
France Culture separately cited police and intelligence sources alleging that foreign-backed bloggers and influencers had amplified the unrest. Officials or state-aligned media in the countries accused have rejected the allegations, The Times said.
Claims of infiltration and payments
David Colon, a historian at Sciences Po who studies disinformation, told The Times that Iran, Russia and Algeria were exacerbating tensions. He argued that Iran had been particularly effective because of its penetration of far-left groups.
Franco-Iranian journalist Emmanuel Razavi alleged that Iranian intelligence cultivated ties with those groups and encouraged them to promote the Palestinian cause. He linked the presence of Palestinian flags at protests to those efforts, although the flags themselves do not establish Iranian involvement.
Razavi also said Iranian agents were suspected of paying unemployed youths a few hundred euros to cause disorder in Paris. He said those allegedly paid represented only a small minority of participants in the October 17 unrest.
He further alleged that the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force operated troll farms and recruited influencers, including on Telegram. The report did not present documentary evidence substantiating his claims about payments or operational links.
Colon cited a Franco-Iranian influencer convicted of inciting terrorism who was now posting about French police violence, arguing that he understood how to maximize online visibility.
Report allegedly withheld
Citing French outlet La Lettre, The Times said Barrot received a government report describing Iranian disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, including activity around the 2024 Paris Olympics and subsequent French protests.
Barrot wanted it published, but Macron refused while seeking to maintain diplomatic distance from both Tehran and Washington during the Iran war, according to the account.
La Lettre’s publicly accessible summary says the Élysée blocked disclosure of evidence compiled by French security bodies and ordered a restrained response to Tehran.
Previous influence campaigns
Iran International reported in October 2024 that Microsoft had identified an operation targeting Israel’s participation in the Paris Olympics by Cotton Sandstorm, a group Microsoft described as directed by the Revolutionary Guards.
Earlier that year, Iran International covered Microsoft’s findings that Iranian actors operated covert news websites targeting Americans across the political spectrum, including left-leaning Nio Thinker and conservative Savannah Time. Tehran denied interfering in US elections.
On October 9, Iran International reported OpenAI’s disclosure of an Iran-origin campaign using seven fictitious journalist identities to place nearly 100 articles in foreign outlets and generate hostile replies to Iran International posts.
OpenAI said the social media activity gained little traction and that it could not identify the organization behind the campaign. Those findings document separate influence efforts, rather than establish responsibility for the current French unrest.
Iran's parliament speaker said a "Persian Gulf Data Authority" was coming and urged regional governments and investors to withhold resources from AI companies involved in military operations, amid Tehran threats against digital infrastructure across the region.
"The Persian Gulf Data Authority is coming," Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf wrote on X Sunday.
"To governments, funds, and firms in the region: you are kindly advised to give no resources to any AI or data company aiding invasions or killing children. No finance, equity, land and energy."
Ghalibaf did not explain how the proposed authority would operate, what powers it would have or how Iran could enforce restrictions on companies operating elsewhere in the region.
The name echoes the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA), which Iran established to administer shipping permissions and tolls for vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz in coordination with the Revolutionary Guards.
Ghalibaf did not say whether the proposed data authority would be linked to that body or follow a similar model for asserting control over regional digital infrastructure.
His remarks followed a series of warnings by senior Iranian officials and hardliners about targeting digital infrastructure across the Persian Gulf.
Hardliners threaten regional digital infrastructure
Last week, Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, warned that undersea communications cables, data centers and artificial intelligence facilities could become targets if war with the United States and Israel resumed.
"If war breaks out, many cables, data centers and artificial intelligence facilities, valued at $2 trillion, will be within range," Rezaei said, according to Iranian state media.
He said American technology assets in the United Arab Emirates and around the Strait of Hormuz had not yet been included among Iran's targets but could be struck in a renewed conflict.
The following day, Hossein Shariatmadari, editor-in-chief of the hardline Kayhan newspaper and the supreme leader's representative at the publication, endorsed Rezaei's warning.
In an article titled "Well Done, Brother Mohsen!", Shariatmadari called for using undersea fiber-optic cables running through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz to pressure Washington and its allies.
He claimed that damaging the cables could disrupt more than 80 percent of commercial, banking, military and AI-related communications, an estimate that has not been independently verified.
The IRGC-affiliated Tasnim News Agency also backed threats against AI infrastructure, arguing in an article titled "Why Is Artificial Intelligence on the Target List?" that attacks on AI centers could undermine US technological competition with China, deter investment and put pressure on American stock markets.
Shariatmadari had previously urged Iran's military and Islamic Revolutionary Guards on September 3 to disrupt or sever international fiber-optic cables beneath the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.
In May, Tasnim proposed imposing licensing and annual renewal fees on foreign operators of undersea internet cables passing through the strait.
It also called for major technology companies, including Meta, Amazon and Microsoft, to operate under Iranian law and proposed granting Iranian companies exclusive control over cable maintenance and repairs.
Previous threats against technology companies
Iran's Revolutionary Guards had already threatened major American technology companies operating in the Middle East during the war earlier this year.
On March 31, the IRGC published a list of 18 companies, including Microsoft, Google, Meta, Apple, Oracle, Nvidia and the UAE-based artificial intelligence company G42, warning that their regional operations could be targeted.
The Guards accused American technology and AI companies of assisting US military operations against Iran and warned employees to leave their workplaces.
The threats followed Iranian drone attacks in early March that damaged Amazon Web Services data centers in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
Amazon said two facilities in the UAE were directly struck, while a nearby drone strike caused physical damage to its infrastructure in Bahrain.
The company reported structural damage, power disruptions and cloud service outages affecting customers across the region.
The Persian Gulf has become an important hub for American technology companies expanding their cloud computing and artificial intelligence operations, with the UAE among the countries hosting major investments in data centers.
Undersea fiber-optic cables are also critical to the region's digital infrastructure, carrying international internet traffic and supporting financial transactions, cloud computing and government communications.
Mehrdad Akhlaghi Ketabchi, a sanctioned veteran of Iran's missile industry with ties to the Revolutionary Guards, became defense minister on Sunday, following his predecessor's killing in the war with the United States and Israel.
Akhlaghi secured 237 votes in favor and 15 against in a virtual parliamentary session attended by 277 lawmakers.
He replaces Aziz Nasirzadeh, who was killed on February 28 during the opening day of joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran. The ministry had since been overseen by acting minister Majid Ebn al-Reza.
Unlike several previous defense ministers who rose through military command positions, Akhlaghi built his career inside Iran's weapons manufacturing establishment, overseeing industrial organizations involved in missile production, aerospace technologies and military procurement.
His name has appeared on international sanctions lists since 2007, reflecting his longstanding involvement in institutions central to Iran's ballistic missile program.
From engineering to missile production
Born on September 10, 1958, in Rasht, northern Iran, Akhlaghi studied chemical engineering at Amirkabir University of Technology before earning a master's degree in strategic management from Malek Ashtar University of Technology, an institution affiliated with the Defense Ministry.
He entered Iran's defense industries in the early 1980s and spent more than four decades in technical, industrial and managerial positions, according to Iranian state-linked media.
Much of his career has involved solid-fuel missile propulsion systems and the management of industrial facilities associated with ballistic missile development.
Solid-fuel propulsion allows missiles to remain stored for extended periods and reduces preparation time before launch, making it a significant component of Iran's missile capabilities.
Akhlaghi previously headed the Shahid Bagheri Industrial Group, a subsidiary of the Aerospace Industries Organization involved in Iran's ballistic missile program.
In November 2014, then-Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan appointed him managing director of the Aerospace Industries Organization, replacing Mehdi Farahi.
He later became head of the Defense Industries Organization, which produces conventional weapons and supplies military equipment to Iran's armed forces.
Akhlaghi's role in the Fateh-110 missile project
Akhlaghi's close relationship with Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, a founder of the Revolutionary Guards' missile program, was central to his involvement in developing Iran's missile industry.
Akhlaghi worked closely with Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, widely known as the father of Iran's ballistic missile program. Tehrani Moghaddam oversaw the development of the Revolutionary Guards' missile arsenal before he was killed in a November 2011 explosion at a military facility near Tehran.
Iran's IRGC-linked Tasnim news agency, citing The Eternal Man, a biography by Masoumeh Sepehri, reported that Akhlaghi approved $10 million in equipment purchases and production facilities for the Fateh-110 missile despite uncertainty over whether the project would succeed.
The account, based on an interview with a senior missile designer, describes Akhlaghi's direct involvement in financing infrastructure used to produce missiles for the Revolutionary Guards.
Pezeshkian also referred to Akhlaghi's association with Tehrani Moghaddam during Sunday's parliamentary session, crediting figures such as the two men with developing Iran's military capabilities.
Nearly two decades under international sanctions
Akhlaghi's involvement in Iran's missile industry brought him under international sanctions long before his appointment to the cabinet.
The United Nations Security Council included him in Resolution 1747, adopted on March 24, 2007, identifying him as head of the Shahid Bagheri Industrial Group.
The group had previously been sanctioned over its involvement in Iran's ballistic missile program.
The US Treasury Department also placed Akhlaghi under sanctions in 2008.
US State Department information about his activities identified him as a senior figure in missile-related industrial operations and described his participation in negotiations to purchase equipment for the missile industry.
In 2020, the first Trump administration sanctioned him in connection with his position as director of the Defense Industries Organization.
The European Union has also included Akhlaghi on its sanctions lists, identifying his senior roles within both the Defense Industries Organization and the Aerospace Industries Organization.
Britain imposed sanctions on him in 2023, citing his involvement in activities connected to the development of systems capable of delivering nuclear weapons.
His name was also included in UN sanctions lists following the reimposition of international sanctions in September 2025.
The measures have made Akhlaghi one of the more extensively sanctioned figures to enter Pezeshkian's cabinet, with restrictions linked to his work in institutions involved in missile development and weapons production.
Missile production and air defenses top priorities
Akhlaghi outlined plans to expand weapons production, strengthen air defenses and rebuild military industrial facilities during his parliamentary confirmation session.
His proposed program includes developing new military technologies, improving production efficiency and increasing cooperation with universities and technology companies.
Akhlaghi also proposed shortening the development cycle for certain new defense technologies to a maximum of six months.
The program envisages increasing the share of production outsourced to companies outside the Defense Ministry to 75 percent in the Iranian year beginning in March 2026 and more than 85 percent the following year.
Highly classified weapons production would remain within facilities controlled by the ministry.
Akhlaghi has also identified continued support for armed groups aligned with the Islamic Republic across the region as a ministry priority.
His agenda builds on programs developed under Nasirzadeh, with adjustments intended to address the damage and military requirements arising from the recent wars.
Akhlaghi portrayed Iran's military capabilities as having frustrated US and Israeli objectives during the latest conflict.
"These capabilities have brought the American-Zionist enemy to the point of desperation in the recent war and placed it in a strategic deadlock," Akhlaghi told lawmakers.
His remarks came as the Defense Ministry faces the task of replacing damaged infrastructure and restoring weapons production capacity following months of military confrontation.
Warning to Washington over possible strikes
Akhlaghi also delivered a warning to the United States on the sidelines of Sunday's parliamentary session.
Asked about the possibility of Washington using the GBU-43 bomb, commonly known as the Mother of All Bombs, against Iran, he said the Defense Ministry had prepared measures to respond.
"The US president should be thinking about how to get his forces out of our region alive. If he drops one bomb, he will have to see how many of his troops he will have to take out of the region horizontally (dead)," Akhlaghi told reporters.
The remarks followed warnings by US officials about the possibility of further military action against Iranian facilities.
President Donald Trump has raised the possibility of striking the underground Pickaxe Mountain complex near Natanz, while US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has warned of severe military consequences if negotiations with Iran fail.
A sanctioned missile official takes charge after the war
Akhlaghi's appointment follows the war with the United States and Israel, which killed senior Iranian military officials and exposed vulnerabilities in the Islamic Republic's military infrastructure and air defenses.
Pezeshkian told lawmakers that the new minister had the backing of the army, the Revolutionary Guards and other military and security institutions.
The president also referred to Akhlaghi's presence on US sanctions lists and expressed hope that he would remain alive to continue his work.
The decision to appoint an official sanctioned for nearly two decades over his involvement in Iran's ballistic missile program points to the leadership's continued reliance on the same military-industrial establishment that oversaw the development of its missile arsenal.
Akhlaghi now faces the task of rebuilding military production capacity and expanding weapons manufacturing at a time when Iran's missile program remains a major source of confrontation with Washington and European governments.
Iran cannot bring the United States to its knees despite inflicting damage on American forces, a former Tehran mayor said in a state television interview, arguing that Iran's military capabilities cannot match Washington's and calling for an end to the war through negotiations.
“We can bring in experts every day to say we are making America suffer, but the reality is that we cannot do that,” Gholamhossein Karbaschi, a former Tehran mayor and former secretary-general of the Executives of Construction Party, told state broadcaster IRIB.
Karbaschi criticized what he described as exaggerated portrayals of Iran's ability to inflict damage on the United States, saying the losses suffered by Iran and its population far exceeded the damage inflicted on Washington.
“The damage we have inflicted on the US is not comparable to the losses our own country and people have suffered. Fundamentally, our capabilities and capacities are not comparable to those of America,” Karbaschi said.
His remarks also addressed the Islamabad agreement, attacks on vessels and the need to release political prisoners to strengthen public support during the conflict.
Islamabad agreement and attacks on vessels
The attacks on three vessels could have been avoided had the Islamabad agreement been properly implemented, Karbaschi said, questioning who was responsible for targeting the ships.
Karbaschi argued that a distinction should be made between the actual reasons for violating an agreement and events used as a pretext to abandon it.
The agreement had been highly favorable to Iran and had surprised international observers because Washington had accepted its terms, Karbaschi said.
Israel opposed the agreement, and the attacks on the three ships ultimately became a pretext for breaching the understanding, he added.
Karbaschi also rejected the suggestion that ending the war through negotiations would require Iran to accept every American demand, arguing that both sides' objectives needed to be examined.
Political prisoners and public support
Iran must secure the backing of its population if it wants to resist pressure from US President Donald Trump, Karbaschi said.
“If this country wants us to stand up to Trump so that he does not dare bully us, we must have the people behind us,” Karbaschi said.
The former mayor questioned the continued imprisonment of prominent reformist politician Mostafa Tajzadeh, arguing that expressing an incorrect political opinion should not justify prolonged imprisonment.
Karbaschi called for the release of Tajzadeh and political prisoner Mostafa Mehraeen as part of efforts to bring the war to an end.
Mostafa Tajzadeh, a prominent reformist politician and former deputy interior minister under President Mohammad Khatami, has been imprisoned over his criticism of the Islamic Republic's leadership and calls for political reform.
Mahraein, a sociologist, was sentenced to a total of eight years in prison, five of which are enforceable. Mahraein was arrested on June 15, 2025, after publishing a letter criticizing former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Reports that the Islamic Republic sent $200 million to Lebanon's Hezbollah have drawn anger from Iranians struggling with rising living costs, low wages and medicine shortages, according to messages sent to Iran International.
Citizens accused the authorities of prioritizing financial support for regional allies over the needs of Iranians, contrasting the reported payment with their own incomes, government subsidies and mounting household expenses.
In messages, several people described struggling to afford basic necessities, while others questioned why the Islamic Republic was directing resources abroad during Iran's economic crisis.
Hezbollah payments dwarf Iranian wages
"You give each Hezbollah family 8 billion rials, but deposit a 5000,000-rial food allowance for each Iranian and then take even that back a few hours later. This country's money belongs to its people, not Hezbollah," one citizen said.
Another compared the payments with compensation given to Iranian soldiers.
"A soldier who spent eight months under missile fire with no way to escape received seventy million rials in combat pay. Then you gave Hezbollah 8 billion rials from our money," the citizen said.
Reuters reported on October 7, citing two people with direct knowledge, that Hezbollah received $200 million from Iran in September and planned initial payments of $3,000 per family, prioritizing approximately 50,000 families displaced by the war.
The reported transfer has been disputed by Washington. The US State Department disputed the reported transfer. Spokesperson Tommy Pigott accused Hezbollah of trying to “save face with fake stories about cash influxes from Iran”, saying the group “can claim whatever it wants, but the money is not there”.
Pigott said Tehran was suffering under a US blockade of its oil exports and that Washington would continue targeting Hezbollah's finances through sanctions while supporting the Lebanese government's efforts to rebuild the country's south.
At an exchange rate of approximately 2.67 million rials per dollar on Iran's open market, $3,000 amounts to roughly 8 billion rials.
A teacher in Tehran with 18 years of experience compared the payments with his annual salary.
"My salary for an entire year is about 3 billion rials, yet you gave 8 billion rials of our money to the Lebanese," the teacher said.
A local government employee with 29 years of service and a master's degree said his total monthly income was 350 million rials.
Citizens in Neyshabur and Malard also criticized the reported payments, saying the Islamic Republic was directing national resources toward allied groups abroad while Iranians faced poverty and declining purchasing power.
Islamic Republic officials have not formally confirmed the reported $200 million transfer, and the US government has rejected the account.
"Hezbollah has been decimated and caused misery for hundreds of thousands of innocent Lebanese. It is now trying to save face with fake stories about cash influxes from Iran," US State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said in a statement. "It can claim whatever it wants, but the money is not there."
Families sell belongings to afford basic necessities
Several citizens described the financial pressures facing their families, including difficulties paying for medicine, food and other essentials.
One person said her husband and son had been forced to sell their mobile phones to cover household expenses, contrasting the family's financial difficulties with the reported funding for Hezbollah.
Another described the rising cost of medication for her father.
"I bought just three blood pressure and heart medications for my father, and they cost 85 million rials. I didn't have enough money to buy the rest of his medicines. Insulin is also unavailable. Previously, these medicines did not even cost 5 million rials," the citizen said.
Other citizens described struggling to afford food and household expenses despite receiving government subsidies and food vouchers.
One person said the authorities treated modest increases in food assistance as a financial burden while continuing to spend substantial sums supporting allied groups in Lebanon.
Anger over Islamic Republic's spending priorities
Some calculated how many Iranian households could benefit from the reported $200 million payment, arguing that the money could help tens of thousands of families struggling with living expenses.
One person directed criticism at Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei over the allocation of national resources.
"You have abandoned your own nation and are giving the Iranian people's money to the Lebanese. It is not your father's inheritance. Charity begins at home," the citizen said.
Another questioned the priorities of President Masoud Pezeshkian and his deputy, saying their public emphasis on serving Iranians conflicted with the financial support directed toward Hezbollah.
The citizen also expressed concern that such funding could contribute to continued armed conflict and civilian deaths.
Several others described the reported payment as part of the Islamic Republic's longstanding policy of financing allied armed groups across the Middle East.
Reuters reported in June that Hezbollah was awaiting additional financial support from Iran after suffering heavy losses in its war with Israel.
The US Treasury Department previously said Iran had transferred over $1 billion to Hezbollah during the first 10 months of 2025.
An editorial questioning Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf’s role as Iran’s lead negotiator has raised an awkward question in Tehran: who exactly is Kayhan criticizing, given that senior officials have said the parliament speaker was given the job with the Supreme Leader’s approval?
In a sharply worded column Wednesday, Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmadari argued that Ghalibaf’s appointment had effectively sidelined parliament for seven months and said those responsible should explain why they had allowed one of Iran’s central institutions to become largely inactive during wartime.
“If those who made this decision knew that its consequence would be the closure of parliament, they must answer this question: What was their purpose in shutting down parliament?” he wrote. “And if they were unaware of the consequence, that is regrettable.”
Iran’s parliament largely suspended its normal work following the outbreak of war in February, with security conditions and Ghalibaf’s negotiating responsibilities limiting its activities.
‘Coordinated with the Leader’
The criticism is striking because Mahmoud Nabavian, a senior hardline lawmaker, said on April 10 that Khamenei had specifically stipulated that Ghalibaf should lead negotiations with Washington.
Nabavian said the selection had been made “with the opinion and coordination of the leadership.”
Ghalibaf has played a central role in talks with Washington since negotiations began in Islamabad in April. He subsequently said he had not volunteered for the role and took it on following a decision by the country’s governing institutions, while describing the negotiations as having proceeded with Khamenei’s authorization.
Shariatmadari did not name Khamenei or directly question his role in the appointment. But his criticism leaves unclear whom he holds responsible for a decision publicly attributed to Iran’s highest authority.
Who watches the negotiator?
The Kayhan editor went further, arguing that Ghalibaf’s roles as parliament speaker and chief negotiator were fundamentally incompatible.
Parliament is responsible for overseeing the negotiating team, Shariatmadari wrote, meaning Ghalibaf is effectively expected both to supervise the negotiations and to be subject to that supervision.
The argument amounts to a challenge to Ghalibaf’s continued combination of the two roles while negotiations with Washington remain unresolved.
Shariatmadari, a longtime hardline figure appointed to Kayhan by the late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, publicly clashed with Ghalibaf in August over his support for negotiations.
Ghalibaf responded by defending diplomacy as a tool of statecraft, writing that negotiations were neither inherently valuable nor taboo and that Iran should “talk when necessary, and fight when necessary.”
Ghalibaf has also acknowledged divisions within the establishment, criticizing both those who reject diplomacy altogether and those he accuses of advocating concessions to Washington.
Shariatmadari’s latest intervention goes further. Rather than challenging Ghalibaf over what he is negotiating, it questions whether the parliament speaker should have been given the job in the first place.
