Iranian authorities have arrested several people accused of encouraging women to defy mandatory hijab rules on a popular cultural street following a series of security operations and business closures in the area, the judiciary said on Tuesday.
The arrests on Tehran's Iranshahr Street followed instructions from judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei to identify and confront what authorities described as organized efforts to promote violations of compulsory hijab and public morality rules, the judiciary's Mizan news agency reported.
Several people accused of promoting "immodesty and indecency" were detained following the intervention of the Tehran Prosecutor's Office, Mizan said.
Prosecutors also warned that individuals accused of encouraging women to appear without hijab or promoting conduct deemed inappropriate would face legal action in coordination with security and judicial enforcement agencies.
The judiciary did not disclose the number of detainees or provide details about their identities.
Crackdown follows bookstore and cafe closures
The arrests mark the latest enforcement action on Iranshahr Street, a popular gathering place for young Iranians near Artists Park that has faced growing scrutiny from authorities and supporters of compulsory hijab.
Two bookstores, Dey Bookstore and Arsa Book House, were reportedly sealed on November 7, days after security forces dispersed Halloween celebrations in the neighborhood.
Journalist Yaghma Fashkhami reported the closures on X, while Dey separately announced it would suspend operations and book deliveries until further notice.
The bookstore had previously been shut down in October 2023 over alleged violations of mandatory hijab regulations.
The latest closures followed an October 30 operation in which police blocked Iranshahr Street before Basij militia members and plainclothes security personnel moved against Halloween gatherings.
Witnesses told Iran International that security personnel beat and detained people, ordered families out of Artists Park and forced nearby cafes to close.
The operation followed a nationwide directive prohibiting businesses from organizing or advertising Halloween celebrations, with authorities warning of closures and prosecution.
Supporters of compulsory hijab had previously called for intervention against women appearing without headscarves on Iranshahr Street.
President Donald Trump’s talks with Qatar’s prime minister come amid a renewed diplomatic push to end the Iran war, but securing terms both Washington and Tehran can present as a victory remains a central obstacle, analysts told Iran International.
Trump and Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani met behind closed doors in the Oval Office on Monday, and Axios reported that their discussions focused on Iran. The Qatari prime minister also met Vice President JD Vance earlier in the day.
An Iranian official told Al-Monitor on Friday that the country’s nuclear program was “under discussion” with mediators. Tehran has said negotiations depend on Washington meeting its demands, including sanctions relief and the release of billions of dollars in frozen assets.
Trump needs a nuclear achievement to justify the war, not just the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, said Aaron David Miller, a former US Middle East negotiator now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“It’s the nuclear issue. He needs a win to justify this war,” Miller told Iran International.
“And I don’t know whether the Iranians are prepared to make that concession or what Trump would consider to be a win that they could accept. So I think that’s a huge problem.”
Who moves first?
The new round of diplomacy has not settled the basic dispute: whether economic and military concessions should come before progress on Iran’s nuclear program, or after.
Danny Citrinowicz, a former head of the Iran branch of Israeli military intelligence and now a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, said an interest in ending the war should not be mistaken for an agreement in sight.
“I believe both sides genuinely want to find a way to end this war, but that does not mean they are close to an agreement,” he told Iran International.
Iran wants Washington to meet its conditions on Hormuz, the naval blockade, oil exports and other economic restrictions before nuclear talks begin. Washington wants movement on the nuclear issue much earlier, he said. “The problem is not simply what each side wants, but who moves first.”
A breakthrough was possible, Citrinowicz said, if Washington accepted a different sequence of reciprocal steps. “Without meaningful American flexibility, however, I see little reason to expect Iran to abandon its red lines.”
Miller criticized the interim memorandum of understanding reached in June, which was meant to open the way to nuclear talks but collapsed soon afterward. It committed Washington to a sequence that favored Iran, he said, calling it “one of the worst negotiated documents in the history of US diplomacy.”
Two definitions of victory
Even if negotiators settle the order of steps, both governments would have to defend the concessions at home as achievements.
Trump could claim victory by reopening Hormuz, lowering energy prices, ending the fighting and securing an Iranian commitment not to build nuclear weapons, Citrinowicz said. Tehran would need an outcome it could present as a success too.
“After surviving months of attacks, the Iranian leadership is not going to accept an agreement that looks like surrender,” he said.
Iran could reopen Hormuz, stop attacks on shipping and regional infrastructure, return to nuclear talks and possibly accept tighter international monitoring, he said. In return it would expect real steps on sanctions, oil exports, frozen assets and guarantees against further attacks.
Miller doubted Trump’s wish to end the war would outweigh his fear of looking beaten. “I think he’d want to be done with this, but I don’t know if he’s prepared to spend the next three years being called a loser,” he said.
Eric Mandel, founder of the Middle East Political Information Network, said a deal could let Trump declare victory while leaving the nuclear dispute open.
“The president would like to have a diplomatic solution. The president is looking for victories. He may claim victories where there aren’t,” Mandel told Iran International.
Tehran was drawing out the talks to wait Trump out, Mandel said, and economic relief in exchange for promises of future nuclear concessions could throw the Islamic Republic a lifeline without securing lasting limits.
A meeting is not a breakthrough
Conflicting reports over a possible meeting between Vance and Iran’s security chief show how uncertain direct contact remains.
Turkey’s intelligence chief, Ibrahim Kalin, said Qatar would host Vance and Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, next week, the Turkish newspaper Türkiye reported. The Tasnim news agency, which is affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards, then quoted a senior Iranian security official as denying any meeting was planned and saying Washington must first act on Iran’s seven conditions.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Tuesday there were no plans for Rezaei to meet Vance. The war, he said, would end neither through military action nor through more sanctions. “The only way to end it is diplomacy and acceptance of the Islamic Republic’s conditions.”
Citrinowicz said Rezaei should not be expected to break with the Islamic Republic’s established positions. “He is deeply rooted in the Iranian political and security establishment,” he said. “He is not someone who can simply be persuaded to abandon the regime’s fundamental positions in exchange for an American offer.”
Rezaei is the subject of an Interpol Red Notice over his alleged role in the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, which killed 85 people. He and Tehran deny involvement. As commander of the Revolutionary Guards during the Iran-Iraq war, he led the failed Karbala-4 offensive of December 1986, in which Iran suffered heavy losses.
The decisive question, Citrinowicz said, is whether Vance has Trump’s authority to offer something substantially different.
“A failed meeting could be more dangerous than no meeting at all,” he said. Trump might conclude that diplomacy had run its course and order more strikes to force concessions.
Continued economic pressure, indirect talks and a limited interim deal would remain options, he said, but failure to close the gaps could raise the risk of a return to war.
More than 70% of respondents to an Iran International survey on household finances said they had either reduced food purchases or postponed medical treatment to cope with rising prices, illustrating the difficult choices facing families struggling with Iran's economic crisis.
The survey, conducted between October 30 and November 3, 2026, collected responses from 404 people, alongside personal accounts of mounting debt, unpaid wages, depleted savings and the psychological toll of financial hardship.
Of the 374 respondents who answered a question about coping with rising prices, 230, or 61%, said they had reduced food purchases, particularly meat and dairy products. Another 177, or 47%, reported postponing medical treatment or medication.
A total of 142 respondents had done both, while 265, or 71%, had taken at least one of these measures over the previous year. Cutting spending on recreation, clothing and education was even more common.
The survey was voluntary and conducted among Iran International's audience, rather than a randomly selected sample of the population. Its findings therefore cannot be considered representative of Iranians as a whole.
‘Can’t afford potatoes’
One participant, who identified themselves as a Social Security pensioner, described receiving 32 million tomans a month, of which 25 million went on rent, five million on loan repayments, 1.2 million on building charges and 200,000 on electricity.
That left just 600,000 tomans for other monthly expenses.
“I don't have money for potatoes and onions,” the pensioner wrote.
The respondent also described having diabetes but being unable to afford medical appointments or medication.
Another participant described the cost of sending three children to school.
“My first-grader went to school with a schoolbag his brother used several years ago and the shoes he wore for Nowruz,” the parent wrote.
“I sewed his coat and trousers myself to save a little money so I could buy them school supplies … Thank God I have children who are content with little. They understand.”
In another message, a respondent described buying barbari bread for 25,000 tomans one day and 40,000 the next. The participant said a local baker had warned that flour was running out and production might stop if more supplies did not arrive.
Food prices have risen particularly sharply as the rial's collapse drives up costs across the economy.
Official figures showed food and beverage prices in September were more than 120% higher than a year earlier, compounding the impact of years of inflation, US sanctions and economic mismanagement.
‘Living in name only’
The survey also examined employment and the number of income earners in each household.
Of the 387 participants who reported their number of jobs, 177, or 46%, said they held one job. Another 95, or 25%, reported two jobs, while 23, or 6%, held three or more.
In total, 118 respondents, or 30.5%, held at least two jobs. Another 92, or 24%, said they had no income-generating employment.
A separate question found that 47% of respondents lived in households with only one income earner, while 6% said nobody in their household earned an income.
For some, even holding multiple jobs was not enough to cover basic expenses.
One participant, the sole income earner in their household, said they worked two jobs but had fallen behind on rent and three loan installments, had unpaid electricity and gas bills, and had not received their wages for a month.
“I borrowed about 60 million tomans from people, and I haven't been able to pay back even one million,” the respondent wrote. “Our life is only a life in name.”
Another participant, who reported holding three or more jobs, said their motorcycle had been taken and they could not afford to retrieve it. The respondent had also reduced food purchases and postponed medical treatment or medication.
A worker living with a spouse and three children described similar pressures despite holding two jobs.
“I can't manage even the simplest things,” the worker wrote, adding that low wages and unemployment had made “anger and arguments an inseparable part of life.”
The war has added to an already weak labour market, damaging factories and infrastructure, disrupting trade and forcing businesses to scale back or close.
US sanctions and restrictions on banking and imports have further constrained businesses, while years of underinvestment and mismanagement have left the economy poorly equipped to absorb the shocks.
‘Getting poorer before my eyes’
As rising prices eroded purchasing power, many respondents reported relying on resources accumulated in better times or taking on new financial obligations.
Of the 374 people who answered the question about coping with inflation, 171 reported spending savings and 86 said they had sold possessions.
After accounting for overlap between the two groups, 200 respondents, or 53.5%, had used at least one of these measures. Another 128 had borrowed money, while 97 had postponed rent or bill payments.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents to the question reported taking at least three different measures to cope with rising prices over the previous year. Almost 30% had taken five or more.
The questionnaire did not measure how much money respondents had borrowed, the value of possessions sold or the amount of savings spent. But drawing on savings and selling assets can provide only temporary relief, leaving households with fewer resources to withstand future financial shocks.
The rial has lost more than half its value against the dollar over the past year. The war and US blockade of Iranian ports have sharply curtailed oil exports and government revenues, intensifying pressures on an economy already weakened by sanctions and systemic corruption.
One respondent began a message with a direct appeal: “If you can, please help me a little.”
The participant said their workshop had closed, leaving them without income for six months. They had three children and reported that nobody in the household earned an income, describing the circumstances as “the hardest moments of my life.”
Another participant, who was employed and lived in a household with two income earners, said: “I can see myself getting poorer before my eyes.”
The psychological toll
The financial pressures described by participants were accompanied by widespread anxiety and pessimism about the future.
Of 398 people who answered a question about their household finances over the previous year, 375, or 94%, said their situation had worsened. Three-quarters described the deterioration as severe.
Expectations for the coming year were similarly bleak, with 91% anticipating further financial deterioration. Separately, 90% said inflation and economic uncertainty had significantly affected their psychological well-being, including their sleep and peace of mind.
The prolonged conflict with the United States and Israel has deepened uncertainty over jobs, prices and access to essential goods, while repeated disruptions to everyday life have compounded the strain of years of economic instability.
One participant described being unable to afford dental treatment despite holding two jobs and living in a household with two income earners.
Another message described medical treatment that had been interrupted for three years. The respondent said they suffered from depression, had been dismissed from a government job because of illness-related absences and were living with an ailing mother in a household without an income.
“I'm exhausted right now, and I'm writing this while crying,” the message said.
Another participant, the sole income earner in a household with a disabled daughter, said they worked two jobs but had still postponed medical treatment or medication and sold possessions.
Among the 142 respondents who had both reduced food purchases and postponed treatment or medication, 135 reported a significant or very significant psychological impact.
Three participants expressed thoughts of suicide or a wish to die in their written messages. The questionnaire was not designed to clinically assess depression or suicide risk, and the prevalence of such conditions cannot be determined from these accounts.
Little hope of improvement
The survey also examined the relationship between respondents' experiences over the previous year and their expectations for the future.
Of those who described the previous year as having been much worse, nearly 85% expected similarly severe deterioration in the coming year.
Respondents reporting greater financial hardship also tended to describe more severe psychological distress and to have adopted more measures to cope with rising prices.
These findings show an association between financial hardship, psychological pressure and pessimism about the future among respondents, but do not establish cause and effect.
Prospects for recovery remain clouded by the unresolved confrontation with Washington, continuing sanctions and the damage inflicted on Iran's productive capacity.
Even an end to the fighting would leave the country confronting longstanding structural problems, including corruption, weak investment and economic mismanagement.
One participant wrote: “I wish tomorrow wouldn't come,” explaining that they expected each new day to bring greater hardship.
The survey was conducted among Iran International's audience from October 30 to November 3, 2026, and received 404 voluntary responses. Not all participants answered every question, and percentages were calculated from valid responses. Personal accounts were drawn from written messages submitted by respondents and reviewed without identifying information.
Iranian human rights lawyer Amirsalar Davoudi suffered a heart attack in detention and was hospitalized in Isfahan before being returned to prison a day later following a court appearance, Norway-based Iran Human Rights (IHR) said on Monday, citing an informed source.
Davoudi was taken to Al-Zahra Hospital on Sunday after nearly a month in solitary confinement following his October 11 arrest while representing a protest detainee at the Isfahan Revolutionary Court, the rights group said.
An informed source told IHR that Davoudi was unconscious when he was transferred to the hospital under tight security.
The source disputed an explanation attributed to authorities that a change in medication had caused his deteriorating health, saying Davoudi had not been taking medication when he was arrested.
Davoudi was discharged from the hospital on Monday morning and taken to court, where his arraignment was postponed because the investigation was incomplete, before being returned to prison, IHR said, citing an informed source.
Tehran-based news outlet Emtedad separately reported, citing Davoudi’s lawyer, Seyed Mehdi Karimi-Farsi, that he had attended an investigative hearing with his client at Branch 11 of the Isfahan prosecutor’s office on Monday and that Davoudi appeared to be in good health.
"Today, my client was in good health and personally defended himself," Emtedad quoted Karimi-Farsi as saying, without addressing the reported heart attack.
Karimi-Farsi said Davoudi faced two separate proceedings, with bail granted in one and a temporary detention order issued in the other.
He said the one-month detention order had expired on Monday and expressed hope that it would be replaced with bail, although no judicial decision had been announced.
"A lawyer's place is not in prison," Karimi-Farsi said, expressing hope that his client would be released.
Separately on Monday, UN human rights experts cited Davoudi's arrest as an example of what they described as escalating persecution and judicial harassment of independent lawyers in Iran.
The experts said Davoudi was arrested on October 11 after appearing before the Isfahan Revolutionary Court on behalf of Taraneh and Romina Rahimi, who were prosecuted in connection with January's anti-government protests.
Taraneh was sentenced to death on charges of moharebeh, or "enmity against God," while Romina received a 25-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting moharebeh, according to the UN statement.
"Independent lawyers are increasingly being prosecuted and intimidated for their professional work and for defending human rights," the experts said.
Iran Human Rights said Davoudi had also represented Mahshad Keshani, the partner of Alireza Sepahi, a protest detainee executed on October 5.
Iranian judicial authorities have accused Davoudi of spreading false information online, inciting violence and propaganda against the state, according to the rights group.
Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, director of Iran Human Rights, called for Davoudi's immediate release and access to medical care, saying Iranian authorities bore responsibility for his safety.
“We call on the EU and all governments maintaining diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic to intervene urgently to secure Mr Davoudi’s release. Iranian and international bar associations must raise their voices today for a colleague who has been silenced while defending the rights of others,” Amiry-Moghaddam added.
Davoudi previously received a 30-year prison sentence and 111 lashes over his human rights activities and criticism of Iran's judiciary. Enforcement of that sentence was suspended in 2024 following a judicial review.
UN human rights experts called on Iran to end what they described as escalating persecution of independent lawyers, warning that restrictions on legal representation were leaving defendants vulnerable to arbitrary detention, coerced confessions and unfair trials.
“Independent lawyers are increasingly being prosecuted and intimidated for their professional work and for defending human rights,” the experts said in a statement.
At least 135 lawyers faced judicial or security measures in Iran between September 2025 and September 2026, including arrests, summonses, imprisonment, professional suspensions and travel bans, according to figures documented by the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) and cited by the experts.
A separate report by the Netherlands-based Lawyers for Lawyers and the London-based Centre for Supporters of Human Rights documented the arrests of at least 23 lawyers across eight Iranian provinces following nationwide anti-government protests.
The experts said Iranian authorities had reportedly instructed lawyers not to take protest-related cases and obstructed independent lawyers from representing defendants in politically sensitive proceedings.
Defendants were often restricted to court-appointed lawyers during initial investigations, while independent lawyers faced limited access to clients and case files, they added.
The statement cited the October 11 arrest of human rights lawyer Amirsalar Davoudi after he appeared before the Isfahan Revolutionary Court on behalf of two clients, Taraneh and Romina Rahimi.
Taraneh was sentenced to death on charges of moharebeh, or “enmity against God,” while Romina received a 25-year prison sentence for aiding and abetting moharebeh in connection with the January 2026 protests, according to the experts.
The experts also raised concerns about pressure on women lawyers, including warnings, suspensions and disciplinary action over alleged violations of compulsory hijab requirements, as well as intimidation and smear campaigns.
They warned that the independence of Iran's bar associations was increasingly under threat, citing interference in elections, the disqualification of candidates critical of the authorities and the expansion of judiciary-controlled licensing outside independent bar associations.
The statement was issued by five UN special rapporteurs, including Mai Sato, the expert on human rights in Iran, and Margaret Satterthwaite, the expert on the independence of judges and lawyers, along with members of UN working groups on arbitrary detention and discrimination against women and girls.
“When independent lawyers are arrested or intimidated for defending their clients, the consequences extend far beyond the legal profession,” the experts said.
“The right to an effective defence, fair trials and the rule of law itself are at stake.”
I was at a gathering of about a dozen friends in Tehran on Thursday night. It was hilariously tragic to watch a bunch of slightly tipsy people at each other's throats over an election in which none of us had a vote but whose outcome could profoundly affect our lives.
We spent much of the evening arguing about Democrats and Republicans, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, and whether the election of Muslim politicians in America was something to celebrate or fear.
“Imagine being told ten years ago that a man with a name like Abdul El-Sayed would become a United States senator,” one friend said. “You’d ask them what drug they were on.”
“Oh, come on,” another protested. “You think America is turning into another Iran because they've elected a progressive senator or mayor who happens to be a Muslim?”
The greatest strength of American democracy, he argued, was that voters could throw out leaders who made a mess of things, or at least take away some of their power.
Quite a few shook their heads. “The trouble is,” one said, “once political Islam gets into power, you can't necessarily get rid of it with another election.”
It was an argument familiar to anyone who has spent time around politically engaged Iranians, but there was something almost comical about hearing it unfold in a Tehran living room.
We were worrying about whether American democracy could survive the election of a Muslim politician while living in a country where our own ability to choose those who govern us has been contested for decades.
The conversation grew louder when someone admitted she was disappointed by the Democratic gains. She had been hoping that Trump and Netanyahu might finally bring about the end of the Islamic Republic.
“The Democrats will make a deal with the mullahs, and we'll be stuck with this lot for another 50 years,” she said.
Her brother was having none of it: “You seriously think Trump and Netanyahu went to war because they care about you and me? All they ever wanted was to force the regime to give them what they came for. Then they’ll walk away. And it’ll be us and the mullahs all over again.”
I have heard versions of this disagreement many times. Some people still hope that outside pressure might accomplish what years of protest have failed to achieve. Others find that hope almost unbearable, particularly after seeing what war has done to the country and how little it has changed the lives of those who survived it.
What struck me, though, was how easily everyone moved between these positions, sometimes contradicting themselves, sometimes laughing at arguments they had made quite seriously only minutes earlier. Nobody seemed especially interested in convincing anyone else.
“I don't even know why you're burning calories over this,” said one of the two friends who had barely spoken until then. “We don't even know if we'll have enough money to pay next month's rent. To hell with the American elections.”
That took some of the energy out of the argument. We could disagree all night about American politics, but there was rather less to disagree about when it came to paying the rent.
And what was the point of discussing that anyway, one friend said bitterly, as though talking about our problems might somehow make them go away.
Perhaps that is what a year of protests, crackdowns, war and unrelenting financial anxiety have done to us. We do talk about politics all the time. But most of us have stopped expecting much from it.
There was a time when conversations like this came with confident predictions. The regime would fall, a deal would be reached, sanctions would be lifted, or another protest would finally change everything. But we’ve stopped making promises about the future, even to ourselves.
None of us in that room had an answer to the question of how we would afford another month, let alone what the American elections might mean for us. But at least we could argue about the latter without having to check our bank balances.
“Avoid the pain if you can” seems to be how we hang on these days. “Take it one breath at a time.”
