Iran's conservative media warn against overreliance on US talks
Iranian newspapers with coverage of nuclear talks with the US
Tehran media outlets controlled by hardliners warned the government on Thursday not to place hope in the outcome of renewed talks with the United States, set to resume in Rome on Saturday.
Two Republican US senators publicly endorsed a right-wing commentator close to Donald Trump who argued against what he called appeasement of Iran and appeared to criticize the president's advisors amid ongoing nuclear talks with Tehran.
Talk show host Mark Levin argued against "another diplomatic solution with an Islamist-Nazi Regime," in a lengthy post on X.
"I’ve great faith in President Trump. Not in some of those trying to pressure him to appease the Iranians, and who none of us voted for and who most Americans know nothing about," in an apparent reference to Trump's advisors.
"I support the President completely when he says no nukes for Iran, I know he means it. We should immediately rally around him and his declaration and let him know we agree. No nukes for Iran. No “peace in our time” phony declarations being urged on him. Either Iran provably and immediately dismantles its development of nuclear weapons or we will do it for them," he added.
Quoting the post, Texas senator Ted Cruz said: "The great @marklevinshow is exactly right. Anyone urging Trump to enter into another Obama Iran deal is giving the President terrible advice."
"@realDonaldTrump is entirely correct when he says Iran will NEVER be allowed to have nukes. His team should be 100% unified behind that," he added.
Another outspoken critic of Tehran, Arkansas senator Tom Cotton, said: "This is correct ... As President Trump said, the only solution is Iran completely dismantling its program, or we should do it for them."
"Allowing this maniacal terrorist regime to threaten America and the world with a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. Those who minimize the risk of this regime are dead wrong."
An Iranian conservative daily warned Tuesday that the country could expel international nuclear inspectors and relocate its enriched uranium if military threats intensify, injecting new tension into Tehran-Washington relations.
The warning came just hours before Rafael Grossi, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was due to arrive in Tehran.
“If a serious military threat emerges, Iran will expel the inspectors, cut their access, and move nuclear materials to locations beyond reach,” Farhikhtegan wrote.
It accused the IAEA of political bias and said Grossi’s previous visits had yielded cooperation only from Iran. “Despite Iran’s compliance, the agency has published reports that fuel anti-Iran resolutions,” it added.
Grossi’s visit coincides with the anticipated second round of negotiations between Iranian and US officials. While details of the agenda remain unclear, the talks have stirred strong opposition across Iran’s ultraconservative press, particularly following mixed signals from Washington.
After the first round of negotiations in Oman on Saturday, US envoy Steve Witkoff said Monday that Iran might be allowed to continue low-level enrichment under a deal resembling the original JCPOA. But on Tuesday, he tweeted that “Iran must stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.”
“A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal," the special envoy said.
The hardline daily Kayhan, overseen by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's office, focused on Tuesday on Witkoff’s new comments and accused the US of using diplomacy to mask coercive aims.
Editor Hossein Shariatmadari wrote that Witkoff’s offer in earlier talks had “no more value than a cheap political ruse,” adding that the US had “flunked its first test of sincerity.”
“The Americans pretend to negotiate, but their demands expose their true intentions—disarming the Islamic Republic and and plowing its land and people,” Shariatmadari said.
“Our positions are firm. It is the Americans and the Zionists who must adjust to Iran’s terms,” he said.
With nuclear inspectors in Tehran and diplomacy on a knife’s edge, Iran’s conservative media are pushing a dual message: cooperation remains conditional, but retaliation, if provoked, would be decisive.
In the days leading up to the second round of talks between Iranian and US delegations, confusion persisted over the venue and agenda of the meeting.
The two sides had initially agreed to meet in Rome. However, a disagreement reportedly arose between Iranian officials—who insisted on holding the meeting at the Omani Embassy in Rome—and the Italian government, which maintained that the talks should take place at the Italian Foreign Ministry. This prompted Tehran to make a last-minute announcement on the evening of April 14 that the meeting would instead be held in Oman.
The US side has not publicly commented on the dispute over the location. However, President Donald Trump, who had previously expressed cautious optimism following the first round, criticized the week-long gap between meetings, suggesting that Iran was stalling. “They've got to go fast, because they're fairly close to having one, and they're not going to have one,” he said, referring to Iran’s nuclear capability.
Iranian officials had also requested that Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi attend the Rome meeting, though they did not provide an explanation for the request.
While Iran’s state broadcaster—heavily influenced by the ultraconservative Paydari Party—has been reluctant to cover the first and second meetings with the Americans, the government broke its silence by releasing previously undisclosed information exclusively to the Tehran Times, an English-language daily. Notably, this disclosure bypassed the many Persian-language newspapers published in Tehran.
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei also weighed in on the talks during a speech on Tuesday. Echoing Trump’s earlier tone, he expressed cautious optimism and said the Iranian negotiating team had performed well.
In a commentary, Eco Iran, a Telegram channel known for serious coverage of domestic politics and economics, wrote: “Despite their historic hostility, an agreement is still possible between Tehran and Washington.” The channel added that Trump had succeeded in pushing Tehran to move its red lines. “The meeting showed that neither Iran nor the United States wants another war in the region,” it added.
Eco Iran also noted growing anxiety among Iranians at home, with many watching the negotiations closely while fearing that Trump’s patience might wear thin. The channel added that Israel is monitoring the talks with concern—especially as Trump may offer Saudi Arabia access to nuclear technology and uranium enrichment during his upcoming visit to Riyadh.
Meanwhile, the pro-reform Telegram channel Jamaran, which is affiliated with former President Mohammad Khatami, posted that many Iranians—particularly those in the middle class—have long supported meaningful engagement with the United States. “Now that the talks have started, the Iranian people are closely watching the developments and discussing them widely,” the channel wrote.
Jamaran added that the public perception is shifting, with many now believing that the government has finally chosen negotiations as a path to address the country’s mounting challenges. It also emphasized that for more than two decades, polls have consistently shown that Iranians favor diplomacy with the West, while also demanding respect for national dignity and interests.
The centrist Telegram channel Emtedad published a commentary by journalist Davoud Heshmati, who welcomed former US Secretary of State John Kerry’s suggestion that any future agreement with Iran should be ratified by the US Senate. He argued that such a step would help reassure Iranians concerned about the possibility of a future US president walking away from the deal.
The comment reflects lingering distrust in Iran toward Trump, with many fearing that even if a new agreement is reached, it could once again be revoked by him—or a successor.
The United States faces a formidable adversary in talks with Islamic Republic, a former top US intelligence official told Iran International, and Tehran's aim could be to buy time for its nuclear program.
Norman Roule, a veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency for over 30 years who once oversaw its Iran desk, said Tehran's veteran negotiators could drag out the talks to their advantage while enriching uranium toward levels needed to build a bomb.
“Every day talks drag on, Iran moves closer to the threshold,” he said. “And if it calculates that it gains more from staying on the edge of weaponization than actually building a bomb, it will continue to play this game.”
Tehran has proven adept, Roule said, at “negotiating the negotiation”, or what he described as using drawn-out diplomacy to defuse military threats and reduce sanctions while continuing nuclear development.
As the United States prepares to resume nuclear talks with Iran this weekend, Iran’s leadership would appear to be on the backfoot amid uncertainty over its political succession, economic malaise, regional setbacks and rising international suspicion of its nuclear ambitions.
Iran has historically used negotiations as a pressure valve, Roule said, entering talks only when the threat of military confrontation peaks, with previous talks in 2003, 2012, and 2015 coinciding with an escalated US military presence or regional turmoil.
But this time is different, he argued.
Norman Roule pictured during an interview with Marzia Hussaini at Iran International's office in Washington DC
“This regime is weaker, more isolated, and increasingly unpopular. If Iran keeps using its nuclear program as a shield to avoid pressure on its oppression, terrorism, and hostage-taking, the international community must call its bluff.”
According to Roule, the Trump administration is entering the talks with a clear objective: a permanent end to Iran’s capacity to build a nuclear weapon, without repeating the perceived flaws of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
“The 2015 agreement placed temporary and reversible limits on Iran’s nuclear program but gave Tehran permanent sanctions relief,” Roule said. “The result was that Iran used that economic relief to finance terrorism and militias across the region.”
Now, Washington may seek to allow Iran a more limited civilian nuclear capability while barring any path to weaponization and denying access to funds that could revitalize Iran’s destabilizing regional network.
Historic Strain
The talks with Trump are proceeding as Tehran is at is weakest strategic moment since emerging from the punishing Iran-Iraq War in 1988, Roule argued.
Politically, the sudden death of President Ebrahim Raisi in a 2024 helicopter crash removed the only viable successor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei who shared the veteran leader's ideological alignment and political credentials.
Presidential elections last year saw historically low turnout, signaling popular resignation, and the recent ouster of the Vice President and the Finance Minister pointed to factional infighting.
On the economic front, inflation and the proportion of Iranians living below the poverty line both stand at around 30% while blackouts routinely plunge residents and businesses into the dark.
“This is an economic catastrophe,” he said. “Iran's people are paying the price for decades of mismanagement and isolation.”
Militarily, an Oct. 26 Israeli attack likely knocked out much of Iran's air defenses, capping months of harsh Israeli blows on Tehran's allies Hamas and Hezbollah.
“The ring of fire Iran built around Israel is now broken,” Roule said. “The Quds Force remains, but it is bruised and scattered,” he added, referring to the elite paramilitary force that oversees Tehran's foreign operations.
Moment of reckoning
While Roule emphasized his support for a diplomatic solution, he acknowledged that Israel in particular is closely studying plans for a potential attack
“If Israel delivers a significant strike, it won’t eliminate Iran’s nuclear capability permanently,” he said, “but it could raise the costs so high that Tehran would hesitate to rebuild.”
Still, there was some possibility that Tehran could choose a fundamentally different posture toward the United States.
“This could be the moment the Supreme Leader chooses normalization over confrontation,” Roule said. “The Iranian people — brilliant, resilient — deserve a future that isn’t shaped by threats, militias and sanctions.”
The Lebanese state must have a monopoly on weapons in the country and the transfer of Iran-backed Hezbollah's arms to Beirut should proceed via direct talks between the presidency and the group, Lebanon’s president Joseph Aoun said on Tuesday.
“The decision has been made to restrict the possession of weapons to the state,” Aoun told the London-based Al-Araby Al-Jadeed in an interview published ahead of his visit to Qatar, saying the move ought to be carried out this year.
“The implementation process remains to be decided through dialogue, which I see as bilateral between the presidency and Hezbollah.”
Washington has pressed for Hezbollah’s disarmament, but Aoun said he warned US envoy Morgan Ortagus about the risk of triggering civil strife.
Hezbollah receives extensive military and financial support from Iran, including arms, training, and strategic guidance from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Iranian help has allowed the group to grow into one of the most formidable non-state military organizations on earth.
However, both Iran and Hezbollah have faced strategic setbacks in recent months. Israeli strikes killed many high-ranking Hezbollah commanders and key IRGC personnel in Syria, while Iran’s influence over its proxies in Iraq and Yemen appears to be shifting under regional and international pressure.
Outlining a future security transition, Aoun rejected forming a Hezbollah-only military unit along the lines of Iraq’s Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces. Instead, he said Hezbollah members who meet military standards could be absorbed individually into the Lebanese Armed Forces.
The commentaries follow five days of speculation over the venue for the second round of talks, along with a considerable degree of public negotiations in which both sides voiced at times contradictory positions.
Kayhan, a daily overseen by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s office, warned that portraying negotiations as the solution to Iran’s economic problems is both misleading and dangerous. This view aligns with Khamenei’s longstanding position since 2018, when President Donald Trump withdrew from the JCPOA nuclear deal and reimposed sanctions. At the time, Khamenei rejected negotiations with Trump and insisted that Iran could endure the pressure without making concessions.
“A tainted and mission-driven current inside the country promotes the idea that 100 percent of our economic troubles stem from sanctions, and that negotiations are the only way to remove them,” the paper wrote.
“This viewpoint was already tested during the JCPOA and yielded nothing but ‘sheer loss’.”
Kayhan did not reject talks outright but insisted they should remain limited.
“We must not abandon negotiations altogether,” the editorial continued. “But we must not put all our eggs in that basket either. At most, 30 percent of our economic problems are due to sanctions, and negotiations should be treated as just one of several tools—not the only one.”
Calling for a wartime posture across government institutions, Kayhan urged officials to invest in domestic capabilities.
“When the enemy, led by the US, threatened us with gasoline sanctions, we could have negotiated,” the paper wrote. “But what proved durable and reliable was relying on domestic capabilities… In the end, the gasoline sanctions were rendered ineffective through trust in revolutionary youth and round-the-clock efforts.”
Javan, a publication linked to the Revolutionary Guard, echoed the skepticism, warning against polarizing discourse.
“Extreme optimism or pessimism about talks risks fueling a false political dichotomy in foreign policy,” the paper wrote.
“A realistic approach strengthens the negotiating team’s resolve, avoids sending weak signals to the opponent, and builds the dignity and prudence necessary for successful diplomacy,” Javan concluded.
Iran and the US held the first round of nuclear talks in Muscat last Saturday, with both sides calling the exchange constructive. But remarks by the US representative—who initially said Iran could retain limited enrichment but later demanded a complete halt to nuclear activity—have heightened tensions.