Iran judiciary reopens probes into disputed land deals near Tehran
Iranian authorities are investigating fresh details in two of 173 cases of disputed land allocations in Damavand and Shemiranat, Tehran province, judicial and semi-official news agencies reported on Sunday.
The judiciary’s Mizan news agency said it had reopened inquiries into decades-old land transfers involving national property. Tasnim, a news outlet affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards, said the cases concern valuable land originally allocated under “olive cultivation” and “orchard development” schemes.
In one case, Tasnim reported, 15 hectares of land in the Lalan area of Shemiranat were sold at a discounted price of 150 million rials (about $150 in today’s rate) on instalments to a company described as belonging to a “well-known figure.”
The outlet said no payments were made, and the property lies within an environmentally protected zone where sales were prohibited.
In another case, ILNA news agency said 80 hectares in the Cheshmeh Magasi area of Damavand were transferred at half price to a buyer under a “fodder cultivation” project allegedly backed by a state official.
No crops were planted, the report said, and after legal challenges the contract was annulled and converted into a lease. Subsequent rulings ordered the Ministry of Agriculture to reimburse the buyer at market value plus expenses.
The Cheshmeh Magasi region has also been the focus of a long-running land dispute involving the Kayhan newspaper, which operates under the supervision of Iran’s Supreme Leader.
In early 2024, local media reported the newspaper had not returned 200 hectares of land allocated in the 1990s for “tree planting and livestock farming” despite a court ruling. Kayhan rejected the allegations at the time, calling them politically motivated.
Young middle-class Iranians are getting increasingly anxious about slipping into poverty, despite salaries that once signaled stability but now fail to cover even routine expenses, Iran’s reformist Shargh daily warned in a weekend report.
Many with monthly incomes of 200 to 300 million rials ($200-300) can no longer afford routine purchases or modest leisure activities.
One young woman told the paper her salary had risen sixfold in four years but her quality of life had deteriorated. “I clearly struggle to make ends meet each month,” she said, explaining that social outings had shrunk to small gatherings at friends’ homes.
A married couple said they had stopped buying basic items like coffee, while another respondent described cutting back on skin-care products and restaurants out of fear of running out of money before month’s end.
Other interviewees echoed the theme. A newly married couple said that after a short trip to Kish Island in southern Iran, they had no money left for the rest of the month.
Once accustomed to filling their cart with extras at chain stores, they now only buy essentials. A bookstore owner recounted earning 500 million rials ($500) a month but said higher household costs meant “in my youth I am constantly thinking about money problems, not joy.”
A teacher who once traveled frequently told Shargh he could no longer afford even budget trips to neighboring Turkey. Rising rents forced him and his friends to abandon a shared home outside Tehran.
“Even though all of us earn more than last year, our quality of life has clearly gone down,” he said.
Psychological strain
The loss of economic security is driving chronic anxiety among young professionals, psychologist Nasser Ghasemzadeh told Shargh.
He said financial stress discourages marriage and childbearing and undermines collective morale: “A young person who compares himself with peers abroad feels defeated. That sense of failure reduces hope in life.”
Without economic reforms, insecurity will continue to erode both individual mental health and wider social cohesion, he warned.
The problem is rooted in inequality and state neglect, economist Hossein Raghfar told the daily. Wage-earners, unable to offset inflation through pricing power, bear the brunt of rising costs, according to him.
Raghfar cited a 60–70 percent jump in car prices last winter as proof of government failure to regulate markets.
He cautioned that frustration is fueling crime and social unrest. “These young people look at the decision-making system and see it as the main cause of their failures—and to a large extent they are right.”
Once a political force, the middle class now feels powerless, he added, drained of energy for civic engagement by daily financial stress.
The insecurity facing young, educated workers is no longer a private matter but a collective threat to Iran’s social fabric and future stability, Shargh concluded.
Iran faces one of the highest inflation rates in the region. According to the International Monetary Fund's estimates, the annual inflation rate has averaged above 42% since 2020.
Sanctions, corruption and economic mismanagement have contributed to widespread economic hardship and market instability as Iran's currency the rial has lost over 90% of its value since US sanctions were reimposed in 2018.
A poll by Iran's leading economic newspaper Donya-ye Eqtesad last month showed that a vast majority of Iranians are dissatisfied with the government's economic policies, as costs of living soar and the value of the Iranian currency slips.
Slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk had privately pressed President Donald Trump in the Oval Office not to launch a war against Iran, even while donors aligned with him opposed that stance, US right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson said.
Kirk was one of the only people close to Trump who raised the risks of escalation, Carlson said at the Megyn Kelly Show on Friday.
“He went to the Oval Office and said, ‘Sir, I totally understand and think Iran’s really bad. But a war with Iran is something that could really hurt our country,’” Carlson said.
He added that Kirk showed him “intense” donor messages criticizing his position but argued he stuck to it because “he was for doing the right and wise and difficult thing.”
In 2020, after the US killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani on Trump’s order, he warned against deeper involvement, saying: “Iran is an evil regime … Critical we remain restrained and disciplined against another endless, reckless war in the region. NO WAR with Iran!”
In the midst of Israel's 12-day war against Iran in June, and before the US airstrikes, Kirk cautioned that Iran’s size, history, and resilience made open war a dangerous prospect.
“They were a great power for a thousand years. Not even the Romans could defeat Persia,” he told Newsmax on June 20.
Yet his stance shifted when Trump ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, known as Operation Midnight Hammer. While other conservative allies questioned the wisdom of the move, Kirk applauded it.
"America stands with President Trump," he wrote on X. "President Trump has been navigating this quite well in fact, he could potentially declare victory," he added in a video testimonial posted online.
Iranian athletes competing abroad face conflicting pressures: the state demands public displays of loyalty, while opponents expect defiance.
Since the 12-day war with Israel in June, athletes have been performing military-style salutes to the flag at international competitions—a move heavily promoted by state media but denounced by opposition groups and angry fans.
The first instance came on June 14, a day after Israel’s strikes, when Iran’s volleyball team saluted before a match in the FIVB Men’s Nations League.
Whether the move was spontaneous or ordered by authorities remains unclear. Since then, athletes at send-off ceremonies, matches and even homecomings are expected to perform the gesture.
Opponents condemn what they see as forced reverence for the flag and anthem, symbols they see as inseparable from the Islamic Republic’s ideology.
Refusal to sing the anthem had become one of the most visible forms of athlete protest in recent years.
State media, including Press TV, portray the salutes as loyalty to the armed forces and solidarity with war victims.
Following the June conflict with Israel and the United States, authorities have embraced a nationalism they once suppressed to rally a weary public. Sports are now used to showcase allegiance.
“This gesture shows our enemies that the nation always stands behind the Leader of the Revolution,” said MP Rahim Zare, praising the footballers’ salute before a CAFA Nations Cup match against India.
Opponents, however, slammed the display and even celebrated the team’s defeat online.
“These are the regime’s team,” one X user wrote. “It used to be the national team when it didn’t give military salutes.”
Football’s loss of support
The national football team, Team Melli, has suffered a dramatic loss of support since the 2022–23 protests triggered by Mahsa Amini’s death in custody.
Some players condemned the crackdown, wore black armbands, and refused to sing the anthem at the Qatar World Cup. Their defiance drew global attention but was followed by a return to compliance, reflecting intense behind-the-scenes pressure.
Many fans began calling the squad the “mullahs’ team.” Victories no longer stirred pride; defeats—such as the Asian Cup loss to Qatar in February 2024—were even welcomed by some.
Pressure beyond football
The football squad’s experience is emblematic, but pressure extends across sports. Athletes risk harassment, arrest and career ruin for small acts of defiance.
Voria Ghafouri, captain of Esteghlal, was arrested in November 2022 after criticizing the government’s protest crackdown and supporting Kurdish rights. His career has since collapsed.
Legendary striker Ali Daei and his family were also targeted: his Tehran businesses were shut, and authorities forced a jetliner to land to stop his family from leaving the country.
Images from a charity match last week showed Daei and fellow former player Hamid Estili refusing to sing the anthem—a quiet but potent reminder that, even under relentless pressure, the anthem remains one of the few remaining stages for resistance.
The Iranian parliament on Saturday convened an emergency meeting with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to review the government’s new cooperation agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) signed in Cairo.
"The lawmakers had questions and concerns that are legitimate and stem from their supervisory role, which they must exercise, and we also have a duty to provide answers," Araghchi told reporters after the meeting.
Lawmakers were supposed to seek explanations on how the accord, signed in Cairo on Tuesday, complies with legislation suspending cooperation with the agency after June's conflict with Israel.
"In today’s session, some of these concerns were raised, and there was consultation on how to move forward more effectively, neutralize the enemies’ tricks in political and international arenas against the people, and safeguard the country’s interests," Araghchi said.
He described the meeting with lawmakers as "very good, constructive, and scientific."
More than 60 MPs earlier backed a request for a special session with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Supreme National Security Council secretary Ali Larijani to provide clarification. The move came after parliament went into recess until September 27, prompting criticism that oversight was being avoided.
Conservative MP Hamed Yazdian, who initiated the request, said the session was needed to assess “the extent of conformity of the Cairo agreement with the law passed by parliament.”
Strong criticism of Grossi
The deal has sparked sharp reactions from hardline lawmakers. Javad Hosseini-Kia called IAEA chief Rafael Grossi “a Mossad agent” and urged that he be arrested if he enters Iran.
Another MP, Mohammadreza Mohseni-Sani, said inspectors “have no right” to enter Iran until damaged nuclear facilities are restored, warning that if UN sanctions are reimposed under the “snapback” mechanism, parliament would pursue leaving the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Some lawmakers, such as Ahmad Bakhshayesh, have argued Iran should no longer limit itself to peaceful nuclear activities, while others, including Mahmoud Nabavian, have branded the Cairo accord a “cursed agreement.”
By contrast, former nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi has described it as “positive” but cautioned that time is running out for diplomacy.
Araghchi insists the Cairo accord safeguards Iran’s interests and is consistent with the law suspending cooperation. He said it recognizes Tehran’s security concerns, guarantees Iran’s rights, and “creates no access” for inspectors at this stage.
Any monitoring, he added, would only be discussed later with approval from the Supreme National Security Council.
The debate in Tehran comes as France, Germany, and Britain have triggered the UN “snapback” mechanism, which could restore sanctions at the end of September. One of their conditions for pausing the process is renewed IAEA access, a demand the United States and European Union have also emphasized.
Israeli officials told French authorities that Iran’s nuclear program was not entirely destroyed in June’s US-Israeli airstrikes, Le Monde reported on Friday.
The French newspaper, citing diplomatic sources, said the information was shared in early September. Le Monde quoted Israeli intelligence as saying that “while the centrifuge manufacturing sites and most of the uranium enrichment facilities were destroyed, particularly at Fordow and Natanz, Iran still possesses this type of equipment.” Officials added: “Too few to restart the program in the short term, but it’s only a matter of time.”
Le Monde said France values the Israeli assessment because US intelligence has stopped sharing information on Iran’s program with European partners since the June war.
Cairo deal and snapback
Iran has rejected the idea that its program was wiped out. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Le Monde in July that “the claim that a peaceful nuclear program has been annihilated is a miscalculation” and said the strikes had “reignited” a nuclear arms race.
This week, Araghchi said Iran’s new agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency, signed in Cairo, does not currently allow inspectors into nuclear sites. He said the deal is consistent with a law passed after the June strikes that suspended cooperation pending approval by the Supreme National Security Council. He added that its continuation depends on Western powers not restoring UN sanctions under the “snapback” mechanism.
Britain, France and Germany triggered snapback in late August, which could restore sanctions at the end of September. They said they would pause the process only if Iran restored IAEA inspections, accounted for its highly enriched uranium stockpile, and engaged in nuclear talks with the United States.
Western pressure
The United States and European Union pressed Tehran to act quickly. Acting US envoy Howard Solomon told the IAEA board that Iran had “ceased implementing its most basic obligations.” The EU said safeguards access is “non-negotiable,” while France, Germany and Britain said they were “alarmed” by Iran’s uranium stockpile.