The UN Security Council’s decision not to lift sanctions on Iran has heightened the stakes for Tehran, with hardliners pushing for nuclear escalation, reformists urging engagement, and a public already strained by inflation.
Hardliners and ultra-hardliners in Tehran, who have long dismissed the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) as a “total failure,” downplayed the impact of the UN’s decision and called for withdrawal from the NPT.
Meanwhile, reformists are calling for urgent diplomacy.
The UN Security Council’s decision not to lift sanctions on Iran has heightened the stakes for Tehran, with hardliners pushing for nuclear escalation, reformists urging engagement, and a public already strained by inflation.
Hardliners and ultra-hardliners in Tehran, who have long dismissed the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) as a “total failure,” downplayed the impact of the UN’s decision. For them, renewed sanctions are little more than symbolic.
“In the past, sanctions far harsher than these have been imposed; this is simply a psychological tactic intended to impact our economy,” hardline lawmaker Hosseinali Haji-Deligani told ILNA.
Meanwhile, Kayhan newspaper, linked to the Supreme Leader’s office, and other hardline outlets such as Vatan-e Emrouz have urged Tehran to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
In an editorial titled “Is it still not time to leave the NPT after 22 years of costly negotiations?!” the paper argued for building a bomb to “fully strengthen national deterrence.”
Ahmad Naderi, a member of parliament’s presiding board, echoed this stance, insisting that “acquiring nuclear weapons is the only way to preserve Iran’s territorial integrity and national security.”
“Withdrawing from the NPT, adopting a policy of ambiguity and ultimately testing the atomic bomb is the only option that can spare Iran the fate of Iraq and Libya,” said Naderi.
“Experience has shown that countries without nuclear deterrence eventually become victims of invasion or regime change. The time has come to make hard but necessary decisions.”
Warning of a deepening crisis, push for policy change
Others caution that the impact will be severe. Journalist Azadeh Mokhtari argued on social media that the Iranian people will once again bear the brunt of political maneuvering: “The return of UN sanctions means increased economic pressure, reduced access to essential goods and medicine, and a deepening livelihood crisis.”
Meanwhile, reformists are calling for urgent diplomacy. Azar Mansouri, head of the Reform Front, warned that “immediate and maximal use of diplomatic capacity to prevent a global consensus against Iran is an unavoidable necessity.”
She stressed that the window of opportunity for negotiations is closing fast, with reinstated UN resolutions carrying “wide-ranging international consequences.”
Ebrahim Asgharzadeh, a reformist politician, went further, telling Etemad newspaper: “Iran stands on the brink of a historic choice: either insist on the illusion of costly deterrence and a single-track foreign policy, which yields nothing but isolation and domestic erosion, or acknowledge the reality of rival powers.”
He added that the world today is “waiting for a change in Iran’s language and behavior, not a repetition or justification of the past.”
Doubts over Russia and China
Hardliners often argue that Russia and China will help Iran weather sanctions. Yet that view has drawn criticism even from conservative voices. Journalist Ali Gholhaki dismissed the notion: “At least in China’s case, it’s just empty talk! Industrial and economic managers understand the reason well. They have seen examples of this in just the past few days.”
Mohammad-Ali Hanaei, head of the Nations Diplomacy Think Tank, told Etemad that Beijing profits from buying Iranian oil cheaply and has little incentive to back sanctions relief. He urged Tehran to consider “logical restrictions” as a way to manage the crisis.
Moscow has suggested it might mediate. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia’s envoy to international organizations in Vienna, told Al Mayadeen that Russia and China are preparing a joint initiative to resolve the crisis, though he offered no details.
Diplomatic openings still possible?
Some experts still see potential for compromise. Economics professor Alireza Soltani told Khabar Online that the diplomatic window is not yet closed, while cautioning against “emotional reactions.”
Even if previous UN resolutions are reinstated, he argued, a comprehensive deal remains possible “provided there is political will from both Iran and the United States.”
Foreign policy analyst Morteza Makki raised the possibility of a “miracle” if Tehran can strike a temporary arrangement with the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany) in the coming days or at the UN General Assembly.
Pezeshkian-Trump Meeting Debate
At home, debate is intensifying over whether President Masoud Pezeshkian should meet US President Donald Trump during his upcoming trip to New York.
Reformist cleric Mohammad-Taghi Fazel-Meybodi called such a meeting “the last chance of the system,” recalling that a missed opportunity between Mohammad Khatami and Bill Clinton two decades ago paved the way for today’s sanctions.
Yet many doubt Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will allow it, having denied similar requests from both Khatami and Hassan Rouhani.
A decisive UN Security Council vote setting Iran on course for the automatic return of pre-2015 sanctions has heightened tensions inside Tehran, as rival factions clash over strategy while officials strive to project a unified message abroad.
The resolution that could have lifted the sanctions was rejected after nine members voted against it on Friday, meaning they will be reimposed on 27 September unless a drastic diplomatic breakthrough prompts the Council to reconsider before then.
“The carelessness and passivity of the Islamic Republic in the face of the snapback is truly astonishing,” wrote outspoken sociologist Hossein Hamdieh on X, urging leaders to “wrest the national interests from the devil’s mouth in the middle of hell.”
Ultra-hardliners, meanwhile, remain opposed to any concession and lay the blame for the so-called snapback at the moderates’ door for agreeing to a deal with such mechanisms a decade ago.
“This flawed mechanism is the result of the mistakes of the JCPOA negotiating team in 2015, including Mr. Araghchi himself,” lawmaker Amir-Hossein Sabeti wrote on X.
“The cost of implementing the snapback is less than the cost of extending it,” he added, arguing that prolonging the deadline would strip Iran of its “nuclear ambiguity” card.
Diplomacy or publicity stunt?
Araghchi’s authority, under attack at home, is also being questioned abroad.
A day earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron had called the sanctions return a “done deal” and questioned whether Araghchi had full authority when presenting his recent IAEA agreement and proposal to the Europeans.
Araghchi rejected the claim, writing on X that he enjoyed the backing of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Analysts in Tehran said Macron’s comments were aimed at pressuring Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to openly endorse or reject the initiatives.
Skepticism also persists over Araghchi’s timing.
“The proposal ahead of the UNSC vote on Resolution 2231 was not meant as a serious move,” Turkey-based analyst Ruhollah Rahimpour wrote on X.
Submitting such a plan just two days before the vote, he argued, meant “you have no sense of timing, or you only sought publicity.”
Last chance?
Some analysts believe the UN General Assembly next week could be Tehran’s final opportunity to resolve the standoff.
“The only chance remaining is that Iran’s proposals are submitted in writing and signed, and direct dialogue between Iran and the United States takes place when Pezeshkian is in New York,” Canada-based commentator Alireza Namvar-Haghighi told Iran International.
Both US and Iranian envoys said after the UNSC vote on Friday that the door is not shut to diplomacy. A negotiated way to avoid UN sanctions is still possible — but not probable.
Moderates in Tehran—often accused by rivals of weakening the system—are now accusing the hardliners of undermining the supreme leader's authority through escalating factional battles.
The charge came from prominent politician Hossein Marashi, head of the centrist Construction Party, who on Wednesday accused ultraconservatives of striking a discordant note on matters of foreign policy and national security.
“(They) cannot bring themselves to act within the overall framework of the political system,” Marashi told the centrist outlet Khabar Online.
“Either their level of understanding is very low, or they fail to grasp that the president, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), and the foreign minister do not speak, decide, or act without careful calculation and coordination with the system’s general policies.”
The “system,” in official parlance, refers to the supreme leader.
When asked if hardliners’ attacks on the moderate administration should be seen as an indirect challenge to Khamenei himself, Marashi said: “I think those in parliament are capable of slighting the Leader even.”
Araghchi under fire
Since Israeli and US strikes on Iran in June, Tehran moderates inside and outside president Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration have been advocating direct negotiations with Washington.
Yet some have also begun questioning the chief protagonist of diplomacy, foreign minister Abbas Araghchi, urging that he be replaced by former nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi.
Replacing Araghchi, however, appears unrealistic.
On September 18, Hadi Borhani, an expert on Israeli affairs, suggested instead that the president appoint Salehi as his plenipotentiary envoy for regional affairs.
But it is unclear what Salehi could do that Araghchi cannot: decisions are made by the SNSC and ultimately by the supreme leader.
Moderates appear to be playing the same game they accuse hardliners of—shooting the messenger when the author of the message is untouchable.
'MPs abusing powers'
That may explain some of their broader criticisms of the foreign ministry.
Prominent centrist and former Tehran mayor Gholamhossein Karbaschi argued on Thursday that the ministry remains dominated by hardliners from the previous administration.
“Only two or three individuals from Amir-Abdollahian and Raisi’s team have been replaced in the current government,” he told Khabar Online, referring to the late foreign minister and president killed in a helicopter crash in May 2024.
The harshest attacks, however, are reserved for rival hardliners in parliament.
“What these lawmakers do to government officials is beyond their official mandate and amounts to abuse,” Karbaschi said, accusing MPs of putting factional feuds above national interests with their impeachment threats.
The ultraconservatives summoned Araghchi over his Cairo agreement with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, a move Karbaschi likened to stretching oversight powers to the point of undermining national security.
“He hasn’t done badly, but his efforts haven’t led to any breakthrough,” Karbaschi said of Araghchi’s record.
Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi could be on shaky ground, with reformists pressing for his replacement by former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi, according to a prominent conservative commentator in Tehran.
Nasser Imani, a longtime contributor to the Supreme Leader-funded Kayhan newspaper, also hinted that Araghchi’s recent overtures on negotiations with the United States have received tacit approval from supreme leader Ali Khamenei.
Tehran is in a tough spot, with the resumption of UN sanctions triggered by European powers weeks away barring an unlikely diplomatic breakthrough.
“Hardliners in Iran are constantly threatening to impeach Araghchi and put former President Hassan Rouhani on trial … while reformists are pressuring the government to replace Araghchi with Salehi,” moderate outlet Khabar Online quoted Imani as saying on September 16.
“When the Foreign Ministry is weakened, the shop window is broken,” he warned. “Everyone knows this—especially those gentlemen attacking Mr. Araghchi for wanting to negotiate with the Americans and the IAEA.
They know that the Foreign Ministry team and the government act in full coordination with the entirety of the governance.”
The phrase “entirety of the governance” is widely read as a euphemism for Khamenei himself—perhaps the first time a conservative insider has publicly suggested the Supreme Leader’s approval for talks with Washington.
Araghchi facing fire
Imani’s remarks appear designed to shield Iran’s top diplomat from hardliner attacks.
Araghchi, a graduate of Imam Sadeq University, has come under mounting pressure from hardliners, particularly in parliament, for his agreement with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi on nuclear cooperation.
The deal sparked fierce backlash, with some MPs accusing him of defying legislation mandating withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Ultraconservatives such as Hamid Rasai have even threatened to impeach him.
Araghchi, summoned to parliament, has tried to balance hardliner demands with what he frames as national interests, denying he had broken the law while still permitting IAEA access.
Salehi, by contrast, is a US-educated nuclear expert and MIT alumnus who remains a trusted Khamenei confidant despite his reformist leanings.
In the early 2010s, Khamenei tasked him with running a backchannel to Washington, separate from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Foreign Ministry, a track that ultimately paved the way for the 2015 nuclear deal.
Calls for talks with US
But Iran’s leadership may face even greater trouble abroad if it fails to strike a quick understanding.
Pressure is now mounting from Europe, where foreign ministers have tied continued sanctions relief to concrete steps on the nuclear file, warning that sanctions would be reimposed if Tehran fails to act in the coming days.
At home, moderates weary of the impasse are voicing impatience with the endless brinkmanship.
Former diplomat Javid Ghorbanoghlou urged readiness for “comprehensive negotiations with America,” while analyst Morteza Makki wrote in reformist daily Etemad that Tehran has decided to cooperate with the UN nuclear watchdog and that opposition from radicals had little bearing on key decisions.
He pointed out that both Araghchi’s meeting with parliament’s National Security Committee and a statement by the Supreme National Security Council confirmed the IAEA deal fell within the SNSC’s nuclear committee framework.
Iranian authorities have led a systematic campaign to silence the families of those killed and executed amid the Woman, Life, Freedom protest movement—denying public mourning, arresting relatives and subjecting mourners to threats and intimidation.
From the earliest days after the death of Mahsa Amini in morality police custody three years ago, family memorials and funerals became focal points for renewed protest.
Victims' kin insist that remembrance itself is a form of resistance, and safeguarding the right to mourn is central to winning truth and justice.
In Iran, funerals and anniversaries have long been potent political tools. They gather people across social and geographic divides, create moments of public memory and sustain narratives of grievance and solidarity.
The 2022–23 protests frequently reignited during burials and 40-day mourning periods. Since then, authorities have continued to dismantle these anniversary rituals through arrests, intimidation, legal harassment and tight security controls at cemeteries where the victims are buried.
Families who refuse to forget
Despite these pressures, families persist. They gather at cemeteries, share photos and videos on social media, and hold private ceremonies to honor their loved ones. Many celebrate birthdays and New Year holidays at graves, bringing cakes, flowers, and posting images online as quiet acts of resistance.
Like previous years, Mahsa Amini’s father, Amjad Amini, published a defiant message on September 14 in remembrance of his daughter on Instagram.
“The memory and demand for justice for Mahsa and the other slain protesters will never be forgotten,” he wrote.
Menaced for mourning
The case of Mashallah Karami demonstrates the lengths to which the state will go to scotch remembrances. His son, Mohammad-Mehdi Karami, along with co-defendant Mohammad Hosseini, was executed in January 2023 for alleged involvement in the death of a Basij militia member in Karaj in central Iran. They denied the charges.
Karami’s father, a street vendor who campaigned relentlessly for his son and Hosseini, was arrested in August 2023 during a security raid. Authorities froze the family’s bank accounts and repeatedly destroyed plaques commemorating the men.
He now serves an eight-year and ten months sentence in prison on fabricated charges of money laundering and obtaining property through illegitimate means, on top of fines and asset confiscations. His appeals for a retrial were rejected by the Supreme Court this month.
Similarly, Mohammad Javad Zahedi, 20, from Sari in northern Iran, was shot dead in September 2022 while on his way to a pharmacy, his body showing close to a hundred pellet wounds.
His mother, Mahsa Yazdani, launched a social media campaign demanding justice but was arrested ahead of the first anniversary of his death.
She was sentenced to 13 years in prison, including a mandatory five-year term, on charges of insulting sacred values and inciting people to disrupt national security, insulting the Supreme Leader and propaganda against the system.
Her sentence was later commuted to home detention with an electronic ankle bracelet, and she was finally released in March after serving two years.
Lawyers in the dock
Legal defenders of these families have also faced persecution.
Saleh Nikbakht, winner of the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize in 2023, who represented Mahsa Amini’s family, was sentenced to one year in prison for interviews with Persian-language media outside Iran and cooperation with hostile states.
Another lawyer, Khosrow Alikordi, was likewise sentenced to one year in prison for propaganda in favor of opposition groups. He represented the prosecuted members of Abolfazl Adinehzadeh’s family.
Adinehzadeh, a seventeen-year-old student, was shot with over 70 pellets in Mashhad during the protests.
Several of his family members, including his father and sister were charged with propaganda against the system. They had been detained at his gravesite on the first anniversary of his death.
