US sets $20 million reward for IRGC suspect in Bolton assassination plot

The gathering of approximately 100 Iranians at the Millennium Hilton Hotel in New York on Wednesday included professionals in the diaspora community advocating for normalization with the Islamic Republic.

Pezeshkian delivered a brief speech before departing the hotel with his delegation for the airport. Although due to host the dinner, the president did not dine with the attendees and the reason for his departure was not immediately clear.

Underscoring the pressure the new president faces on hot-button issues, at least one attendee invited to speak pressed the president on the harshness of hijab enforcement in the country.

Pezeshkian attempted to parry the subject by citing alleged Western hypocrisy at highlighting the issue while downplaying Israel's actions in the region.

"Why do they not react to the massacre of 45,000 Palestinians in Gaza?" the president said, according to news outlet Iranwire.

Javad Zarif, typically affable with guests, entered the dinner alongside security personnel but left immediately after without engaging with attendees, the outlet added.

Also attending an evening meeting ahead of the dinner were several advocates of the now voided Iran nuclear deal which had lifted some sanctions in exchange for curbs on Tehran's enrichment activities.

These included Ali Vaez, head of the Iran program at the International Crisis Group; Hooman Majd, Iranian-American journalist; Trita Parsi, founder of the National Iranian American Council; Negar Mortazavi, Iranian-American journalist; and Mohsen Milani, University of Florida professor, who generally departed before the dinner.

According to Iran International reporters at the scene, many guests of the evening events hosted by the Iranian delegation shielded their faces upon entering the hotel.

Farewell to arms

Central to the president's dilemma were comments he made in a closed door meeting with media professionals on Monday in which he said the Islamic Republic was willing to lay down its arms if its Israeli foe did the same.

"We are prepared to give up all our weapons, provided Israel also disarms, and an international organization steps in to ensure security in the region. We don't even need them—we know how to secure our own safety," Pezeshkian said.

A press conference due to follow was abruptly cancelled without any reason provided.

Aides denied the reported comments but a recording obtained by Iran International confirmed them, earning blistering criticism in Iran.

The hardline Kayhan newspaper, widely seen as a reflection of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's thinking on key issues, lambasted the remarks as violations of the Islamic Republic's founding principles.

In another major embarrassment which earned the ire of conservatives, Lior Sternfeld, a professor at Pennsylvania State University who holds Israeli nationality, said he met and spoke personally to the president at an interfaith meeting early in the week.

Speaking in New York on the sidelines of the UN’s General Assembly, Rafael Grossi said: ”Unfortunately this ship has sailed.”

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency has long warned of Iran’s proximity to nuclear weapons, earlier this year saying it was “weeks, not months” away.

One year ago, Iran banned what Grossi said comprised one third of the team dedicated to monitoring the country’s nuclear program, branding them “extremists”.

At the time, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), Mohammad Eslami, said that those expelled had a history of "extremist political behavior”, contradicting Grossi’s statements and saying only an "insignificant" number had been barred.

The IAEA called the move "unprecedented" and a "very serious blow" to its work.

In June, the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors passed a resolution calling on Iran to step up cooperation with the agency and reverse the barring of those inspectors, technically known as 'de-designation'.

This week, Grossi told Reuters, ”Until a few months ago they said they were considering and now they say they are not going to reincorporate these inspectors to the list, so unfortunately this ship has sailed.”

An IAEA report in August said that Iran had told the agency in June that its position "with regard to the de-designation of those inspectors is unchanged and this position will remain as it is”.

Grossi is now pushing to meet Iran's new president Masoud Pezeshkian next month to appeal to the new premier who is seeking to elevate Iran’s place on the world stage.

Taking a more moderate approach than his predecessors, during his his first speech at the UN, Pezeshkian, who took office in July, said: “I aim to lay a strong foundation for my country’s entry into a new era, positioning it to play an effective and constructive role in the evolving global order”.

Today, Iran is enriching uranium to up to 60 percent purity, close to the roughly 90 percent needed to be weapons-grade. It has enough uranium enriched to that level, which if enriched further could produce almost four nuclear bombs, according to the IAEA's August report.

Unprecedented, the IAEA says no other country has enriched uranium to that level without producing a bomb.

The figure represents a sixfold increase compared to the same period last year, when only 7.3 tons, worth $466 million, were imported.

Mohammad Rezvanifar noted that most of the gold was cleared through the International Imam Khomeini Airport in Tehran, with a small percentage handled by customs offices in various other locations across the country.

In a similar period last year, 7.3 tons of gold bullion, valued at $466 million, were imported into the country. This year, "96.8% of the imported gold bullion was brought in and cleared through Imam Khomeini Airport Customs,” he said on Tuesday.

Regulatory shifts impacting gold imports

Iran has been adjusting its approach to foreign exchange regulations in response to international sanctions. Exporters, particularly those dealing in petrochemicals, steel, and oil products—key sectors in the country's non-oil exports—have been allowed to import gold as an alternative to repatriating foreign currency earnings.

However, a directive issued in June by the Central Bank, halted the practice for some exporters. Observers have pointed out that the surge in gold imports may reflect broader efforts by the country to shield its economy from currency shortages and manage international trade amid sanctions.

Conflicting reports on Central Bank's gold reserves

The rise in gold imports comes amid conflicting reports regarding the true state of Iran’s gold reserves. During Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency, the Central Bank stopped regularly disclosing its gold reserves and import data, attributing the decision to the impact of sanctions.

In 2011, then-Governor Mahmoud Bahmani said that Iran’s reserves stood at 500 tons—a figure that was later debunked. Subsequent reviews under Hassan Rouhani's government revealed that the actual reserves in 2011 were around 45 tons.

In July, Mohammadreza Farzin, the Central Bank governor appointed by Ebrahim Raisi, without mentioning the amount of gold reserves, said: “One of the main goals of the Central Bank is to increase currency reserves, and it can be confidently stated that free currency and gold reserves are increasing.”

The August gold rush

An unprecedented public rush to buy gold occurred on August 18, driven by social media campaigns promoting the superstition of "good fortune" on that particular day. The sudden surge in demand shocked officials, with the vice president of the Iran Gold and Jewelry Union noting that he had never seen such a phenomenon in his 64 years in the market.

Although specific data on the amount of gold sold that day hasn’t been released, the Customs report on gold imports might help explain the surge. Some have speculated that the promotions to increase gold sale to citizens were linked to entities within the government to offload gold imported for currency stabilization. Thus, the owners of those 42.8 tons of gold likely managed to sell a portion of the imported gold during the rush.

Gold-for-drones

Iran's use of gold in international transactions has a long history, often as a tool to bypass international restrictions on currency flows. In February, a hacking group exposed documents from Tondar Sahra, a company involved in drone technology and reportedly linked to the Islamic Republic’s military.

The hacked documents showed Russia paid Iran approximately $1.75 billion in a deal for Shahed-136 drones. Part of the payment was made with several tons of gold ingots.

The leaked files also detail the establishment of a production line in Russia for these drones, set up by Alabuga Special Economic Zone, a Russian state-backed entity. This arrangement allows Russia to manufacture Shahed drones domestically, reducing costs and dependency on imports from Iran.

During Ahmadinejad's tenure, it was revealed in a court session involving Babak Zanjani, an Iranian oil sales middleman, that 1.5 tons of gold had been purchased from Africa. Zanjani testified that the gold, coordinated by the Central Bank, was seized in Turkey and later found to be fake when it arrived in Dubai.

At his first press conference, responding to a female journalist's complaint about the morality police, Pezeshkian remarked, "They were not supposed to harm. We will follow up to ensure they don't bother you." During the election debates, he had an even more critical stance, referring to compulsory hijab enforcement as a “dark agenda.”

However, just two days after this statement, the Guardian Council approved the restrictive hijab law passed by the previous parliament in May 2023, imposing a range of restrictions and punishments on women’s clothing choices.

Later, the firebrand Friday prayer leader of Mashhad, Ahmad Alamolhoda, criticized Pezeshkian’s stance, saying, "The administration may not agree with a particular method of enforcement, but it has the authority to implement an alternative approach... however, rejecting the hijab is intolerable."

Reports indicate that the activity of the morality patrols has decreased since the start of the new administration, though this pattern has been seen in previous governments as well. The vice police patrols have historically been periodic and seasonal.

Meanwhile, many women in Tehran and other major cities have continued to defy the mandatory hijab since the 2022 protests following the death of Mahsa Amini in morality police custody. Since then, violent arrests have persisted, keeping the government on edge as it faces the constant threat of renewed public unrest.

The approval of the new hijab law, while the previous one remains unenforced, has drawn criticism from government-backed clerics. The challenge now is how to address these contradictions.

Three strategies for compulsory hijab enforcement

When analyzing the decisions of the Guardian Council, parliament, and officials' statements, alongside field observations, it appears the government has adopted a three-pronged strategy regarding the controversial hijab enforcement.

First, the strategy involves delaying the implementation of the new hijab law, even after its formal approval. This approval seems designed to appease Shia clerics, religious authorities, and Sharia-oriented officials within the ruling class. However, the law may remain unenforced, much like the longstanding ban on satellite TV equipment, which, after years of raids and confiscations, was largely ignored or forgotten. The public, accustomed to the inconsistent enforcement, is unlikely to protest the lack of rule of law, while religious loyalists will gradually shift focus and forget the issue.

The second strategy involves reverting to the previous method of enforcement—seasonal and periodic implementation of the new hijab law (such as the usual crackdowns every early summer) to maintain a constant level of intimidation. Simultaneously, the government may distance itself by unofficially suggesting that enforcement is not carried out by government or municipal employees, but by self-motivated individuals. This approach mimics the "volunteer" narrative seen with the Hijab Watch plan, where the Tehran municipality’s funding and involvement were quickly exposed despite claims of grassroots enforcement.

In this scenario, the law isn't entirely abandoned, keeping Sharia-oriented factions somewhat satisfied. Meanwhile, the president can claim, as others before him have, that "we don’t have enough power to stop it." This allows the Sharia believers to perceive Pezeshkian’s administration as sidelined on issues like internet filtering and hijab enforcement, despite its public stance.

The third strategy involves keeping the enforcement of the hijab law experimental rather than fully legal. Authorities may test the law in select provinces for a limited time, gauging societal reactions. If the law generates sufficient intimidation, it will be enforced; if not, it could be quietly abandoned, much like the satellite TV ban. If the majority comply and only a small group resists, the law would then be fully implemented.

This approach reflects a trial-and-error method, balancing power between the people and the government, and is aimed at preventing uprisings like the Mahsa Revolution. This perspective is reportedly supported by members of Khamenei's office and authoritarian factions. Notably, compulsory hijab wasn’t introduced by law—it was enforced in 1980, years before the hijab law was passed in 1985. Thus, the power struggle between the government and the people has always been the key factor.

Given society’s sensitivity and the sharp divide between authorities and the public—92% of whom are dissatisfied—this third strategy seems more likely. The regime understands that daily confrontations with ordinary citizens on the streets could threaten its survival.

Opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily the views of Iran International

Iranian social media users compared Pezeshkian’s call for mutual disarmament between Iran and Israel to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, suggesting that Pezeshkian is attempting to trigger the decline of the Islamic Republic, much like Gorbachev did with the Soviet Union.

Others, mostly loyalist hardliners in Tehran, have gone as far as calling for Pezeshkian’s impeachment and removal upon his return to Tehran. On Wednesday, thousands of Iranian social media users trended the hashtag #Pezeshkian's_Impeachment in Persian.

The hardline newspaper Kayhan which is close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's office used strong words in condemning Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi for their remarks in New York. In a commentary headlined "Pezeshkian's uncalculated remarks, who is advising the President," the Kayhan wrote that Pezeshkian's comments were surprising and played into the hands of international and regional media.

After arriving in New York, Pezeshkian held a closed-door meeting with American reporters and columnists. Following the meeting, reports surfaced claiming he had suggested mutual disarmament if Israel agreed to do the same. While his foreign minister quickly denied these claims, Iran International obtained an audio file of the meeting, confirming that the Iranian president had indeed made those remarks.

Pezeshkian said, "We are prepared to give up all our weapons, provided Israel also disarms, and an international organization steps in to ensure security in the region. We don't even need them—we know how to secure our own safety."

Kayhan criticized Pezeshkian's remarks as a "slip of the tongue" and faulted him for his inability to deliver effective speeches. Kayhan argued that these comments could be interpreted as Iran recognizing Israel, contradicting the principles of the Islamic Republic’s founder, Ruhollah Khomeini, and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The daily went on to advise Pezeshkian to dismiss his current advisers, particularly those behind the 2015 nuclear deal—presumably Vice President Mohammad Javad Zarif, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht Ravanchi. Kayhan accused these individuals of lacking a proper understanding of international relations.

Meanwhile, the IRGC's daily newspaper Javan also harshly criticized Pezeshkian and called him a poor speaker and repeated Kayhan's accusations about his advisers. "Those who brokered the nuclear deal are saying that they will remain in New York for a few days after Pezeshkian leaves on Wednesday and try to pretend that they can have some achievements during those few days."

Javan quoted Pezeshkian's statement and sharply criticized both him and his advisers. The hardline newspaper condemned the idea of disarmament, taking aim at the presidential team for suggesting that after Iran and Israel lay down their arms, “an international organization can restore security in the region, although even that is not necessary." The paper directly blamed his advisers, holding them responsible for what it labeled a "shambolic statement."

Meanwhile, another hardline daily, Hamshahri, published by the Tehran Municipality, praised Pezeshkian as "The Voice of the Oppressed Palestinians" and commended the Iranian delegation's diplomatic efforts to build a consensus against Israel in New York. However, the paper did not specify which countries were aligned with the Islamic Republic in this so-called "consensus."

Ironically, the reformist daily Etemad, whose managing editor Elias Hazrati, acting as the government's News Dissemination Chief, had denied Pezeshkian's comments on Tuesday, ran a commentary titled "We are prepared for negotiations." The piece largely contradicted Hazrati’s stance as a state official. Critics had already flagged a potential conflict of interest when Hazrati was appointed to the post earlier in the month.

Ali Khamenei, the ultimate decider in Tehran, has remained silent on Pezeshkian’s visit to New York, likely giving him some leeway to portray the Islamic Republic as a reasonable regional power. Pezeshkian’s presidential campaign and post-election statements have consistently emphasized that lifting US economic sanctions is a top priority for a state facing both a serious economic crisis and the threat of war with Israel.