More Stories
Whether direct or indirect, top diplomats from Iran and the United States are expected to meet in Oman on Saturday. The mere prospect of their presence in the same place at the same time has lifted spirits in Tehran.
While some hardline lawmakers in the Iranian parliament reiterated their distrust of Washington on Tuesday, public sentiment—particularly online—appears more hopeful.
Despite continued criticism of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and frequent jokes about President Donald Trump “breaking the ayatollah’s will,” the mood on social media suggests widespread excitement and a degree of optimism about the talks.
In one of the first reactions to the announcement, former lawmaker Ali Motahari said, “Many in Iran want direct negotiations, and opponents of the talks cannot stand in their way.”
He added, “Whether direct or indirect, participating in negotiations is a decision backed by the entire Iranian political system.” According to Motahari, “a majority of Iranians want an agreement between Tehran and Washington—an agreement that would lift the sanctions.”
Public criticism of hardline figures like Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmadari, along with a rise in the value of the Iranian currency, appeared to support Motahari’s point. He told Khabar Online that “hardliners only want to make their presence felt; beyond that, they can’t actually prevent negotiations.”
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi echoed a similar message in remarks to state television. “What matters is ensuring that both sides are serious about negotiating,” he said, while emphasizing again that no arrangement has been made for direct talks.
The shift in tone among Iranian officials in recent days, including military chief Mohammad Bagheri—who expressed support for negotiations—has signaled a broader change in the country’s mood toward diplomacy.
Former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, in a post on X, expressed confidence in Araghchi's leadership. “It is heartwarming to know that Araghchi is heading the talks for Iran. He is knowledgeable, serious, and committed to reaching an agreement based on national interests and mutual respect. Things will go well if the US delegation approaches the talks with the same seriousness and respect for Iranian interests.”
Zarif added: “Now it is the United States’ turn to cooperate in building a better future for the region and the world.”
Commenting on Trump’s decision to announce the Oman talks himself, Iranian journalist Niloofar Ghadiri noted in a post on X: “One of the main differences in this round of negotiations is that the first leak to the media came directly from the US president.”
Meanwhile, Mohammad Hossein Khoshvaqt—a relative of Khamenei and director of the pro-reform Fararu website—offered a provocative comment on X: “What would you say if you found out that Iran had launched a one-trillion-dollar project and hadn’t barred American investors from participating?”
In contrast, hardline daily Kayhan pushed back forcefully on Trump’s claim that a military option remains on the table if talks fail. “America is bluffing,” the paper wrote in its first article on the statement. “There will be no military attack. Any US military action would cause havoc in the region.”
The editorial added: “Even a limited military action will provoke Iran to destroy the Israeli regime.”
A hardline Iranian newspaper, Javan, cautioned on Wednesday that any discussion of Iran's missile program in upcoming talks with the United States would immediately end negotiations, while outlining a potential scenario where Iran might reduce uranium enrichment in exchange for the complete lifting of sanctions.
"Regarding missiles, Iran will certainly not start any discussion... This is where the negotiations can end, and perhaps America included it in the discussions for this very purpose, which is to make the negotiations fruitless!" read the editorial by Javan, which is seen as close to the Revolutionary Guards.
On Tehran-backed militias, the newspaper highlighted Iran's stance that it does not have proxy forces and suggested Iran would likely ask the US to negotiate directly with those groups.
Predicting the course of the negotiations, Javan wrote that Iran might first agree to reduce its enrichment levels, which it said should not be seen as a retreat.
The paper said that maintaining the nuclear industry and enrichment to levels meeting non-military needs has been Iran's long-standing position.
In return for reduced enrichment and increased inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog, Iran should demand the complete removal of sanctions, Javan argued.
Iran's has enriched of uranium to up to 60% fissile purity, close to the 90% needed for a bomb. Tehran denies seeking a bomb, but the United States, Israel and Western powers doubt its intentions.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi saidthat the upcoming discussions with the United States, led by US envoy Steve Witkoff, will solely focus on Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.
"The nuclear issue, in the sense of clarifying and assuring the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of the cruel sanctions, is the only topic of discussion," Araghchi said regarding his meeting with Witkoff.
Araghchi emphasized that the talks scheduled for Saturday in Oman present "a new opportunity for diplomacy and a test to gauge America's seriousness; a country with a long history of bad faith and unilateralism in its record."
A prominent Iranian analyst and former diplomat hailed the upcoming talks between Iran and the United States as a potential turning point in relations, while cautioning about the challenges ahead, particularly from hardliners and the limited timeframe.
In an editorial in the daily Donya-e-Eqtesad, Kourosh Ahmadi, a former Iranian diplomat at the United Nations, wrote that the confirmation of talks by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi following Donald Trump's announcement should be seen as the start of a new era in Iran-US relations and the nuclear negotiations.
Ahmadi expressed optimism that the Foreign Ministry is leading the talks, hoping it will develop principled and logical plans, standing firm against vested interests and what he called "delusional" influential figures, a tacit reference to the hardliners.
He stressed that avoiding war and its immense damage should be the top priority, leaving diplomacy and negotiation as the only viable path.
A month-long protest by farmers in the central Iranian province of Isfahan over their water rights has once again brought the country’s growing water crisis into sharp focus.
Farmers' protests in Isfahan culminated last week in the sabotage of water transfer infrastructures and the cutting of drinking water supplies to the neighboring province of Yazd, highlighting the growing potential for civil unrest and national security risks linked to water scarcity.
Over 95 percent of Iran is currently experiencing prolonged drought. Yet experts argue that the root causes of the crisis go beyond climate, pointing to decades of mismanagement, poor resource planning, and development strategies that ignored environmental realities.
Among the most contentious issues is the concentration of water-intensive industries—such as steel and ceramics—in already water-stressed provinces like Isfahan and Yazd.
Environmental geologist and activist Nikahang Kowsar, who has been warning of a looming water catastrophe since the early 2000s, blames government policies stretching back to the reformist era of President Mohammad Khatami.
Khatami’s supporters, however, argue that plans to transfer water from Isfahan’s Zayandeh Rud to Yazd, Khatami’s hometown, began much earlier and were only completed during his presidency.
The video in the tweet shows the broken pipeline
Experts also cite excessive groundwater extraction for agriculture—pushed in the name of food security—as a major contributor to dropping water tables and land subsidence across much of the country.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has long championed agricultural self-sufficiency. In a March 2021 speech, he called for domestic production of key crops such as wheat, corn, and barley, asserting that the goal was both necessary and achievable. But critics say this policy has encouraged unsustainable water use, especially in arid regions.
Tensions in Isfahan flared last month as local farmers demanded the release of water from behind Zayandeh Rud Dam to the dry river to irrigate their parched lands. The government temporarily eased the standoff on April 5 by releasing water into the river for ten days, prompting celebratory gatherings of citizens along the dry riverbed.
Zayandeh Rud, once the lifeline of Isfahan, has not maintained a permanent flow since 2006. The decline is attributed to drought, upstream agricultural expansion in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Province, and the controversial diversion of water to Yazd.
Much warmer months, however, are ahead with temperatures exceeding 40 degrees celsius and both farmers and residents of the city are highly likely to face serious water issues for the irrigation of the crops and normal use, including the running of evaporative air conditioners.
Isfahan’s farmers claim that water diverted to Yazd is being used to support industrial operations, including a major steel plant and greenhouse agriculture such as the cultivation of cucumbers for export. Officials, however, maintain that the pipeline primarily supplies drinking water.
Isfahan Province is also a highly industrial city with a massive steel complex (Mobarakeh Steel Company). Local farmers also grow highly water-intensive crops such as watermelons and rice.
In recent days, angry demonstrators destroyed three pumping stations and damaged the main pipeline to Yazd. Supply of water has been partially restored. Government sources say full restoration of the pipeline could take up to two months.
The resulting emergency triggered a major water crisis in Yazd, forcing the government to announce the closure of government offices and educational facilities on Saturday and Sunday and to begin the distribution of drinking water with tankers to the city’s over half a million population.
The pipeline has long been a flashpoint. It was first sabotaged in 2012, and subsequent protests over water scarcity in Isfahan, Khuzestan, and Bushehr in 2018 and 2021 were met with a heavy government crackdown.
While protests in Isfahan temporarily subsided in Isfahan, the deeper crisis remains unresolved. Isfahan continues to suffer from some of the worst water stress in the country, even as it remains a hub for heavy industry.
Amid growing concerns, some officials have even floated the idea of relocating the capital from Tehran to the water-rich Makran region along the Gulf of Oman—a dramatic proposal that underlines the severity of Iran’s water crisis and its potential to destabilize the country’s future.
