“Negotiation, whether direct or indirect, with [Qasem] Soleimani’s killers, those who murdered 50,000 people in Palestine, is not going to end well," warned Fatemeh Tashakori, an ultra-hardliner activist on X, referring to an Iranian commander assassinated in a US drone strike in President Donald Trump's first term.
"The reason: Gaddafi’s fate in Libya!” she added.
As US-Iran talks are set to begin on Saturday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and influential US Senator Tom Cotton in recent days both said Tehran ought to follow the example of Libya and renounce weapons of mass destruction.
Tripoli under veteran strongman Muammar Gaddafi made the move in 2003, only to be toppled in a Western-backed uprising and murdered by armed rebels in 2011.
Another popular ultra-hardliner activist with 22,000 followers, @Ya_Fatemeh, echoed similar sentiments, arguing that Gaddafi complied with US demands—scrapped Libya’s nuclear program, limited missile ranges—and it only brought years of civil war. “Yes, that’s what the Libyan model negotiations are like.”
The Libyan civil war was primarily rooted in internal grievances against Gaddafi’s authoritarian rule, including political repression and corruption.
While the United States and NATO intervened militarily in 2011 to prevent a massacre in Benghazi, they did not start the uprising. The conflict began as part of the broader Arab Spring uprisings, with Libyans taking to the streets demanding change well before any foreign involvement.
Ultra-hardliners who claim to be Khamenei’s most loyal—and only—true followers are well aware that the upcoming talks in Oman would not be happening without his tacit approval.
Though they stop short of naming him directly, the implication is unmistakable—and widely noted on social media. “Shame on you for comparing the Leader of the Revolution with these three people,” hardliner figure Mohammad-Ali Ahangaran, who has nearly 28,000 followers on X, wrote in response to a post that invoked the fates of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.
In their opposition to renewed nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington, ultra-hardliners frequently cite Israel’s influence over the Trump administration, particularly its push for the total dismantling of Iran’s uranium enrichment program.
“America and Israel’s Main Strategy Against Iran: Libyazation of Iran,” read the headline of a Raja News article—the outlet affiliated with supporters of former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili an ultra-hardliner ideologue.
The piece referenced statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Senators Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham advocating the use of the "Libyan model" in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program.
While Israeli media reported that Netanyahu discussed the Libyan model during his recent visit to Washington, the US stance remains ambiguous, as Trump gave no firm indication on whether he would adopt the model.
Ultra-hardliners recently warned that the Islamic Republic was risking alienation of its staunchest supporters, who they said make up the “solid core of the system”, if authorities continued suspending strict hijab enforcement.
Often referred to as “super-revolutionaries” by rival conservatives, most ultra-hardliners have strong links to the Paydari (Steadfastness) Party and a group known as MASAF. The two parties form the majority in the Parliament.
Last week, Iran’s Press Supervisory Board issued a rare warning to Kayhan newspaper, a leading ultra-hardline publication, after it published an article interpreted as a threat to assassinate Trump over the 2020 killing of Soleimani. The paper later claimed the piece was satirical.
Officials have made clear that tolerance for dissent against the talks, even from the far right, will depend on the outcome of negotiations—and the Supreme Leader’s position.
Some hardline publications appear to be adjusting their tone. An editorial by Gholamreza Sadeghian, chief editor of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) linked Javan newspaper, for instance, said on Wednesday that Iran may agree to reduce its enrichment levels but warned that this should not be viewed as a concession.
In return for reduced enrichment and increased inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog, IAEA, Iran should demand full sanctions relief and an end to Western support for the Islamic Republic’s opposition, the editorial argued.
