Negotiators are set to meet in Geneva on Thursday in discussions that could prove decisive, particularly if reports are accurate that Washington has set informal deadlines for progress.
Public messaging inside Iran reflects both anticipation and unease as officials brace for what could be a pivotal round.
Late Tuesday, just before departing for Geneva, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi struck an optimistic tone.
“We have a historic opportunity to strike an unprecedented agreement that addresses mutual concerns and achieves mutual interests,” he wrote on X. “A deal is within reach, but only if diplomacy is given priority.”
Government-aligned newspapers such as Iran and Etemad described the talks as “an exit route for both sides” and “the last resort to prevent military confrontation.” The phrasing carried urgency — and an implicit acknowledgment of rising stakes.
At the same time, outlets close to security circles worked to downplay the prospect of imminent war.
Tabnak, run by a former IRGC commander, and Nour News, affiliated with senior adviser Ali Shamkhani, dismissed Western reporting on possible US military action as “media terrorism inspired by Trump’s manifesto in The Art of the Deal.” The suggestion was clear: Washington’s threats are part of a pressure campaign, not a prelude to attack.
The heightened tone followed President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address, in which he referenced Iran’s nuclear and missile programs — remarks that reverberated quickly across Iranian media and political circles.
Other commentary reflected a careful hedge. Fararu and Iranian Diplomacy, which is close to the Foreign Ministry, outlined potential military scenarios—from limited symbolic strikes to targeted attacks on infrastructure or senior officials—but argued that the cost of escalation makes a prolonged conflict unlikely.
Official rhetoric has remained firm. ISNA reported that Iran warned the United Nations it would “respond swiftly to any aggression,” including attacks on “all assets and military bases of belligerent parties in the region,” which Tehran would treat as legitimate targets.
Yet markets betrayed public sensitivity to the tension. The dollar climbed to 1,660,000 rials amid the renewed uncertainty.
Among the more measured assessments was an article in Fararu by Mohsen Jalilvand, who argued that “there will be no war,” and that the likelihood of regional countries joining a confrontation is “near zero.”
Still, he acknowledged the impasse. “There is a wide gap between the demands of the two sides,” he wrote, warning that even if sanctions were lifted immediately, “it would take at least 15 years for the country to return to normal conditions.”
His closing note captured the broader sentiment: “We cannot afford excessive optimism.”
