Persian Gulf states call Iran attacks 'existential threat' as UN backs reparations push

Daily NK reported that residents in northern areas were closely following the war and asking whether it could eventually pull Pyongyang in.

One source said some were alarmed that the fighting had continued despite the killing of Iran’s top leader.

“Some parents with sons about to be conscripted are worried it could lead to overseas deployment,” the source said, while others urged caution, saying, “The war in Russia is not even over – would they really send troops to the Iran war as well?”

The same report said rumors tied to the conflict were spreading in Yanggang and other northern areas, adding to a broader sense of unease already fueled by worsening living conditions.

Residents were said to be more focused on rising prices and food shortages than on military achievements. According to sources cited by the outlet, repeated missile launches have drawn a cold response from the public as inflation and exchange-rate pressure deepen the burden on households.

“Which people would applaud this in such a situation?” one source said. Others complained that “it would be better if they reduced the number of launches and brought in more rice,” reflecting frustration that resources were being directed toward military activity rather than basic needs.

Another source said rhetoric about strengthening defense or expanding strike capabilities was failing to resonate with ordinary people.

“Words like ‘strengthening defense capabilities’ and ‘strike capacity’ do not even register with residents,” the source said, adding that for people struggling to survive day to day, the only welcome news would be lower prices for rice and other essentials.

The reports suggest a widening gap between official propaganda and public sentiment, with concerns about deployment, food costs and daily survival outweighing state messaging about military strength.

North Korean state media, however, has used the Iran war to reinforce its long-held argument for retaining and expanding nuclear weapons.

Leader Kim Jong Un this week accused the United States of carrying out “state terrorism and acts of aggression throughout the world” in comments widely interpreted as referring to the war.

According to KCNA, Kim said North Korea had made the decision to “permanently and irreversibly consolidate the possession of nuclear weapons,” adding that Pyongyang was “prepared to respond” whether its adversaries chose confrontation or peaceful coexistence.

The reported proposal, described by Pakistani and Egyptian officials speaking to the Associated Press, covers sanctions relief, civilian nuclear cooperation, curbs on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, stronger International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring and guarantees for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

One Egyptian official described it as a “comprehensive deal,” but said it was being treated only as a basis for further talks, adding that Iranian officials remained “very skeptical” of the Trump administration.

That skepticism has been reinforced by Iran’s public messaging. Iran’s ambassador to Pakistan, quoted by state media, said no direct or indirect talks with the United States had taken place, even as he said “friendly countries” were trying to create conditions for dialogue.

An Iranian military spokesman was even more dismissive, mocking Washington’s diplomatic push and saying Iran would never “come to terms” with the United States.

“Do not call your defeat an agreement... Have your internal conflicts reached the point where you are negotiating with yourselves? You will see neither your investments in the region nor the former prices of energy and oil again until you understand this: stability in the region is guaranteed by the strong hand of our armed forces,” said the spokesperson for Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, Ebrahim Zolfaghari.

The mixed signals come after President Donald Trump said the United States was “in negotiations right now” with Iran and suggested Tehran wanted a deal.

Pakistan has emerged as a possible channel, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif saying Islamabad was ready to host talks, while Saudi Arabia’s crown prince also discussed Pakistan’s mediation effort with Sharif, according to the AP report.

According to a senior Iranian talking to Reuters on Wednesday, Turkey had also "helped to end the war and either Turkey or Pakistan was under consideration as the venue for such talks."

Even as diplomacy stirred, the war showed little sign of pausing. The United States was moving about 1,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division to the region and deploying two Marine units, while Israel launched new wide-scale strikes and Iran continued attacks on Israel and across the Persian Gulf region.

Israeli officials were described as surprised by the submission of a ceasefire plan, having pushed Trump to keep up military pressure.

Still, major uncertainties remain over who in Iran has the authority to negotiate, what terms Tehran might ultimately accept, and whether any proposal can survive continued fighting.

Reflecting that uncertainty, the Kremlin said on Wednesday it had received no information from Iran about the reported US plan and could not assess the reliability of the reports.

The controversy intensified after reports by Israel’s Channel 11 and Politico suggested that Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf could be the “pragmatic partner” potentially engaging with the Trump administration.

According to the Politico report, “at least some White House officials see him as someone who could lead Iran and negotiate in a next phase of conflict with the Trump administration.” However, the report added that the White House “is not yet ready to bet on a single figure” and is exploring multiple options.

The mere suggestion that a sitting Iranian parliament speaker could be engaged—formally or informally—with Washington carries significant implications within Iran’s political system, where any perception of independent diplomatic outreach can trigger backlash, particularly during periods of heightened tension.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC)-linked media outlets have strongly rejected claims of secret negotiations.

Fars News Agency described the reports as a “psychological operation,” asserting that the narrative was designed with three goals: “character assassination of Ghalibaf, incitement toward possible physical targeting, and sowing division in the country.”

Similarly, Tasnim News Agency called the reports a “complex enemy design to create the perception of internal tension,” arguing that it aimed to distract political forces from the ongoing conflict.

Even political figures outside Ghalibaf’s immediate camp have echoed concerns about psychological warfare.

Mohammad-Javad Azari-Jahromi, telecommunications minister under President Hassan Rouhani, wrote on X that Trump’s contradictory statements—and media suggestions that Ghalibaf could be conducting secret talks—are intended to “create division within the government and among military forces.”

Hesameddin Ashena, a former media adviser to Rouhani, also warned of “character assassination,” describing the amplification of such claims as effectively “aligning with the enemy.”

Iranian officials have acknowledged indirect communications with Washington through intermediaries. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and spokesman Esmail Baghaei said countries such as Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan have been exchanging messages between the two sides in recent days in an effort to reduce tensions.

At the same time, Iranian officials stressed that Tehran’s core positions remain unchanged.

These include its stance on the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz—a position that has contributed to escalating rhetoric, including reported threats by Trump to target Iran’s energy infrastructure and impose a short deadline.

An Iranian official told Al Jazeera that Washington has so far refused to meet Tehran’s key conditions for negotiations: “payment of war reparations and acknowledgment of aggression against Iranian territory.”

Meanwhile, reports from Reuters and The Wall Street Journal suggest that potential talks to end the conflict could take place in Pakistan or Turkey, possibly involving figures such as Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, and Vice President J. D. Vance in the coming days.

Despite official denials, the issue has gained traction on social media—particularly among Iranians abroad, given severe internet restrictions inside Iran since the war began.

Thousands of responses to Ghalibaf’s denial of secret talks with Washington on X framed the issue in terms of suspicion and alleged betrayal.

Some users pointed to his absence from certain recent public events, while others noted that his name had not appeared in US bounty lists targeting Iranian officials, interpreting this as suspicious though without evidence.

Others revived longstanding allegations of financial corruption and nepotism raised by hardline factions such as the Paydari Front and supporters of Saeed Jalili—claims that have circulated in Iran’s political rivalries for years.

The projectile was not intercepted in Lebanese airspace and instead landed on the coast, according to Iran International sources, disputing earlier reporting by Reuters.

The strike came shortly after Lebanon declared Iran’s ambassador to Beirut, Mohammad Reza Raouf Sheibani, persona non grata and ordered his expulsion.

Lebanese Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi said on X that the decision had been formally communicated and that the envoy must leave the country by March 29.

Lebanon also recalled its ambassador from Tehran for consultations, accusing Iran of violating diplomatic norms and established protocols between the two countries.

Israel’s military said that, based on its assessments, a ballistic missile launched from Iran fell in Beirut around the same time as missile attacks targeting Israel. In a statement, the army said the projectile was fired by the “Iranian regime” and landed inside Lebanon.

Diplomats from several Persian Gulf states told Iran International on Tuesday that Tehran was acting like a “runaway horse,” warning that attacking another Arab country crossed a new red line and would not be tolerated.

According to Iran International sources, since the start of the current conflict following US and Israeli strikes in early March, Iran has targeted at least 12 countries in the region. Lebanon is now the 13th.

Reactions to Lebanon’s move were swift. Israel’s President Isaac Herzog called the expulsion a “very courageous decision,” according to Israeli media. Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar welcomed the move, describing it as “justified and necessary” in response to Iran’s actions in Lebanon, including its backing of Hezbollah.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said Israel would continue its attacks against Iranian positions “with full force.”

Hezbollah condemned the decision, warning it could undermine national unity and deepen internal divisions.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday that Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates are growing increasingly impatient after attacks on energy infrastructure and airports, and could join US- and Israeli-led strikes if Iran targets critical facilities.

Trump did not provide details about the offer he said Iran had made but described it as related to oil, gas and the Strait of Hormuz.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump said Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were among the officials leading the talks and were "dealing with the right people" in Iran.

Tehran has not publicly acknowledged any such proposal. Iranian officials, however, have been quoted by various outlets as saying that they have received proposals conveyed through intermediaries and are reviewing them.

Trump suggested that Tehran was eager to reach an agreement after weeks of fighting with the United States and Israel.

“And the other side, I can tell you they’d like to make a deal, and who wouldn’t?” Trump said. “If you were there, look, their navy’s gone, their air force is gone, their communications are done — that’s the biggest problem.”

The president’s remarks marked a shift in tone from comments he made at the White House last week, when he said he did not want a cease-fire.

Pressed on the apparent reversal, Trump said the change reflected the progress of talks.

“The fact that they are talking to us and they are talking sense,” he said.

Trump reiterated that the central condition of any agreement would be Iran’s commitment not to develop nuclear weapons.

“And remember, it all starts with they cannot have a nuclear weapon, just as I said yesterday,” he said. “I said, ‘Well, number one, two and three is they can’t have a nuclear weapon,’ and they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon, and we’re talking about that.”

Officials in Washington have indicated that potential talks could involve senior US negotiators and intermediaries in countries such as Pakistan or Turkey, as diplomatic efforts intensify alongside the continuing conflict.

Iranian officials have acknowledged indirect contacts with Washington but have said any agreement would require recognition of Iran’s rights under international law and relief from sanctions.