Iran International
As Tehran reviews US proposals and influential figures increasingly speak openly in favor of negotiations, developments on the ground are pulling Iran and the United States in the opposite direction.
The contrast was on display this week as senior Shiite cleric Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani publicly endorsed negotiations with Washington while fresh military exchanges across the Gulf highlighted the risk of renewed escalation.
Quoted by several Iranian outlets on Tuesday, Sobhani said “we should back negotiations and follow a good outcome from them, and a good negotiation must be based on the collective and national interests of the country.”
The remarks were among the clearest signs yet that influential clerical circles are prepared to publicly back diplomacy.
Several newspapers also published composite images showing chief negotiator and parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf alongside IRGC commander Ahmad Vahidi, appearing to emphasize unity among senior officials as Tehran reviews US proposals.
Ghalibaf has also been quoted as saying Iran is examining Washington’s suggestions, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this week that negotiations over the language of a possible agreement could be be concluded within days if progress continues.
Yet the diplomatic signals have coincided with renewed escalation on the ground. Iranian attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, and US strikes on Iranian targets in the early hours of Wednesday, underscored how fragile any diplomatic opening remains.
At the same time, hardline rhetoric has continued inside Iran. A group of lawmakers on Tuesday called for expanding the range of Iran’s missiles until they could reach Washington.
The competing narratives were also laid bare in an interview with veteran diplomat and US expert Abbas Maleki in Sharq newspaper, and another with conservative analyst Hassan Hanizadeh published by Fararu.
Hanizadeh outlined ongoing indirect contacts between Tehran and Washington while warning that President Donald Trump’s approach could amount to a delaying tactic aimed at securing broader strategic advantages.
Yet unlike many conservative commentators, he did not reject negotiations outright. Instead, he acknowledged that Iran had already conveyed a five-point proposal to Washington through Pakistani intermediaries and argued that talks could be acceptable if they safeguarded national interests and delivered sanctions relief.
Maleki placed greater emphasis on diplomacy itself, describing it as a pillar of national power and pushing back against factions that rely primarily on military force.
He characterized the current phase of Iran-US relations as one of “suspension,” requiring diplomatic engagement to manage the aftermath of the conflict and protect Iran’s interests.
Despite their differences, both men portrayed negotiations as a necessary component of statecraft rather than a concession.
The limits of establishment support for diplomacy were also underscored by the conservative daily Farhikhtegan, which revisited the experience of the 2015 nuclear deal and described it as a “strategic error.”
The paper argued that any future agreement must satisfy two conditions: reversibility and multilateral guarantees.
Iran, it said, should retain the ability to immediately reverse any commitments if Washington defaults, while financial and political mechanisms should involve other international actors to raise the cost of a future US withdrawal.
While influential clerics, politicians and commentators increasingly portray negotiations as necessary, military confrontation continues to shape the political environment.
The result is a moment in which preparations for a deal and preparations for further conflict appear to be unfolding simultaneously.
Tehran’s unveiling of a towering statue depicting the Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling before pre-Islamic Persian King Shapur I has renewed criticism of the Islamic Republic’s appeal to nationalist sentiment following the June war with Israel.
For over forty years, the theocracy purged ancient Persian history from schoolbooks, replacing it with post-Islamic narratives. But after the 12-day conflict with Israel, officials have turned to the distant pre-Islamic past to rally a divided society.
From murals of ancient kings and soldiers to patriotic songs added to Shi’ite mourning ceremonies performed before Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran now embraces imagery once deemed heretical by its own revolutionary ethos.
'Kneel before Iran' campaign
Tehran’s Revolution (Enghelab) Square was the scene of an unusual spectacle on Friday as officials unveiled a massive bronze statue depicting Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling in submission before Sassanid King Shapur I, commemorating Iran’s victory at the Battle of Edessa (260 AD).
The event was held under the slogan “Kneel before Iran,” part of what authorities describe as a campaign to project “national unity and historical pride” following the June war with Israel.
Tehran Mayor Alireza Zakani, a staunch ultraconservative, said on X: “Enmity with Great Iran can only end in kneeling before this historic nation.”
Municipal official Davood Goodarzi said the installation would be accompanied by visual displays depicting “other victories of Iranians over foreign aggressors,” including the defeat of British forces by local commander Rais-Ali Delvari, Mirza Kuchak Khan’s resistance against Russian troops, and Surena’s triumph over Rome at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BCE.
The goal, Goodarzi said, is “strengthening concepts such as national dignity, social unity, and Iranian identity.”
The statue, he said, would remain temporarily at Revolution Square before being moved to a city gateway “where it will stand as the first emblem of Iran before diplomats and foreign visitors.”
Unveiled women were allowed to attend the unveiling ceremony—an uncommon scene at events organized by Tehran’s ultra-hardline municipality.
The turn to the pre-Islamic past
The sharp reversal also recalls remarks once made by Khamenei. In a 2011 speech, he asserted that “all the great military victories of this nation came after Islam,” dismissing pre-Islamic accounts as “things that are not documented.”
In 1987, he had said that prophets triumphed over kings such as Cyrus and that “nothing remains of these monarchs in history but names remembered with derision.”
Nevertheless, pro-government social media accounts have now gone so far as to circulate posters equating Khamenei himself with Shapur, showing him standing with a staff as Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump kneel before him. The caption reads: “You will kneel before Iran.”
'Hypocrisy'
Pro-government figures have hailed the move as a patriotic success. Conservative political reporter Hossein Saremi posted: “Today’s grand Iranian gathering showed that people and the state share one essence: Iran itself. Nothing can take our homeland away.”
Others, however, called the spectacle “hypocrisy.” Journalist Gholamhossein Pashaei wrote on X: “Every year you close Pasargadae to stop people from celebrating Cyrus Day, yet you unveil Shapur’s statue in Enghelab Square with drums and fireworks during Fatimiyya (mourning period)!”
Dissident commentator Hamid Asafi called the ceremony “a perfect snapshot of the Islamic Republic’s contradictions.”
On Telegram he wrote: “A week ago they closed Cyrus’s tomb out of fear of the crowds, and now they glorify Shapur in the same breath. The Islamic Republic fears living history but poses for selfies with its corpse.”
He added: “They know people no longer respond to rosaries and sermons. That’s why they’ve brought history back to the stage—in a controlled costume. If they can’t erase the past, they’ll try to own it.”
The irony deepened as UNESCO formally recognized Cyrus’s Charter as one of the earliest human-rights documents.
President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on X: “Iran, the cradle of dialogue, justice, and coexistence, can still inspire peace today.”
Users swiftly replied, questioning how such pride could coexist with a government that blocks access to Cyrus’s tomb each year to those wishing to visit it on his birthday.