Iran turns to LA-based singer for state-backed religious event

The performance took place on Thursday during Eid al-Ghadir celebrations at Imam Hossein Square in central Tehran. The event, which received extensive coverage from official and semi-official media outlets, featured Binesh Bolour, known professionally as Gheysar, who has lived outside Iran for nearly four decades.

In recent years, the Islamic Republic has sought to transform Eid al-Ghadir into a broader national celebration through large-scale public events held in city streets and squares.

The festival included speeches by clerics, performances by government-approved pop singers and religious vocalists closely associated with hardline political groups. Gheysar took the stage as some members of the crowd chanted “Long Live Iran” and “Death to America.”

• 

  Tehran Aims To Prevent Concerts By Iranian-American Singers From LA

Official and semi-official media outlets, including state broadcaster IRIB, widely circulated videos of his appearance. In a caption accompanying one of the videos, IRIB wrote that Gheysar had “shouted out his patriotism and returned to Iran” after the outbreak of the recent war involving Iran, the United States, and Israel.

The newspaper Haft-e Sobh described Gheysar’s participation in an official event as both “surprising” and “taboo-breaking,” noting that it was unprecedented since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The newspaper wrote: “Gheysar’s presence in Tehran and his performance should be regarded as an important development with dimensions beyond an artistic event. This form of participation in an official ceremony could symbolize the breaking of one of the cultural boundaries of the past four decades.”

Anti-western statements during the war

During the recent conflict involving Iran, the United States and Israel, Gheysar repeatedly criticized US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on social media. He also strongly attacked Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi and opposition groups that advocated foreign support for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic.

In one video, he said the Iranian nation had broken the “hegemony of the West” and that he was proud of being Iranian. Following the military confrontation, he published additional videos praising Iran’s military capabilities and said: “We shattered the West’s grandeur, and I am proud of that.”

Mixed reactions online

The singer’s appearance has generated sharply divided reactions on social media. Some users described the government’s decision to allow him to perform as hypocrisy, arguing that the authorities embrace nationalism only when they need public support.

One user, Mehrdad Raha, wrote: “Whenever you see a veteran Iranian singer abroad becoming softer in tone toward the Islamic Republic, know that the government has probably been in contact with them for some time, using intermediaries, with promises of money, sponsorship, travel opportunities to Iran, or other incentives to win them over.”

Gheysar rejected such accusations in a video circulated online. He said this was not his first visit to Iran and insisted that he had not returned for money or to obtain a permanent license to work in the country.

He said he had participated in the ceremony because, like many Shiites, he holds a deep respect for Imam Ali, whom Shiites believe was designated by the Prophet Muhammad as his successor at Ghadir.

The legacy of the “Los Angeles singer”

The controversy also revived discussion about the long-standing phenomenon of the so-called “Los Angeles singer.”

Following the 1979 revolution, many Iranian pop stars and actors left the country, particularly female performers whose singing careers were effectively prohibited under the new political order. Many settled in the United States, especially in Southern California.

For years, recordings by exiled singers circulated inside Iran through cassette tapes and videotapes that were copied and distributed despite official restrictions. Possession or distribution of such material could expose people to legal penalties.

The style of dance-oriented Persian pop music associated with Los Angeles was often portrayed in official discourse as morally corrupt, and the term “Los Angeles singer” frequently carried a derogatory connotation in state media.

Several Iranian outlets referred to Gheysar, who has also performed in Israel, a destination Iranian citizens are generally prohibited from visiting, in exactly those terms while reporting on his recent appearance.

Yet the two songs he performed in Tehran differed markedly from the repertoire that made him famous.

One song was dedicated to his hometown, Tehran. The second, titled “The Children of Minab,” was inspired by damage to a school in the southern city of Minab during the first day of the recent conflict. Iranian media reported that 120 schoolchildren and nearly 40 teachers, staff members and parents were killed in the attack.

Could other exile artists return?

Gheysar’s official appearance has renewed speculation about whether other prominent exile artists might be allowed to return.

Haft-e Sobh asked: “Now we must wait and see whether Gheysar’s return is an exception or whether this path will be opened for other artists as well. Will this remain limited to one person, or could it become a model for the future?”

In recent months, several well-known Los Angeles-based Iranian singers have publicly expressed a desire to spend their final years in Iran.

Among those expressing a desire to return is veteran singer Shahram Shabpareh, who has said he would like to spend the final years of his life and career in Iran.

The possibility of a return by singer Moein has also been the subject of recurring speculation, although reports about potential concerts in Iran have repeatedly been denied by him or those close to him.

• 

  Iran Halts Music Fest As It Teases Diaspora Singer's Return

For supporters, Gheysar’s appearance may signal a gradual easing of long-standing cultural restrictions surrounding exiled performers.

Skeptics, however, point to the experience of singer Habib, who returned to Iran in 2009 but was repeatedly denied permits to perform, arguing that official approval can be fleeting and does not necessarily translate into lasting artistic freedom.

Recent reports by state-linked, reformist and business-affiliated institutions suggest growing concern not only about economic hardship but also about its long-term social consequences.

One of the most striking indicators comes from Eghtesad News, which reported in May that Iran's middle class, estimated at 65% to 70% of the population at the beginning of the 2010s, now accounts for only around half of the country's population.

While the recent conflict involving Israel and the United States has intensified economic pressures, many analysts argue that the underlying deterioration long predates the war.

A separate study highlighted by the state-owned Mehr News Agency points to mounting pressure on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which remain among the largest employers of working- and lower-middle-class Iranians.

According to the Iran Chamber of Commerce Research Center, macroeconomic pressures are "systematically destroying" SMEs while leaving large state-backed entities comparatively insulated.

Unable to access affordable financing and struggling with rising costs, many businesses have resorted to what the report describes as "hidden layoffs"—reducing working hours, delaying wage payments and replacing long-term contracts with temporary arrangements.

The result, according to the report, is a gradual shift of workers out of the formal economy and into more precarious forms of employment.

That trend is explored in a separate analysis published by the reformist website Rouydad24, which traces the growth of informal labor to the sanctions shock that followed intensified international pressure in 2012.

Industries dependent on foreign trade and international supply chains increasingly turned to informal employment arrangements, hiring workers without insurance coverage or social-security protections.

According to the report, the probability of workers entering the informal economy rose by roughly 9% following the sanctions shock, with the effects becoming more pronounced over time.

While the informal sector helped absorb displaced workers and prevented a sharper rise in unemployment, the long-term costs have been significant. Analysts cited by Rouydad24 point to lower productivity, weaker tax collection and growing strain on pension funds as insurance contributions decline.

Low-skilled and less-educated workers have experienced the highest rates of displacement into insecure employment, while rural communities have seen some of the sharpest reductions in working hours and income stability.

What began as a deterioration in working-class security has increasingly spread into the middle class, leading to housing insecurity, declining consumption, shrinking access to cultural activities and growing economic pessimism.

Property prices and rents have risen far faster than incomes, forcing many households into smaller homes, peripheral neighborhoods or satellite towns on the outskirts of major cities.

Economists warn that such displacement carries broader social consequences, weakening community ties, increasing commuting times and reducing overall quality of life.

Inflation has also altered household consumption patterns. Reports increasingly describe families reducing spending on meat, dairy products and other staples, while expenditures on books, cinema, travel, restaurants and other cultural activities have become harder to sustain.

The cumulative effect is a gradual narrowing of the economic and social space traditionally associated with middle-class life.

These assessments stand in sharp contrast to recent remarks by Vice President Jafar Ghaempanah, who said that 82% of Iranians were satisfied with market management and the availability of essential goods during the war.

His comments came as government officials simultaneously acknowledged that authorities were unable to increase the purchasing power of subsidized coupons used to buy basic necessities.

For many economists, the central concern extends beyond living standards. Historically, Iran's middle class has played an important role in education, entrepreneurship, professional development and civic participation.

As economic pressures push more households downward, analysts increasingly warn of declining social mobility, weaker social trust and a growing risk of future instability.

The warnings emerging from Iranian experts converge on a similar point: the country's economic difficulties are no longer confined to the poorest segments of society and are reshaping the social foundations on which long-term stability depends.

On Thursday, the Revolutionary Guards said no lasting calm would be achieved in the region unless Israel withdrew from Lebanese territory and halted attacks, while senior adviser Mohsen Rezaei insisted Iran would not give a “green light” to negotiations until all of its demands were met.

Against that backdrop, two political insiders from different camps have issued unusually direct warnings about Iran's domestic vulnerabilities, arguing that economic hardship and the widening gap between the state and society could fuel renewed unrest.

In a June 1 interview with the moderate daily Etemad, prominent centrist politician Hossein Marashi described a deep structural and cultural disconnect between the state and society.

He warned that unless the political system adapts by addressing economic inefficiencies, acknowledging cultural differences and creating channels for dissent, unrest will continue to recur.

The leadership in Tehran, Marashi argued, remains at odds with a large segment of the population over cultural and political issues and should align governance with the expectations of at least 70% of society.

According to him, the divide between state and society has become so entrenched that many Iranians now separate their attachment to the country from their view of the government.

Marashi also said one of the Islamic Republic's fundamental failures has been its inability to build a strong economy and a trusted judiciary. Protests, he argued, should not be viewed as isolated incidents but as repeated expressions of accumulated public frustration.

A similar theme emerged this week in an op-ed by reformist commentator Nasser Zakeri in Sharq newspaper.

Reviewing Iran's recent military and geopolitical challenges, Zakeri contrasted what he described as the resilience of Iran's defense sector with decades of economic underperformance marked by unemployment, chronic inflation and weak productivity.

He argued that policymakers should use the experience of the past year to identify which institutions proved resilient under pressure and which did not.

Zakeri also challenged those who portray revision as a betrayal of the Islamic Republic's core principles, arguing that even policies once considered successful must be reassessed when circumstances change.

Such arguments remain politically sensitive in a system where calls for reform or revision are often portrayed by hardliners as attempts to weaken the ideological foundations of the state.

Although Marashi and Zakeri approached the issue from different angles—one focusing on public dissatisfaction and the other on institutional performance—both arrived at a similar conclusion: military strength and crisis management alone cannot guarantee long-term stability unless the political system addresses deeper economic, social and political grievances.

Late on Thursday, reports emerged that Pakistan's Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi would return to Tehran as part of efforts to keep the Iran-US negotiating track alive.

The diplomatic process remains uncertain. But the warnings from Marashi and Zakeri suggest that, for some voices inside the establishment, the more pressing question may be whether the state can address the domestic challenges that persist regardless of whether negotiations succeed.

Iranian officials and hardline media are signaling a tougher stance toward Washington after the most serious US-Iran military exchange in weeks, even as President Donald Trump says negotiations are progressing and an Iran deal may still be within reach.

The latest escalation began early Wednesday, when the United States struck an Iranian telecommunications tower on Qeshm Island. Iran responded by announcing attacks on US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain.

Kuwaiti authorities said an Iranian drone struck Kuwait International Airport, killing one person and injuring dozens of others. The IRGC, however, denied targeting the airport.

The confrontation has put new pressure on the 56-day ceasefire between Washington and Tehran, with President Trump seeking to preserve the truce while Iranian hardliners argue that recent military action has strengthened Tehran’s position.

Read the full article here.

The latest escalation began early Wednesday, when the United States struck an Iranian telecommunications tower on Qeshm Island. Iran responded by announcing attacks on US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain.

Kuwaiti authorities said an Iranian drone struck Kuwait International Airport, killing one person and injuring dozens of others. The IRGC, however, denied targeting the airport.

The confrontation has put new pressure on the 56-day ceasefire between Washington and Tehran, with President Trump seeking to preserve the truce while Iranian hardliners argue that recent military action has strengthened Tehran’s position.

Trump keeps talks alive

Despite the latest confrontation, Trump has publicly remained optimistic about diplomacy, saying talks are progressing well and suggesting that an agreement could be reached by the end of the week.

He has described the latest American strike as severe but framed Iran’s response as retaliatory, a distinction that appears intended to leave space for diplomacy.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Trump privately told advisers that he wants to preserve the current ceasefire and would only consider resuming large-scale military operations if American service members are killed.

The message has left Washington in a delicate position: seeking to deter further Iranian attacks while avoiding steps that could collapse the ceasefire and end the negotiations altogether.

Iran’s rhetoric hardens

In Tehran, however, the public messaging has moved in the opposite direction.

Iran’s English-language Press TV argued that the country’s period of restraint had ended and described recent military action as part of a doctrine of “qualitative asymmetry,” under which Iranian responses would not necessarily remain proportional to the original attack.

The article said any hostile action by the United States, regardless of scale, could trigger a significantly broader Iranian response.

Hardline political figures have echoed that argument.

Kamran Ghazanfari, a former hardline lawmaker, accused officials of limiting the armed forces because of what he described as fruitless negotiations. He said Iran should respond to attacks with significantly greater force rather than seek compromise.

“Under no circumstances should we back down before the enemy, and if they hit one of our ships, we must hit three or four of theirs,” he said.

Such statements reflect growing pressure from hardliners who believe recent military action has strengthened Tehran’s position and that negotiations should not be allowed to restrain Iran’s military options.

Araghchi warns regional states

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also adopted a sharper tone Thursday, saying Iran had previously warned regional countries about allowing the United States to use military bases on their soil.

His comments followed Iranian attacks on US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain, which Tehran announced after the United States struck an Iranian telecommunications tower on Qeshm Island in the early hours of Wednesday.

The exchange marked the most serious confrontation between Washington and Tehran since the ceasefire came into effect and immediately raised questions about its durability.

Kuwaiti authorities said an Iranian drone struck Kuwait International Airport, killing one person and injuring dozens of others. The IRGC denied targeting the airport.

A spokesperson for the force claimed that damage to the passenger terminal was caused by a malfunction involving a US-supplied Patriot missile system, arguing that interceptor missiles had fallen on the facility after failing to stop incoming Iranian projectiles.

Washington denied that Iranian missiles successfully struck American military installations. Iranian media outlets, however, published satellite images they said showed damage to a shelter used for drones and aircraft at Kuwait’s Ali Al Salem Air Base.

Iranian state media and IRGC-affiliated outlets have also dismissed photographs that purportedly show damage to Kuwait Airport, describing them as fabricated images intended to support what they called a false narrative.

Regional alarm grows

The attacks have deepened concern among regional governments that the ceasefire could unravel.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry condemned the Iranian missile and drone attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, warning that escalating hostilities could derail efforts to resolve the conflict through peaceful means.

Islamabad called on both sides to exercise maximum restraint and noted that formal negotiations between Tehran and Washington, which Iran suspended after recent US military actions, have not yet resumed.

The Pakistani statement underscored the widening regional stakes of the confrontation. While Trump has continued to emphasize the possibility of a deal, Iran’s suspension of direct message exchanges through mediators has left the diplomatic track vulnerable to further military escalation.

Lebanon adds pressure

Developments in Lebanon have added another layer of uncertainty.

Iran has linked continued negotiations with Washington to ceasefires across all regional fronts. But despite an earlier truce arrangement, Israel launched new attacks in southern Lebanon on Thursday.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem criticized agreements reached by the Lebanese government and said the group remains committed only to a complete cessation of Israeli attacks, a formal ceasefire and a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory.

The IRGC reinforced that position, saying a comprehensive ceasefire, including in Lebanon, remains a prerequisite for ending the broader regional conflict.

Some Iranian media outlets, including Iran View 24, have argued that Israeli military activity in Lebanon is intended not only to violate ceasefire arrangements but also to test Iran’s deterrence and the resilience of allied groups across the region.

Risk of unraveling

The longer talks remain unresolved, the greater the risk that military incidents and hardline pressure could overtake diplomacy.

Canada-based analyst Shahir Shahid Saless argued in a post on X that as negotiations drag on and Iranian leaders gain confidence from recent attacks on US positions in Kuwait and Bahrain, Trump may eventually reconsider his commitment to the ceasefire.

His assessment points to the central danger facing both sides: Trump is still signaling that he wants a deal, but Tehran’s public posture is becoming less conciliatory, and the ceasefire now depends not only on the US-Iran track but also on events in Kuwait, Bahrain and Lebanon.

For now, both governments continue to leave room for diplomacy. But the latest exchange has narrowed that room, giving hardliners in Tehran more space to argue that military pressure, not negotiation, is what has shifted the balance.