Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has not yet commented on the announcement. President Masoud Pezeshkian, however, welcomed the development in a post on X, saying that if all provisions of the memorandum are implemented correctly, it could become "a source of pride for the country."
Pezeshkian said that an overwhelming majority of members of Iran's Supreme National Security Council had approved the text so that "America's genuine commitment to respecting the rights of the Iranian nation could be tested in practice."
Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who also served as Iran's chief negotiator, struck a triumphant tone. In a message posted on X, he wrote that despite efforts by those who sought "to destroy the Iranian nation and force the country into submission, Iran had taken a major step toward final victory."
He added: "They wanted to, but they could not."
Judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei also praised the outcome, saying the Islamic Republic had demonstrated "dignified and revolutionary diplomacy."
The announcement had an immediate impact on Iran's financial markets. The value of the US dollar and other foreign currencies, as well as digital assets such as Tether and gold prices, dropped following the news. Tehran's stock market also reacted positively when trading resumed on Monday.
Lawmakers split over agreement
Some members of parliament welcomed the reported memorandum.
Rouhollah Lak-Aliabadi told the conservative Tabnak news website that one of the memorandum's positive aspects was that “contrary to Washington's initial demands, there is no discussion of limiting the country's missile capabilities." He claimed that even American officials now speak of continued uranium enrichment "within specified frameworks."
"This shows that the Islamic Republic's military strength has been able to influence the course of negotiations," he said.
Hossein Samsami, a member of parliament affiliated with the hardline Paydari Front, argued that nuclear and regional negotiations are not permissible and that any future talks should serve only to buy time so that the country's deterrence capabilities can be strengthened.
In a post on X, he wrote that he follows the Supreme Leader's directives, but that his expert assessment differs.
This position was criticized by Lak-Aliabadi, who told Tabnak: "For someone to declare that even if the Leader supports a decision, he will still oppose it, is fundamentally unacceptable."
Hardline lawmaker Amirhossein Sabeti described the agreement as "hasty and weak," claiming it violated the Supreme Leader's red lines and reflected a "miscalculation" by officials.
According to Sabeti, "This agreement reflects the capabilities and understanding of the country's senior officials under current circumstances, not the satisfaction of the Supreme Leader." He further argued that the deal "will neither bring economic relief nor guarantee the country's security."
Mahmoud Nabavian, another hardline parliamentarian associated with the Paydari Front, called on authorities to provide the public with a detailed report on implementation of the memorandum, including provisions concerning the lifting of maritime restrictions, oil and petrochemical exports, banking and insurance services, and the release of frozen Iranian assets.
The hardline Raja News website criticized what it called an agreement with "the killer of the Leader," referring to US President Donald Trump, and questioned the lack of publicly available details regarding Iran's commitments under the memorandum.
Controversies over timing
Some hardliners also objected to the timing of the announcement. Because the news broke after midnight in Iran, while it was still June 14 in Washington — Trump's birthday — critics portrayed it as a symbolic gift to the US president.
Conservative journalist Parisa Nasr wrote: "Couldn't they have waited a few more hours until June 14 had passed in Washington before trumpeting the Iran-US peace agreement? Was giving a birthday gift to the killer of the martyred Leader also one of the unwritten conditions of the deal?"
Ahmad Qadiri, a hardline activist and researcher of international law, argued that Iran had obtained only promises while "what Trump has gained immediately is Iran's loss of credibility among the resistance front, lower oil prices, and having the agreement announced on his birthday."
Reformists and moderates welcome move
Several prominent reformist and centrist figures endorsed the reported agreement.
Former president Mohammad Khatami and former foreign minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif, who helped negotiate the 2015 nuclear agreement, both expressed support. In a statement, Khatami described acceptance of the memorandum as "a major and courageous step" and said that it was something "to be genuinely pleased about."
Reformist journalist Ahmad Zeidabadi offered a more measured assessment. Writing on his Telegram channel, he argued that the memorandum represented neither the surrender of one side nor the complete victory of the other.
"It is, like every other phenomenon, the ultimate result of the balance of power between the parties," he wrote, warning that absolutist interpretations favoring either side could complicate future negotiations aimed at reaching a final agreement.
The news website Rouydad24 described the current arrangement as "a major geopolitical ceasefire and a preliminary non-proliferation agreement" rather than a lasting peace settlement.
"Iranian diplomacy must now move from the phase of containing war to consolidating achievements and achieving the durable removal of sanctions — a marathon in which wisdom, domestic cohesion and avoiding unnecessary extremism are the first conditions for success," the report said.
In a commentary for Asr-e Iran, journalist Reza Ghibishavi argued that the end of the conflict could mark a historic turning point for the country.
"From Monday morning, with the official end of the war and the end of abnormal conditions, Iran enters a new era," he wrote. "A new Iran with a new leader, new circumstances, new experiences, a new society, a new region, a new agreement, a new America, and a new world. None of them will return to the past."
