Iranians say US deal leaves people out of the equation

The reaction reflects a familiar hope in Iran: that lower tensions with Washington will strengthen the rial, cool inflation and ease living costs after years of sanctions, isolation and war. But economists are warning that the market rally may be pricing in more than the agreement can deliver.

Former Central Bank deputy governor Heydar Mostakhdemin-Hosseini put it succinctly. “An agreement is a necessary condition for economic improvement, but it is not a sufficient condition,” he told Jahan-e Sanat.

That warning has become more relevant since the 14-point “Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding” emerged on Wednesday. The document outlines an immediate halt to military operations, a 60-day negotiation period, steps toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz, US Treasury waivers for Iranian oil exports and talks over frozen assets and sanctions termination.

• 

  US says Iran won't get funds upfront under MoU

But the most sensitive economic promises are conditional. Senior US officials said after the text emerged that Washington is not committing to immediate sanctions relief, upfront access to frozen assets or direct funding for Iran. They said economic incentives would depend on Iranian compliance and progress toward a final deal, particularly on nuclear issues.

The $300 billion reconstruction and economic development plan mentioned in the memorandum has already become one of the most disputed parts of the deal. US officials said it does not mean Washington will provide money to Tehran. Instead, they described it as a possible future framework for third countries and private investors if sanctions are eased and Iran meets its commitments.

President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance have also rejected the idea that the United States would provide direct financial aid or war reparations to Iran.

The issue of frozen assets is similarly uncertain. Iranian officials have presented the memorandum as a route to usable funds, while US officials said no assets would be released automatically upon signing. Some funds could become available during the negotiation period, they said, but only if Iran takes concrete steps demanded by Washington.

• 

  Hope meets caution as Tehran weighs economic impact of US deal

Central Bank Governor Abdolnasser Hemmati said Wednesday that the memorandum had been drafted in a way that clearly defines US obligations over asset releases and makes them enforceable.

But he added a note of caution: “As with any international agreement, a final assessment will depend on observing implementation and conducting the necessary verification in practice.”

For economists, that is the core problem: even if some relief arrives, Iran’s economic problems are not only external.

Economic analyst Nasser Zakeri told Fararu that the long-term effect of any diplomatic opening will depend on domestic policymaking. He said Iran would need to reassess its internal and regional realities and reorient its economic strategy around whatever opportunities the agreement creates.

Ali Ghanbari, an economics professor, made a similar point. “We should not become excessively excited or optimistic,” he said. “We should not assume that simply signing an initial understanding can solve all of Iran’s economic problems. Sustainable growth requires structural reforms, and such reforms are impossible without careful planning.”

Iran’s inflation problem shows the scale of the challenge. The latest official point-to-point inflation rate stands at 83.9%, according to the Statistical Center of Iran, and 77.2% according to the Central Bank.

Inflation briefly fell to single digits in the two years after the 2015 nuclear deal took effect, but surged again after Washington withdrew from the accord in 2018 and reimposed secondary sanctions.

A new deal could ease some of those pressures if it restores oil exports, reduces shipping restrictions and gives Tehran access to some blocked revenues. Under the memorandum, the US Treasury would issue waivers for Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and related services, including banking, insurance and transportation, pending a final agreement.

But Mostakhdemin-Hosseini warned that even higher oil revenue and reduced sanctions would not resolve budget deficits, rapid money-supply growth, banking imbalances and weak productivity. Without political stability, better governance and restored public trust, he said, chronic inflation could return quickly.

Hossein Selahvarzi, the former head of the Tehran Chamber of Commerce, also warned against reading peace as prosperity.

“A peace agreement does not, by itself, revive the economy, and the end of military conflict does not automatically mean the beginning of economic prosperity,” he wrote in Etemad.

He pointed to energy shortages, lack of working capital, aging equipment, limited access to technology, unstable regulations, weak investment and low productivity across industry and mining.

“The war only deepened and exposed these problems,” Selahvarzi wrote. “If we are now speaking of a post-war era, we should not expect miracles.”

State-controlled media initially struck an upbeat tone, highlighting the positive reaction in Iran’s foreign-exchange and gold markets. It also amplified reports about the repatriation of frozen assets and a $300 billion reconstruction package.

But the market rally was short-lived, and both stories about incoming cash were quickly dismissed as fake news and publicly refuted by Trump at the G7 summit in France.

Across Tehran’s media on Tuesday morning, coverage reflected a mix of cautious optimism and skepticism.

The debate is unfolding even as the memorandum itself remains unpublished and some of its key provisions unclear.

The agreement is expected to be formally signed on Friday, but it faces critics in both Tehran and Washington, where opponents have questioned everything from sanctions relief to the handling of Iran’s nuclear program.

The divide was especially clear in two interviews: one with economist Heydar Mostakhdemin-Hosseini in Jahan-e Sanat newspaper, and another with macroeconomist Hadi Haghshenas on the Khabar Online website.

Mostakhdemin-Hosseini’s core message was a warning: while a political breakthrough may calm market psychology and reduce short-term inflationary expectations, it will not resolve Iran’s entrenched structural problems, including chronic budget deficits, excessive money creation and a dysfunctional banking system.

He stressed that political calm can temporarily stabilize markets by reducing panic buying and war-related anxiety, but it cannot cure long-term inflation.

On the dangers of crisis financing, he said: “The greatest danger in wartime conditions is financing the costs of war through printing money… Almost all countries that experienced hyperinflation during periods of conflict repeated this exact mistake.”

He also warned that “capital flees from instability,” arguing that legal stability, respect for property rights, anti-corruption measures and reduced political risk must be top priorities.

“In times of economic crisis, the public’s psychological trust in the government’s economic stewardship is a far more powerful tool for market stabilization than physical gold or foreign currency reserves,” he added.

Offering a starkly different assessment, Haghshenas presented an optimistic outlook for Iran’s economy following what he described as a two-stage agreement with the United States.

He predicted that the post-war period could mirror the economic rebounds seen after the 1988 ceasefire with Iraq under UN Resolution 598 and the 2015 nuclear deal, potentially delivering single-digit inflation and double-digit growth.

He argued that a final deal could reduce inflation by stabilizing the foreign-exchange market and unlocking frozen assets to absorb excess liquidity.

Psychological relief and a decline in inflation would emerge during the current Iranian year ending in March 2027, he said, while more substantial macroeconomic gains, including double-digit growth, would likely materialize in the following year ending in March 2028.

“When blocked resources enter the economy, they will collect a portion of the existing liquidity,” he added. “Therefore, the potential agreement will lead to a reduction in the inflation rate from two directions.”

Whether that optimism proves justified remains uncertain. Even if a broader agreement is reached, many of the structural problems identified by Mostakhdemin-Hosseini—including fiscal imbalances, monetary expansion and weak investor confidence—would remain unresolved.

As Iran twice came from behind to draw 2-2 at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, California, fans cheered different goals for different reasons. Some celebrated every Iranian attack. Others openly rooted against a team they view as inseparable from the Islamic Republic.

The divided reactions reflected a question that has become increasingly fraught since January 8-9, 2026, when the Islamic Republic launched a nationwide crackdown on anti-regime protesters that killed tens of thousands of unarmed civilians: can one support Team Melli without supporting the state it represents?

The trauma of those events continues to reverberate far beyond Iran's borders.

At SoFi Stadium, one fan wore a custom jersey marked "8-9," a reference instantly recognizable to many Iranians as the dates of the deadliest two nights in Iran's modern history.

"I felt proud to be Iranian, but with a mixed bag of emotions, carrying the weight of everything that the regime has done and what the people have suffered," actress and activist Nazanin Nour told Iran International.

Nour said she ultimately decided to attend the game despite her conflicted feelings because the regime has taken so much from Iranians worldwide, and she did not want it to deprive her of the joy of the sport as well.

"I think everybody's feelings are informed by their pain and trauma and everything that we've witnessed over the last not just few months but 47 years," she said. "It makes sense that everybody feels like this is a really weird time but still a time to be proud of who we are and where we come from."

100%

A team added

Since the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom protests, players have faced scrutiny over whether they sing the national anthem, meet state officials or publicly support protesters.

Supporters and critics alike increasingly view the national team through a political lens because it officially represents the Islamic Republic.

While some players and football federation officials have shown alignment with the state, others have faced pressure for expressing solidarity with anti-government protests or refusing to sing the national anthem.

Former Iranian national team goalkeeper and coach Mohammad Rashid Mazaheri has been held by Iranian authorities since late February 2026 after criticizing the leader in an Instagram post.

For many Iranians, his case is another reminder of how even prominent athletes can face severe repercussions—even death—for expressing dissent.

"We're a world away from past World Cups, when, regardless of politics, Iranians inside the country and across the diaspora were united behind Team Melli," said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute.

That unity was perhaps best illustrated in 1998, when Iran's victory over the United States sparked celebrations from Tehran to Los Angeles.

Pride and protest

Before kickoff, hundreds of protesters gathered outside SoFi Stadium waving anti-government signs and the pre-revolution Lion and Sun flag in a city home to one of the world's largest Iranian diasporas.

Despite FIFA's ban on the Lion and Sun flag, videos circulating online showed numerous fans displaying it inside the stadium.

Among those in attendance was activist Mersedeh Shahinkar, who was blinded in one eye after being shot directly in the eye by security forces during the 2022 protests. Shahinkar, who later fled Iran and now lives in the United States, arrived carrying a Lion and Sun flag.

Shahinkar confronted supporters of the Islamic Republic both inside and outside the stadium, where tensions at times spilled into verbal confrontations and some spectators called fans carrying Iran’s current flag "terrorists."

At times, Shahinkar pointed to the empty eye socket left after she was shot during the 2022 protests, a reminder of the price many Iranians have paid in opposing the state.

100%

Iranian-American news anchor Shally Zomorodi later posted a video to Instagram with tears in her eyes, saying two men confronted her husband over his Lion and Sun logo.

"The hardest part of tonight," she wrote. "Two Iranian men saw my husband with the Lion Sun logo on his shirt and started cursing at him and tried to start a fight with Bruce."

But the atmosphere was not uniformly hostile, said Nour, who witnessed fans carrying Lion and Sun flags sitting near supporters displaying Iran’s official flag.

"I just saw people enjoying a game and being respectful of each other's opinions," she said.

Inside the stadium, boos rang out during the national anthem while many fans appeared to cheer individual players rather than the state they represent.

After the match, Iranian goalscorer Ramin Rezaeian pushed back when asked by a US journalist about fans whistling and booing during the national anthem.

"That's none of your business," he said. "What happens between Iranians is our own matter, and we will resolve it ourselves."

The same arguments played out far from California.

In North Vancouver, home to a large Iranian Canadian community, some crowds—even those displaying Iran's pre-revolutionary flag—erupted in cheers when Iran scored against New Zealand.

A sign of just how complicated the issue can be.

"We're here for the players only," Zina Monjazeb of Los Angeles told Reuters. "We're not here supporting the regime, at all."

Others rejected that distinction entirely.

"We believe that this is not the Iranian team. This is the Islamic regime," Naderi Alizadeh, 39, of San Diego, told Reuters.

In one scene captured on social media, Iranian player Mehdi Taremi is seen handing his shirt to a fan displaying the Lion and Sun flag.

For some Iranians, Team Melli remains a source of national pride distinct from the state it represents. For others, the jersey has become inseparable from the government behind it.

Ninety minutes of football did not resolve the argument. But for one night, it revealed just how deeply it now runs.

“We welcome the announcement of a deal between the United States and Iran, secured under the strong leadership of President Trump, with the support of mediating countries,” the leaders said in a statement on geopolitical issues.

They said the agreement provided “an historic opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring any nuclear weapon and tackling the threats related to its regional and ballistic activities.”

“We support and are ready to contribute to its implementation,” the statement said.

The Group of Seven also backed further diplomacy after the US-Iran memorandum of understanding, saying any follow-on negotiation should address threats posed by Iran “in the region and beyond” and include relevant partners, including the International Atomic Energy Agency.

“We reaffirm that Iran will never obtain a nuclear weapon,” the leaders said.

100%

On Lebanon, the G7 tied its support to an immediate ceasefire and the disarmament of Iran-backed Hezbollah.

“In Lebanon, we support, through an immediate robust ceasefire, the Lebanese leadership’s efforts to achieve the disarmament of Hezbollah and the monopoly of arms, and to protect Lebanon’s territorial integrity and sovereignty with the appropriate international security guarantees,” the statement said.

The leaders also backed the resumption of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, saying “the right of transit passage without restrictions or tolls is the bedrock of international trade.”

They said a multinational defensive initiative led by France and the UK could help protect merchant vessels, reassure shipping operators and verify the removal of mines.

The G7 also pledged to reduce global vulnerability to the Strait of Hormuz by accelerating the diversification of energy supply routes and increasing energy stocks.

The MoU is expected to be formally signed on Friday and followed by 60 days of talks aimed at reaching a final deal, leaving many Iranians torn between relief over the end of fighting, hope for sanctions relief, anger over years of delay, and distrust of both Tehran and Washington.

Regime supporters say Iran forced concessions

Some government supporters argued that Iran emerged from the conflict without losing territory and succeeded in compelling its adversaries to accept its demands through resistance.

A review of public comments posted in response to a Khabar Online survey on reactions to the end of the war showed both pride and anger among users.

One user wrote that they were “very happy” about the end of the war while also feeling “a sense of pride.”

That view was quickly challenged by others. Responding to the comment, another user wrote: “Exactly what is there to be proud of? The destruction of military and technical infrastructure? Crushing inflation that is breaking people's backs? Or the fact that countries in the region are no longer willing to maintain relations with Iran? What pride are you talking about?”

Another user was even more critical, writing: “They struck our leader and senior officials. Several layers of leadership were hit from top to bottom. Our skies had become a thoroughfare for Israel and the United States. I am not proud of this situation.”

Relief mixed with anxiety

Many users said they welcomed the end of the fighting but remained pessimistic about the future or fearful that war could erupt again.

Responding to Khabar Online, one user wrote: “I am happy the war is over, but I do not have an encouraging outlook for the future.”

The user added that prospects would remain bleak as long as some groups could freely gather in the streets under the protection of security forces and express their views, while criticism of government policies by others was treated as opposition to the entire political system and met with “insults, reprimands, prison, and torture.”

Another user described their feelings as “a measure of calm accompanied by anxiety about another war in the future.”

Some users expressed hopes that a final agreement and the lifting of sanctions could improve living conditions.

Dorna Afshinfar wrote on X: “If a final agreement is reached and sanctions are lifted, what changes do you expect to see? I expect dramatic falls in the prices of essential goods such as rice, meat, chicken, dairy products, and fruit; sharp declines in housing, dollar, and gold prices; medicines and healthcare becoming much cheaper; the arrival of new airplanes, buses, and ships; and lower ticket prices for all of them.”

Critics say the deal came too late

A recurring theme among users was criticism of the government for resisting negotiations with Washington for years before eventually returning to the negotiating table after a costly conflict.

One user named Mojtaba wrote on X: “After all this war and misery, we are back to nuclear negotiations again. My God, what sin did we commit that negotiations never leave us Iranians alone?”

He added: “If you were going to make all these concessions, you should have accepted them from the beginning and not let people be crushed under the burden of inflation.”

The same user accused officials of ruining lives through years of insistence on the nuclear issue, writing: “You destroyed people's lives through all these years of absurd insistence on nuclear energy. Now you have accepted it. You should have made a rational decision from the start. I feel bitter that my past, present, and lost youth have been wasted.”

Another user wrote: “What do we feel? We feel inflation, helplessness, and a lost future. Why did you choose this path from the beginning, create all this damage, and then return to where you started? Why all these costs and wasted opportunities?”

Opposition lashes out at Trump

Many opponents of the Islamic Republic reacted angrily to Washington's decision to reach an agreement with Tehran, saying they felt abandoned by President Donald Trump and his administration.

One user wrote on X: “Shame on Trump for making a deal with the killers of 50,000 martyrs.”

Another user, referring to reports that Trump prevented Israel from targeting Ali Khamenei during the 12-day war in 2025, said: “This agreement is a betrayal of the Iranian people. They told us not to come out into the streets until the right time arrived, but it never came. Why did they not allow Khamenei to be targeted during the 12-day war? There are many other questions that I know will never be answered. They played with our blood.”

Yet another user wrote: “Forty thousand martyrs are the light that guides us, and avenging them remains our goal. Whether America wants it or not, whether it makes a deal or not, what matters is what the people of Iran want.”

Others insisted that the opposition movement would continue regardless of diplomatic developments.

“One way or another, they will reach an agreement and remain in power, but we will still be here. We will confront them in the streets. We swear by the blood of the slain that we will not go back,” one user wrote on X.

Another added: “Despite this agreement, I have never been more certain that this regime will fall. We have a king, and we will stand by our king and our flag until the end. We will reclaim Iran ourselves.”

Hardliners reject negotiations

Hardline government supporters who oppose any negotiations with the United States and believe the conflict should continue until the defeat of the United States and Israel also expressed anger at the agreement.

In recent days, hardline demonstrators have chanted slogans such as “Death to the compromisers,” “What happened to the blood of the martyred Leader?” and “We do not accept the agreement.” They have also launched a campaign under the slogan “We Do Not Accept” in an effort to halt the deal.

Videos and posts circulating on social media appeared to show security forces trying to prevent some of these gatherings and, in some cases, using force against demonstrators in Tehran and Mashhad. Iran International could not independently verify the footage or the circumstances.

Among the posts shared on X was one by Mohammad-Taher Rahimi, who wrote: “May the hand be cut off of anyone who shakes hands with the killers of the martyred Imam and poses for a commemorative photograph with them.”

A hardline user named Mehrdad wrote: “After the enemy gains access to uranium, we will enter a difficult existential war. Do not forget that Ghalibaf and Pezeshkian paved the way for this conflict.”

Another user, Hessam Mahmoudi, argued that Iran's uranium stockpile was a key deterrent. “The enemy needed to destroy missile cities with tactical nuclear bombs to force Iran's surrender. The only thing stopping them was uranium. If we give up our uranium stockpile or destroy it, next time they will do something unprecedented to us.”

A user posting under the name Bi Behnam on X wrote: “Let me be very clear. Trump's primary and ultimate goal in accepting this agreement is to remove Iran's uranium reserves. After that, the rest of the path will not be difficult for him. The moment the reserves are handed over or diluted, they will come down on Iran in a way that will become a lesson for history.”