Iran International
A senior aide to President Masoud Pezeshkian has turned Iran’s dispute over the US memorandum into a fight over authority, arguing that Supreme Leader’s views are subject to expert review within the state’s decision-making bodies rather than implemented automatically.
Vice President Mohammad-Jafar Ghaempanah came under fierce criticism from ultra-hardliners after saying Khamenei’s recent message on the memorandum showed respect for the Islamic Republic’s institutional decision-making process, not opposition to the agreement.
The dispute follows the publication of a written message attributed to Khamenei, in which he said he had “a different view in principle” about the memorandum but approved it after receiving assurances from the Supreme National Security Council and its chairman, Pezeshkian, that Iran’s national interests and those of the so-called Axis of Resistance would be protected.
That phrase has become the center of an increasingly bitter dispute.
Ultra-hardliners argue that Khamenei’s statement proves he had serious reservations about the agreement and accepted it only under pressure.
Some conservative figures and media outlets, including the hardline daily Kayhan, have warned that portraying the Supreme Leader as being at odds with the SNSC risks deepening political polarization.
A message read two ways
According to Ghaempanah, Khamenei had instructed that the memorandum be discussed at an SNSC meeting attended by senior military commanders, and had said the agreement should be accepted if three-quarters of members approved it.
“If every opinion expressed by the Leader were implemented without question, there would be no need for institutions such as parliament or the SNSC. The Leader expresses his views, and those views are examined by experts,” he added.
Ghaempanah said all but one member voted in favor of signing the memorandum, after which Khamenei authorized it while warning that “Iran must not retreat in the face of excessive American demands.”
He also said Khamenei’s reported remark that he had “a different view in principle” did not mean opposition to the memorandum, but instead strengthened Iran’s bargaining position with the United States.
Authority at the center of backlash
Ultra-hardliners interpreted Ghaempanah’s remarks as diminishing the doctrine of Velayat-e Faqih, or Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, arguing that he had implied the Supreme Leader’s view could be subordinated to decisions taken by the SNSC.
Reza Narimani, a prominent eulogist or maddah (religious singer) associated with the ultra-hardline camp, accused Ghaempanah of misunderstanding the concept of Velayat-e Faqih.
Writing on the hardline Raja News website, Narimani said Ghaempanah should not hold office if he believed “not everything the Leader says is binding,” arguing that practical commitment to the Leader’s directives is a prerequisite for serving in the Islamic Republic.
He further wrote that Ghaempanah “is not in a position to subject the Leader’s opinion to expert review because the Leader’s opinion itself is the expert judgment within the framework of divine law.”
Addressing Ghaempanah directly, Narimani added: “The problem is your understanding. Your understanding of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist is flawed, and that is why the country’s problems remain unresolved. Instead of negotiating with America and looking to the West to solve the country’s problems, improve your own understanding until it reaches that of the Leader.”
The comments were widely shared by ultra-hardline social media users.
One user, Hamid Khorasani, wrote: “This system is the system of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist. Either you do not understand the meaning of Absolute Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, or you do understand and are acting on behalf of the enemy.”
Another user wrote: “You cannot consider your own opinion on par with the opinion of the Leader! According to the Constitution … the Leader’s opinion is the top priority of the entire system and governmental institutions.”
The 'coup' claim spreads
The controversy comes amid an escalating ultra-hardline campaign against the Pezeshkian administration over the US memorandum.
Hardline lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian has already accused Pezeshkian and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf of carrying out a “coup” against the Supreme Leader by bypassing his authority to push through the agreement with Washington.
A hardline social media user, Shahram Rashidnia, wrote that “the time for advice and warnings to Pezeshkian’s government is over; the coup against the Leader is now open and explicit.”
He urged supporters to use Khamenei’s funeral ceremonies to defeat what he described as the conspiracy.
Government says remarks distorted
Supporters of the government argue that Ghaempanah was explaining Khamenei’s message, not challenging his authority.
They say the text shows that Khamenei initially held a different view but approved the memorandum after receiving guarantees from Pezeshkian on behalf of the SNSC, while making clear that implementation depended on the United States honoring its commitments and avoiding excessive demands.
The Executive Vice Presidency’s public relations office issued a statement on Wednesday rejecting criticism of Ghaempanah’s remarks, saying they had been taken out of context and distorted.
It said his comments “in no way conflict with the position of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist.”
The statement also warned that “in the current sensitive circumstances, taking officials’ remarks out of context and creating a false dichotomy between the Leader and the state’s institutions not only fails to protect the position of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist but could weaken national cohesion and distort understanding of governance in the Islamic Republic.”
Iran's Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei plans to remove judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Eje'i at the end of his first five-year term and appoint a new figure to lead the judiciary, sources familiar with the matter told Iran International.
Sources inside Iran told Iran International that Khamenei does not intend to extend Eje'i’s term for another five years, breaking with a practice followed for nearly four decades in which judiciary chiefs have usually served two consecutive five-year terms.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the decision is not aimed at judicial reform but is part of a broader reshaping of power after the recent war.
They said the new supreme leader is seeking to replace key officials in major state institutions with figures more closely aligned with him.
Eje'i’s expected removal could mark one of the first major signs of Khamenei’s effort to rebuild control over the Islamic Republic’s judicial, security and political apparatus after the transfer of power.
Hardliners step up pressure on Eje'i
The decision comes amid growing criticism of Eje'i from hardline figures after the names of Supreme National Security Council members who voted in favor of a memorandum of understanding with the United States were disclosed.
Critics say Eje'i’s vote was at odds with Khamenei’s stated position, after the leader said in a letter that he had, in principle, held a different view on the memorandum of understanding.
Signs of dissatisfaction with Eje'i’s five-year record have also appeared in recent official and semi-official commentary close to the power structure.
In a message marking Judiciary Week, Khamenei did not clearly endorse Eje'i’s continuation in office. Instead, he addressed the judiciary as an institution and called for the “actualization” of demands previously made by former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
The message repeated calls for the implementation of the judicial transformation document, fighting corruption inside the judiciary, reviving public rights, blocking the use of recommendations and lobbying, and improving communication with the public.
Eje'i seeks to defend his record
A day later, Eje'i published a letter to Khamenei in deferential language, defending the judiciary’s performance and pledging to continue the path of “judicial transformation.”
“I and all components of the judiciary consider ourselves obliged to carry out Your Excellency’s binding commands precisely, swiftly and without any reduction,” Eje'i wrote.
Media outlets and figures close to the establishment criticized Eje'i for not publishing such a letter before Khamenei’s message. Some also described the new leader’s renewed emphasis on his father’s demands as a negative assessment of Eje'i’s record, arguing that their repetition showed the judiciary had failed to deliver practical results under him.
Rival factions inside the establishment have also stepped up attacks on Eje'i, accusing him of distancing himself from the leadership’s demands.
Media close to Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and President Masoud Pezeshkian have described the attacks as part of an effort by the faction aligned with Saeed Jalili, a member of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, and the Paydari Front to create divisions among senior officials and weaken the postwar political path.
Media close to the judiciary and Eje'i’s supporters have sought to portray his five-year record as successful, citing reduced imprisonment, electronic court proceedings, shorter trials, anti-corruption efforts and public outreach.
Rights groups point to record of repression
Human rights groups and activists say Eje'i is not a reformist figure but a long-standing part of the Islamic Republic’s repressive judicial and security apparatus.
They point to his record in the Special Clerical Court, the Ministry of Intelligence, and later as first deputy and head of the judiciary, saying his tenure has been marked by continued heavy sentences against protesters, political activists, journalists, prisoners of conscience and minorities.
Rights advocates say the judiciary under Eje'i has continued to act as the legal and executive arm of security institutions in political and security cases.
They also argue that replacing Eje'i alone would not bring meaningful change without structural reform, an end to security interference in judicial cases, guaranteed access to lawyers, a halt to forced confessions, the annulment of political verdicts and respect for fair trial standards.
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.
