Turkey’s tougher residency rules are leaving growing numbers of Iranians facing legal uncertainty, financial losses and difficult choices over whether they can remain in a country that was once among their most accessible migration destinations.
The Iranian newspaper Shargh reported on Thursday that many Iranians in Turkey have had residency renewals rejected, seen sudden changes to their legal status or, in some cases, been ordered to leave the country.
The report said some had rented homes, bought property or established businesses under rules that previously offered a relatively predictable path to renewing short-term residency permits.
Turkey became a major destination for Iranian migrants over the past decade because of its proximity, visa-free short visits and relatively accessible residency procedures.
Thousands of Iranians moved there for work, study, investment or family reasons, settling in cities such as Istanbul, Izmir, Antalya and Alanya.
According to Shargh, the situation began to change after the COVID-19 pandemic, as Ankara tightened migration policies affecting many categories of foreign residents.
One Iranian identified as Sina told the newspaper that immigration officials ordered him to leave Turkey for six months despite renting a home in Izmir for four years.
"I kept explaining that I had rented a house here and they couldn't do this," Sina said. "They behaved politely but kept repeating the same thing. In the end, they said if I objected, I should hire a lawyer."
Another Iranian, Reza, told Shargh he moved to Istanbul with his wife and daughter in 2021 after spending his family's savings on renting a home, furnishing it and registering a company.
When the family applied to renew their residency a year later, officials rejected the application without providing a detailed explanation despite what he described as complete documentation.
Maryam, a fashion designer who opened a small workshop in Antalya, said uncertainty over her residency prevented her from expanding her business or planning for the future.
Tougher enforcement
An immigration lawyer interviewed by Shargh said the changes largely reflect stricter implementation of existing rules rather than major amendments to Turkish immigration law.
The lawyer said short-term residency is not an automatic right and Turkish authorities have broad discretion to approve or reject applications after assessing individual circumstances.
Higher migration following the pandemic, pressure on the housing market, changing security and demographic priorities and restrictions on registering foreign residents in parts of major cities all contributed to tighter enforcement, the lawyer said.
The lawyer also cautioned that renting or purchasing property no longer guarantees residency and advised applicants seeking long-term stays to consider more stable legal pathways such as work permits, student visas or qualifying investment programs. Applicants whose requests are rejected generally retain the right to challenge the decisions before Turkey's administrative courts.
The experiences described by Shargh mirror accounts gathered by the Associated Press following months of conflict involving Iran, Israel and the United States, with many Iranians in Turkey describing growing uncertainty over both their legal status and finances.
"There are people who have lived on them for over 10 years," Sedat Albayrak of the Istanbul Bar Association's Refugee and Migrant Rights Center told AP in April, referring to Iranians relying on renewable short-term residence permits instead of obtaining more permanent legal status.
Nearly 100,000 Iranians lived in Turkey in 2025, according to the Turkish Statistical Institute.
The United Nations refugee agency says around 89,000 Iranians entered Turkey after the conflict began, while roughly 72,000 later departed, indicating that many crossed the border only temporarily or continued to third countries where they already held residency or citizenship.
Conflict compounds financial strain
For many Iranian residents, the recent conflict has intensified economic pressures already created by tighter immigration rules.
Nadr Rahim, who has lived in Turkey for 11 years, told AP his family depended on income from a motorcycle showroom in Iran because obtaining permission to work legally in Turkey remained difficult. Sales largely stopped after the fighting began, while internet disruptions complicated financial transfers.
"If the war continues, we will have no choice but to return," Rahim told AP. His children have grown up in Turkey and speak Persian only with difficulty, making the prospect of returning especially challenging.
Another Iranian woman, who requested anonymity, told AP she enrolled at a Turkish university mainly to secure a student visa while working long hours in service jobs to support relatives in Iran.
"I have a bad life in Turkey, and my parents have a bad life in Iran," she said. "I came to Turkey with so much hope, to support my parents and build a future. But now I feel hopeless."
AP also reported that some families have been separated because of residency complications. Bakery worker Sadri Haghshenas said her daughter returned to Tehran after the family missed a residency application deadline and feared deportation proceedings could jeopardize her chances of returning legally to Turkey.
Easy to visit, harder to stay
For Iranians hoping to settle in Turkey, obtaining or renewing residency has become increasingly difficult. Yet for many others, the country continues to serve as the nearest and most accessible destination outside Iran.
The Wall Street Journal reported on June 26 that traffic through the Kapikoy border crossing near Van has begun returning to prewar levels following the ceasefire, with Iranian visitors once again traveling to eastern Turkey for shopping, leisure and entertainment.
Nightclub manager Hüseyin Aşan told the newspaper business at his venue, which caters largely to Iranian visitors, fell by about 70% during the conflict but has since begun recovering.
"We just came from a war, so we're going to have some fun," a visitor from Tehran told the newspaper after crossing into Turkey for a week's holiday.
Others remained uncertain about what awaited them at home. A 27-year-old medical laboratory technician returning to Iran after vacationing in Turkey told the Wall Street Journal: "I don't know who won the war, but the people lost."
Kharratian has often argued that Iran must preserve what he sees as its strategic leverage in any confrontation or negotiation with Washington, including its military and nuclear capabilities, control over pressure points such as the Strait of Hormuz, the impact of oil prices and political divisions inside the United States.
His latest remarks have triggered debate across Iranian media and social networks.
Some experts interviewed by Iran International said any restructuring of the IRGC would likely amount to little more than a rebranding exercise, preserving the Guards’ power while trying to shed some of their political and economic baggage.
Others see the debate as a sign that Iran’s leadership understands the country cannot emerge from the recent war unchanged.
Proposal predates the war
The discussion is not entirely new. Shortly before the outbreak of the recent war, the moderate daily Jomhouri-e Eslami proposed merging the IRGC into the regular army, arguing that Iran’s security and economic conditions required a review of the country’s military structure.
The newspaper said such a move could create a more coherent defense system. But its argument went beyond military organization.
The article also criticized the IRGC’s growing reach outside the battlefield, including its role in the economy, politics, media and parts of diplomacy.
It said that expansion had not produced greater national power or strategic cohesion, but had instead given the IRGC the image of a controversial, factional and multifaceted institution.
Domestically, the newspaper argued, the Guards had become a source of political dispute.
Abroad, it said, their expanded role had given Iran’s adversaries a pretext for pressure, sanctions and costly decisions against Iran’s national interests.
Hardline backlash
Jomhouri-e Eslami’s proposal drew an immediate backlash from conservative media.
The hardline newspaper Kayhan described the idea as “a project to eliminate the IRGC,” comparing it to what it called US and Israeli efforts to dismantle Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces.
It dismissed the proposal as “not an expert discussion,” but rather a continuation of foreign projects aimed at weakening what it called the Islamic Republic’s defensive arm.
Abdollah Ganji, the former managing director of the IRGC-affiliated newspaper Javan, also denounced Jomhouri-e Eslami on X, calling it “a polluted mouthpiece.”
He wrote that raising such an idea while the country faced the threat of war was, “even if it is not evidence of enemy infiltration, evidence of catastrophically flawed understanding.”
Arguments for restructuring
Not all commentary rejected the idea. The website Eghtesad 24 argued that, given the IRGC’s designation as a terrorist organization by the United States and the European Union, some analysts viewed a merger with the regular army as a possible way to reduce legal and diplomatic pressure on Iran.
The outlet wrote that “merging the army and the IRGC could, from the perspective of reducing legal and international pressure, be worthy of consideration,” adding that such a move could reduce some of the diplomatic costs created by those designations.
It also referred to an earlier claim by IRGC commander Hassan Kazemi that the United States had demanded the dissolution of the IRGC and its integration into the regular army.
Social media reflects sharp divisions
The issue has circulated on Iranian social media for months, where hardline users have recently accused senior officials involved in negotiations, including Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and members of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration, of trying to sideline revolutionary forces and even plotting a coup.
One X user wrote: “The final stage of the coup is dissolving the IRGC and merging the armed forces.”
Another said: “You’ll take the dream of dissolving the IRGC to your grave.”
A third argued that Kharratian’s remark alone was enough to show that “the coup plotters signed Iran’s destruction and partition long ago,” adding that dissolving the IRGC would mean disarming the Islamic Revolution and stripping it of legitimacy.
Others voiced a different concern. They argued that if a merger ever took place, it would not produce a more conventional national army, but would instead amount to the regular army being absorbed into the IRGC, turning the unified force into an ideological military organization.
A recurring debate
The idea of dissolving the IRGC or merging it with the regular army dates back to the early years of the Islamic Republic under Ruhollah Khomeini.
No merger took place. But in 1989, Iran merged the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of the IRGC as part of an administrative, budgetary and logistical restructuring, while leaving the two forces institutionally separate.
The General Staff of the Armed Forces was also established to coordinate strategy, assign responsibilities and oversee the military.
Later that year, Iran’s new supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, emphasized that both the IRGC and the regular army should be preserved, and that neither should be sacrificed for the other.
Months later, he sought to settle the debate by defining the IRGC’s primary mission as defending the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic, while assigning the regular army responsibility for defending Iran’s borders.
The patient paid 1,592,500 rials (about $0.91) for 15 insulin pens in early May. The same prescription, purchased from the same pharmacy in Tabriz on June 28, cost 39,092,500 rials (about $22.27), an increase of about 2,355%.
The sharp rise in the patient's bill far exceeded the increase in the price of the medicine itself. The total cost of the prescription rose from 96,862,500 rials (about $55.19) to 134,362,500 rials (about $76.56), an increase of 37,500,000 rials (about $21.37), or about 38.7%.
The receipts show the same billing categories, including the insurer's contribution, the patient's share, coverage for patients with special illnesses and pharmacy service fees. But while the drug's price increased, the Social Security Organization's reimbursement remained fixed at 96,000,000 rials (about $54.70), leaving the patient to pay the difference.
The newer receipt also included a new line item labeled "difference" worth 37,500,000 rials (about $21.37), transferring the additional cost directly to the patient. That line did not appear on the receipt issued in early May.
As a result, while the price of the drug itself increased by less than 40%, the patient's out-of-pocket payment rose more than 24-fold because the insurance reimbursement ceiling was not adjusted.
Drug prices continue to climb
Iran International reported in late April that insulin prices had already surged compared with levels before the Persian New Year (March 21), with some domestically produced brands rising by up to 212% and imported products by as much as 271%.
The latest receipts suggest prices have continued to rise since then, while also highlighting the growing burden on patients as insurance coverage has failed to keep pace with higher costs.
Industry blames production costs
Pharmaceutical industry representatives say the crisis has been driven by a combination of factors, including the removal of subsidized exchange rates, the depreciation of the rial, higher prices for raw materials and packaging, rising wages, increased financing costs and supply chain disruptions linked to the recent war.
They say manufacturers have also struggled with higher working capital requirements, while delayed price adjustments and insufficient government and banking support have compounded the problem.
Since January, following the government's exchange-rate unification policy, pharmaceutical raw materials that had previously been imported at a subsidized exchange rate have instead been purchased at rates more than five times higher.
Mohammad Abdehzadeh, head of the Health Economy Commission at the Tehran Chamber of Commerce, told Donya-ye Eqhtesad on Wednesday that most medicines had been removed from the subsidized currency system since March and were now being produced using the new exchange rate.
The newspaper said Iran's pharmaceutical sector was facing twin pressures: producers struggling with sharply higher manufacturing costs and liquidity shortages, and patients increasingly forced to bear a much larger share of medicine costs out of pocket.
The interview was interrupted while Ghalibaf was explaining the mechanism for releasing Iranian assets abroad.
Video of the broadcast shows his remarks being cut off abruptly, followed by a black screen before the channel switched to other programming.
IRIB later said the interview would continue in a second installment on Wednesday, adding that this had been announced in an on-screen ticker at the end of the program.
Parliament says broadcaster gave no notice
In a statement, parliament's media office said the interview had been recorded more than two hours before broadcast and delivered in full to IRIB.
It said that if the broadcaster had decided not to air parts of the interview, it should have coordinated with parliament beforehand. Instead, it said, "The interview was stopped in the middle of its broadcast without any prior notice."
The statement said the cut section covered some of the most sensitive issues in the interview: possible IAEA inspections of Iranian nuclear sites, efforts to release frozen Iranian assets, the reported $300 billion reconstruction credit in the US-Iran MoU, responses to remarks by US President Donald Trump, and what it called Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei’s strategic message last month.
Video of missing segment circulates
Several Iranian media outlets later published what they described as a brief clip from the unaired portion of the interview.
In the footage, Ghalibaf defended the mechanism for releasing Iranian funds, saying critics ignored that similar humanitarian purchase arrangements had existed for years.
"Where were these purchases made over the past 15 years? Weren't the letters of credit opened in London?" Ghalibaf said.
"Why has this suddenly become an issue? Because they do not want to admit that this memorandum of understanding opened the way for OFAC authorization. This is the power of the Islamic Republic. Be proud of it and stand by it. This document is America's defeat, and we achieved it with dignity," he added.
Iranian media reported that about 20 minutes of the interview had not been aired.
Online speculation
Messages sent by viewers to Iran International suggested the interview was cut as Ghalibaf referred to an earlier agreement under late president Ebrahim Raisi that enabled about $6 billion in Iranian funds to be transferred from South Korea to Qatar for humanitarian purchases.
Other audience messages linked the interruption to reports that a senior IRIB executive had returned to the broadcaster after leaving following another controversial live broadcast last month.
During that program, hardline lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian disclosed what he described as confidential correspondence from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei criticizing the US-Iran negotiations before the interview was abruptly cut short. IRIB later said Nabavian's remarks had violated the law and announced the executive's departure.
Iranian news website Jamaran cited unnamed sources saying the executive had returned to work on Tuesday and raised questions about whether the personnel change was connected to the interruption of Ghalibaf's interview. No official has confirmed or denied the report.
Broader political divisions
The dispute over Ghalibaf's interview came amid growing signs of divisions within Iran's ruling establishment over the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
Several Iranian media outlets portrayed the interruption as evidence of widening political rifts. Fararu said it reflected the growing influence within state broadcasting of allies of hardline politician Saeed Jalili and the ultraconservative Paydari Front, arguing that IRIB could no longer tolerate "even the official narrative of the conservative parliament speaker."
The outlet described the episode as "factional monopolization," "another crossed red line," and "media self-sabotage at one of the country's most sensitive political moments."
The controversy follows weeks of public infighting over negotiations with Washington. Hardline figures have repeatedly accused Ghalibaf, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and President Masoud Pezeshkian of making excessive concessions, while Ghalibaf and his allies have defended the agreement and pushed back against the criticism.
