Can Tehran seek revenge and negotiate with Washington?

In a message issued after the burial of former supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei described retaliation for his father’s death in a February 28 airstrike as “a national demand”, adding that it “will most certainly be carried out.”

Judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei, recently reappointed by Khamenei for another five-year term, immediately welcomed the declaration that revenge for his slain father was inevitable.

“We will pursue and punish the murderers of the martyred Imam,” he wrote on X.

Former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei, now a military adviser to the supreme leader, said US president Donal Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had crossed the Islamic Republic’s “red lines” and “must be met with decisive and proportionate punishment.”

“Revenge is part of the path of the Revolution,” he added.

The declaration revived a contradiction at the heart of Iranian policy: whether Tehran can negotiate with Washington while presenting revenge against its president as a national or religious obligation.

Hours before Khamenei’s message, Trump said 1,000 US missiles were “locked and loaded” and aimed at Iran, with thousands more ready to follow if the Iranian government acted on threats to kill him.

The message also intensified pressure on officials viewed as favouring engagement with Washington.

Some hardline commentators portrayed it as drawing a clear line between the supreme leader and supporters of negotiations, while others complained that senior officials and institutions had been slow to endorse it publicly.

President Masoud Pezeshkian had earlier affirmed Iran’s right to avenge what he called the “historic crime,” while Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf said those responsible would face justice.

Neither had publicly commented on Khamenei’s latest message at the time of writing.

Former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili said avenging Khamenei would be “a defence of every nation’s sovereignty” and “the greatest service to international law.”

Hardline political activist Ahmad Ghadiri argued that advocating Trump’s assassination fundamentally contradicts negotiations with Washington.

Amir Chizari, a political activist close to Ghalibaf, disagreed. He maintained that the obligation to seek revenge, which he said Khamenei had imposed on all Muslims, “does not contradict the negotiations that have taken place so far.”

Reformist journalist Ahmad Zeidabadi questioned the logic of pursuing both tracks simultaneously.

“Those who say Iran should negotiate and reach an agreement with the United States while at the same time planning to cut off Trump’s head, or demanding his extradition to Iran to be killed, what framework of political or practical logic are they following?” he wrote.

Some hardline figures called for the rhetoric to be translated into action.

Political analyst Ehsan Salehi told Hamshahri’s online television channel that security agencies should establish dedicated units to carry out revenge operations.

“The word ‘revenge’ is neither ambiguous nor open to interpretation,” he said. “It has a clear meaning: punishing and eliminating the killers. It cannot be diluted into harmless slogans or symbolic projects.”

Salehi argued that a stronger response to the US killing of Qasem Soleimani in 2020 might have deterred subsequent attacks.

Cleric Mohammad Fayyazi said Khamenei’s declaration had effectively made revenge official policy and urged the government to endorse it formally, without what he called “pointless diplomatic considerations.”

The debate exposed broader disagreements over Iran’s priorities.

The news website Rouydad24 argued that while parts of the political and military establishment consider revenge the country’s foremost objective, others see the deteriorating economy and declining public trust as the more immediate threats.

It warned that becoming trapped in “a vicious cycle of emotional decisions” could bring tougher sanctions, greater economic hardship and deeper domestic discontent.

One reformist-leaning user argued that revenge also required the capacity to carry it out.

“A country that could not guarantee the security of its late leader, and cannot fully guarantee the security of its current leader, should first restore its own strength before thinking about revenge,” the user wrote. “Otherwise, the result will be no different from before.”

Religious scholar Saeed Sadoughi raised a more fundamental question.

“Suppose Trump and Netanyahu are gone and revenge is achieved. Will the country’s problems be solved?” he wrote. “Will issues such as high-level uranium enrichment and the Strait of Hormuz simply disappear? Will the country suddenly move towards development and prosperity?”

While the government continues to provide monthly cash subsidies and electronic food vouchers to a large share of the population, many families say these measures no longer come close to covering rapidly rising living costs.

An analysis by economic news website EcoIran comparing official food prices, a minimum nutritional basket and the minimum wage found that the salary of a married worker with one child is now enough to cover little more than the minimum monthly food needs of a three-person household.

The analysis estimated that an individual needed around 78 million rials in June to meet minimum nutritional requirements.

For households relying solely on the minimum wage, it found that almost all monthly income would be consumed by food purchases alone, leaving little for rent, utility bills, transportation, healthcare, education or clothing.

Unrelenting inflation

The squeeze comes as many Iranian families already spend between 50% and 70% of their income on housing costs.

Food prices have continued to climb sharply, with staples including red meat, poultry, dairy products, rice, eggs, cooking oil, fruit and vegetables increasingly out of reach for many households.

According to data cited from the Statistical Center of Iran, annual inflation currently stands at about 66%, while year-on-year inflation has jumped by roughly five percentage points over the past month to exceed 88%.

Food and beverage inflation has climbed above 130%, with some categories recording even sharper increases. Prices of red meat and poultry have risen by nearly 180% compared with a year earlier, according to Iranian market reports, causing demand to fall significantly.

Many Iranians say their personal experience of inflation is significantly worse than official figures suggest.

Economists note that inflation indexes measure a broad basket of goods and services, while lower- and middle-income families spend a much larger share of their income on essentials such as food, rent, transportation and medical care.

Dwindling middle class

Economist Kamran Nadri told Tejarat News that years of sustained inflation have inflicted lasting damage on household finances.

“Economic pressure on low-income groups and the middle class may be tolerable for a short period, but when it persists for years, it leaves broad social and economic consequences,” he said.

“Since 2018, following the United States' withdrawal from the nuclear agreement, Iran has experienced average annual inflation of around 40 to 45 percent,” Nadri said. “During that period, wages did not increase in line with inflation under successive governments, and the purchasing power of the middle class has declined markedly.”

Economists caution that even if Iran reaches an agreement with the United States and the risk of military conflict subsides, inflation is unlikely to fall quickly.

Political economy researcher Kamal Athari told ILNA that even under the most optimistic scenario—including sanctions relief and removal of obstacles such as Iran’s inclusion on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)—it would still take years for Iran to restore normal commercial relations with the global economy.

“Under such circumstances, inflation could eventually decline, but the process would not be rapid,” he said.

‘It’s all on Pezeshkian’

Growing concern over living standards has prompted renewed calls for additional government support.

Mohsen Bagheri, a board member of the Tehran Islamic Labour Councils' Coordination Council, told Khabar Online that wages, which were set in early April, should be revised upward in the coming months.

He also argued that the value of electronic food vouchers should increase, saying they have remained unchanged despite rising prices and earlier government promises.

The economic pressure has also become part of the wider battle over Iran’s political direction after the war.

Hardline critics who continue to advocate confrontation with the United States and Israel have blamed President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration for the deteriorating situation.

“Pezeshkian destroyed the country,” one hardline user wrote on X. “He created limitless inflation. He allowed us to be deceived by the enemy three times. Zero achievements, countless losses.”

Others have pushed back, arguing that continued calls for confrontation ignore the country’s worsening economic reality.

“Families are literally being destroyed, education, healthcare, housing, inflation, employment, and every economic indicator point to a bleak future,” one user wrote. “Yet some profiteers have forgotten the suffering of the people and keep calling for more war.”

Outlets from different political camps are warning of mounting pressure from inflation, falling purchasing power, unemployment and infrastructure failures, even as they sharply disagree over who is responsible.

Independent and reformist-leaning publications such as Sharq, Etemad and Tose’e Irani have focused on the rising cost of basic goods, reporting that food prices have surged far beyond wage growth.

They point to basic commodities such as bread, poultry and vegetable oil rising between 130% and more than 200%, while wages cover only a fraction of estimated household costs.

Even outlets close to the government, including ILNA and Etemad, have highlighted the growing gap between income and survival, noting that the minimum wage of around 16.6 million tomans covers less than 40% of the estimated 45-million-toman basic subsistence basket for an average family.

Beyond inflation and market instability, Iranian media have also focused on a worsening infrastructure crisis.

Severe rolling summer blackouts have returned, disrupting factories, increasing pressure on businesses and making daily life harder during peak heat.

The search for blame mirrors Tehran’s broader political divisions.

Moderate and reformist outlets such as Sharq, Etemad and Arman Melli emphasize structural failures, isolation and the economic toll of years of confrontation.

They argue that sanctions, conflict, damaged infrastructure and policy failures have intensified pressure on the economy.

Some commentators have warned of an “inflation bomb” and questioned whether decision-makers understand the “accumulation of public dissatisfaction.”

Earlier this week, Jahan Sanat published industrial analyst Alireza Mahdiyeh’s commentary under the headline “The sound of an inflation bomb,” citing Central Bank figures that he said showed the economy facing one of its worst periods in decades.

“Inflation has now reached even the price of bread,” he wrote. “Bread is still available, but more expensive than before. Yet inflation in bread does not give the baker more bread. It only means that what reaches people’s tables is smaller and less than before.”

Moderate outlets have also pointed to domestic policy decisions, including severe internet restrictions and blackouts, arguing they have damaged the digital economy and created widespread “hidden unemployment.”

Hardline dailies Kayhan and Resalat offered a different diagnosis, placing responsibility on the United States and Israel.

They argue that Washington’s declaration that the June interim agreement is “dead,” combined with renewed military pressure, proves that Western economic warfare is driving instability.

These outlets have also accused “economic saboteurs,” domestic speculators and merchants of manipulating currency markets and hoarding essential goods.

The proposed solutions reveal two competing visions for Iran’s future.

Hardliners have called for a “resistance economy,” including tighter controls on markets, action against price gouging and expanded rationing networks.

Moderate economists and commentators writing for outlets such as Donya-ye-Eghtesad argue that internal crackdowns cannot solve deeper structural problems.

They say economic stability depends on reducing tensions, restoring international trade, easing restrictions on businesses and creating conditions for investment and reconstruction.

But optimism remains limited as the damaged diplomatic process between Tehran and Washington offers little immediate relief.

As economist Mehdi Pazouki told reform-leaning Fararu, further escalation could push the country into even more dangerous territory.

“If Israel’s warmongering policies and the hardline approaches of certain actors inside Iran intensify, there is a serious possibility that we will move toward hyperinflation and the dollarization of the economy,” he said.

The emerging message is not unity around solving Iran’s deepening economic, security and diplomatic crises, but unity around revenge, resistance and obedience to the new leadership.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps put that message in explicit terms after Khamenei’s funeral ceremonies in Iran and Iraq, describing the processions as a display of loyalty, unity and resistance.

In a statement thanking the public and officials involved in the ceremonies, the IRGC said “blood vengeance” for Khamenei and others killed was a “certain, legitimate and unforgettable demand.”

It said punishment of the “agents, commanders and supporters” of the killing would remain in the memory of the Islamic community and the so-called resistance front until what it called justice was achieved.

Banners and posters threatening Trump, including calls to kill him and references to bounties, were a recurring theme during the week-long funeral processions for Khamenei, turning the language of vengeance into one of the ceremony’s most visible messages.

1 / 7

100%

1 / 7

The IRGC statement did not name Trump, but its language echoed a wider funeral narrative in which the US president was repeatedly cast as a target of vengeance.

It also framed the funeral processions in Najaf and Karbala as proof of the bond between Iran, Iraq and Tehran’s regional network, and said the IRGC and allied forces would continue Khamenei’s path under Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

The message came as hardliners inside Iran were also targeting officials involved in diplomacy with Washington.

The tension has been visible since the announcement of the memorandum with Washington, which hardliners rejected from the outset with slogans such as “We do not accept.” What began as opposition to the agreement soon turned into direct attacks on President Masoud Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.

• 

  Revenge rhetoric dominates Khamenei funeral despite US talks push

According to ILNA, the confrontation peaked during Khamenei’s funeral ceremonies, which authorities had sought to present as a symbol of unity and political continuity. Instead, groups in the crowd chanted “Death to the compromiser” and slogans against Pezeshkian, Araghchi and Ghalibaf.

Footage from the ceremonies showed Pezeshkian being addressed with insulting chants. Another video showed people throwing stones toward Araghchi and shouting abuse at him, drawing reactions from political figures and media outlets inside Iran.

ILNA warned that national unity cannot be preserved through insults, vilification and polarization, saying some hardliners had moved beyond political criticism into efforts to deepen internal divides.

Mohammad Mohajeri, a conservative political activist, called the chants against Araghchi and Ghalibaf an “Israeli sedition” and warned that silence by Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and other council members could be read as complicity.

Hesamodin Ashna, a former adviser to Hassan Rouhani, also reacted to the attacks on Araghchi, writing on X: “The same person you are stoning is standing up for you.”

• 

  Iran uses Khamenei funeral in Iraq to claim regional reach

Unity and retaliation

Mohammad-Saleh Jokar, head of parliament’s internal affairs and councils committee, told ILNA the country needed unity “more than ever” and said polarization was what the enemy wanted.

But his definition of unity also centered on retaliation.

“If we are to avenge the blood of the martyrs and the martyred Imam, this will certainly be achieved in the shadow of unity,” Jokar said.

He said Iranians should direct their anger at the United States, adding that “criminal America” must be held accountable and that the nation would not leave alone those who had committed “evil and crime.”

Jokar said the funeral ceremonies had displayed the “strength and power” of the nation and angered the enemy. “We must act in such a way that it dies of this anger,” he said, adding that the “blood of our martyrs” must be avenged.

• 

  Tehran torn between war and deal as Khamenei is buried

Call for nuclear weapons

Some hardline lawmakers have pushed the message further. Hossein Samsami, a member of parliament’s economic committee, told Didban Iran that taking revenge for Khamenei’s death required strengthening Iran’s offensive and defensive capabilities and reconsidering the country’s nuclear doctrine.

“A change in our nuclear doctrine is one of the requirements for taking revenge,” he said, implying that Iran should make nuclear weapons.

Samsami also said those responsible for Khamenei’s killing should be treated like Salman Rushdie, referring to Ruhollah Khomeini’s fatwa calling for Rushdie’s death.

He accused Washington of using diplomacy and the funeral period to gather intelligence on Iranian officials, saying the ceasefire and funeral ceremonies were used to identify their residences for future assassinations.

“The enemy enters through the door of peace to break your neck,” he said.

These remarks show how the language of revenge is spreading beyond military retaliation into broader demands for a harder ideological, nuclear and security line.

That shift comes as ordinary Iranians face the consequences of renewed confrontation, from economic pressure and insecurity to the risk of wider war.

ILNA warned that whenever politics has moved toward harsh polarization and the elimination of rivals, “the whole society has paid the price.”

For now, however, the loudest official language around unity is not focused on that price. It is focused on revenge, loyalty and the claim that disagreement itself may serve the enemy.

The debate comes as Ali Khamenei was buried in Mashhad after a week of funeral ceremonies, marking the symbolic beginning of a new political era for the Islamic Republic.

One headline on a leading Tehran news site captured the anxiety: “People will have to pay the price of uncalculated slogans.”

Other outlets warned of “the very high possibility of a full-fledged war,” soaring exchange rates and gold prices, and a country trapped in “a war between wars.”

Coverage on pro-reform Fararu and other outlets reflected growing concern over security and the economy, as Iranians rushed to convert savings into gold and dollars in a volatile market reacting to every comment from Tehran or Washington.

‘Incation worse than compromise’

Economist Mehdi Pazouki warned in an interview with Fararu that continued uncertainty would deepen the damage to Iran’s economy and people’s livelihoods.

“Every single day earlier that the agreement is signed is in the country’s interest,” he said, urging Tehran to finalize an agreement with Washington and pursue deeper reforms.

“The cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of compromise,” he added.

Despite renewed military escalation, Reuters cited a US official on Thursday as saying Washington remained committed to finding a resolution with Iran and that technical talks were continuing.

The pro-Pezeshkian daily Etemad voiced concern over the growing pressure on Iran’s state institutions.

While acknowledging what it called “the necessity of a calculated defense to deter unilateral American bullying,” the paper warned that a wider regional war could overwhelm civilian systems.

It pointed to casualties reported by the Health Ministry—at least 14 killed and 78 wounded—and damage to transport corridors in Khuzestan and Golestan provinces.

Etemad urged the Supreme National Security Council to ensure that any military response does not close backchannel or third-party diplomatic efforts, arguing that preventing a broader crisis must remain the government’s priority.

Sharq warned that US strikes on bridges and the Tehran-Mashhad railway marked a shift toward what it described as efforts to isolate Iran’s domestic markets.

Sharq said Iran’s ability to withstand pressure depends not only on military power but also economic durability, urging the government to use global concerns over energy instability to push for mediation.

‘Sacrilegious and criminal’

Hardline outlets presented the same developments as evidence that Iran should abandon restraint and expand its response.

Conservative factions framed the latest strikes as an opportunity to enforce Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz.

Kayhan, whose chief is customarily appointed by the Supreme Leader, described the targeting of the Tehran-Mashhad railway corridor ahead of the late Supreme Leader’s burial as a “sacrilegious and criminal act of desperation.”

It argued that Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei now had a mandate for defiance, warning that any attack on Iran’s infrastructure would render “the entire maritime transit apparatus of the Persian Gulf completely non-operational.”

In a commentary headlined “Shattering the Logistics of Aggression,” the municipal daily Hamshahri praised Iranian strikes on US targets, including Patriot missile infrastructure in Kuwait and fuel depots in Bahrain.

Hamshahri argued that by expanding attacks to include host nations, Tehran was weakening what it described as the American security umbrella in the region.

The paper warned that disruption of Iran’s transport networks would be answered with paralysis of the regional energy supply chain.