Iran commander sets one-for-one retaliation against US troops

The dispute has reignited a long-running confrontation between Pezeshkian's administration and the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), which reformist and pragmatic politicians have for years accused of partisan coverage and a pro-hardline editorial line.

The omitted remarks came during a televised interview in which Pezeshkian described how Iran's leadership decided to resume negotiations.

"After the Twelve-Day War, the martyred Supreme Leader officially announced that we would no longer negotiate with the United States," Pezeshkian said. "State television broadcast those statements as well."

According to the president, he and other senior officials later met Khamenei to explain the country's circumstances, reminding him that he himself had argued that a prolonged state of "neither war nor peace" was unsustainable.

"We asked, 'What should we do?' He instructed us to go and negotiate," Pezeshkian said.

"He also sent a message saying, 'Go and resolve the problem,' because it was not possible to continue under conditions of neither war nor peace."

Pezeshkian stressed that opening negotiations did not amount to a concession, adding that even now, despite what he described as "difficulties communicating with the Leader," the government's diplomatic steps continued to be taken "under his guidance and instructions."

The remarks appear to describe a distinction between Khamenei's public stance and his private guidance to senior officials, although Pezeshkian did not explain why the two differed.

The president's office later complained that the passage had been removed from the version broadcast by state television, prompting criticism from government supporters and renewed accusations that IRIB had selectively edited the interview.

The broadcaster has not publicly explained why the segment was omitted.

The clash is the latest in a series of disputes between Pezeshkian's administration and IRIB.

Since taking office, government officials and reformist politicians have repeatedly accused the broadcaster of favouring hardline political factions, selectively editing interviews and undermining the elected government through its news coverage.

IRIB has consistently rejected accusations of political bias, saying its editorial decisions are made according to professional standards.

“We’re talking to them right now,” Trump said Friday when asked whether Americans should expect major strikes. He said the United States could continue attacking Iran “piece by piece” or intensify the campaign “in a more rapid fashion,” while describing a negotiated agreement as the smarter option.

Trump said Iran appeared increasingly serious about reaching a deal but warned that negotiations could still fail. Any agreement, he said, must prevent Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

His comments came after The New York Times reported that he had met senior advisers to consider intensifying US military operations against Iran. The discussions followed US Central Command’s announcement Thursday that it had completed a 13th consecutive night of strikes on Iranian military and maritime targets.

Persian Gulf states enter the fight

The Wall Street Journal reported that Bahrain and Kuwait secretly sent warplanes to strike drone- and missile-storage facilities and other military sites inside Iran in early July, marking their first direct retaliation against Tehran.

The United Arab Emirates provided intelligence and defensive air cover, according to the report. Bahrain and Kuwait both host US military bases and have repeatedly come under Iranian missile and drone attack.

Kuwait’s military said Friday that its air defenses were confronting “hostile” drones launched from Iran, while Bahrain said it had intercepted and destroyed several Iranian aerial attacks.

Iran also stepped up its warnings to countries supporting US military operations.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said countries that allowed the United States to use their bases or territory for attacks would place themselves “among the aggressors.”

Mediation channels

Pakistan and Oman were working to keep channels open between Washington and Tehran as fighting continued.

Pakistan was exploring a possible route to restart stalled US-Iran talks after a diplomatic push by China, three Pakistani sources told Reuters. They said major obstacles remained, including Iranian attacks on Saudi Arabia and other regional states.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, accused Washington of a “breach of commitments” and “excessive demands” during a meeting with his Pakistani counterpart in Kyrgyzstan.

The Iranian and Omani foreign ministers also spoke by phone as an Omani delegation arrived in Tehran for talks on managing shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, the state-run IRNA news agency reported.

Maritime conflict spreads

Maritime tensions intensified across two of the region’s most important shipping routes.

The United States and Britain were planning a high-level meeting in London on forming an international coalition to protect commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Washington was seeking allied contributions including de-mining vessels, naval ships and drones.

In the Red Sea, the Saudi vessel NCC Masa suffered minor hull damage in an attack but continued to its destination after checks confirmed that the ship and crew were safe. The incident came four days after the Iran-backed Houthis announced an immediate naval blockade on Saudi-linked shipping through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait.

As fighting continued across the region, rhetoric from Tehran also pointed toward further escalation.

Major General Ali Abdollahi, commander of Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, said Iran would kill one American service member for every Iranian citizen killed in US attacks.

“For every proud citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran who is martyred, one American force will be sent to hell,” Abdollahi was quoted as saying by IRGC-affiliated Tasnim News.

He added that Iran had prepared “free, direct tickets to hell” for US troops.

On Friday, Trump met his top advisors to discuss the possible escalation but later told reporters he had not yet decided whether to launch major new strikes. He at the same time warned that the US military is “locked and loaded” to escalate the campaign.

His comments came one day after he told Axios he was considering launching a military strike on Iran "larger than all previous attacks" and that he was close to making a decision.

Inside Iran, however, the focus quickly shifted from Trump's words to what they might signal.

International affairs analyst Amir-Ali Abolfath drew parallels with the opening hours of the war.

"I have the same feeling I had on the night of February 28th before the major attack," he wrote. "It may not happen tomorrow, but if the current trajectory continues, another day like that—or an even bigger one—could lie ahead."

Another widely shared post by X user Tohid Javadi reflected similar anxiety.

"All the signs point to extensive bombing of Iran in the coming hours and days. Unless Iran fully surrenders, this situation will continue."

Military exchanges widen

The speculation was reinforced by another night of military exchanges.

US Central Command carried out strikes mainly across southern Iran targeting military installations, logistics facilities and air defense systems.

Iran, meanwhile, continued attacks on US positions in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq's Kurdistan Region.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed it had struck a US base in Kuwait as well as an Amazon data centre in Bahrain, alleging the facility had provided intelligence support to the US military.

Iran's army also claimed attacks on Isa Air Base in Bahrain and Al-Azraq Air Base in Jordan.

In a separate statement, the IRGC urged civilians in those countries to remain at least 500 metres away from potential Iranian targets.

Social media activist Hatef Salehi argued that the scale of the American military buildup suggested Washington was preparing for more than coercive diplomacy.

"This enormous military buildup and deployment of advanced US equipment to the region is highly unlikely to be merely psychological or diplomatic pressure on Iran."

War or pressure campaign?

Not everyone believes the latest escalation points to an imminent regional war.

Political analyst Amin Shayegan argued that the confrontation remains "more a contest of endurance than a purely military competition."

According to Shayegan, Washington is attempting to gradually erode Iran's military and economic capabilities, while Tehran is seeking to tie the costs of the conflict to global energy markets and international trade in an effort to alter US calculations.

Diplomatic activity has added another layer of uncertainty.

Britain announced the withdrawal of all its diplomats from Tehran, while reports circulated that US military aircraft had departed British air bases for operations related to Iran.

Iranian media also reported that French and German diplomats had left Tehran. France's embassy denied those reports, while the German embassy told Iran International that it remained open but was currently providing limited consular services.

Attention also focused on the arrival of an Omani delegation in Tehran.

Officially, IRNA said the visit concerned coordination of shipping management in the Strait of Hormuz. But Oman has long served as the principal intermediary between Tehran and Washington, prompting widespread speculation online that Muscat could also be carrying messages related to the rapidly escalating conflict.

Some users interpreted the visit as a final warning before a larger US military operation, while hardline commentators instead portrayed it as another attempt to revive negotiations—an outcome they argued Tehran should reject.

The debate has grown louder as speculation mounts over whether the conflict could eventually require American ground forces, despite repeated White House assurances that no such deployment is planned.

Speaking to Iran International, Senator Ted Cruz called Trump's military campaign "the most consequential decision of his presidency" but said he did not expect a prolonged deployment of US ground troops.

"I do not believe there is any possibility that the president will send boots on the ground for any sustained involvement," he said. "There might be ... a limited involvement."

Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville likewise argued that decisions over troop deployments should rest entirely with Trump.

"We've got a commander in chief. He got 80 million votes," Tuberville told Iran International. "He should be able to do what's right for the country."

Asked whether he would support sending troops into Iran, Tuberville said the decision was "up to him."

Democrats challenge legality

Democratic Senator Tim Kaine argued that the administration had already exceeded its constitutional authority.

"The president is in the middle of an illegal war," Kaine told Iran International. "He violated the Constitution by starting war without Congress."

Kaine also said Trump had violated the War Powers Resolution by continuing military operations beyond the statutory deadline without congressional authorization.

"He is triply violating the law," Kaine said, adding that "Congress needs to stop this war."

The exchange highlighted a widening divide on Capitol Hill, where Republicans argue the campaign is necessary to restore deterrence and Democrats counter that any deployment of US ground troops requires explicit congressional authorization.

The Senate this week voted narrowly against advancing legislation that would have required congressional authorization for continued hostilities, leaving Trump with broad operational freedom even as the political debate over the next phase of the conflict intensifies.

The debate has sharpened as the conflict enters a more dangerous phase.

Trump said this week he was considering a "massive attack" against Iran larger than previous operations while insisting no final decision had been made. The White House has continued to maintain that it has no plans to deploy US ground troops.

Iran has responded with threats of its own.

On Friday, Major General Abdolrahim Abdollahi, commander of Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, declared that Iran would kill one American service member for every Iranian citizen killed in US attacks.

"The rule ... is now a definitive and officially declared equation of the battlefield," he said.

The report, published on Friday, followed recent remarks by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said the US-Israeli attack that killed Khamenei and several senior military commanders did not occur during a full meeting of Iran's Defense Council. Instead, Araghchi said, a subordinate committee of the council, chaired by the council's secretary, was meeting at the time.

• 

  Araghchi interview draws fire from Iran hardliners

According to Noor News, the committee was chaired by Ali Shamkhani and was discussing the implementation of a comprehensive plan to organize resources, personnel, structures and equipment to manage future protests, while also assessing what participants believed was an imminent US-Israeli attack on Iran.

Protest response and military planning

The outlet said officials viewed the country as facing a "multi-layered threat" combining foreign military action with the prospect of domestic unrest, making preparations for both scenarios a priority.

The protest management plan, Noor News wrote, gained urgency after nationwide protests in January 2026. Khamenei, it added, rejected a proposal to transfer responsibility for the plan to the Supreme National Security Council's secretariat and instead instructed Shamkhani to oversee its implementation until its completion.

Khamenei and Shamkhani, the report added, also emphasized reducing casualties among civilians and protesters during demonstrations, leading to the development of new equipment and procedures for managing public gatherings.

The January protests were triggered by soaring prices, a collapsing currency and deep public anger toward the Islamic Republic. What began as an economic protest quickly evolved into a nationwide political crisis, prompting one of the most intense crackdowns in the Islamic Republic’s history.

• 

  100 days on: the anatomy of Iran’s January crackdown

Authorities responded with internet shutdowns, mass arrests and a violent crackdown. More than 36,500 Iranians were killed by security forces during the nationwide crackdown on January 8 and 9, according to classified government documents and other evidence reviewed by Iran International's Editorial Board.

The strike began while the committee was in session, killing Shamkhani and several senior military commanders, according to Noor News. The outlet said the meeting was intended to prepare for what participants believed would be simultaneous external military action and internal unrest.

• 

  Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

Khamenei was killed on February 28 in the opening hours of the US-Israeli war against Iran. He died in a coordinated airstrike targeting his heavily fortified compound in Tehran as part of a broader operation aimed at decapitating Iran's military and political leadership. Satellite imagery later showed extensive destruction at the compound.

Khamenei, who had ruled Iran since 1989, was 86. The Assembly of Experts subsequently appointed his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, as Iran's new Supreme Leader.