• العربية
  • فارسی
Brand
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Theme
  • Language
    • العربية
    • فارسی
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
All rights reserved for Volant Media UK Limited
volant media logo
INSIGHT

War pause lays bare Tehran split over US talks

Jul 28, 2026, 01:54 GMT+1

The suspension of US and Iranian attacks has revived hopes for diplomacy, but in Tehran the military lull has exposed a widening divide over whether the Islamic Republic should negotiate with Washington or press what hardliners see as a battlefield advantage.

Deputy Parliament Speaker Hamidreza Haji Babai made that resistance explicit on Monday, telling lawmakers that Iran would "never reach an understanding with the United States."

"We should not allow America to wage war whenever it wants and declare a ceasefire whenever it wants," he said during a virtual parliamentary session.

Former vice president Mohsen Mansouri, who served under the late President Ebrahim Raisi, voiced similar opposition in a social media post, arguing that Iran was discussing negotiations precisely when its military position had strengthened.

Read the full article here.

Most Viewed

Potential US targets in Iran extend beyond Pickaxe Mountain - WSJ
1

Potential US targets in Iran extend beyond Pickaxe Mountain - WSJ

2

Scandal rocks Iran's secret oil money network as billions go 'missing'

3
PODCAST

US strikes pause. What comes next for Iran?

4

Trump faces growing Capitol backlash over Iran war

5

Iran's Alamut Castle inscribed as UNESCO World Heritage site

Banner
Banner
Banner

Spotlight

  • I stayed awake for them
    TEHRAN INSIDER

    I stayed awake for them

  • Iran factions vie to shape narrative of military lull
    INSIGHT

    Iran factions vie to shape narrative of military lull

  • War pause lays bare Tehran split over US talks
    INSIGHT

    War pause lays bare Tehran split over US talks

  • US strikes pause. What comes next for Iran?
    PODCAST

    US strikes pause. What comes next for Iran?

  • Iran is living through America’s 2022 inflation shock almost every month
    ANALYSIS

    Iran is living through America’s 2022 inflation shock almost every month

•
•
•

More Stories

War pause lays bare Tehran split over US talks

Jul 27, 2026, 21:39 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
100%
Pedestrians walk beneath a state-sponsored billboard depicting Donald Trump in a coffin in downtown Tehran, Iran, July 23, 2026

The suspension of US and Iranian attacks has revived hopes for diplomacy, but in Tehran the military lull has exposed a widening divide over whether the Islamic Republic should negotiate with Washington or press what hardliners see as a battlefield advantage.

Deputy Parliament Speaker Hamidreza Haji Babai made that resistance explicit on Monday, telling lawmakers that Iran would "never reach an understanding with the United States."

"We should not allow America to wage war whenever it wants and declare a ceasefire whenever it wants," he said during a virtual parliamentary session.

Former vice president Mohsen Mansouri, who served under the late President Ebrahim Raisi, voiced similar opposition in a social media post, arguing that Iran was discussing negotiations precisely when its military position had strengthened.

"We struck several ships, closed the strait and fought even harder than before. An arrow set Aramco ablaze, oil prices rose, and Iran's power became more evident than ever," he wrote.

"Why is it that just when our position is stronger and the enemy is more desperate, some immediately begin talking about negotiations, a ceasefire and reopening the strait?"

He added: "Do not restart this flawed cycle. The path to peace does not pass through negotiations and agreements. Struggle, jihad, vengeance and resistance are the road to peace."

The hardline pushback comes despite mounting signs that indirect diplomacy has resumed.

President Donald Trump said Monday that Washington was engaged in "very serious negotiations" with Iran while warning the United States would resume "very powerful military action" if diplomacy failed.

According to Turkey's Anadolu Agency, citing Pakistani sources, Pakistan and Qatar have intensified exchanges between Washington and Tehran.

The report said the mediators had proposed restoring the status quo that existed before July 9 through a two-week ceasefire, reopening maritime routes and resuming negotiations.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei confirmed in an interview with Austria's ORF television that Iran and the United States were exchanging messages through intermediaries.

At his weekly press briefing on Monday, however, he denied that Tehran had requested negotiations, insisting Iran had only been discussing shipping arrangements in the Strait of Hormuz with Oman.

Baghaei also rejected reports of a proposed ceasefire, saying Iran "has never allowed, and will never allow, the United States to determine the timing of war and peace."

Not everyone inside Iran shares the hardliners' view.

The reformist newspaper Etemad argued Monday that recent developments marked a turning point, with military confrontation giving way to deterrence and renewed diplomacy.

Former diplomat Abdolreza Faraji Rad wrote in Arman Emrooz that several developments—including the suspension of US attacks and Trump's latest remarks—suggested behind-the-scenes negotiations had either already produced results or were close to doing so.

He argued both sides still appeared to regard their earlier memorandum of understanding as valid.

Others dismissed that assessment.

Fada-Hossein Maleki, a member of parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, told the Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA) that the reduction in US military operations reflected the impact of Iranian attacks on American logistical and operational infrastructure rather than diplomatic contacts.

"Iran has entered the offensive phase," he said. "In the offensive phase, there is certainly no discussion of negotiations."

The United States halted its nightly strikes on Friday after nearly two weeks of attacks, while Iran has not launched further strikes on US bases in the region since shortly after Washington's final operation.

Whether the lull develops into renewed diplomacy or merely precedes another round of fighting remains uncertain.

What has become increasingly clear, however, is that the military pause has opened a new political battle inside Tehran over whether Iran should negotiate from what some see as a position of strength or continue pressing its advantage on the battlefield.

Tehran braces for possible new phase of war

Jul 24, 2026, 21:15 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
100%
An Iranian flag is raised during a state-organized ceremony at Tehran's Azadi Square commemorating the country's slain Supreme Leader, July 24, 2026

President Donald Trump’s increasingly explicit threats of a wider Iran war have fueled anxiety and speculation inside the country, as analysts and social media users debate whether the conflict is approaching a more destructive and unpredictable phase.

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.

Cafés close, tolerance ends: Iran’s post-war shift on compulsory hijab

Jul 24, 2026, 10:37 GMT+1
•
Masoud Kazemi
100%
File ohoto shows a police officer standing inside a café in Tehran during an inspection.

Several cafés in central Tehran have been shut down after authorities renewed pressure over compulsory hijab, days after senior clerics called for stricter enforcement and weeks after the government briefly tolerated looser dress code during wartime pro-establishment gatherings.

Café owners describe a renewed campaign against businesses associated with a different urban lifestyle.

Among the cafés forced to close in recent days were some located along Tehran's central streets. Some had previously been shuttered over allegations they failed to enforce Iran's compulsory hijab rules.

  • Raid on Tehran's cafés was a show of contempt

    Raid on Tehran's cafés was a show of contempt

The latest wave followed public appeals by Friday prayer leaders for tougher action.

“The situation regarding hijab in society is not acceptable,” Mohammad Reza Naseri, the Friday prayer imam of Yazd, said on July 17, urging officials and cultural institutions to confront what he described as “corruption and indecency.”

In the northern city of Rasht, Friday prayer imam Rasoul Falahati praised pro-government nighttime gatherings and argued that confronting what he called “organized unveiling” should also involve public participation. Falahati urged the government and parliament to fully implement Iran's hijab law.

Days later, café owners in central Tehran found their businesses sealed.

'They saw us as the odd ones out'

The owner of a café on Sanaii Street in Tehran, which was closed on July 20, told Iran International that unusual pressure had built over recent weeks, saying organizers of nighttime gatherings appeared to view cafés such as his as incompatible with the atmosphere they wanted to create.

According to the owner, plainclothes men carrying radios and firearms visited the café twice in the days before the funeral of Ali Khamenei, the slain leader of the Islamic Republic, describing the business, its staff and customers as “a stain of shame” and “the enemy's foot soldiers.”

“One of them said our city was preparing for the funeral of the leader, yet you are here engaged in pleasure, music and corruption,” the owner recalled.

He said he warned employees that closure appeared imminent.

A young woman who managed the dining area at another shuttered café on the same street said rumors of inspections had circulated the previous day, but the conduct of officials still came as a shock.

  • Café closures mount after protests as Iran’s job market freezes

    Café closures mount after protests as Iran’s job market freezes

“The way they stormed in and behaved was so aggressive and disrespectful that everyone was stunned,” she said. “Some colleagues did not even have time to collect their personal belongings before the café was closed.”

Wartime images told a different story

The closures stand in sharp contrast with scenes seen only weeks earlier.

During the 40-day war and its aftermath, women without compulsory hijab appeared openly at pro-establishment nighttime gatherings and at Ali Khamenei's funeral. State media interviewed some of them, and their images appeared in official coverage.

100%
Women gather at a café in Tehran. Cafés have become important social spaces for young Iranians, but several venues in the capital were recently closed. (File photo)

Religious singers also adopted a noticeably different tone.

“A woman with loose hijab who has come to the square is the light of our eyes and the daughter of our country,” one speaker said during a gathering.

The imagery contrasted with years of rhetoric from parts of Iran's political and religious establishment portraying women who reject compulsory hijab as posing an ideological challenge to the Islamic Republic.

The difference appeared less a change in official thinking on compulsory hijab than a reflection of changing political priorities. At a moment when authorities sought to project national unity and broad public participation, women with different styles of dress became part of the official narrative. As that period faded, so did the visible tolerance.

The pattern extended beyond dress.

State media also featured rappers performing songs supporting the system and Iran's armed forces, despite rap music facing years of official restrictions and criticism.

The contrast illustrated a broader pattern. Different forms of dress, music or cultural expression appeared acceptable when reinforcing an official political message but faced restrictions once they existed outside that framework.

Pressure spreads beyond Tehran

The closures in central Tehran form part of a broader campaign affecting businesses across Iran.

On May 19, the historic Ameri House hotel complex in the central city of Kashan was closed over what authorities described as failure to observe mandatory hijab rules.

On June 15, the judiciary's Mizan news agency reported that prosecutors ordered a Tehran café closed and opened a criminal case against its managers after images circulated online from an event authorities said violated legal and religious standards.

The campaign expanded elsewhere.

On July 2, the public prosecutor of Kohgiluyeh County announced the closure of 10 cafés and teahouses in Dehdasht for allegedly failing to observe religious standards.

Less than three weeks later, the Mohseni Mansion, a restored historic Qajar-era property operating as a hotel and restaurant in the southern city of Behbahan, was shut over what officials described as optional hijab among some customers and the playing of music.

100%
A customer smokes a cigarette inside a café in central Tehran. (File photo)

Authorities in Lorestan, Ardebil and Aran va Bidgol have also announced closures of businesses over accusations including unveiling, failure to observe Islamic standards, moral violations.

Competing accounts

Officials and business owners offer different explanations for the closures.

Tasnim News Agency, which is affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, rejected suggestions that the cafés had been targeted over morality enforcement. The businesses, it said, were closed solely because of licensing and trade violations and that the action had “no connection” to moral security.

Café owners dispute that account.

  • Iran’s café culture buckles as everyday life contracts

    Iran’s café culture buckles as everyday life contracts

They describe earlier warnings, visits by plainclothes personnel, scrutiny of customers' clothing and growing pressure surrounding the atmosphere inside their businesses. Their accounts differ sharply from the official explanation and leave unanswered questions about the principal reason behind the closures.

For many owners, the consequences extend beyond politics. Many cafés had already struggled amid economic stagnation, falling purchasing power, internet disruptions and a sharp decline in customers. Sudden closure leaves employees without wages, rent unpaid and businesses facing taxes and debts despite being unable to operate.

Oil rally hardens Tehran's stance on US talks

Jul 24, 2026, 01:38 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
100%
Iranian lawmakers raise fists and wave red “revenge” flags during a parliamentary session in Tehran, beneath a portrait of slain Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, July 14, 2026

The surge in oil prices appears to be hardening Tehran's resolve against renewed negotiations with Washington, giving ammunition to those who argue that a prolonged conflict puts more pressure on the United States than on Iran.

The shift comes as Brent crude climbed above $100 a barrel for the first time in two months after Iran-aligned Houthi attacks expanded maritime tensions from the Strait of Hormuz to the Bab al-Mandab Strait, raising fears of broader disruption to Middle Eastern energy exports.

US President Donald Trump this week warned that the United States would destroy Iranian bridges or power plants in response to attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

He later blamed Tehran for Houthi attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea, saying any further assaults would trigger an "extremely severe" US response against both the Houthis and Iran.

Amid the escalating threats, Brent crude surged 6% on Thursday, climbing back above $100 a barrel for the first time in two months.

Tehran sees leverage

Iranian officials increasingly portrayed the price rally as evidence that insecurity around the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab had strengthened Tehran's negotiating position.

"The equation of this war is clear: either everyone or no one," Parliament Speaker and Iran's chief negotiator Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf wrote on X. "In a region where we cannot sell oil, no one will sell oil. If our security is not guaranteed, no infrastructure will remain safe."

He later added: "They wanted to punish Iran. Punished themselves with triple-digit oil instead."

Mohammad Mokhber, an adviser to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, argued that the latest rally reflected disruptions to transportation rather than production, implying prices could climb much higher if energy infrastructure itself came under attack.

"Oil at $100 is, so far, merely the result of disruptions in transportation, not production. The fire the United States is igniting in the region's oil and gas fields will eventually engulf the entire world."

Ali Akbar Velayati, another senior adviser to Mojtaba Khamenei, likewise warned that "the illusion of striking Iran at low cost" could have consequences extending well beyond the battlefield to global energy markets.

Talks lose momentum

The more confident tone in Tehran coincided with signs that diplomacy was stalling.

According to Axios, citing two regional sources familiar with mediation efforts, Iran's leadership rejected the latest proposal presented through intermediaries.

"We're trying, but the Iranians are not cooperating," one source told the outlet.

Trump also acknowledged that negotiations had made little progress, saying Tehran wanted to negotiate but had not "suffered enough yet."

Conservative Iranian media and hardline commentators argued that soaring oil prices had renewed Washington's interest in diplomacy and urged Tehran to resist returning to the negotiating table while economic pressure on the United States and its partners continued to build.

Following its announcement of attacks on US facilities in Kuwait, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) declared that Washington "must pay the price for breaking its commitments" and vowed not to allow the United States to use "deceptive ceasefires" to replenish military supplies and strategic reserves before resuming hostilities.

The statement accused Washington of seeking negotiations only after being "defeated on the battlefield."

Hardline commentator Hamid Moghaddam similarly argued that renewed American interest in diplomacy reflected the surge in oil prices and urged Iranian negotiators to hold their position.

Another hardline commentator wrote that unless households in the West began to feel the economic consequences of the conflict, the United States and Israel "would have no hesitation in turning Iran into another Libya or Gaza."

Former Israeli intelligence officer Danny Citrinowicz questioned whether Trump's increasingly forceful warnings would alter Tehran's calculations.

"The Houthis are not going to stop attacking, just as Iran is not going to stop supporting them," he said.

"These threats are unlikely to change behavior in either Sana'a or Tehran. If anything, repeated ultimatums that are not enforced risk highlighting the limits of American deterrence."

Trump threat to hit Pickaxe renews calls in Iran for nuclear bomb, NPT exit

Jul 23, 2026, 16:19 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
100%
An Iranian cleric visiting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Force Museum in Tehran, November 2025

President Donald Trump’s threat to strike Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain nuclear-linked facility has intensified hardline calls for Tehran to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and develop a nuclear weapon.

The debate gained fresh momentum after Trump warned Tuesday that the United States would target the deeply buried facility, known in Persian as Mount Kolang Gaz La, if Iran sought to restore its nuclear program there.

Advocates of this view argue that the recent wars demonstrated that conventional military capabilities alone no longer provide sufficient deterrence, making a nuclear option increasingly necessary. Others stop short of openly advocating nuclear weapons but argue that Iran should at least leave the NPT in response to growing US threats.

The arguments echo comments made by Fereydoun Abbasi, the former head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and a politician closely associated with Saeed Jalili’s hardline camp, months before he was killed in Israeli strikes during the 12-day war in June 2025.

In January 2025, Abbasi argued that under the new security environment, “the dangers of not building a bomb and lacking strong deterrence are far greater than the costs of acquiring it,” warning that weak deterrence would only encourage direct aggression.

Abbasi also maintained that Iran had long ago crossed the scientific and technical threshold required to build a nuclear weapon, arguing that the remaining obstacle was no longer technical but rather “a strategic decision.”

In his view, when threats from Israel and its allies become existential, missile deterrence and reliance on regional allies are no longer sufficient, leaving the country increasingly vulnerable without a nuclear deterrent.

Social media campaign targets negotiating officials

Many hardline social media users now argue that Iran should build a nuclear bomb as quickly as possible. They have also criticized officials they describe as “eager for negotiations”—including President Masoud Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi—for failing to put withdrawal from the NPT on the government’s agenda.

One X user writing under the name Ayyar reacted to Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei’s statement that Iran remained committed to the NPT.

“Just hours after Baghaei declared that Iran is still a member of the NPT, Trump threatened to bomb the Pickaxe Mountain nuclear facility,” the user wrote. “They killed the country’s leader along with thousands of Iranians and repeatedly struck our nuclear facilities. What exactly must the enemy do before we leave the NPT? Are you asleep?”

Another user, writing under the name Sam, argued: “Why are we afraid of leaving the NPT? Afraid of a global consensus against Iran? Staying in the treaty hasn’t prevented that. We have no choice but to build nuclear weapons for comprehensive deterrence. Nuclear weapons could be the final answer.”

Another account, Seyed Mehrdad, wrote: “The answer to a nuclear threat is not threatening regional infrastructure. Deterrence lies in leaving the NPT and conducting a live nuclear test.”

Other users argued that Iran should not remain without nuclear weapons if countries such as Turkey or Saudi Arabia eventually acquire them, insisting that “missile power alone cannot guarantee deterrence.”

Another post claimed that nuclear-capable bombers would not threaten Iran if the country already possessed nuclear weapons, reflecting a broader argument among hardliners that only an atomic arsenal could prevent further US or Israeli attacks.

Debate spreads beyond social media

The discussion has also spread into conservative media. On June 28, the IRGC-affiliated Fars News Agency published an opinion piece titled “There Is No Alternative but to Build an Atomic Bomb,” arguing that Iran required nuclear deterrence to secure the “peace of mind” necessary to resolve other disputes through negotiations.

Fars later clarified that the article had appeared in its interactive opinion section and did not represent the agency’s official editorial position.

Other conservative outlets, including Kayhan, and hardline members of parliament have generally avoided explicitly endorsing nuclear weapons. They have, however, increasingly referred to concepts such as “redefining deterrence,” “reviewing nuclear commitments” and “revising the country’s defense doctrine.”

Calls for NPT withdrawal intensify

Trump’s latest warning against Pickaxe Mountain has also prompted some conservative figures to publicly raise the possibility of leaving the NPT.

Political analyst Mohammad Hossein Khoshvaght, who has close ties to the late supreme leader’s family, questioned whether conventional responses to US attacks would simply encourage further aggression, asking whether such a cycle could continue “until Iran is brought down.”

Former senior Revolutionary Guards commander Ghorbanali Salavatian urged Iranian authorities to formally notify international organizations that Iran would withdraw from the NPT if the United States attacked Pickaxe Mountain.

He added that such a withdrawal should occur “without delay” if an attack took place.

Khamenei’s fatwa returns to focus

The debate has also reopened questions surrounding the religious prohibition on nuclear weapons issued by the late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Following Khamenei’s death, some social media users argued that Mojtaba Khamenei, as the new supreme leader, should revoke or revise his father’s fatwa declaring nuclear weapons religiously forbidden in light of the changed security environment.

One user wrote in March that because Ali Khamenei was no longer a living source of emulation, his fatwa was no longer binding. The user described the pursuit of nuclear deterrence as “a national demand and the right of the Iranian people.”

The issue had already surfaced in September 2025, when 70 members of parliament argued that Khamenei’s previous ruling should be changed or reinterpreted and demanded authorization for the development and possession of an atomic bomb to establish “nuclear deterrence.”

The lawmakers argued that while the use of nuclear weapons could remain religiously forbidden, producing and possessing them solely for deterrence should be treated differently.

Official position remains unchanged

Before Ali Khamenei’s death, Iranian officials and nuclear negotiators consistently maintained that his fatwa was a permanent religious ruling rather than a temporary political decision.

According to their interpretation, not only the production and use of nuclear weapons but even their possession solely for deterrence is forbidden under Islamic law. They argued that Iran’s deterrence should instead rest on missile capabilities, technological advances and human capital.

Under Shiite jurisprudence, however, a new marja, or source of emulation, may issue rulings that differ from those of his predecessors.

Araghchi acknowledged this possibility in an interview with Al Jazeera in April, saying any change to the nuclear fatwa would depend on the position adopted by Iran’s new supreme leader.

For now, the government’s formal position remains unchanged. Baghaei said Monday that Iran remained a member of the NPT and recognized its obligations under the treaty, although he added that Tehran continually reviewed its foreign policy and national security options.

Baghaei also said Wednesday that no nuclear activity was taking place at Pickaxe Mountain, accusing Washington of using the site as a “fabricated pretext” for further attacks and sabotage.