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

Russia secretly helping Iran develop supersonic cruise missiles - FT

Sep 2, 2026, 03:04 GMT+1Updated: 06:06 GMT+1

Russia has been secretly helping Iran develop advanced supersonic cruise missiles capable of threatening US aircraft carriers and other warships in the Middle East, the Financial Times reported Tuesday.

The multiyear covert program, codenamed C430L, began in 2023 and brought in experienced Russian missile specialists to help Iran develop ramjet propulsion technology for a new class of weapons, according to an FT investigation based on leaked correspondence, travel records and military patents.

The technology allows cruise missiles to sustain flight at several times the speed of sound and was almost certainly intended for anti-ship and land-attack missiles, experts cited by the FT said.

Iran has built and flight-tested the ramjet propulsion system, but there is no evidence that a Russian-assisted supersonic cruise missile has yet been deployed, the report said.

The program was arranged by Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport in coordination with missile manufacturer NPO Mashinostroyenia. Russian engineers analyzed data from an Iranian flight test and advised Tehran on issues including fuel systems, combustion stability, air intakes and engine nozzles.

The FT said the cooperation continued into 2026, after the start of the US-Israeli war with Iran, with the two sides discussing a further phase of the program as recently as June.

Most Viewed

Trump dismisses Iran deal after Tehran pushes return to Islamabad memorandum
1

Trump dismisses Iran deal after Tehran pushes return to Islamabad memorandum

2
ANALYSIS

The republic of magic: How Iran turned the unseen into an instrument of rule

3

President's son questions enrichment, ignites fierce debate in Tehran

4
EXCLUSIVE

IRGC Unit 4000 plans attacks on shipping in East Asia, sources say

5
ANALYSIS

Iran loses ground on trade as war hits oil and non-oil exports

Banner
Banner

Spotlight

  •  Hackers without borders: serving Tehran, stealing on the side
    SPECIAL REPORT

    Hackers without borders: serving Tehran, stealing on the side

  • The republic of magic: How Iran turned the unseen into an instrument of rule
    ANALYSIS

    The republic of magic: How Iran turned the unseen into an instrument of rule

  • President's son questions enrichment, ignites fierce debate in Tehran

    President's son questions enrichment, ignites fierce debate in Tehran

  • Iran fires back, but can missiles ease economic pain?
    ANALYSIS

    Iran fires back, but can missiles ease economic pain?

  • IRGC Unit 4000 plans attacks on shipping in East Asia, sources say
    EXCLUSIVE

    IRGC Unit 4000 plans attacks on shipping in East Asia, sources say

  • Iran loses ground on trade as war hits oil and non-oil exports
    ANALYSIS

    Iran loses ground on trade as war hits oil and non-oil exports

  • Iranians hit back at VP's case for pricier gasoline as dollar passes 2.1m rials
    VOICES FROM IRAN

    Iranians hit back at VP's case for pricier gasoline as dollar passes 2.1m rials

Banner
•
•
•

More Stories

US-Iran escalation prompts debate in Iran over preemptive strikes

Sep 2, 2026, 02:57 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
100%
Smoke rises following a US strike on Iran’s Larak Island on August 30, 2026.

Calls for preemptive strikes on US forces are growing in Iran after renewed US attacks, intensifying debate over whether Tehran should shift away from a mainly retaliatory strategy.

The latest cycle began with a US strike on Revolutionary Guards targets on Larak Island in Hormozgan province Sunday night, after a period in which Washington had increasingly emphasized economic pressure, a naval blockade and additional sanctions on Iran.

Iranian authorities initially reported two deaths, but the toll later rose to three after one of the wounded died in hospital, according to the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim news agency.

US Central Command said the Larak strike targeted an “imminent threat,” alleging Revolutionary Guards forces were preparing to launch rockets carrying sea mines toward the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran rejected that account.

Iran responded early Monday with missile and drone attacks on two US bases in Jordan, according to the Revolutionary Guards, which said it had targeted technical and maintenance infrastructure and areas where fighter jets were stationed. Iran’s army separately said it had launched dozens of explosive drones at US personnel and helicopters at Al Minhad Air Base in the United Arab Emirates.

Iran also said after the Larak strike that its forces had shot down US MQ-9 drones over and east of the Strait of Hormuz. There was no immediate US confirmation of those claims.

The confrontation escalated further Tuesday when President Donald Trump announced “large and powerful” US strikes on Iranian targets near the Strait of Hormuz, warning Tehran that retaliation would trigger attacks at a “much harder and higher level.”

CENTCOM later said it had completed a new wave of strikes against Iranian military targets including air defenses, radar systems, maritime assets, mine-laying capabilities and communications sites. US officials told Axios that around 100 targets were struck.

Trump later told Fox News that Iranian radar systems were among the targets.

“They tried to rebuild their radar because they can’t see anything,” he said. “We waited until it was almost built and then we hit it.”

Iran responded with another round of missile and drone attacks on US positions across the region. The Revolutionary Guards said it targeted US facilities in Jordan and Erbil, while Iran’s army said it launched a large-scale drone attack on Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain. Bahrain said its air defenses intercepted and destroyed Iranian drones over the kingdom.

The IRGC also said it had begun responding to the latest US strikes and claimed its air defenses had shot down what it called the 50th US MQ-9 drone. The claim has not been independently confirmed.

Calls for a change in strategy

The widening exchange has unfolded alongside an increasingly explicit debate inside Iran over whether its armed forces should move from retaliating after attacks toward acting when they detect signs that an attack is imminent.

Iran’s leadership has not formally announced any shift toward a preemptive doctrine.

But even before Trump announced Tuesday’s new strikes, political figures close to the establishment were arguing that the confrontation had exposed the limits of diplomacy and of waiting to respond after US military action.

Ali Gholhaki, a political activist close to parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, argued Tuesday that the Larak strike had demonstrated the “audacity of the United States” and showed that Washington was prepared to resume significant military action after a period of relative restraint.

He also said expectations of reviving the Islamabad understanding had been disappointed.

“It seems that resolving the issues in the ‘military field’ — given the conditions inside and outside Iran — will be more feasible than ‘diplomacy,’” he wrote.

The argument contrasts with President Masoud Pezeshkian’s continued insistence Tuesday that Iran was prepared to return to the Islamabad memorandum if the United States resumed compliance with its commitments.

Nour News, a website close to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Tuesday that the Larak attack and Iran’s response should not be viewed simply as another cycle of “attack and retaliation,” but as a “sign of a change in the battlefield.”

The website linked Mohsen Rezaei’s appointment as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council to an approach aimed at raising the costs of US military decisions and shifting some of the war’s pressure toward the US economy and domestic politics.

“In the previous model, the United States attacked and Iran responded to maintain deterrence. But in the new model, the response is not only to punish the aggressor; rather, the action must be designed in a way that makes the next US decision more difficult and costly,” Nour News wrote.

It argued that Iran was seeking to confront Washington with a dilemma: restraint by the United States could be interpreted in Tehran as evidence that the threat of force had lost some of its deterrent value, while further US attacks could raise risks to energy supplies and economic stability.

Tasnim, which is affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards, similarly portrayed the speed of Iran’s response to the Larak strike as evidence that the gap between political decision-making and military action was narrowing.

The agency argued that Iran should move from an “immediate response after an attack” toward readiness for “action at the first serious signs of an attack,” while acknowledging the political and strategic risks of such a shift.

Hardline lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian went further, openly calling for a preemptive attack on US interests across the Middle East.

“Given the enemy’s depleted war reserves, rising fuel prices and the proximity of the US congressional elections, the enemy is seeking to reduce tensions,” Nabavian wrote on X. “So now is the best time for a preemptive attack on US interests in the region, forcing the enemy to retreat and breaking the blockade.”

He described failing to act as “wasting the opportunity.”

The calls do not amount to an announced change in Iranian military doctrine. But they show a growing argument among hardline and security-linked voices that waiting for each US strike before responding leaves Washington with too much control over the pace of escalation.

Hormuz becomes central to military calculus

The debate is closely tied to the struggle over the Strait of Hormuz, where both sides increasingly portray military pressure and control of commercial shipping as part of the same confrontation.

Iranian officials continue to insist that ships cannot transit the strategic waterway without coordination with Tehran. Lawmaker Esmail Kosari said Tuesday that vessels attempting to cross without coordination would be confronted by the Revolutionary Guards.

In a video interview Tuesday, Ghalibaf said: “The Americans falsely assure ships that they can pass through the Strait, but those ships come under attack.”

Iranian military-linked outlets have also reported attacks or threats against vessels Tehran considers noncompliant. The IRGC said one supertanker caught fire after striking two naval mines, but CENTCOM rejected that account and said no vessel had struck mines in the Strait.

Fars separately reported that a Saudi tanker, Cedar, had stopped while transiting the southern corridor of the Strait, but did not establish that Iranian forces had detained the vessel.

The maritime confrontation widened further Tuesday when the US military struck two Iranian government tankers. Axios reported that the attack was carried out under a new “tanker for tanker” policy approved by Trump in response to Iranian attacks on shipping.

US officials said the two tankers were anchored off Iran’s coast north of the US naval blockade line when drones launched missiles into their engine rooms. Axios said it was the first time the US military had struck Iranian tankers in retaliation for attacks on shipping rather than to enforce the blockade.

The escalation leaves the debate inside Iran no longer centered solely on how to answer individual US attacks. Increasingly, the argument is over whether Tehran should try to anticipate them — and whether doing so would strengthen deterrence or instead accelerate an already widening regional war.

Protester blinded in one eye sentenced to death after return to Iran

Sep 1, 2026, 22:13 GMT+1
100%
Ali Zarei Doozdarresi

An Iranian court has sentenced Ali Zarei Doozdarresi, a protester shot by security forces and blinded in one eye during the 2022 protests, to death after he returned from Germany and was arrested upon arrival in Iran, US-based rights outlet HRANA reported.

Branch 23 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court convicted Zarei of “corruption on Earth,” based on alleged acts including extensive political activity, producing false news, propaganda against the establishment, disrupting security and unauthorized entry into and exit from the country, according to HRANA.

The death sentence was communicated to him on August 23, HRANA said.

Zarei, around 27 and from Tehran, was arrested by Intelligence Ministry agents on April 28 after returning to Iran. His case was initially handled by Branch 3 of Tehran Prosecutor’s Office District 33, known as the Security Prosecutor’s Office, before he was transferred to Qezel Hesar Prison in Karaj on June 30.

He is currently being held in Unit 3, Ward 37 of the prison, according to HRANA.

Zarei lost sight in his right eye after being shot during the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom protests. He was later detained in December 2023 while visiting the graves of protesters killed in the crackdown at Tehran’s Behesht-e Zahra cemetery and spent 33 days in solitary confinement in Evin Prison.

He subsequently left Iran and reached Germany on a humanitarian visa.

While in Germany, Zarei appeared on stage at a February 14 rally in Munich held on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference alongside exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi who had called for the gathering.

Iranian authorities have increasingly used the death penalty against protesters and political dissidents. Amnesty International has accused authorities of continuing to “weaponize the death penalty to repress dissent,” saying politically motivated death sentences have followed grossly unfair trials.

Last month, Norway-based Iran Human Rights said 29 people arrested in connection with the January 2026 protests had been executed since March 19, in addition to two protesters from the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom movement. The group said hundreds of protesters were facing the death penalty and warned of an escalation in executions of political prisoners.

The US-based Center for Human Rights in Iran has also said authorities are increasingly using fast-tracked group prosecutions to sentence protesters to death, describing the practice as part of a strategy to punish those who joined protests and deter future dissent.

IAEA says status of Iran’s fourth enrichment site remains unknown

Sep 1, 2026, 20:44 GMT+1
100%
FILE PHOTO: A satellite image shows airstrike craters over the underground centrifuge halls of the Natanz Enrichment Facility, following U.S. airstrikes amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Natanz County, Iran, June 22, 2025. Maxar Technologies/Handout via REUTERS

The UN nuclear watchdog says it remains unable to determine the status of Iran’s fourth declared uranium-enrichment facility after Tehran failed to provide information or allow inspectors access to the site.

A confidential quarterly International Atomic Energy Agency report said the agency had made no progress over the past three months in verifying key parts of Iran’s nuclear program, with its continued lack of access to nuclear material remaining a proliferation concern, Reuters reported on Tuesday, citing a copy of the report it had seen.

Iran has provided neither information on the status of affected declared nuclear facilities and material nor access needed for on-site verification at the Isfahan Fuel Enrichment Plant.

Iran notified the IAEA on June 12, 2025 that it intended to establish the plant at the Nuclear Reactors Fuel Company site in Isfahan, making it the country’s fourth declared uranium-enrichment facility after two plants at Natanz and one at Fordow.

The IAEA planned to carry out its first design verification at the new facility the following day, but the visit was cancelled when Israeli strikes on Iran began.

The agency has never inspected the plant and says it does not know its precise location, whether it became operational or whether it contained nuclear material. Iran later told the IAEA that the facility had been subjected to military attack, which the agency has been unable to verify.

The uncertainty forms part of a wider gap in the IAEA’s knowledge of Iran’s nuclear material since the June 2025 attacks. Its last estimate before losing verification put Iran’s uranium stockpile at 2,391.1 kg enriched up to 2%, 6,024.4 kg up to 5%, 184.1 kg up to 20% and 440.9 kg enriched up to 60%, close to weapons grade. The agency has since been unable to verify the current quantities or whereabouts of the material.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said earlier this year that the agency believed a little more than 200 kg of Iran’s 60%-enriched uranium had been stored in the wider Isfahan tunnel complex and was likely still there. That storage area is distinct from the fourth enrichment facility whose status the agency has been unable to establish.

Underground uranium storage site

Separately, the US-based Institute for Science and International Security last week identified what it assessed to be a probable uranium hexafluoride storage facility at the Natanz Nuclear Complex. The partially underground, bunkered structure was built between 2010 and 2017 and was likely intended to support large-scale enrichment at Natanz, the institute said.

The institute said the facility does not appear to have been targeted in the 2025 or 2026 military strikes, but said its role before and after the June 2025 war remains unclear. It said no vehicle activity had been observed there in available satellite imagery since that conflict.

Iranian nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami said last week that Tehran still considers itself to be in wartime conditions and would not permit inspections of nuclear sites hit by military strikes until a new inspection protocol is established. He said IAEA inspections could continue at facilities that were not attacked.

Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, has meanwhile suggested Tehran could reconsider its longstanding rejection of nuclear weapons, arguing that US attacks had strengthened the case for an atomic bomb as a deterrent.

Rezaei stopped short of saying Iran had decided to develop a nuclear weapon. Tehran continues to maintain that its nuclear program is exclusively peaceful.

Trump dismisses Iran deal after Tehran pushes return to Islamabad memorandum

Sep 1, 2026, 17:11 GMT+1
100%
President Masoud Pezeshkian showing his copy of the MoU signed remotely with President Donald Trump. June 17, 2026

Hours after Tehran called on Washington to return to the Islamabad memorandum, President Donald Trump dismissed the value of any agreement with Iran, ordered massive strikes on southern Iran and threatened an even larger attack if Tehran retaliates.

Trump told Fox News on Tuesday that he had given Iran “a lot of chances” and said he had little faith in any agreement with Tehran.

“I think an agreement with them isn't worth the paper it's written on. We gave them a lot of chances,” Fox News quoted him as saying.

His remarks came as President Masoud Pezeshkian said Iran would respond immediately if the United States returned to its commitments under the June agreement, reinforcing Tehran’s position that the memorandum remains the principal route back to diplomacy.

However, Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf struck a harder tone in a video message the same day, saying Iran’s policy, based on Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei’s directive, was to secure implementation of the memorandum’s conditions.

“If the United States does not fulfill its commitments, we will force it to do so through the language of power,” Ghalibaf said.

He said the Strait of Hormuz would not reopen until Washington implemented its obligations under the agreement and described forcing the United States to comply as what would become its “third defeat.”

Ghalibaf also warned that Iran would respond militarily if Washington intensified its maritime blockade.

“If the enemy intends to prevent Iran from exporting oil from the Persian Gulf, it should know that no one else will be able to export oil from this region either,” he said.

He added that Iran had exported more than 80 million barrels of oil while the Islamabad memorandum was being implemented and had also made progress in importing essential goods.

The renewed emphasis on the memorandum comes amid another escalation in direct US-Iran fighting. The United States struck IRGC positions in southern Iran on Tuesday, two days after attacking Larak Island, prompting Iranian retaliatory attacks.

Trump on Tuesday warned Iran against further retaliation, saying any response would trigger much heavier US strikes and threatening an even larger attack that he said could leave “very little” of the Islamic Republic.

Mediation efforts

Against that backdrop, regional mediators including Pakistan have continued efforts to revive the diplomatic process. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif discussed the memorandum with Pezeshkian on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit this week and described it as the “only viable pathway” toward lasting peace.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar echoed that position in talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Tuesday, saying sincere implementation of the agreement by both sides remained the “only way forward.”

The latest diplomatic effort follows Pakistani army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir’s visit to Tehran last week, when he met Pezeshkian, Ghalibaf and other senior Iranian officials.

Reuters reported that Munir spoke with Trump before traveling to Tehran, with a Pakistani source saying Washington wanted Islamabad to use its influence to bring Iran back toward negotiations.

Iranian officials subsequently said Munir’s visit had made significant diplomatic progress, although Washington has publicly maintained that no negotiations with Tehran are currently underway.

Pakistan is not alone in trying to revive diplomacy. Qatar has also pursued mediation between Tehran and Washington, including discussions over arrangements for commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Islamabad memorandum, agreed in June, was intended to halt the conflict and provide a temporary framework for negotiations. It included provisions dealing with the US maritime blockade and commercial navigation through Hormuz.

Article 5 has become particularly important to Tehran. It provides for arrangements ensuring commercial passage through the strait and for Iran and Oman to discuss its future administration and maritime services in accordance with international law.

Iran has increasingly made implementation of those provisions, alongside an end to the US blockade, a condition for fully reopening Hormuz.

The renewed diplomatic push therefore comes as the two sides publicly move further apart: Tehran says it is prepared to return to the memorandum if Washington moves first, while Trump has dismissed the value of an agreement with Iran and threatened substantially heavier military action if Tehran retaliates.

The republic of magic: How Iran turned the unseen into an instrument of rule

Sep 1, 2026, 14:27 GMT+1
•
Reza Haji Hosseini
100%

The Islamic Republic moved beliefs about the unseen from the margins of society to the center of power, and used oil money to give them institutions, budgets and a propaganda apparatus, so that its rulers could draw legitimacy from a source no citizen can question.

Two recent scenes show what that means in practice.

At state-organized rallies in February, marking the anniversary of the 1979 revolution, organizers set fire to effigies they identified as Baal, the Canaanite deity condemned as a false god in both the Bible and the Quran. In the middle of an economic crisis, the state staged its victory over its enemies as a piece of street ritual.

  • Why were ‘Baal’ statues burned at Iran’s revolution anniversary rallies?

    Why were ‘Baal’ statues burned at Iran’s revolution anniversary rallies?

Months later, Salar Velayatmadar, a member of parliament, said the decision to stop publishing images of Mojtaba Khamenei had been taken on the advice of senior clerics in Qom, Mashhad and Najaf, and of security officials, so that Iran's enemies could not use "occult sciences," a term covering practices such as talismans, incantations and divination, to harm him.

With that, the occult had entered the official language of national security.

A distinction matters here. This is not an argument about what Iranians privately believe, and the point is not that millions of people hold beliefs about the sacred, as they do in every society. The question begins at the moment an unfalsifiable claim becomes the basis of political legitimacy, a security decision and the distribution of public money. At that point it has stopped being faith and become statecraft.

Nor is this a case of a secular state later contaminated by such thinking. The Islamic Republic's identity was bound from the beginning to a phrase that describes the country as belonging to someone who cannot be seen.

The absent owner

Speaking to government officials in September 1981, Ruhollah Khomeini, the cleric who led the 1979 revolution and founded the Islamic Republic, said: "The owner of this country is the Imam of Time." The line is recorded in volume 15 of Sahifeh-ye Imam, the official collection of his speeches and writings.

The Imam of Time is the twelfth imam of Shia Islam, who is believed to have vanished in the ninth century, to be alive and hidden, and to be destined to return. Iran's constitution frames clerical rule explicitly as an arrangement for the era of his absence.

  • Will Mojtaba Khamenei's absence help the Islamic Republic survive?

    Will Mojtaba Khamenei's absence help the Islamic Republic survive?

Read as a theory of ownership, the consequences are considerable. If the country's true owner is absent, clerics become the interpreters of his will, and the Supreme Leader, rather than representing citizens, becomes the deputy of an absent proprietor. His accountability runs towards a realm no one can reach, not towards a public that could remove him.

Khomeini's arrival did not create popular belief in miracles and unseen forces, which long predated him. What the state he founded did was move those beliefs out of private life and into the machinery of power.

Manufacturing the sacred

The apparatus has been building sanctity around its leaders since the beginning.

The historian Olmo Gölz, in a study of the claim that Khomeini's face could be seen in the moon, drew on memoirs and newspapers of the period to trace both the spread of the rumor and its rejection by Khomeini himself and by a number of clerics. The denial did nothing to prevent the halo forming.

Video from Khomeini's first days back in Tehran shows a man touching his hand and then the hands of the crowd, passing on a blessing said to reside in the leader's body.

Decades later, Mohammad Saeedi, the Friday prayer leader of Qom, said that Ali Khamenei, the late supreme leader, had uttered the name of Imam Ali at the moment of his birth. The political significance of such a story lies not in efforts to establish whether it happened, but in the fact that the official apparatus uses it to build sanctity around a ruler.

The unseen world also has physical addresses. The most important is the mosque at Jamkaran, outside Qom, built on the belief that the hidden imam once appeared on the spot. Its own website describes the well where visitors drop written petitions addressed to him. Around such beliefs the state has built rituals, buildings, media, pilgrimage routes and an economy.

Set in that history, the absence of Mojtaba Khamenei is the most recent expression of the same logic. A leader with no verified image or voice governs a system whose true owner is also described as absent. What looks from outside like a crisis of decision-making, and has clearly produced disagreement inside the government, is material that this apparatus is equipped to convert into mystery, sanctity and waiting.

The security dimension is real, and the comparison with Osama bin Laden's final years captures it. But the difference is in the structure of meaning: the al-Qaeda leader hid in order not to be found, while the ruler of a country said to belong to a hidden imam can turn his own invisibility into symbolic capital.

In a secular system, a vanished leader is a legitimacy crisis. Here, absence was given meaning in advance by the architecture of belief.

Messages attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei extend the same logic outward, describing Iranians as the bearers of a historic mission and placing the public, state institutions and allied forces abroad in a chain of divine purpose. The ruler cannot be seen, but society is required to carry out his mission.

Who pays for it

None of this could have expanded so far without earthly backing.

The Venezuelan anthropologist Fernando Coronil, in The Magical State: Nature, Money, and Modernity in Venezuela, described how oil states use wealth from beneath the ground to stage a power that appears miraculous. In the Islamic Republic the metaphor has acquired a literal meaning.

In the state's first decades, oil revenue freed the government from depending on taxation, and therefore from bargaining with its citizens. Money came out of the ground and was spent building an apparatus that took its legitimacy from the sky. Oil remains the state's source of foreign currency: according to data from the analytics firm Kpler, China took about 1.2 million barrels a day from Iran in 2026.

On that foundation, the seminaries, the propaganda organizations, the shrines, religious foundations, devotional associations and cultural institutes became a network for reproducing this worldview.

Superstition in the Islamic Republic moved well beyond the pulpit and the amulet-writer: it acquired organizations, media, staff and budget lines.

In the 2026 budget bill, the Supreme Council of Seminaries was allocated 74.5 trillion rials, about $37 million at market exchange rates, and the Seminary Services Centre 164.2 trillion rials, roughly $82 million. What those figures show is less their size than their presence: bodies of this kind now appear as line items in the national accounts. In the same budget, a meaningful pay rise for civil servants and pensioners was set aside in the name of controlling inflation, while the apparatus that produces and distributes religious legitimacy was left untouched.

The political function of these institutions is clear enough. They produce clerics, preachers, rituals, obedience, enemies and legitimacy. They build a world in which a foreign policy failure becomes a divine test, poverty becomes an occasion for patience, repression becomes the defense of faith, and the survival of the government becomes a sacred promise.

But the apparatus is no longer run on oil money alone. The 2026 bill projects that 87 percent of total budget resources will come from taxation. Oil was central to constructing this ideological edifice; taxes, inflation and the falling purchasing power of Iranians now pay to maintain it.

Magic did not produce oil for the Islamic Republic. The Islamic Republic used oil money to turn magic into an instrument of power.

In the republic of magic, the orders still come from heaven. The bill is increasingly paid out of people's pockets.