Can Iran and US find a deal while threatening escalation?

Hassan Qashqavi, spokesperson for parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said on Tuesday the panel approved Articles 13, 14 and 15 of the proposed Strategic Action Plan for the Security and Development of the Strait of Hormuz.

The measures are part of a broader push by parliament to establish a permanent Iranian regulatory system for the strategic waterway. The committee last month approved a provision allowing Tehran to charge authorized vessels for navigation, environmental, insurance and security services, as well as refueling in special circumstances and other services. The fees could be collected in rials or another currency designated by Iran.

Under Article 13, vessels passing through the strait outside the regulations set by the proposed law would face penalties under Iran’s Islamic Penal Code, in addition to the seizure of 20% of their cargo or an equivalent amount based on its value. The vessel could be temporarily detained until the penalty is paid.

The bill would also require Iran’s judiciary to establish specialized branches staffed by judges and experts in maritime and international law to handle cases arising from the legislation, according to Qashqavi.

Article 14 would impose Grade 5 criminal penalties on individuals or legal entities whose actions or omissions prevent the full or timely implementation of the law, unless a more severe punishment applies.

A provision attached to the article says any bilateral or multilateral international agreement concerning the Strait of Hormuz must comply with several articles of Iran’s constitution governing treaties, national security and the division of state powers.

Article 15 would require the Armed Forces General Staff, directly or through the Defense Ministry, to report to parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee every three months on implementation of the law.

The legislation has developed from a series of proposals introduced after the war began in February, with Iranian lawmakers seeking to turn Tehran’s wartime restrictions on shipping into a lasting framework for managing Hormuz.

Earlier provisions considered by parliament include restrictions on vessels linked to the United States, Israel and other countries Tehran considers hostile, as well as requirements for ships to obtain Iranian authorization or coordinate their movements with Iranian authorities.

The proposed fees have become one of the most contentious elements. Iran has argued that ships can be charged for security and other services it provides, while Oman has proposed a regional arrangement under which shipping companies could make voluntary contributions to fund navigation, environmental protection and search-and-rescue services. Tehran has resisted proposals that would prevent it from exercising substantial oversight of both inbound and outbound traffic.

The International Maritime Organization has opposed mandatory tolls, saying transit through international straits should remain unimpeded and free of charges simply for passage. International law does, however, allow charges for specific services actually provided to vessels, a distinction Tehran has sought to emphasize by describing its proposed payments as service fees rather than a transit toll.

The bill has not yet become law. Provisions approved by parliamentary committees must still clear the full parliament and receive approval from the Guardian Council.

The statements came within hours of each other, from MPs, a Tehran city council official and military figures, and they map the mood in the hardline camp on the eve of the president's departure.

It came as Donald Trump said he was willing to meet Pezeshkian in New York while warning that "something big" could happen to Iran.

Kamran Ghazanfari, a hardline MP, told Didban Iran that if the existence of the Islamic Republic came under serious threat, the new supreme leader could reconsider the question of nuclear weapons. Some MPs favor a nuclear deterrent to end the recurring threats against Iran, he said, though any decision would rest with senior officials and the Supreme National Security Council.

Parviz Sarvari, deputy chairman of Tehran city council, said he would welcome news that Iran had moved toward building nuclear weapons for deterrence. Membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty had brought Iran no benefit, he said, while its adversaries threatened it from a position of nuclear superiority.

The push has gone beyond words. Hossein-Ali Haji-Deligani, an MP, submitted a triple-urgency bill for Iran's withdrawal from the NPT, arguing that membership had become more costly since the IAEA Board of Governors referred Iran to the UN Security Council. Similar proposals have circulated for months and the leadership of parliament has kept them off the floor. Haji-Deligani said the presidium has now acknowledged receipt of this one.

Military figures spoke the same day. Army commander Amir Hatami said the armed forces were at full readiness. Esmail Kowsari, of parliament's national security committee, said Iran's growing capabilities would eventually push American forces out of the region.

Revolutionary Guards spokesman Hossein Mohebbi said the war with the United States and Israel was not over and that the Guards had prepared for a long one, citing assessments that Washington may be considering fresh strikes.

What the day was for

Three things were happening at once.

The first is the argument about the last war. The ceasefire that ended the 12-day conflict left hardliners needing it not to look like a defeat at home, and insisting the war is unfinished keeps the account open.

The second is pressure on Pezeshkian. The NPT bill and the nuclear talk arrived alongside renewed parliamentary criticism of his government for allowing IAEA inspectors access, in a dispute over how far Iran should engage Washington and the monitors.

The third is the IAEA referral and the threat of snapback sanctions, which is the immediate cause of the NPT bill and the reason the timing is not a coincidence.

The language stayed inside limits. Ghazanfari attached any reconsideration of weapons to an existential threat. Sarvari's endorsement was of a hypothetical. Neither said Iran should build a bomb now, and neither Mojtaba Khamenei nor the Supreme National Security Council has said anything on the question.

The risk is how it reads elsewhere. Open parliamentary discussion of leaving the NPT and of nuclear contingencies is the kind of material Washington and Israel have previously cited as evidence that Iran is moving toward a weapon, and the United States struck Iranian nuclear sites during the last war. On the same day, the Guards said they expected it to happen again.

The proposal has already been delivered to Washington through mediators and calls for renewed negotiations aimed at permanently ending hostilities, Kyodo News and Reuters reported on Tuesday, citing senior Iranian officials.

Iran wants the United States to begin lifting its blockade of Iranian ports and halt military operations related to the strait. In return, Tehran would reopen the waterway within seven days and return to negotiations, according to the reports.

One official said Iran’s delegation at the UN General Assembly had full authority to revive diplomacy with Washington and discuss the details of an agreement through intermediaries. The initiative was approved by Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei and the Supreme National Security Council, Kyodo reported.

The official nevertheless ruled out a meeting between Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and US President Donald Trump in New York, leaving mediators as the likely channel for any immediate exchange.

“There is a possibility of moving toward an agreement,” the official told Kyodo, while saying Washington would need to demonstrate “seriousness and commitment.”

Pezeshkian left Tehran for New York on Tuesday saying he would use the General Assembly to defend Iran’s position, describe the suffering of its people and address what he called the erosion of trust caused by Washington’s conduct.

“We will use this opportunity in the best possible way to convey Iran’s message of victimhood to the international community,” he said before departing.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who arrived in New York ahead of Pezeshkian, said Iran remained in a “state of war” following US-Israeli attacks and subsequent developments. He described the UN gathering as an opportunity to present Tehran’s case while criticizing the organization’s failure to maintain international peace and security.

“The question of restoring trust is important and provides an opportunity to discuss with the world how trust in the United Nations was lost and how it can be restored,” Araghchi said.

The conditional proposal on Hormuz places that argument about trust at the center of the latest diplomatic effort. Tehran is signaling that it could quickly ease one of the war’s most damaging economic disruptions, but only after Washington takes the first step.

That sequencing reflects how Iranian officials now describe diplomacy itself. IRGC spokesperson Hossein Mohebbi said Tuesday that negotiations should not be understood as reconciliation or peace but as an extension of the conflict by other means.

“If the country’s interests require it, negotiations can be part of the battle while we remain prepared for combat,” Mohebbi said. “One war is fought with weapons; in negotiations, the war is fought with words, arguments and diplomatic methods.”

Mohebbi said the IRGC was preparing for a prolonged conflict, although it assessed that Iran’s adversaries lacked the capacity to begin another war. “The war is not over,” he said.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf offered a similar formulation, arguing that diplomacy should convert military strength into political gains rather than amount to surrender. But other political figures sought to narrow Pezeshkian’s room for maneuver. Lawmaker Mohammad Rostami said any direct negotiations with Trump would be unacceptable, calling the US president the “killer of our martyred leader.”

Pezeshkian also faced criticism from lawmaker Mojtaba Yousefi and former senior IRGC commander Hossein Kanani-Moghadam, who said he should have considered staying away from the General Assembly. Their remarks underscored the domestic resistance the president could face if the diplomatic opening advances beyond indirect contacts.

The value of Tehran’s Hormuz offer will partly depend on whether the United States sees seven-day reopening as a meaningful concession or merely a reversal of disruption Iran helped create. The economic pressure around the waterway also continues to change.

Saudi Arabia restarted its East-West oil pipeline and could resume crude exports from the Red Sea port of Yanbu later Tuesday, Reuters reported. Drone attacks had forced the pipeline to shut on September 13, limiting a key alternative to Hormuz. Its return, even initially at a low rate, could reduce some of Tehran’s leverage by restoring another route for Saudi exports.

China is also emerging as a potential source of pressure. Beijing has offered to help Washington press Iran over the war in return for US concessions on arms sales to Taiwan, Reuters reported, citing sources familiar with discussions between the US and China ahead of a meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The report did not specify what measures China might take against Tehran.

Yet Beijing simultaneously opposed US sanctions affecting Iranian airlines. China’s Foreign Ministry criticized unilateral measures lacking authorization from the UN Security Council after the US Treasury secretary warned that countries providing Iranian carriers with fuel, credit or other services could lose access to the US dollar system.

Iran Air said it had received no official orders from Turkey, Azerbaijan or Iraq to suspend services to Istanbul, Baku and Najaf. Iraq’s Transport Ministry likewise said flights to and from Iran were continuing normally.

The push gathered pace around the UN General Assembly, where Qatar said it was trying to secure even a short-term agreement between Iran and the United States that could reopen negotiations. Doha said restoring navigation through Hormuz and removing the threat of military action would be necessary for meaningful talks.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, arrived in New York and spoke by phone with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres about the General Assembly agenda and efforts to advance international peace and security, according to the IRGC-affiliated Tasnim news agency.

The diplomacy is taking place as Persian Gulf Arab states increasingly discuss not only how to stop the fighting but what a future security arrangement with Iran could look like. Qatar and the United Arab Emirates have called for greater regional dialogue, with Qatar advocating a common security framework involving Tehran and Persian Gulf states. The Financial Times reported that Saudi Arabia has also discussed a possible non-aggression pact with Iran. The FT described the war as prompting Persian Gulf states to reassess their approach to regional security.

That effort is closely tied to the disruption around Hormuz, which has become one of the war’s central economic pressure points. French President Emmanuel Macron said after meeting US President Donald Trump in New York that France and the United States would work together to protect critical Middle East energy infrastructure and freedom of navigation through the strait. They would also seek a moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure. Macron had warned earlier that disruption around Hormuz and attacks on alternative routes were putting global energy markets under severe pressure.

Washington is also looking beyond the immediate shipping disruption. The Trump administration has proposed contributing $5 billion to a fund to rebuild damaged regional energy infrastructure and reduce reliance on Hormuz, with eight Middle Eastern partners asked to provide matching contributions for a potential $10 billion fund. The Wall Street Journal reported that some regional officials questioned whether rebuilding could begin safely without a peace agreement with Tehran, given the risk of renewed attacks.

The economic consequences are already being felt beyond Iran. Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi said Tehran had prevented Iraqi tankers from passing through Hormuz despite Baghdad considering Iran a regional partner, and said Iraq had lost about $60 billion in revenue since the war began. US Central Command, meanwhile, said its forces had redirected 110 commercial vessels as part of Washington’s blockade against Iran.

Pressure is also spreading westward toward the Red Sea. Britain agreed to provide Saudi Arabia with limited defensive air-to-air refueling support after intensified attacks by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis, while G7 foreign ministers meeting in New York called on Iran to stop arming and supporting the group. They warned that continued Houthi attacks threatened civilian shipping, international trade and wider stability.

At the same time, Tehran has continued to signal military readiness. An IRGC deputy commander said Iran was strengthening its missile, drone, cruise missile, cyber, electronic warfare and air-defense capabilities, underscoring the tension between the diplomatic activity in New York and the continuing risk of renewed escalation.

The diplomatic push is unfolding as the war continues to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, strain regional energy supplies and widen security concerns across the Middle East.

For Iranians visiting relatives abroad, returning home has become increasingly uncertain. For those living outside the country, reaching parents, children and other loved ones in Iran is becoming just as difficult.

The disruption has left travelers trying to determine which flights are still operating, whether future bookings can be relied upon and what alternatives remain if they cannot fly.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Monday that US sanctions would effectively shut Iranian airlines out of international operations from September 23, warning foreign companies against providing them with fuel, ground services or ticket sales.

“All the Iranian airlines will be shut down around the world,” Bessent told CNBC. “If they land, you cannot provide them with fuel, you cannot provide them with landing services, you cannot sell them tickets, or you will be knocked out of the dollar system.”

The warning does not itself close foreign airspace to Iranian aircraft, but raises the risk of US penalties for companies and financial institutions that continue doing business with sanctioned carriers. The practical impact will depend on how governments, airports and service providers respond.

Iran International contacted multiple international airlines and four travel agencies specializing in travel to Iran to establish what options remain for passengers.

Which flights are still available?

Options are increasingly limited and can change at short notice.

Turkish Airlines has suspended all flights to Iran until at least March 2027, a company representative told Iran International by phone, adding that no services are currently scheduled before then and there is no guarantee they will resume in March.

Emirates said it is no longer operating flights to Tehran, while Lufthansa and Austrian Airlines confirmed that flights to and from Iran are suspended until at least October 24, 2026.

Both Lufthansa and Austrian Airlines said they were monitoring the situation and could not guarantee that flights would resume after that date.

Qatar Airways told Iran International that its flights to Iran are currently suspended because of airspace restrictions. Services are tentatively scheduled to resume on November 29, but the airline said that date could change depending on conditions.

Four travel agencies specializing in Iran travel said they were also unable to book operating services on airlines from Russia, China and Oman, as well as Turkey’s Pegasus Airlines and carriers serving routes from Armenia, at the time they spoke to Iran International.

One agency said it had seen Pegasus continue to accept some bookings for Iran routes that were later cancelled at short notice, forcing passengers to change their travel plans.

Iran International found some Pegasus itineraries between Turkey and Iran displayed on booking platforms from November 29, but the listings do not guarantee that the flights will operate.

Iran also did not appear as a destination option in searches on Flydubai’s or Expedia’s booking systems. Other routes checked by Iran International produced no available itineraries before March 2027.

100%

Those searches provide only a snapshot of what booking platforms were displaying at the time and do not establish when international services will resume or whether other routes may remain available.

How are people getting to and from Iran?

The travel agencies, which requested anonymity, said their businesses had been severely affected as passengers looked for alternatives to flying directly into Iran.

They said some travelers arriving from Western countries were flying to Turkey and then taking a roughly 17-hour bus journey to Van, near the Iranian border.

From there, travelers could cross into Iran and continue by road. The agencies estimated that reaching Tehran from Van could take another 16 to 17 hours by bus or car.

That can mean more than 30 hours on the road alone, excluding the initial flight, border crossings and waiting times.

The agencies said Mahan Air had already stopped operating from Turkish airports after losing access to ground-handling services.

The disruption followed the US Treasury’s September 8 sanctions package, which designated all Iranian airlines and also targeted three Turkey-based companies accused of providing services to Mahan Air. Treasury described the 27 sanctioned carriers as Iran’s remaining airlines not already covered by US sanctions.

Other Iranian carriers were still operating through Turkish airports as of September 21, the agencies said, but they expected those services to come under increasing pressure after September 23 as companies assessed the risk of continuing to service sanctioned aircraft.

What changes on September 23?

The US Treasury sanctioned 36 targets connected to Iran’s aviation sector on September 8, including 27 Iranian airlines. Treasury accused the aviation sector of being used to transport weapons, military personnel and illicit cargo.

Bessent said on September 21 that the restrictions would effectively shut Iranian airlines out of international operations from September 23 by targeting the foreign services they rely on.

The sanctions do not automatically prohibit Iranian aircraft from entering every country or close foreign airspace to them. But airlines need access to airports, fuel, ground handling, ticketing, banking and other services to operate internationally, giving Washington significant leverage over their ability to continue flying abroad.

Some countries have already moved to restrict Iranian carriers.

Flights by US-sanctioned Iranian airlines to Georgia stopped from September 21 after the affected carriers operated their final services the previous day, according to Georgian media. Georgia’s Civil Aviation Agency had earlier said it takes US and European sanctions mechanisms into account when granting foreign airlines access to its aviation market.

Iraq is moving even earlier than Bessent’s September 23 deadline. Two Iraqi government sources told AFP that Baghdad would suspend flights operated by Iranian airlines from dawn on Tuesday, September 22.

One official said Iraq would implement the restriction in accordance with the US Treasury decision and warned that countries failing to comply risked sanctions. A second source confirmed the decision.

The suspension could particularly affect Shiite pilgrims travelling from Iran to the Iraqi holy cities of Najaf and Karbala, as well as families and other passengers who rely on flights between the two countries.

For travelers, the central problem is that schedules displayed today may offer little certainty about what will actually operate in the coming weeks. With foreign airlines withdrawing and Iranian carriers facing new barriers abroad, travelling both into and out of Iran is increasingly dependent on a shrinking number of routes — or long overland journeys through neighboring countries.