Sixty countries have issued a declaration calling for the preservation of freedom of navigation, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said Monday, as maritime security remains a major concern over the war involving Iran.
Marco Rubio’s invocation of ancient Persia in a speech championing Western power has given Tehran an opportunity to present itself as a defender of Iranian identity, even as critics recall the Islamic Republic’s own record of disparaging pride in the country’s pre-Islamic rulers.
The US secretary of state’s October 7 address in Athens drew on Xerxes’ invasion of Greece in 480 BC to celebrate Western resilience, before contrasting Western traditions of sacrifice with what he called the Iranian leadership’s “cult of death.”
The remarks drew objections even from critics of the Islamic Republic, who argued that opposition to clerical rule does not diminish Iranians’ attachment to their ancient history.
Iranian officials seized on that sensitivity to cast themselves as defenders of the country’s ancient heritage. Parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf accused Iran’s adversaries of seeking to erase ancient civilizations and warned Washington that it would meet the fate of Persia’s defeated enemies.
“Those who chase Alexander’s legacy will share Valerian’s fate: you will kneel,” he wrote on X on Friday, referring to the Roman emperor captured by the Sasanian king Shapur I.
The history Khamenei dismissed
That embrace of ancient Persian power contrasts with slain Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s criticism of the very campaign Rubio recounted.
Addressing army commanders in April 2012, Khamenei cited Xerxes’ invasion of Greece as an example of military force serving rulers’ political ambitions rather than national interests. He described an army returning defeated, its ships wrecked, and associated the campaign with Iran’s historical taghut, a religious term used to condemn illegitimate or ungodly rule.
“These were not for national interests,” he said.
In 2018, Khamenei dismissed pride in the rule of the ancient Kayanian and Achaemenid dynasties as illusory, arguing that national esteem should rest on tangible achievements in contemporary society.
Those remarks complicate the authorities’ present effort to speak for Iranians offended by Rubio’s account. One Persian-language X user mocked government supporters’ sudden concern for Xerxes, contrasting it with their past ridicule of ancient Persian figures and people visiting historical sites.
The struggle over these symbols predates the current war. During Nowruz in March 2025, crowds gathered at Persepolis and the tombs of Hafez and Ferdowsi while authorities promoted religious mourning coinciding with the holiday.
After the June 2025 war with Israel and the United States, patriotic music entered the leadership’s own ceremonies: Khamenei asked eulogist Mahmoud Karimi to perform “Ey Iran Iran” at a July mourning gathering, a separate song from the better-known anthem.
Later, media reports documented a statue of the mythical archer Arash in Tehran, banners likening Iranian missiles to his legendary arrows, and a billboard depicting Benjamin Netanyahu kneeling before an ancient Persian emperor.
By November 2025, authorities had also unveiled a statue depicting Valerian’s submission to Shapur I. Such imagery associated the state’s confrontation with foreign powers with a national history reaching far beyond the Islamic Republic.
A propaganda opening
Speaking at the Pnyx with the Acropolis behind him, Rubio recounted the Persian destruction of Athens’ sanctuaries and the city’s subsequent rebuilding. He also praised the Spartans’ last stand at Thermopylae, presenting ancient Greek traditions as foundations of Western courage, ambition and duty.
His explicit attack on contemporary Iran targeted its rulers, whom he called “radical mullahs.” But placing that criticism within a speech celebrating resistance to Persian armies prompted objections to the implied continuity between ancient conflict and today’s war.
Historian Touraj Daryaee told the Tehran Times that treating the ancient wars as a confrontation between East and West misrepresented a conflict between an empire and Greek city-states. He also challenged the use of that history to frame the present conflict.
Questions about Rubio’s historical framing also came from admirers of the speech. Writing in the Spectator, Alexander Munguía praised its defense of the West but argued that its celebration of relentless ambition better resembled Alcibiades, who championed Athens’ disastrous expedition to Sicily, than Pericles, whose wartime strategy emphasized restraint.
US-based Iranian journalist and analyst Omid Memarian warned on X that Rubio “may have just handed Tehran one of the biggest propaganda gifts of this war.”
“It just reframes this war as a civilizational clash. And that plays directly into Tehran’s hands,” he wrote, arguing that the rhetoric helped authorities portray Washington as an enemy of Iran itself rather than its government.
The State Department did not immediately respond to Iran International’s request for comment on the criticism and whether Rubio intended to draw a parallel between ancient Persia and today’s Iranian government.
A distinction between Iran and its rulers
Iranian political analyst Nejat Bahrami disputed the interpretation of Rubio’s speech as an attack on Iranian civilization.
“Rubio’s speech was part of a broader theme that he, the current Trump administration and right-wing political figures in Europe have pursued in recent years: that the West must return to its roots, resist the erosion of Western civilization and preserve Western values,” he told Iran International.
“Contrary to the fuss made by the Islamic Republic, Rubio did not attack Iranian civilization in the speech. He referred to a historical event: the Persian attack on Athens and the destruction that followed, before describing how the Greeks returned and rebuilt. His point was that the West today should similarly follow their example of determination and resilience.”
Rubio had previously drawn an explicit distinction between Iranians and their rulers. At his January 2025 Senate confirmation hearing, he praised Iran’s ancient civilization and culture and Iranians’ pride in their Persian heritage, saying he knew of no country with a greater divide between its people and those governing them.
Two commercial vessels were attacked near Oman on Sunday, two Indian sailors were left missing, and a drone struck an Iranian Kurdish opposition camp in Iraq on Monday, as Iranian officials warned that a renewed war could put regional infrastructure at risk.
The tanker incidents underscored the threat to shipping beyond the waterway itself. The Nicaragua-flagged Petro Dolphin was hit by a drone at Sohar anchorage off Oman, India’s shipping minister said. Nine of its 11 Indian crew members were rescued, while two remained missing.
Separately, the Marshall Islands-flagged Valthera was struck by an unidentified projectile in the Strait of Hormuz, setting off a fire onboard; all 11 Indian crew members were safe, India’s foreign ministry said. The ministry condemned the attacks, and India’s embassy in Muscat was coordinating with Omani authorities to help locate the missing sailors.
The latest incidents followed repeated attacks on commercial vessels in the region, but the statements from India did not identify who was responsible for Sunday’s strikes.
Separately, a drone struck a camp belonging to an Iranian Kurdish opposition group in Koya, east of Erbil in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, Reuters reported, citing two security sources. No casualties were immediately reported.
Kurdistan-based website Rudaw published video showing a drone in the sky over Koya, but said it was not yet clear whether it had hit a target. No responsibility for the reported strike was established.
The incidents came as Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, warned that a renewed war could put infrastructure across the region within range.
“If war breaks out, many cables, data centers and artificial intelligence facilities, valued at $2 trillion, will be within range,” he said, according to state media. Rezaei added that Iran would continue resisting until its adversaries accepted its rights.
Iranian officials also continued to issue warnings to Washington and regional governments. Acting Defense Minister Majid Ebn al-Reza said the armed forces were ready to respond to threats and urged neighboring countries to leave what he called the US security umbrella.
His remarks followed a statement by armed forces spokesman Abolfazl Shekarchi that Iran would not allow the United States and Israel to re-establish their preferred regional order.
At the same time, diplomatic contacts had not stopped. Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran was reviewing Washington’s latest proposal and that messages between the two countries continued through mediators.
Baghaei gave no indication of a breakthrough, saying Iran’s position on the Strait of Hormuz remained tied to the US naval blockade.
The developments pointed to risks spreading across shipping routes, Iraqi Kurdistan and potentially digital infrastructure, even as intermediaries continued trying to keep US-Iran diplomacy alive.
Washington’s new sanctions are unlikely to stop a China–Iran freight train at the border, but may make the route Tehran has turned to under pressure from the US naval blockade costlier and less reliable.
The blockade has sharply restricted maritime trade, while years of sanctions have squeezed Iran’s access to international finance. But not every trade channel had already closed.
Trains carrying goods from China were still reaching Iran before the latest US measures. The question now is whether sanctions on Iran’s railway companies will narrow that remaining route and complicate the flow of goods, including auto parts, carried on it.
Last week, the US Treasury designated three Iranian rail companies: the state-owned Islamic Republic of Iran Railway Company, known as RAI; Raja Passenger Trains Company; and private freight operator Railway Transportation Company.
The department said Iran had turned to rail to sustain trade and transport oil as the maritime blockade took hold.
The sanctions block the US-based property of the designated companies and prohibit US persons from dealing with them, while separate sectoral determinations give Washington wider scope to impose future designations. They do not automatically block every foreign railway, freight company or shipment connected to Iran.
The more immediate effect may be caution among companies involved in the trade. Banks may reject payments. Insurers and equipment suppliers may refuse to handle business involving designated companies. Others may charge higher fees or take longer to process shipments.
None of this would close the railway, but together it could make the route less dependable.
A useful route, with clear limits
The China–Iran rail connection is no longer just a proposal. In September, a block train bound for Iran was reported traveling through Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan before entering at Sarakhs.
A train from Xi’an to Iran’s Aprin dry port in 2025 was reported to have taken about 15 days, compared with an estimated 30 to 40 days by sea. Iranian railway officials also reported that 43 freight trains arrived from China in the first nine months of 2025.
Those figures show a route in use, although they do not indicate how much of Iran’s overall trade moves by rail.
Rail can move selected goods, industrial inputs, equipment and containerized cargo faster than shipping by sea. But it cannot replace the volume carried by tankers or bulk freighters.
Treasury says Iran is using rail to help transport oil, but its announcement provides no figures for oil moved this way. There is therefore little evidence that rail is a meaningful substitute for seaborne oil exports.
The new designations could nevertheless complicate the China route. Freight must be coordinated among operators, border agencies and terminals in several countries, making the response of Chinese and Central Asian companies important to how disruptive the sanctions ultimately prove.
Auto parts show where the sanctions overlap
The automotive sanctions create a second pressure point because auto parts from China have traveled to Iran by rail.
In 2025, Iran Khodro reportedly received an all-rail shipment through Sarakhs. The head of the local special economic zone said the route reduced transit and stockpiling time from about 50 days to 15.
Sanctions on automakers and rail operators could therefore put pressure on the same supply chain from two directions.
Procurement and payment may become harder, while freight companies and intermediaries may avoid shipments linked to designated firms.
The impact on car production, however, will depend on what parts are affected, how much stock manufacturers have and whether other suppliers or routes are available.
The trains may run, but at a price
The blockade has squeezed Iran’s maritime options; the rail sanctions raise the risks attached to an overland alternative.
They may not stop the China–Iran connection, but could make it costlier and less predictable by deterring the banks, insurers and logistics firms that keep shipments moving.
How much traffic falls will depend largely on the response of Chinese and Central Asian operators.
For now, the railway remains open. But as Iran leans more heavily on the trade routes still available to it, Washington is trying to make those routes harder to use.
Efforts to end the war with Iran and restore normal shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remained deadlocked Sunday, as military pressure continued at sea and the Iran-backed Houthis carried out increasingly deadly attacks inside Saudi Arabia.
Iran said the United States had accepted some of seven conditions it presented for reopening the strait but that Washington's response was insufficient, leaving the two sides without agreement on renewed negotiations or unrestricted passage through the waterway.
“The US has agreed to some of Iran’s seven conditions, but we consider its response INADEQUATE,” Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei said in a post on X. “Iranian diplomacy has changed and there will be no return to the status quo ante.”
Iran presented the seven-condition proposal during the UN General Assembly, offering to restore normal maritime passage through the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if its conditions were met. The United States later responded through Qatari intermediaries.
The latest exchange comes days after Axios reported that the Pentagon had instructed US Central Command to complete preparations for the possible resumption of major combat operations against Iran. President Donald Trump subsequently said the United States would not attack Iran before the November 3 midterm elections and described talks with Tehran as “productive.”
Rezaei, however, said Washington still needed to clarify parts of its response and that Iran would not reopen the strait to the United States or resume negotiations until its conditions were met.
Pressure builds around Hormuz
The diplomatic impasse is playing out most directly at sea, where Washington is enforcing its blockade of Iran as Tehran maintains restrictions on passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
US Central Command said a US fighter jet struck the stern of the Panama-flagged M/V Ocean Molica, also known as the Arika Sun, after the vessel left an Iranian port and ignored repeated warnings as it attempted to breach the blockade.
The strike fully disabled the vessel's propulsion without harming its crew, according to CENTCOM, which warned other commercial vessels approaching Hormuz to comply with blockade instructions.
Iran, for its part, has continued restricting passage through the strait. The IRGC Navy said Sunday that a tanker carrying 750,000 barrels of crude struck a naval mine and caught fire after attempting to use what it described as an unauthorized route despite warnings.
The IRGC-affiliated Tasnim news agency described it as the third tanker to strike a mine in the strait that day.
The incidents come amid a sharp deterioration in shipping security this month. UK Maritime Trade Operations recorded 11 attacks on commercial vessels in the week ending October 9, including 10 in the Strait of Hormuz and one in the Persian Gulf.
Seven of the vessels attacked in the strait sustained only minor damage and continued their transit, UKMTO said. Vessel traffic through Hormuz remained about 75% below pre-conflict levels.
Separate shipping data this week showed tanker attacks had reached their highest weekly level since the Iran war began, with the number of vessels transiting Hormuz falling to its lowest in more than two months.
The disruption has extended well beyond the waterway, pushing up global fuel costs and prompting Washington to seek additional supplies as the Trump administration faces pressure over diesel prices ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.
Trump said Friday that Russia had agreed to immediately supply more than 300,000 metric tons of diesel to US and global markets, with further supplies to follow. His administration also temporarily eased sanctions on Russian fuel to facilitate the arrangement.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent defended the deal Sunday and explicitly linked it to the confrontation with Iran, saying Tehran was the “biggest loser” because its attempts to create choke points in the Strait of Hormuz and diesel supplies had failed.
“We're going to do it with all the legal authorities we have,” Bessent told Fox News, saying the agreement would help bring diesel prices down.
Fighting intensifies between Saudi Arabia and Houthis
The Iran war's Yemen front has intensified as Saudi Arabia expands military operations against the Iran-backed Houthis and the group carries out increasingly deadly attacks inside the kingdom.
A Houthi attack on King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh Saturday killed 13 people and wounded more than 300, the deadliest attack in Saudi Arabia in more than a decade. The airport was attacked again Sunday, when a projectile struck Terminal 4, killing a Pakistani resident and injuring 11 people, according to Saudi aviation authorities. Saudi air defenses also intercepted a cruise missile near the airport.
Saturday's strike followed two earlier attacks on the Riyadh airport during the week that killed four people, one of which also heavily damaged a Saudi commercial aircraft parked on the tarmac.
The latest escalation followed a Houthi offensive last month that seized strategic territory along Yemen’s Red Sea coast near the Bab al-Mandab strait, a critical shipping route and an alternative to the Strait of Hormuz.
Saudi-backed forces have since intensified their campaign against the Houthis. The Saudi-led coalition said it had struck 136 Houthi targets, including sites linked to the group’s ballistic missile capabilities. Yemen’s internationally recognized government forces separately said they had carried out 1,732 strikes and “neutralized” more than 900 Houthi fighters during Operation Dawn of Yemen.
The escalation has also raised the prospect of deeper US involvement. Trump said Saturday that Washington was considering joining Saudi strikes against the Houthis. The United States is already providing Saudi Arabia with intelligence support but has stopped short of the direct military assistance sought by Riyadh and its Yemeni allies.
The attacks have spread beyond the capital. The Houthis said Sunday they also targeted King Fahd International Airport in Dammam and two Saudi Aramco facilities. There was no immediate Saudi confirmation of those attacks.
The intensified attacks have come as Saudi Arabia steps up its military involvement in Yemen. The Saudi-led coalition has carried out large-scale strikes against Houthi positions, while Saudi-backed Yemeni government forces have launched a ground offensive against the group.
The coalition said earlier that 136 Houthi targets had been struck, including sites linked to the group's ballistic missile capabilities. Yemen's internationally recognized government forces separately said they had carried out 1,732 strikes and “neutralized” more than 900 Houthi fighters during Operation Dawn of Yemen.
The growing threat to Saudi aviation has begun prompting wider precautions. The US Federal Aviation Administration warned American airlines Sunday to exercise caution when flying to or over Saudi Arabia because of military activity and navigation-system interference, while the Houthis renewed warnings against using Saudi airports.
Diplomatic channels between Tehran and Riyadh have nevertheless remained open. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi spoke Sunday about the fighting and efforts to reduce the confrontation, with Araghchi saying Iran was prepared to help facilitate dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
That contact has not altered the broader Iran-US impasse. Washington and Tehran remain divided over the conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, leaving restrictions on shipping and fighting on the Saudi-Yemen front unresolved despite continuing diplomatic contacts.
Footage and images showing men wielding machetes and swords at an IRGC-backed rally in the central Iranian city of Isfahan have renewed scrutiny of the Islamic Republic's history of using unofficial armed groups to suppress anti-government protests.
The October 1 event, dubbed "Jan-Fadayan," or "Those Willing to Sacrifice Their Lives," brought together members of the Basij paramilitary force, religious organizations and other participants, according to Iranian state media.
Organizers described the gathering as a demonstration of public readiness and mobilization capabilities.
Iranian lawyer Ali Mojtahedzadeh described the public display of bladed weapons as a "show of force with weapons" and called on local security authorities to explain why it had been permitted.
A review of statements by senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and former security officials shows that the use of unofficial groups, including individuals described as criminals and street thugs, to confront protesters dates back decades.
From the 1999 student protests to the 2009 crackdown
One of the earliest documented accounts dates to July 1999, when security forces and allied groups attacked Tehran University student dormitories, triggering widespread demonstrations.
Ali Hashemi, a former deputy security minister at Iran's Intelligence Ministry, said in an audio recording published by Iran International that approximately 250 individuals described as "thugs and hooligans" were organized during the student protests.
Hashemi said the experience later served as a model for deploying similar groups during the mass demonstrations that followed Iran's disputed 2009 presidential election.
He also described the use of individuals with criminal records to beat detainees, including at the notorious Kahrizak detention center, referring to authorization from judicial authorities.
Hashemi said similar individuals were subsequently deployed during protests in 2017, 2018 and November 2019.
One of the most explicit accounts came from Hossein Hamedani, a senior IRGC commander responsible for security operations in Tehran during the 2009 unrest.
Hamedani said the Revolutionary Guards identified approximately 5,000 people who had participated in disturbances but were not affiliated with political parties or movements. He described them as "criminals and thugs."
According to Hamedani, these individuals were initially prevented from leaving their homes on days when protests were planned, but some were later recruited and organized into three battalions.
"I then made them members of the battalions," he said.
Explaining the strategy, Hamedani said that training fighters required recruiting individuals accustomed to handling "blades and machetes."
Hamedani also described preparations to confront protesters during Ashura, a major Shiite religious observance, in December 2009.
He said cinemas, schools and religious halls were made available to pro-government forces, while approximately 30 religious groups were mobilized in Tehran.
"On Ashura, these same three battalions put an end to the unrest," Hamedani said, adding that approximately 45,000 Basij members had also been deployed.
Following Hamedani's death in Syria in 2015, Mohammad Ali Jafari, then commander-in-chief of the IRGC, credited him with helping suppress the 2009 protests, saying his leadership had been crucial to ending what Iranian authorities described as "sedition."
Hamedani had also played a central role in organizing local militias supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad during the country's civil war.
Jafari later said Hamedani had organized approximately 100,000 local fighters in Syria.
Allegations of machete-wielding clerics in 2022 protests
Similar allegations emerged following the nationwide protests triggered by the death of Mahsa Jina Amini in morality police custody in September 2022.
In 2024, former lawmaker Mohammad Ashrafi Esfahani accused a group of clerics associated with influential religious figure Alireza Panahian of attacking protesters with knives and machetes while dressed as civilians.
He alleged that the men returned from the streets wearing bloodstained clothes before changing into clerical robes.
Ashrafi Esfahani also said members of the group operated in plainclothes and changed into clerical attire, including turbans, when police officers appeared to avoid being confronted.
The allegations emerged amid a legal and financial dispute between Ashrafi Esfahani and Panahian over a religious complex in Tehran and have not been independently verified.
Renewed scrutiny of unofficial armed groups
Nearly three decades after the 1999 student protests, the images from Isfahan have again raised questions about the role of unofficial groups operating alongside Iran's formal security forces.
Although the names, structures and political circumstances of the groups involved in past crackdowns have varied, accounts by former security officials and IRGC commanders describe the repeated recruitment and deployment of individuals capable of using violence against demonstrators.
The available evidence does not establish that the groups involved in different periods belonged to a single organization or were directly connected.
Nor has any organizational link been established between those previously deployed against protesters and the men seen carrying machetes and swords at the Isfahan rally.
The identities and affiliations of the armed men have not been independently verified.
Their appearance at an IRGC-backed event has nevertheless renewed attention to the Islamic Republic's documented history of mobilizing forces outside conventional security structures during periods of political unrest.