Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian discussed joint oil and gas projects in Moscow on Tuesday, as Tehran seeks closer economic ties with Russia while its energy exports remain squeezed by a US naval blockade.
The two leaders discussed expanding political, economic, trade and energy cooperation, including joint projects in the oil and gas sectors, according to a readout from the Iranian government.
Pezeshkian also called for greater cooperation on natural gas exports, saying Iran produces around 280 billion cubic meters of gas annually, ranking behind only the United States and Russia.
He said global developments required greater technical and engineering cooperation and “strategic governance” of international energy markets.
The meeting took place on the sidelines of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum summit, which brought together some of the world's largest gas producers.
Putin also met Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani on Tuesday and said Russia was ready to do everything within its power to help resolve the “complicated situation” in the Middle East.
The Qatari emir told Putin that the region was going through “difficult circumstances” because of tensions between the United States and Iran.
Moscow offers mediation
Russia has sought a role in efforts to end the US-Iran conflict, repeatedly offering to mediate between Washington and Tehran as regional governments push for renewed negotiations.
Putin has previously told US officials that he believes there remains room for diplomacy with Iran, while Moscow has also offered to help resolve one of the central nuclear disputes by taking Iranian highly enriched uranium out of the country.
Iran faces mounting economic pressure from the US blockade and sanctions, which have sharply curtailed its oil exports.
Russia has provided Iran with diplomatic backing, condemning US and Israeli military action and opposing efforts to increase pressure on Tehran at international bodies.
Moscow and Tehran signed a comprehensive strategic partnership treaty in 2025, although cooperation on major energy projects has remained more limited as the two countries are themselves major oil and gas producers.
Regional powers are intensifying efforts to prevent a wider war with Iran, but their diplomacy comes with explicit demands of Tehran: reopen the Strait of Hormuz, stop threatening Persian Gulf states and allow international nuclear inspectors to work without obstruction.
Qatar and Pakistan, two of the principal mediators between Tehran and Washington, made those demands publicly on Tuesday, just one day after Saudi, Pakistani and Turkish officials traveled to Tehran for talks.
The military and security makeup of the delegation reflected the two tracks regional powers are pursuing: diplomacy aimed at containing the conflict alongside deeper defense cooperation in case it spreads.
The parallel efforts reveal the limits of the latest diplomatic push. These countries want to prevent another round of war, but they also want changes in Iranian behavior and are preparing to protect their interests if talks produce none.
After a Qatari delegation visited Tehran earlier this week, Doha said Tuesday that Iran needed to show “good intentions” for mediation efforts to succeed.
A Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesperson called on Tehran to stop threatening Persian Gulf Arab states and open the Strait of Hormuz.
Pakistan also set out what it expects of Tehran at the UN Security Council on Tuesday. Its representative pointed to the June Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding between Iran and the United States as evidence that diplomatic progress remained possible, while insisting that the International Atomic Energy Agency be allowed to operate without obstruction.
Islamabad said it continued to seek a ceasefire, reduce tensions and create conditions for renewed negotiations between Tehran and Washington.
Preparing for failure
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey are strengthening military cooperation under the Mecca defense pact. Talks with Tehran therefore do not mean military preparations have stopped.
Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia and insecurity along maritime routes have imposed serious costs on the kingdom and affected countries across the region and beyond. For Riyadh, de-escalation with Iran is closely linked to protecting infrastructure, trade and economic stability.
On October 23, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the R4 group, held talks with Britain, France, Germany and Italy in Istanbul. Their joint statement stressed resolving disputes through dialogue and reducing tensions.
The R4 statement emphasized diplomacy but also condemned Houthi attacks, expressed solidarity with Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s government and called for safe and unhindered passage through Hormuz. These are not the positions of countries offering Tehran unconditional support.
Before Istanbul, the possibility emerged of an informal division of labor: direct US and Israeli pressure on Iran on one track, with regional states seeking to contain the consequences of the war, particularly Houthi attacks, on another. The subsequent diplomacy does not rule that out.
Better protection for Saudi Arabia could indirectly benefit US operations, but that does not establish a coordinated strategy or secret agreement. Nor can regional states be treated as part of the same coalition as Israel.
Their opposition to expanding attacks on Iran and continued contacts with Tehran point to different objectives, even if some of their actions have complementary effects.
Two visions of security
The Tehran meeting also exposed sharply different interpretations of what regional diplomacy is intended to achieve.
Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, described the talks in terms of “endogenous security,” presenting Iran’s defense model as a basis for regional security and linking cooperation with Tehran to countering US and Israeli involvement.
Tehran is seeking to show that despite the war and pressure it faces, it remains indispensable to discussions about the region’s future. But the presence of foreign officials in Tehran does not by itself amount to endorsement of that vision.
Riyadh has emphasized de-escalation, a diplomatic solution and support for Qatari and Pakistani mediation, without suggesting either acceptance of Tehran’s security model or a reduced US role in the region.
Qatar’s latest demands suggest that regional diplomacy is not an embrace of Tehran’s position but an attempt to change its behavior while avoiding a wider war.
Pakistan’s position adds another condition: renewed diplomacy should go alongside unobstructed international oversight of Iran’s nuclear program.
Diplomacy, with limits
The Tehran talks were not an isolated attempt at mediation. Pakistan and Qatar helped secure the June Iran-US memorandum, and both have continued trying to revive negotiations.
The renewed mediation efforts amid a major US military buildup and Israeli threats show that regional countries still see space for diplomacy. But their public demands also demonstrate how far they remain from Tehran on some of the central issues driving the crisis.
The presence in Tehran of Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman carried particular weight. His previous visit was on April 17, 2025, less than two months before Israel launched its June attacks on Iran.
Regional governments are therefore trying to preserve the possibility of an Iran-US agreement without tying their security to its success. They want to contain Houthi attacks, protect Saudi Arabia and keep Hormuz open, while avoiding a wider confrontation with Iran.
That balancing act is becoming harder. Diplomacy remains active, but so do preparations for what happens if it fails.
Iran could lose up to 1.4 million jobs this year if its economy contracts by seven to eight percent, a senior Labor Ministry official said on Tuesday, estimating that around 2.5 million people are already unemployed.
Malek Hosseini, deputy minister for entrepreneurship and employment development, said Iran's economy contracted by 10 percent excluding oil and 4.6 percent including oil in the spring, citing official figures in an interview with labor-focused ILNA news agency.
According to two decades of Labor Ministry research, every one-percentage-point decline in economic growth corresponds to an average loss of 170,000 jobs, Hosseini said.
“If negative growth of seven to eight percent is recorded by the end of the year, around 1.2 million to 1.4 million people will have completely left the labor market” over the course of the year, he said.
The warning follows remarks by Ali Babaei Karnami, head of parliament's Social Affairs Committee, who said on October 23 that more than 1.7 million Iranian workers had lost their jobs since the start of the 12-day war.
Economist Ahmad Alavi told Iran International on October 18 that poverty, unemployment and declining purchasing power had existed before the war but had since worsened, attributing the country's economic difficulties to the Islamic Republic's policies.
More than one million leave insurance rolls
Around 1.15 million people were removed from Iran's compulsory social insurance rolls between March and August, although further analysis is needed to distinguish retirements, disabilities and new registrations, Hosseini said.
Another 300,000 people joined the unemployment benefits system by the end of August.
Iran's formal labor market recorded a net loss of approximately 500,000 workers during the Iranian year ending March 2026, according to Hosseini.
The official estimated that informal employment accounts for 54 percent of Iran's workforce, compared with 46 percent in formal employment.
“Our labor market suffers from chronic and structural problems,” Hosseini said, adding that the balance had shifted further toward informal and underemployed work since the war.
Government proposes jobs without insurance coverage
The Labor Ministry is developing a public employment program for unemployed people and informal workers affected by the economic crisis, offering short-term construction and service-sector work.
“There is absolutely no social security insurance under the public employment program,” Hosseini said.
Participants will also fall outside the protections of Iran's labor law, although existing employers and workers in registered businesses will remain subject to those regulations.
Hosseini said the ministry was working with the Central Bank to identify informal workers through banking transactions, distinguishing wage income from investment returns.
The official also warned that if raw materials are not adequately supplied, Iran's garment production and distribution chain could suffer losses equivalent to about 60 percent of its pre-war workforce, potentially affecting up to 750,000 jobs.
Workers, retirees and employees across Iran have repeatedly staged protests in recent months over low wages, unpaid salaries, rising living costs, dismissals and job insecurity.
Talks involving Saudi Arabia and its defense partners in Tehran may offer a final diplomatic opportunity before a collective military response, a regional affairs analyst said Monday, amid attacks on Saudi territory and threats of renewed US-Iran fighting.
Mohamed Fahmy, a journalist and regional affairs analyst, described the visit as an exercise in "coercive diplomacy," arguing that the alliance was combining negotiations with preparations for a possible military response.
"This may be the last chance before a collective imminent military action," he told Iran International.
Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman, Pakistani army chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin met Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, with Rezaei hosting the four-way talks.
Riyadh said the visit by representatives of the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement was part of efforts to reduce tensions and promote dialogue.
The attacks on Saudi Arabia have presented the first major test of the agreement, signed by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan in August, which pledges collective action when a member comes under attack.
Iranian state television reported that the four countries agreed to continue discussions on regional peace and security. No agreement to halt the Houthi attacks was announced.
The talks also unfolded against renewed threats of military action between Washington and Tehran. President Donald Trump has kept open the possibility of renewed strikes, while Iranian officials have warned of retaliation.
"The main objective is pressure," Fahmy said.
He said Saudi Arabia and its partners were attempting to exhaust diplomatic options while demonstrating that continued Houthi attacks could bring a collective response.
Professor Saad bin Tefla al-Ajmi, a former Kuwaiti information minister, told Iran International that the seniority of the delegation demonstrated the lengths to which Iran's neighbors were prepared to go to prevent another war.
He described the visit as an extraordinary diplomatic effort to prevent renewed hostilities, but said it could be interpreted in sharply different ways within Tehran, either as evidence of Iranian strength or as an opportunity to pursue a diplomatic settlement.
Iranian hardliners, he said, could portray the arrival of senior Saudi, Turkish and Pakistani officials as evidence that the Islamic Republic had gained the upper hand, forcing its neighbors to seek accommodation on Iranian territory.
A more pragmatic interpretation would see the visit as an opportunity for Tehran to demonstrate a willingness to cooperate with neighboring countries and pursue a diplomatic settlement, while portraying Washington and Israel as responsible if negotiations failed.
"It depends on whose mind you are reading in Tehran now," al-Ajmi said.
Attacks test the Mecca pact
Al-Ajmi also pointed to a hardening Saudi position toward the Houthis, arguing that Riyadh had exhausted its attempts to accommodate the group.
"I think that they have made their mind that the Houthi will have to go and they can't take it anymore," he told Iran International.
Al-Ajmi said Saudi Arabia was seeking international diplomatic and political support while demonstrating that it had been the target of aggression by the Houthis and their Iranian backers.
The urgency of the talks follows a series of deadly attacks on Saudi civilian and strategic infrastructure.
The Houthis claimed fresh attacks Monday on Saudi oil infrastructure and Riyadh airport, although Saudi authorities did not immediately confirm those claims.
The Saudi-led coalition also reported destroying Houthi missile infrastructure in Yemen, while Egypt's parliament authorized military support to help defend Saudi Arabia, potentially drawing another regional power more directly into the confrontation.
Egypt's decision, Fahmy argued, adds another dimension to the confrontation, with potential consequences for the country's already vulnerable economy.
The diplomatic effort may also involve financial concessions.
Israel Hayom reported Monday, citing unnamed Persian Gulf diplomatic sources, that Saudi Arabia was discussing a possible $1 billion payment to the Houthis through Iran as part of a ceasefire arrangement.
The Israeli newspaper said a Saudi official did not confirm any transfer but acknowledged that earlier understandings with the Houthis included financial assistance for public-sector salaries and reconstruction in exchange for an end to attacks.
Iran International could not independently verify the reported $1 billion proposal.
The possibility of a negotiated settlement comes as the Mecca pact's ability to fulfill its military commitments faces growing scrutiny.
Historian and political analyst Dr. Shahram Kholdi told Iran International that the alliance had failed to deliver the protection promised to its members.
"The Mecca Pact has effectively been a paper tiger," Kholdi said.
He argued that despite military cooperation among the three countries, Saudi Arabia remained vulnerable to Houthi missile and drone attacks.
Obstacles to a lasting settlement
Kholdi believes the delegation's principal objective is to persuade Tehran to restrain the Houthis, potentially in exchange for efforts to convince Washington to reconsider some of the conditions preventing renewed US-Iran negotiations.
He said Turkey and Pakistan were reluctant to confront the Houthis directly because of the risk of Iranian retaliation, leaving Saudi Arabia pursuing diplomacy while continuing to face attacks.
Even securing Tehran's cooperation, however, may not produce a lasting settlement.
Kholdi argued that the Houthis could demand political guarantees amounting to the effective partition of Yemen before agreeing to stop their attacks.
Such an arrangement could leave Saudi Arabia facing an entrenched hostile entity along its southern border, an outcome Riyadh has so far resisted.
Other regional diplomatic efforts have focused on the US-Iran standoff. Qatari officials visited Tehran on Sunday, while Pakistan has continued to serve as an intermediary between the United States and the Islamic Republic.
Disagreements remain over the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, access through the Strait of Hormuz and the terms of a broader settlement addressing Iran's nuclear program.
Kholdi expects the diplomatic effort could produce a temporary reduction in hostilities, but doubts it will deliver a lasting ceasefire. He warned that even a brief lull could unravel through miscalculation.
The Mecca pact was established to provide collective security. Continued attacks on Saudi Arabia are now testing that commitment while its members pursue talks with Iran.
With no announced agreement to halt the Houthi attacks and the US-Iran standoff unresolved, the risk of a military confrontation extending well beyond Yemen remains.
As Iran hosted senior Saudi, Turkish and Pakistani officials for security talks on Monday, an influential hardline newspaper editor warned that the diplomatic initiative could undermine Tehran's position and relieve pressure on the United States.
Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of Kayhan daily and a longtime appointee of the late supreme leader Ali Khamenei, questioned the purpose of the gathering in an article headlined “Tehran summit: Oasis or mirage?”
His criticism extended even to Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council and himself a prominent hardliner who opposed the nuclear diplomacy of former President Hassan Rouhani.
Bagheri had presented the meeting as an opportunity to develop a new regional security framework. Shariatmadari dismissed that prospect, arguing that Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were too close to the United States to credibly mediate between Tehran and Washington.
He accused the three countries of supporting US and Israeli military operations against Iran and questioned why Tehran would expect them to abandon their longstanding strategic ties with Washington.
Iran's support for the Houthis
Shariatmadari's central objection concerned Yemen's Iran-backed Houthis.
Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan signed the Mecca mutual defense pact in August, committing themselves to collective defense. With Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia intensifying, Shariatmadari argued that cooperation with the three countries risked weakening Iran's support for the Yemeni group.
He described Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Iraqi militias and Palestinian armed factions as “one spirit in several bodies,” arguing that confronting any of them amounted to confronting Iran itself.
Shariatmadari questioned whether the visiting delegations intended to pressure Tehran into distancing itself from the Houthis and insisted Iran would never abandon them.
Yet he also portrayed the diplomatic visit as evidence of Iranian strength, arguing that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz had brought Washington and its allies close to economic suffocation and forced regional governments to seek relief through Tehran.
His argument exposed a tension in the hardline position: the arrival of foreign delegations was presented as proof that Iran's pressure was succeeding, while negotiations aimed at easing that pressure risked squandering the leverage it had created.
Against compromise
On Saturday, the hardline Paydari Front urged Iran to begin withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and reconsider its defense doctrine. Hardline lawmakers have also sought to impeach Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi over his dealings with Washington.
These critics are closely tied to Iran's security establishment. Paydari Front leader Sadegh Mahsouli is a former Revolutionary Guards officer, while Shariatmadari represented the late supreme leader at Kayhan for decades.
Their criticism has continued even as President Masoud Pezeshkian and national security chief Mohsen Rezaei welcomed the visiting delegations. The four countries ended Monday's meeting with an agreement to continue discussions on regional peace and security.
The dispute exposes a growing divide within Iran's ruling establishment over what to do with the leverage created by months of confrontation.
Shariatmadari and like-minded hardliners believe that confrontation is working. In their view, diplomacy that requires Tehran to relinquish that leverage risks trading away the very gains it has produced.
An Iraqi court ordered the arrest of a provincial leader on Monday after he threatened road blockades and even separation from Iraq over the closure of a border crossing with Iran, revealing tensions over Baghdad's efforts to curb Tehran’s influence on Iraqi security decisions.
Mustafa Duair, head of the provincial council in Maysan, a southeastern governorate bordering Iran, threatened civil disobedience unless the Al Sheeb crossing was reopened.
Baghdad has cited technical problems for the closure, while Tehran has pointed to US pressure.
The Iran-aligned Badr Organization defended Duair, turning the dispute over a border crossing into a broader challenge to the central government's authority from within Iraq's Shiite political establishment.
Risks of another battlefield
In September, Iraqi authorities seized a drone launcher allegedly used to attack Saudi Arabia's East-West oil pipeline. Saudi officials had traced the attack to the province, close to the Iranian border.
Asharq Al-Awsat reported Saturday that Iraqi officials suspected Israel had struck two depots storing Chinese-made portable air-defense systems allegedly supplied by Iran to allied Iraqi militias.
The reported shipments and Israeli involvement remain unconfirmed, but the allegations underscore the risks Baghdad faces when armed factions acquire weapons and pursue military agendas outside state control.
Ammar al-Hakim, a veteran leader with longstanding ties to Tehran, acknowledged sympathy for Iranians facing sanctions but warned in a September interview that Iraq must protect its own citizens from the same penalties.
“The feeling that the Islamic Republic has been treated unjustly under this siege of sanctions is valid and justified. But countries cannot be governed by wishes and emotions,” Hakim said.
On Monday, a spokesman for his Hikma Movement warned that breaking a militia de-escalation agreement could plunge Iraq into a “tunnel of sanctions.”
Baghdad pushes for greater control
Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi has set June 2027 as the deadline for bringing armed factions under state authority, although some Iran-backed groups continue to resist.
He has also replaced several security chiefs since taking office in May. On Monday, Zaidi dismissed intelligence chief Hamid al-Shatri, who was appointed by his predecessor and had himself been considered for prime minister. No official explanation was given for his dismissal.
The push for greater state authority aligns with Washington's longstanding demands that Baghdad curb independent militias.
Zaidi has also sought closer economic and political ties with the United States, with more than $60 billion in commercial agreements and memorandums announced during his July visit to Washington.
But Zaidi still relies on a coalition that includes Iran-aligned parties. He insists Iraq will not become involved in the Iran war and wants Baghdad to act as a mediator, while acknowledging that disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has damaged Iraq's economy.
Iraq’s leaders are emphasizing national authority and economic interests over involvement in Tehran's confrontations, but the reaction to the Maysan border closure shows how difficult asserting that authority over Iran-aligned factions remains.
