Prince Pahlavi says Islamic Republic is weaker than ever

The responses followed Bessent's interview with Iran International, in which he urged Iranians to prepare for severe fuel shortages and forecast a contraction of more than 25 percent in the country's economy in the year ending March 2027.

“My advice to the Iranian people would be: don't pay your taxes because you're not going to get anything back from the government,” Bessent told Iran International's Kambiz Tavana on Monday.

• 

  Bessent says Iran economy will contract by more than 25%

Bessent also urged households to stock up on heating fuel and fill their gasoline tanks, warning that Washington's Operation Economic Outcast would intensify over the next eight weeks.

The interview prompted a discussion among Iranians commenting on Iran International's Instagram post, with responses ranging from support for economic noncooperation to questions about how individuals could implement the recommendations.

Tax boycott prompts questions over implementation

Several commenters pointed out that income taxes are deducted automatically from salaries, leaving employees with little control over whether they pay them.

“We don't voluntarily pay taxes; they take them from us. Other deductions are made too, and whatever salary remains is paid late,” one commenter wrote.

Others noted that taxes are also included in the prices of goods and services, making them difficult to avoid through individual action.

“To avoid paying taxes, we'd have to stop eating because they're built into essentials. We'd starve if we didn't pay. And what fuel are we supposed to store, and how?” another wrote.

Some business owners and other respondents raised concerns about the consequences of withholding taxes, including potential restrictions on bank accounts and payment terminals.

“If you fail to pay taxes, your card terminal and bank accounts can be blocked. A shopkeeper's livelihood depends on them. We know this route; if it worked, we'd have tried it. Why not listen to people about practical solutions?”

• 

  US crackdown leaves much of Iran’s shadow banking untouched

Others questioned how much a boycott of individual tax payments would affect the Islamic Republic's finances.

Fuel recommendations draw questions

Bessent's recommendation to stockpile gasoline and heating fuel also generated discussion about household infrastructure, storage capacity and costs.

Several commenters noted that many Iranian homes use piped natural gas for heating and hot water, rather than fuel that can easily be stored.

“Where am I supposed to store fuel? I live in a 74-square-metre apartment with no balcony or storage. There's barely room for me. Even if I had fuel, how would I use it in my gas heating system?”

Another asked how households could prepare for shortages of piped gas or gasoline.

“How exactly should we stockpile fuel? How can we store the piped gas supplied to our homes, or gasoline for our cars?”

Financial considerations were another recurring theme, with some respondents describing difficulties setting aside money for additional supplies.

“A week after my salary arrives, only a small portion remains in my account, and I have to live on that until the end of the month. How am I supposed to stockpile fuel?” one wrote.

Others responded with humor, including suggestions about filling balloons with gas or storing kerosene in apartments.

Some urge collective action against the Islamic Republic

Not all responses focused on the practical challenges. Some supported Bessent's broader message, arguing that Iranians should take an active role in increasing economic pressure on the Islamic Republic.

“People of Iran, we should act too; we cannot expect the US to do everything. Let's start by not paying water, electricity and gas bills, and shopkeepers should withhold taxes.”

The suggestion also prompted questions about possible consequences, including the disconnection of essential services for nonpayment.

Others raised concerns about the wider impact of Washington's pressure campaign, including the possibility of military action and its consequences for civilians.

• 

  What Operation Economic Outcast means for Iran, and for everyone trading with

“Are Iranians supposed to do everything – take to the streets, risk their families and lives – only for the US to bomb Iran, divide its territory and take its oil? Ordinary Iranians would be worse off,” one commenter wrote.

Bessent said the US campaign was intended to pressure Iran's leadership rather than its population, forecasting further economic deterioration and serious fuel shortages this winter.

Kuwait Times reported that the State Security Criminal Court’s anti-terrorism division handed down the sentences on Monday over charges including espionage, planning attacks against Kuwait, membership in an outlawed organization and actions deemed harmful to national interests.

The death sentences are not final and are subject to review by Kuwait’s Court of Appeals.

Explosives alleged in assassination plan

Prosecutors accused some of the defendants of preparing to use explosives in the assassination plot, while one was accused of attempting to smuggle explosives into Kuwait for use in the planned attacks.

The court said the defendants sought to undermine state security, create instability and weaken public confidence in the authorities’ ability to maintain order, according to Kuwait Times.

AFP, citing two judicial sources, identified one of those sentenced to death as Hussein Abdallah al-Maatouq, a religious figure and secretary-general of the National Islamic Alliance. The sources said another of the three had previously been convicted on terrorism charges in 2016, later pardoned by Kuwait’s emir and arrested again in April.

Similar cases in Kuwait

The ruling follows another Iran- and Hezbollah-linked espionage case in Kuwait earlier this year.

In July, Kuwait’s State Security Court of Appeal sentenced a Kuwaiti citizen to life imprisonment after overturning an earlier 10-year term. Local reporting said he had been convicted of cooperating with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah and had traveled to Qom, where prosecutors said he received weapons and drone training.

The allegations in that case included meetings with security figures linked to Iran and Hezbollah and preparations for activity deemed harmful to Kuwait’s national security.

Bahrain has also prosecuted alleged IRGC networks

Bahrain has brought several similar cases this year involving alleged cooperation with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards.

In May, a Bahraini court sentenced nine defendants to life imprisonment and two others to three years after convicting them of collaborating with the IRGC in what authorities described as hostile and terrorist activities against the kingdom.

Bahrain’s Interior Ministry had earlier said it arrested dozens of people it linked to the IRGC as authorities investigated alleged networks operating during the wider regional conflict.

The cases have unfolded amid heightened tensions between Iran and states across the Persian Gulf, with governments in the region increasing scrutiny of alleged Iranian-linked security and espionage networks.

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.

An excerpt from an interview al-Hakim gave to Iraqiya TV on September 29 has gone viral in recent days.

Al-Hakim, head of Iraq’s National Wisdom Movement and a former head of the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq, said Washington had explicitly warned Baghdad to comply with US sanctions against Iran or risk sanctions itself.

He said Iran was justified in feeling it had been treated unfairly under what he described as a US siege, but argued that countries could not be governed by emotions and aspirations alone.

Iraq, he said, stood in solidarity with the Iranian people while also having a responsibility to shield its own population from the consequences of sanctions.

‘Honour vs dishonour’

Hardline Iranian social media users accused al-Hakim of betraying Iran and showing ingratitude for its support, with some calling for retaliatory measures against Iraq.

Ehsan Salehi, an adviser to former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, accused al-Hakim on X of bowing to Washington, justifying that stance and moving closer to Arab Gulf rulers.

Hardline commentator Alireza Taghavinia interpreted al-Hakim’s comments as an admission that Iraq had little choice but to comply with Washington.

“When Ammar al-Hakim, a Shiite whose position he owes to Iran, says this, what can we expect from [Pakistan’s Prime Minister] Shehbaz Sharif?” he wrote.

Filmmaker Ali Zarnegar wrote: “This is precisely the line between honor and dishonor, and unfortunately, you chose to be dishonorable.”

Another user sarcastically called for Iran to prevent Iraqi oil from passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

“Our feelings are with Iraq, too, but what can we do? We have to attack tankers associated with them,” the user wrote. “Since they are so afraid that America will freeze their oil money, we will make things easier for them and prevent even a drop of their oil from being exported through the Strait of Hormuz.”

National interest first

Other users defended al-Hakim, arguing that his remarks reflected the Iraqi government's responsibility to protect its national interests and criticizing Iran’s leaders for putting ideology ahead of Iran's own welfare.

Mohsen Salehikhah, a journalist and documentary filmmaker associated with reformists, praised the Iraqi politician.

“Ammar al-Hakim said something absolutely right,” he wrote. “If the Islamic Republic also understood that it should prioritize Iran’s interests rather than sacrifice our national interests at the altar of ideological delusions and aspirations, perhaps the situation would be different today.”

Another user pointed out that al-Hakim leads one of the Iraqi political movements closest to Iran, suggesting that other Iraqi groups could hardly be expected to put Iranian interests first.

“Some people spent years selling the public the illusion that sanctions did not matter because we could maintain relations with our neighbors instead of America,” the user wrote. “Well, this is our closest neighbor.”

‘Teach others a lesson’

The backlash comes amid a separate dispute over Iraq’s closure of the al-Shaib/Chazabeh border crossing with Iran.

An adviser to Iraqi Prime Minister Ali Faleh al-Zaidi has said the crossing was closed to prevent the smuggling of narcotics and counterfeit money from Iran, while Iran’s Interior Ministry complained that Baghdad had not informed Tehran in advance.

The closure has prompted calls from some Iranian hardliners for retaliation against Iraq.

Iranian businessman Babak Zanjani called for greater restrictions on Iraq’s access through the Strait of Hormuz, saying Baghdad should be made to understand “the real meaning of a blockade and its consequences.”

He went further, arguing that Iraq should be brought closer to collapse over what he described as a strategic mistake “so that others learn a lesson.”

At Woolwich Crown Court on Monday, prosecutor Bill Emlyn Jones challenged contradictions between Mostafa Sepahvand’s testimony and his messages to a contact in Iran, accusing him of being a “skilled liar.”

Sepahvand later acknowledged that a proposed £150,000 payment was conditional on harming a journalist, but maintained that he had demanded the sum to deter the IRGC and never intended to carry out an attack.

Sepahvand, 41, is on trial alongside Farhad Javadi Manesh, 46, and Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori, 57. All three deny charges under Britain’s National Security Act.

Prosecutors allege they gathered information for Iranian intelligence to prepare for serious violence against at least one target, with Sepahvand expected to carry out an attack. The alleged targets included Iran International journalists Mojtaba Pourmohsen and Kambiz Hosseini.

Jones put it to Sepahvand that either his messages to Mostafa Ghorbani or his account to the jury was untrue. Following the prosecutor’s accusation that he was a skilled liar, Sepahvand shouted in English: “I never did this.” The court then took a break.

When the hearing resumed, his defense barrister, Tyrone Smith, asked him to confirm that the £150,000 discussed in his messages related to causing harm to a journalist. Sepahvand answered yes.

Smith revisited a March 20, 2025, voice message in which Sepahvand discussed the payment, locating a target and carrying out the task when the money was ready.

Asked whether he believed the money would ever be paid, Sepahvand said no. He maintained that his demands were intended to scare off the IRGC.

“I never wanted to harm anyone,” he told the court, saying he had been deceiving the group throughout because he hated it. Asked whether he had ever seen or harmed any of the journalists, he answered no.

Earlier questioning examined Sepahvand’s repeated attempts to reach Ghorbani in late December 2024 and January 2025.

Sepahvand said he was anxious about his criminal case in Iran and wanted Ghorbani and another contact, Amin, to enlist the help of a man referred to as “Haji.”

He said Amin had told him the case had been stopped or canceled, but that this was a lie.

A translated Iranian judicial document examined in court indicated that Sepahvand’s sister appeared on his behalf on January 7, 2025, to appeal convictions dating from 2014 for 32 burglary offenses. The appeal was unsuccessful, although the judge altered the sentence.

Sepahvand said his sister appealed again and that he also pleaded guilty. He maintained that repeated calls to Ghorbani concerned efforts to resolve the case.

He attributed other exchanges about money to car trading, a bodywork workshop and loans that had to be repaid with interest.

During the defense questioning, Sepahvand reaffirmed that threats against his family had prompted his actions. Smith referred to his account that he had sought to appear cooperative without actually assisting a foreign intelligence service or intending to harm anyone.

Smith also asked whether Sepahvand’s solicitor had contacted counterterrorism police several times between July and December 2025 to say he had information to provide, and whether police had declined to speak to him until he pleaded guilty. Sepahvand answered yes.

He confirmed that he had asked his solicitor to pass on the name of Navid, a contact previously discussed during the trial.

Prosecutors reject Sepahvand’s claim that he acted under duress and deliberately performed the surveillance poorly.

According to the prosecution’s account of their defenses, Javadi Manesh and Noori accept visiting locations and taking photographs and videos but say they did not know they were assisting Iranian intelligence.