Iran’s deputy army coordinator said on Thursday that the country had suffered damage in wars but that its adversaries had failed to achieve their goals.
“We suffered damage but did not allow the enemy to win,” Habibollah Sayyari said.
He added that “surrender has no place in our people’s vocabulary” and said Iran would prevail as long as it continued to resist what he called “imperialism.”
As growing numbers of Iranian women appear in public without headscarves, authorities are pursuing organizers of cultural and sporting events over alleged violations of mandatory hijab rules.
Tehran’s prosecutor’s office announced this week that it had opened a case against the organizers of Tehran Art Fair, a privately run event held at the Iran Mall commercial complex from September 20 to 23, citing “failure to observe legal and religious requirements.”
The organizers have been summoned to court, while the fair’s ticketing website and social media account have been blocked on the prosecutor’s orders.
The announcement did not specify which activities at the event, which featured visual arts, music, theater and performance art, were considered violations.
Images and videos showed numerous female visitors without headscarves, as well as women performing without hijab.
In one performance, two women sat on the floor as red yarn was wrapped around them in a spiderweb-like pattern. Their bodies were then decorated with flowers before two other women cut the threads with scissors, freeing them.
Another video circulating on social media showed a woman in a long black dress that covered her body but left her head uncovered as she moved to music.
‘Offending public sentiment’
The action against the art fair came amid similar proceedings over Fitex Tehran, a sports equipment exhibition where women performed fitness routines and acrobatics to music without headscarves.
The judiciary announced Tuesday that an unnamed fitness blogger had been arrested on charges of “offending public sentiment” and “propaganda against the system.”
Videos of the performances, in which women wore long-sleeved tops and leggings but no headscarves, circulated widely on social media.
The prosecutor’s office ordered the event’s social media account closed for publishing “criminal content” and said an arrest warrant had been issued for one of the exhibition’s organizers.
The event drew criticism from conservative media. Tasnim, affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), condemned what it called widespread “deviations” at Fitex in an October 25 report and urged sports authorities and other institutions to intervene.
State broadcaster IRIB also described the event as an example of “deviance” and called for judicial action.
Beyond the exhibitions
Other cultural events have faced scrutiny over the past year, including music and theater performances and Tehran Design Week, held at the University of Tehran’s College of Fine Arts.
In some cases, judicial intervention has concerned interactions between women and men rather than hijab violations.
Last month, those involved in the play Tehran, Paris, Tehran/Bridge faced prosecution after a scene showed a female actor briefly resting her head on the chest of a male actor playing her brother.
The prosecutor’s office described the actors’ behavior as “contrary to tradition and propriety.”
Authorities have also taken action against venues hosting events attended by women without hijab.
Earlier this month, the IRGC-linked Fars News Agency reported that a banquet hall in the religious city of Qom had been sealed on the prosecutor’s orders after the wife of prominent soccer player Ali Daei attended a private company conference there without a headscarf.
A judicial case was also opened against the conference organizers, and the prosecutor warned that everyone involved would face action.
Changing streets, unchanged laws
Since the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom movement, which followed the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, street-level enforcement of compulsory hijab has declined.
Increasing numbers of women now appear in public without headscarves, wearing clothing other than the long coats and chadors traditionally expected by authorities. Women also exercise in public parks without covering their hair.
But mandatory hijab rules remain in force, including in schools, government institutions and universities, while organizers of public events continue to face legal pressure.
Women’s rights activists and opponents of mandatory hijab argue that the growing visibility of women without headscarves does not amount to freedom of choice as long as legal restrictions remain.
The recent prosecutions show how authorities continue to enforce those restrictions through legal action against organizers, performers and venues, even as uncovered hair becomes increasingly commonplace in public.
US President Donald Trump confirmed he approved Vice President JD Vance's outreach to Iran, saying it focused on medical supplies, as Washington weighs a possible week-long military campaign against Tehran after next week's midterm elections.
Trump said on Wednesday that Vance had sought his approval to contact Iranian authorities but denied directing him to restart peace negotiations.
"They need help with medical supplies and various things. He asked me what I thought. I said, 'if you want to do that, that's OK,'" Trump told reporters.
"Basically, it's getting supplies in to help people that are not well," he added.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Vance had sent a letter to Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, seeking to restart negotiations between Washington and Tehran.
The diplomatic contacts come as regional mediators led by Qatar seek an agreement to prevent further military action, while US and Israeli officials prepare for possible strikes after the November 3 elections.
Vance seeks discussions on Iran's nuclear program
Vance's letter to Rezaei stressed that any negotiations aimed at preventing further US military strikes would require discussions on Iran's nuclear program, Axios reported, citing a US official.
The official said Vance had proposed contacting Rezaei, who has direct access to Iran's Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, and that Trump had supported the initiative.
"The President was enthusiastic about the letter," the official told Axios.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the outreach focused on exploring a possible framework for renewed negotiations rather than presenting a detailed peace proposal.
According to the newspaper, Vance had previously expressed reservations in private about prolonging the war, which began in February, while publicly supporting the US military campaign.
The vice president previously led US negotiations with Iranian representatives, but those efforts did not produce a lasting agreement.
A central issue remains Washington's demand for nuclear concessions before economic relief, while Tehran wants the US to lift its naval blockade, release frozen Iranian funds and allow oil exports before negotiations move forward.
Qatar leads efforts to restart negotiations
Regional mediators led by Qatar, with support from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey, are working to restart negotiations between Washington and Tehran, according to Axios.
Qatari negotiator Ali al-Thawadi visited Tehran earlier this week to discuss possible terms for an agreement with the Trump administration.
One proposal under discussion would allow inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to visit Iranian nuclear facilities damaged during US and Israeli attacks in exchange for limited sanctions relief.
The arrangement could include waivers allowing Iran to export oil and the release of some frozen funds to purchase food and other humanitarian supplies, Axios reported, citing a regional source familiar with the discussions.
The proposals seek to address differences between Washington's demand that Iran give up its enriched uranium stockpile and Tehran's insistence that the US first ease economic restrictions.
"There is some movement. We are waiting for the Iranian response," the regional source told Axios.
The source said the proposed arrangement could allow Iran to retain its enriched uranium initially while Washington secured steps toward renewed nuclear oversight.
Trump confirmed to Axios on Wednesday that negotiations were taking place through mediators but said their outcome remained uncertain.
"We need to finish the job — either through a deal or another way — we will find out if negotiations can succeed," Trump said.
Seven-day proposal under discussion
Qatari mediators also presented Iran with ideas for a seven-day process to address concerns on both sides, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing an official briefed on the negotiations.
According to the official, the draft calls for daily confidence-building measures from each side, with the process potentially beginning early next week.
Several countries would serve as guarantors of the agreement, the official said, adding that Iran was expected to respond by the end of the week.
However, a senior Iranian official told Reuters that Qatar had not presented a formal peace proposal but had instead put forward ideas Tehran considered unacceptable.
The official said Iran would show no flexibility on the nuclear issue.
Another option under discussion involves reviving a September 2025 agreement between Iran and the IAEA in Cairo that provided a framework for inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities.
The agreement was suspended after the UN Security Council reimposed sanctions on Iran the following month.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told the UN Security Council on Tuesday that reviving the Cairo agreement could provide a basis for restoring inspections at facilities damaged during the war.
US and Israel prepare for possible week-long military operation
US and Israeli officials are preparing for possible renewed military action against Iran after the November 3 midterm elections, according to reports by Axios and the Wall Street Journal.
Axios reported, citing US and Israeli officials, that a potential military operation could involve a week of extensive strikes against Iranian leadership, energy infrastructure, nuclear facilities and other targets.
Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir spoke with US Central Command chief Admiral Brad Cooper on Monday to coordinate preparations for possible attacks, the report said.
The Wall Street Journal separately reported that Washington had warned several Persian Gulf countries to prepare for a possible short, intense military campaign following the elections.
The US military has been strengthening regional missile defenses, relocating personnel from vulnerable bases and replenishing munitions, according to the newspaper.
Additional naval and air forces are also being prepared for possible operations.
Trump has not made a final decision on further military action, the reports said.
Saudi officials have urged Washington to allow more time for negotiations before deciding on further strikes, Axios reported, citing a US official.
Saudi, Turkish and Pakistani security officials also discussed the situation during recent meetings in Tehran, according to the report.
Iranian authorities have executed at least 34 people in connection with the January protests, conducted mass trials resulting in death sentences and detained thousands, UN Special Rapporteur Mai Sato said Wednesday.
Addressing the UN General Assembly, Sato described the scale of human rights violations during her two-year Iran mandate as extraordinary. “I struggled to find its precedent in recent history,” she said, warning that her findings represented only a fraction of the abuses committed against Iranians.
Her report, covering February through August 2026 following the December-January nationwide protests, detailed how the Islamic Republic used the war with the United States and Israel to intensify repression, treating peaceful protesters as agents of hostile foreign powers.
In just one case, 34 defendants were tried in five days, with 12 sentenced to death and seven already executed. She said such proceedings could not establish individual criminal responsibility, rendering the death sentences arbitrary.
Sato said senior Iranian officials had publicly demanded expedited trials, while courts conducted mass proceedings and broadcast alleged confessions within days of arrests. She added that lawyers defending protesters had been summoned, threatened and, in some cases, arrested.
The special rapporteur also reported thousands of arrests on national security charges, with many detainees held incommunicado at undisclosed locations, a pattern she described as enforced disappearance. She said families of protesters killed in the crackdown faced threats of prosecution and asset confiscation for demanding accountability, while some were denied the right to hold funerals.
Sato also described prisoners left locked inside overcrowded cells during airstrikes, with bars reportedly welded to ward doors. Government-imposed internet shutdowns prevented civilians from receiving warnings about incoming attacks and made documenting abuses dangerous. Under Iranian espionage legislation, sharing information with foreign media can carry the death penalty.
She said the authorities continued withholding information about executions and killings by security forces while publishing protest death tolls far below independent estimates.
“The result is that there is no lawful way left to dissent,” Sato said.
The UN's Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, which addressed the same session, concluded that the suppression of January's nationwide protests amounted to crimes against humanity. Sato said she saw no reason to depart from that finding.
Iran and allies challenge UN findings
Iran's representative, Ali Karimi Magham, rejected both UN investigative mechanisms, describing them as illegitimate and politically engineered instruments unrelated to genuine human rights protection.
Russia accused the investigators of advancing Western political interests and disregarding Iran's “complex and unique sociocultural context.”
North Korea similarly rejected the investigations, accusing the UN of the “weaponization of human rights.” Its representative argued that countries should determine their own societal models free from external interference and that country-specific investigations violated national sovereignty.
China concentrated on the consequences of war and sanctions, urging respect for Iran's sovereignty and calling for the removal of unilateral economic restrictions. Beijing said such measures violated economic and social rights and worsened the population's hardship.
Sato responded to Tehran's objections by pointing out that Iranian authorities had engaged with her office throughout her mandate, including extensively over the war, while continuing to withhold information about killings carried out by their own security forces.
Western governments condemn Iran’s crackdown
Other delegations focused on the violations documented by the UN investigators, particularly the killing of protesters, executions and torture.
Britain described the killing of children during the January crackdown as “abhorrent” and condemned the torture of detainees, widespread violence against peaceful protesters and the authorities' internet shutdowns.
Australia accused Iranian authorities of using lethal force, mass arrests and a nationwide communications blackout to silence dissent and isolate Iranians from the outside world.
The European Union called for an immediate halt to executions, condemning the use of capital punishment and torture to suppress political opposition. It also warned about reprisals against critics, including those living abroad.
The Netherlands said the findings confirmed gross human rights violations, particularly a dramatic escalation in lethal force and mass arrests during the protests.
Canada raised concerns about proposed legislation that would criminalize contact with foreign organizations, civil society groups and diplomatic missions, potentially further restricting communication between Iranians and the outside world.
Sato also documented discrimination against Kurds, Baluch, Arabs and Azerbaijani Turks, alongside continuing persecution of Baha'is and Christian converts.
In her concluding remarks, Sato called on the United States and Israel to end hostilities and investigate their strikes, while urging Iranian authorities to halt executions and repression and investigate deaths caused by their forces.
Instead, she said, repression had deepened the grievances driving people into the streets.
A reported order by Iran’s supreme leader to end the state of “neither war nor peace” may signal a turn towards diplomacy. But a closer reading suggests Tehran is offering no concessions, only restating its longstanding demands for ending the confrontation with Washington.
On Tuesday, Iranian state media announced that Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei had received Maj. Gen. Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and ordered an end to “the war and the ‘neither war, nor peace’ conditions.”
Abroad, that was read as Tehran wanting out. It wants nothing of the sort. Read the whole sentence, and the “order” is the same demand the Islamic Republic has made since the shooting stopped in April: the stalemate ends when Washington capitulates.
The news cycle started with a readout released by Mojtaba’s official website, which was reproduced word for word across the domestic press. The item is a summary, not a transcript. Every line attributed to Mojtaba is in reported speech, without a single direct quotation.
He is said to have called for “exerting control over the Strait of Hormuz,” declared the enemy “desperate,” bound Iran’s “interests” to those of its regional allies in the “Axis of Resistance,” and called for an end to the war “through realization of the conditions set out by the country’s officials.”
That last clause is the whole message, and the conditions it refers to are no secret. Rezaei himself set them out in September: an end to the war on all fronts, Lebanon included; the release of Iran’s frozen funds; an end to the US naval blockade of Iranian ports; and guarantees against renewed strikes.
Earlier versions added compensation for war damages, the lifting of sanctions and recognition of Tehran’s control over the strait. In short: Tehran keeps its grip on Hormuz, its regional allies stay in place, and Washington concedes. Then, and only then, the stalemate ends. Not one condition softened, not one position moved.
Now consider what the readout is not. It is not independent evidence that a meeting took place. It carries no date and no place. Under Ali Khamenei, the leader’s office opened such items with “this morning” or “this afternoon” and named the venue, usually the Imam Khomeini Hussainiya in Tehran. That convention has quietly disappeared.
The readout carries no image, either. No independently verified new photograph, audio or video of Mojtaba Khamenei has surfaced since the February strike that killed his father. The same was true of the four earlier meetings state media has reported for him, twice with the president, once with the parliament speaker and once with the chief justice.
Eight months in, the authorities have offered only written accounts of these meetings, without independently verifiable visual or audio evidence. When and where they took place, and whether the official accounts are accurate, remain unverified.
Some have nonetheless read the announcement as significant, on the grounds that Mojtaba called for an end to the war. The record says otherwise: the conditional clause simply restates Tehran’s standing terms.
A call to end the stalemate with no change in terms is the oldest tactic in the Islamic Republic’s repertoire: stall, buy time, rebuild; when the pressure rises, flirt with peace; and when an opening appears, strike.
The readout did not specify when or where the meeting took place. Although it was published Tuesday, a day after Saudi, Turkish and Pakistani envoys visited Tehran, the text does not establish that the meeting occurred that day or that it was connected to the diplomatic visit.
What Tehran is actually telegraphing
What “neither war, nor peace” means in the mouth of a Khamenei, the family’s own usage helps explain.
In August 2018, Ali Khamenei told a public audience that there would be no war and no negotiation with the Trump administration, because talks would end to Tehran’s detriment. The government daily Iran bannered it the next morning: “there will be no war, and we will not negotiate.” In May 2019, he called negotiation “poison” and declared the nation’s choice to be “resistance.” The limbo was Tehran’s own posture, and a boast.
After the twelve-day war of June 2025, he flipped the phrase. Addressing the cabinet on September 7, he said hope and productivity had to prevail over the “neither war, nor peace state that the enemy wants to impose on us” as part of its “psychological war.” His remedy was self-reliance: “don’t wait for external developments.” The limbo was now the enemy’s doing; the answer was still not to talk.
President Masoud Pezeshkian has leaned on that speech ever since, most recently on October 24, when he said, “Many are struggling for their evening bread” because of the war and the stalemate, adding, “One cannot plan in limbo... The martyred Leader ordered us to go and finish the job.”
The IRGC’s press corps answered within a day. Javan headlined that exiting the stalemate “will not come through negotiation” but through “changing the enemy’s calculations.” Fars News presented the phrase as the doctrine of the “martyred Imam,” with negotiation a “strategic trap.”
Tuesday’s readout appears to settle that argument in the IRGC’s favor. The son inherits the father’s phrase and makes it a condition for ending the confrontation: the stalemate is over when the other side accepts Tehran’s terms.
Three uses of one phrase, one underlying position. Refuse talks in 2018. Blame the enemy for the stalemate in 2025. Demand an end to the stalemate on Tehran’s terms in 2026. At no point has “ending neither war nor peace” meant Tehran moving an inch.
Meanwhile, the authorities continue to announce meetings involving a leader who has not appeared publicly in independently verified images or recordings. This is not an order to end the stalemate. It is the stalemate, restated as a demand.
The IRGC-linked Tasnim news agency has set out the case for Iran to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), adding to a renewed debate over Tehran's nuclear strategy as the region remains caught between diplomacy and war.
In a commentary published Wednesday, Tasnim argued that the treaty had failed to protect Iran's interests and questioned the benefits of remaining a member after successive wars with Israel and the United States.
The intervention comes as Qatar promotes a diplomatic framework reportedly linking the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions relief and efforts to reduce tensions involving Yemen's Houthis.
It also follows signals from Tehran that its leadership wants to end the current diplomatic and military stalemate.
Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Secretary Mohsen Rezaei said Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei had told him during a meeting on Tuesday that it was time to end the state of “no war, no peace.”
President Masoud Pezeshkian said Wednesday that his government would do everything it could to fulfil the leader's wishes.
Tasnim's commentary, titled “Why Should Iran Leave the NPT?”, highlights divisions over how Tehran should respond to international pressure on its nuclear program.
The case for withdrawal
Hardline politicians have repeatedly raised the prospect of leaving the NPT during periods of nuclear negotiations, arguing that the treaty has failed to protect Iran's interests.
Tasnim identified three central objectives of the treaty: preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, encouraging nuclear-armed states to disarm and protecting members' right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
The agency argued that the treaty had failed on all three counts.
It accused the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of abandoning its role as an impartial technical body and becoming politically aligned with the United States and Israel.
The agency had failed to defend Iran's rights when its nuclear sites were attacked, so withdrawal would be a legitimate option for Tehran, Tasnim argued.
Tasnim maintained that withdrawal would not necessarily mean developing nuclear weapons. Some lawmakers, however, have explicitly linked the two.
On Tuesday, MP Abolfazl Aboutorabi called for Iran to withdraw from the NPT and begin building a nuclear bomb.
Other hardline figures, including members of the ultraconservative Paydari Front, have advocated withdrawal, arguing that continued membership has failed to prevent attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities despite their being subject to international safeguards.
Divisions within the establishment
The calls have met resistance from other establishment-aligned media, reflecting disagreements over the potential costs of withdrawal.
Khabar Online, a pragmatic-conservative outlet, sharply criticized the campaign in an October 25 report, singling out the Paydari Front and questioning the political judgment of those advocating departure from the treaty.
Its headline described the proposal as a radical demand dating back two decades, with “neither head nor tail.”
The reformist Arman Melli newspaper has also taken a position against withdrawal, broadly reflecting the Pezeshkian administration's preference for maintaining Iran's existing treaty commitments.
Nour News, which is close to the SNSC, adopted a more cautious approach in its own October 25 analysis.
It argued that neither withdrawal nor continued membership could guarantee Iran's security and that dissatisfaction with the IAEA did not, by itself, justify abandoning the treaty.
The outlet also warned that withdrawal from the NPT would create further political and diplomatic complications, while remaining in the treaty would still allow Tehran to restrict aspects of its cooperation with the IAEA.
Withdrawal, it concluded, should not be considered without a clear plan for what would follow.
A consequential decision
Leaving the NPT would have implications beyond Iran's relations with the IAEA.
Under Article X of the treaty, a state party may exercise its right to withdraw if it determines that extraordinary events have jeopardized its supreme interests. It must give three months' notice to other treaty parties and the UN Security Council, explaining the events behind its decision.
Withdrawal could further complicate Tehran's relations with Western governments and raise questions about the future of international monitoring of its nuclear activities.
Despite the calls from hardline lawmakers and media outlets, Iran has announced no decision to leave the treaty.
The government continues to maintain that its nuclear program is peaceful, and neither the SNSC nor Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has publicly endorsed withdrawal.
The competing arguments underscore a debate within Iran's political establishment: whether abandoning the treaty would strengthen Tehran's position after repeated military attacks or leave it more isolated and vulnerable as regional powers seek a diplomatic settlement.