A significant share of production capacity at damaged gas refineries in southern Iran’s South Pars complex has returned online after repairs, an Iranian lawmaker said on Friday.
Ramazanali Sangdovini, a member of parliament’s energy committee, said the energy task force aimed to get through winter without gas or electricity cuts across the country
US Vice President JD Vance has offered to meet Iran's top security official Mohsen Rezaei to discuss ending the war, the Washington Post reported, as Qatari mediators returned to Tehran on Friday to pursue a deal.
Vance sent a letter last week to Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council and a former commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), outlining the interests of both countries in possible negotiations, the newspaper reported on Thursday, citing a US official familiar with the discussions.
The letter stressed that Washington's main objective was to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, while recognizing Tehran's interests in rebuilding its economy and preserving its national sovereignty.
The vice president also told Iran it needed to appoint representatives authorized to negotiate over its nuclear program, according to the report.
Istanbul or Doha could host a meeting between Vance and Rezaei if the two sides agree to direct talks, the official said.
The Washington Post reported that US officials regarded Rezaei as an important contact because of his influence within Iran's security establishment and his access to Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.
Qatar returns to Tehran for new talks
Qatari mediators returned to Tehran on Friday to advance efforts toward an agreement between Iran and the United States, Reuters reported, citing an official briefed on the negotiations.
The mediators have been coordinating their efforts with Washington as they seek to narrow differences over the nuclear program and the economic restrictions imposed on Iran.
The two sides remain divided over the order of steps needed to reach an agreement. Washington wants nuclear issues addressed from the outset, while Tehran insists that the US first end its naval blockade and lift restrictions on Iranian oil exports.
Qatar presented Iran with a draft peace plan on Sunday, but a senior Iranian official subsequently described the ideas as unacceptable and said Tehran would not change its position on the nuclear issue.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Wednesday that Tehran was consulting closely with intermediaries on ideas for implementing its own seven-day proposal to end the war.
The Washington Post reported that Qatari representatives have maintained regular contact with Rezaei and other senior Iranian officials.
According to the newspaper, Iranian leaders regarded Vance's direct letter as a sign of respect, although there was no indication they had changed their nuclear position.
Washington sees Rezaei as central to negotiations
The Trump administration believes Rezaei could help secure support within Iran's leadership for a nuclear agreement, the Washington Post reported, citing the US official.
US intelligence officials believe Rezaei has maintained regular contact with Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, including discussions in recent days after receiving Vance's letter.
Rezaei, a former commander of the IRGC, has gained influence within Iran's political and security establishment and maintains connections with officials overseeing the economy, according to the report.
The newspaper said US officials viewed him as someone capable of securing agreement among Iranian leaders on sensitive nuclear issues.
Vance previously led US negotiations with Iran, including an April meeting in Islamabad with Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.
Those discussions involved possible sanctions relief and economic cooperation in exchange for a nuclear agreement, but they failed to produce a lasting settlement.
The Washington Post reported that US officials believe the opportunity to reach an agreement without further military action could be narrowing.
Trump says contact focused on medical supplies
US President Donald Trump confirmed Wednesday that he had approved Vance's outreach to Iran but said the contact concerned medical supplies rather than instructions 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 first reported the letter to Rezaei, saying the contact was intended to explore whether Washington and Tehran could agree on a framework for negotiations.
Axios separately reported that Vance stressed the need for any renewed negotiations to address Iran's nuclear program.
The discussions come as Trump considers possible renewed strikes against Iran after the November 3 US midterm elections, according to reports by US media outlets.
Vance says Trump will not allow prolonged Iran war
Speaking at a Fox News town hall in Fort Worth, Texas, on Thursday, Vance said Trump would not allow the conflict with Iran to become a prolonged US military engagement.
"We've been involved in Iran in some form for seven months. The United States has been dealing with Iran for 47 years, and I promise you that Donald Trump is not going to let Iran become a forever war," Vance said.
He said opposing lengthy military interventions did not mean ruling out the use of force.
"I think there's a difference between criticizing foreign military misadventures and saying that you can never ever use the American military," he said.
"He's going to accomplish America's objectives, and then we're going to focus on the other things that we're doing," Vance added.
His comments came as US military officials prepared options for possible further strikes against Iran, with Trump yet to announce a decision.
Prison air is “fetid” and “suffocating,” Mahvash Sabet writes in her new memoir, Open Wide the Doors, offering a rare account by a Baha’i prisoner of life inside Iran’s prisons and the persecution of the country’s religious minority.
The book, launched in London on October 21, was written inside prison “on scraps of newspaper and tissue paper and whatever else she could find,” according to Payam Akhavan, the international human rights lawyer who hosted the event.
The fragments were later smuggled out of Iran and assembled by Azita Mottahedeh, a scholar, and writer Bahiyyih Nakhjavani., the book’s translators
Sabet trained as a teacher and was a member of the “Yaran,” or “Friends” of Iran, a group tasked, with the government's knowledge, with caring for the Baha’i community’s basic needs.
More than 200 Baha’is were executed after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and the community continues to face widespread discrimination and persecution.
After Sabet’s arrest in 2008, the other six members of the Yaran were also detained. All seven were jailed for a decade on charges including conspiring against national security. Their former lawyer, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi, has said no evidence was presented to substantiate the charges.
Released in 2017, Sabet was arrested again in 2022 and sentenced to another decade in prison alongside fellow former Yaran member Fariba Kamalabadi. She is currently on medical furlough but could be recalled to prison at any time.
The book offers an unflinching account of prison conditions. In solitary confinement, the stench is so “noxious” that Sabet tries to breathe through a slit in her door. Other prisoners’ faeces lie in piles in her cell, and cockroaches crawl across the floor.
Remembering hours of blindfolded questioning early in her detention, Sabet writes that “the hair rose on the back of my neck” each time her interrogator drew close.
But alongside the degradation and violence, the memoir describes Sabet’s efforts to preserve compassion for those around her, including fellow prisoners and even her jailers.
At the London launch, two former cellmates and another former prisoner spoke about Sabet’s influence on their lives.
Roxana Saberi, a journalist imprisoned in Evin in 2009, recalled being “dumbfounded” when Sabet and Kamalabadi told her they were “trying to turn their experiences [in prison] into an opportunity.”
As Sabet showed “kindness and compassion to everyone, from her fellow cellmates to her captors,” Saberi came to believe that such an approach could help lay the foundations for “democracy, freedom and understanding” in Iran.
One episode in the memoir captures that compassion. When an “emaciated” crack addict, with “a head like a prop for an anatomy class … eyes set back in deep rings of darkness,” reaches toward Sabet from a lower bunk, she climbs down to hold the woman’s hand.
Although Sabet has only just secured a bed in an overcrowded ward, she also holds the woman’s wounded, “festering” feet, describing how her heart breaks and fills with love.
Sabet does not conceal her own suffering. After a brutal interrogation in which she endures insults and blows from six “sweating, stinking” men, she recalls how “desperate” she had been for “fresh air.”
Iqan Shahidi, an Iranian Baha’i imprisoned between 2012 and 2017, described Sabet as “like a light in the darkness for me.”
Now an academic in the United Kingdom, Shahidi said he had studied at the informal Baha’i university where Sabet taught before her imprisonment.
The institution illustrated how Baha’is responded to persecution, he said. Rather than resorting to political confrontation or violence, “instead they built something,” providing education to young Baha’is barred from public universities.
“Mahvash kept everybody so hopeful through very simple things in life,” said Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, the Iranian-British former prisoner who spent six years in detention.
Every year in prison, Zaghari-Ratcliffe recalled, Sabet invited the entire ward to a Nowruz feast. Tables were pushed together, and Sabet supervised the careful slicing of potatoes for traditional Persian dishes.
She continued paying for the annual celebration even after her release, sending money to jailed activist and future Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi.
For Zaghari-Ratcliffe, the gatherings represented something larger than a shared meal.
Iran’s political prisoners, drawn from different ethnic and religious communities and political backgrounds, were forced to live together for years despite their differences.
Sabet, she said, would “make sure that we [were] all part of the same community.”
“We are against this oppression that has put us in this place … regardless of our differences, we are all one.”
That commitment extended even to prison staff.
Sabet recounts returning to a jail where she had previously been held and receiving a warm welcome from guards. One officer, who tells her that “all my life I have been a good Muslim,” confesses that he has come to hate religion and works for the government only to support his family.
Sabet tries to reassure him, expressing her belief that Iran has a better future and that its people will one day rebuild the country together.
The officer says he wishes he could believe her.
“So allow yourself to,” Sabet replies, “instead of wasting energy on your doubts!”
In the book’s final pages, Sabet recalls an unexpected encounter in prison with Jamaloddin Khanjani, the eldest member of the Yaran.
“The sheer wonder of what had happened felt like a recompense for all the beatings, a reward after all that solitude; it was like breathing fresh air in the suffocating corridors of Evin.”
An Iranian cleric and former Revolutionary Guards member arrested during January's nationwide protests has been sentenced to death twice in separate cases, including for apostasy, US-based rights group HRANA reported Thursday.
The cleric, identified only as Mehdi, was sentenced to death alongside two other protesters, Amirreza Rezaei and Vahid Ghahremani, by Branch 23 of Tehran's Revolutionary Court, according to HRANA.
The charges against the three included allegedly carrying out operations on behalf of Israel, HRANA said. They were informed of their sentences in prison on Monday.
Mehdi, whose surname remains unknown, received a second death sentence from Iran's Special Clerical Court on a charge of apostasy. HRANA provided no further details about the circumstances of that case or his previous service in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
All three were arrested separately by security forces during the nationwide protests in January. They were transferred from Greater Tehran Prison to Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj on Wednesday.
The sentences come amid warnings from the United Nations that Iranian authorities have intensified executions and prosecutions linked to the protests during the war with the United States and Israel.
UN Special Rapporteur Mai Sato told the General Assembly on Wednesday that at least 34 people had been executed in connection with the nationwide protests.
Sato cited one case in which 34 defendants were tried in just five days, with 12 sentenced to death and seven already executed. She raised concerns about mass trials, forced confessions and the lack of due process in capital cases.
"The war has provided cover for the authorities to intensify their crackdown and tighten the repression," Sato said, adding that protesters had been portrayed as agents of foreign powers and peaceful dissent prosecuted as a national security threat.
The protests began in late December with strikes by merchants in Tehran before spreading across the country. At least 36,500 people were killed during the subsequent crackdown by security forces, according to Iran International's reporting, while tens of thousands were arrested or summoned.
Iranian media have highlighted Benjamin Netanyahu's weakened position following Israel's election, but analysts in Tehran say his departure would be unlikely to change Israel's approach to Iran, even if it weakened its ability to pursue the confrontation.
Reports by the Tasnim and Fars news agencies, both affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), as well as state radio and television, have focused on the failure of either of Israel's two main electoral blocs to secure a governing majority, raising the prospect of prolonged political deadlock.
These outlets have also devoted considerable attention to gains by Arab parties and the possibility that their increased representation could help bring about Netanyahu's removal as prime minister.
They have largely avoided discussing whether the election outcome could increase or reduce the risk of further escalation in the war with Iran.
Senior Iranian officials have yet to comment on the result. Before the vote, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran did not care who led Israel, stressing that Iran was at war and would not hesitate to defend itself.
Netanyahu or Eisenkot?
Iranian analysts have generally argued that the election outcome could affect the timing, scope or objectives of potential Israeli military action, but would not fundamentally change Israel's approach to Iran's nuclear and missile programs or its regional influence.
Masoud Asadollahi, a Middle East expert and university professor, told Nour News, an outlet close to Iran's Supreme National Security Council: “From a military and security perspective, one cannot simply conclude that the mutual threats or strategic differences between Iran and Israel will disappear because a prime minister leaves office.”
He said Netanyahu's opponents differed from him mainly in how they would manage the war and make strategic decisions, rather than in their fundamental approach to Iran.
The conservative Khorasan newspaper addressed the question in a Thursday article titled “Which Is Better for Iran: Netanyahu or Eisenkot?”
It argued that Netanyahu's removal should not be equated with the end of the Israeli threat to Iran. Gadi Eisenkot, it said, was neither an outsider to Israel's political establishment nor opposed to confrontation with the Islamic Republic.
“The experience of coalition governments and political disagreements in Israel has shown that diversity within the cabinet can increase the costs of decision-making,” the newspaper wrote.
Khorasan argued that Netanyahu's departure could benefit Iran by weakening the political and diplomatic capacity he had accumulated during the confrontation, even if his successor pursued similar policies.
But it also acknowledged that internal political rivalries could produce more aggressive policies.
“Sometimes removing one player does not end the game, but it can make the game more difficult for the other side,” the newspaper wrote.
Other analysts warned that political uncertainty could itself increase the risk of military escalation.
Morteza Makki, an international affairs analyst, told the Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) that delays in forming Israel's next government could work to Netanyahu's advantage by giving him a potential window to attack Iran.
Makki said the uncertainty could also affect the prospects for coordination with the United States in any such operation.
“Overall, the likelihood of war is high, and one cannot judge whether war will or will not occur solely on the basis of which political camp wins the election, because both camps are inclined toward war,” foreign policy analyst Alireza Komeili told the conservative Nameh News website.
Hardliner claims Iran drove Israeli turnout
Ali Akbar Raefipour, an ultra-hardline political figure, claimed in a social media post that concerns about Iran were behind the high turnout in Israel's election.
“The highest voter turnout in Israel's elections in the past 28 years has been recorded so far. And the main reason for it is Iran alone. Yes, Iran,” he wrote on X.
His claim drew responses from Iranian social media users who contrasted Israeli participation with low turnout in Iranian elections.
“We have influence over elections all over the world, and the results of elections everywhere in the world affect our lives, except for the results of our own elections,” one user wrote.
The prospect of another US-Iran war has fuelled debate over whether Washington is preparing for a prolonged campaign of military and economic pressure or whether diplomacy can still avert a wider conflict.
The debate comes amid continuing attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, warnings from Tehran that it is better prepared for another confrontation, and fresh revelations about Iran's efforts to circumvent sanctions and the US naval blockade to import military equipment.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Thursday that three tankers had struck naval mines in the strait over the previous 24 hours. Vice President Mohammadreza Aref said Tehran was managing the strategic waterway and that its defensive readiness had improved since the 12-day and 40-day wars.
Analyses published in Iranian newspapers in recent days offer differing assessments of the likelihood of another confrontation and the prospects for a negotiated settlement.
The economic daily Donya-ye Eghtesad said war was not inevitable, pointing to continuing backchannel contacts despite deep disagreements between the two sides.
Political analyst Rahman Ghahramanpour told the paper that another conflict would be unlikely to end after only a few days, warning that even limited US military action could become part of a sustained campaign combining strikes and sanctions.
Ghahramanpour described a possible eight-to-twelve-month strategy aimed at weakening Iran's ability to resist US demands.
War: disastrous but not inevitable
Reuters investigation published Thursday revealed how Iran has used a network of more than 5,000 military-linked agencies to import at least $2 billion worth of equipment, explosives and heavy-duty trucks since January 2025, circumventing Western sanctions and the US naval blockade.
The findings shed light on Tehran's efforts to sustain its military capabilities despite the pressure campaign.
Former diplomat Kourosh Ahmadi challenged predictions that another war was imminent, arguing that the remaining disagreements between Tehran and Washington might not be substantial enough to justify the costs of a new conflict.
Writing in the reformist daily Shargh, Ahmadi said President Donald Trump's statements should not be treated as evidence that he had decided to attack Iran, while warning that another war could have devastating consequences.
He identified three broad options available to Washington: pursue a diplomatic settlement, continue economic and military pressure to weaken Iran, or undertake another military operation.
Diplomacy remained possible, Ahmadi argued, because the dispute concerned the sequencing of concessions more than fundamentally incompatible objectives.
Cost of stalemate
The moderate news website Fararu examined the damage already being inflicted by the prolonged stalemate.
Former diplomat Fereydoun Majlesi argued that Iran's state of “neither war nor peace” was itself becoming a major economic burden, with uncertainty prompting businesses to hold on to cash and avoid investment.
Such decisions weaken production, employment and economic growth over time, he said, even without another military confrontation.
Both sides, Majlesi said, continued to define an acceptable agreement primarily in terms of their own interests while resisting the concessions necessary to bridge the gap.
He warned that prolonged uncertainty could make an eventual settlement more difficult as economic pressure and mutual distrust intensified.
For Ghahramanpour, the question was not simply whether Washington might strike again, but whether military pressure could secure political concessions without triggering a wider war.