Iran International
Iranian commentators are divided over JD Vance's remarks on the political costs of the war with Iran, with some seeing evidence of tensions within the Trump administration and others warning that he may be trying to lure Tehran into a disadvantageous deal.
In a post on X on Wednesday, Vance identified ending the war and reassessing relations with Israel among the priorities of voters who supported Donald Trump in 2024 but switched to Democrats in Tuesday's midterm elections.
Iran's parliament speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, quoted Vance's post to challenge the Trump administration's approach to the war and its relationship with Israel.
Iranian media have since offered differing interpretations of Vance's intentions and his influence over US policy.
The analytical website Vana News said the vice president's remarks highlighted differences in how senior US officials assessed the costs and future of the war, but cautioned against interpreting them as evidence of an irreconcilable rift.
“Differences in perspective do not necessarily mean a breakdown in political cooperation or an irreconcilable conflict between the president and his deputy,” Vana News wrote, adding that it remained unclear whether such differences would affect Washington's policy decisions.
‘Self-interest’
Mohsen Zahedi-Movahed, a retired diplomat and international affairs analyst, was more emphatic.
“Vance's admission that the war was the first reason voters were angry with Republicans is extremely important. How will Trump respond? The divide they wanted to create among Iranian leaders has now come back to haunt them!” he wrote on X.
Ali Nasri, a pro-government commentator, argued that Vance's apparent differences with Trump over Israel predated the Republican election defeat.
“[Vance realised] that his own political future and the survival of the entire America First movement depend on distancing himself from Israel and ending the war with Iran,” Nasri wrote on X. “We paid a heavy price to reach this position of strength,” he added.
‘Prelude to war’
But Parisa Nasr, a hardline journalist, warned against interpreting Vance's remarks as an encouraging sign, describing them as “another episode in Vance's double game.”
She accused Vance of pursuing an electoral and geopolitical manoeuvre designed to appeal to American voters while encouraging Iranian officials who favour an agreement with Washington.
Nasr also linked the remarks to mediation efforts by Qatar and Pakistan, warning that Tehran could be drawn into an agreement that would leave it vulnerable to renewed conflict.
“Even if it leads to an immediate asymmetric agreement, it is a prelude to the next war and poses a very serious danger,” she wrote.
Diplomacy continues
Asked on Wednesday whether he agreed that the war had contributed to the Republicans' defeat, Trump said it was “largely true” but defended his decision to attack Iran, insisting that military action was necessary to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The debate over Vance's intentions comes against the backdrop of a letter he sent in late October to Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, to which Tehran has not formally responded.
According to US media reports, Vance called for the immediate start of comprehensive negotiations, including on Iran's nuclear programme, and expressed his readiness to lead the American delegation in talks with Iranian officials.
Rezaei said on October 31 that he had read the letter, delivered through Qatar, but had not yet responded. He described its tone as different from previous communications from Washington, calling it “a good sign” that demonstrated Iran had consolidated its power.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei struck a more cautious note on November 2, saying Tehran would judge Washington by its actions rather than the tone of its letters.
Ships linked to Iran looped, loitered and went dark over undersea internet cables in the Gulf of Oman in the weeks after Tehran threatened the region’s digital infrastructure, the Financial Times reported on Friday. One of them had been boarded by US Marines in May.
At least four vessels tracked by the maritime analytics firm Windward took unusual routes and lingered over cable corridors off Oman in October, the FT said. Three were tankers under US sanctions. The fourth was a small Iranian fishing boat with no known owner.
The ships sailed normally “until they reached a specific cable corridor, and only then slowed, looped, turned back, loitered or went dark,” Windward told the newspaper. That behavior “fits the profile of mapping the cable routes, or placing charges or mines on them while dark,” it said.
The most striking case is Celestial Sea, an Iran-flagged products tanker sanctioned by the United States last year and boarded by US Marines in the Gulf of Oman in May on suspicion of trying to run the American blockade.
On October 14 it drifted in a loop for more than four hours beside the 2Africa cable, which will connect Persian Gulf states to Europe and the east coast of Africa, according to Windward’s October 29 report, on which the FT’s story is based. The next day it switched off its transponder inside the 2Africa and Bay of Bengal Gateway corridors off Sohar. It stayed dark for 86 hours and reappeared nine nautical miles away, made a U-turn over the second cable and anchored. It was empty the whole time.
A second sanctioned tanker, a gas carrier loaded with about half a million barrels of Iranian LPG, left the same anchorage for Malaysia on October 23. Ten hours out, it slowed over 2Africa, turned 180 degrees back toward Oman and went dark. Five days later it had not reappeared. A loaded ship with a buyer waiting has no cargo reason to do that, Windward said.
The third, a crude tanker operated by Iran’s state tanker company, loitered at under one knot for about ten days in Iranian waters between Jask and Chabahar, within a few miles of four cable routes, switching off its tracking repeatedly, once for 33 hours.
The fourth vessel is the odd one. A 34-meter Iranian fishing-support boat whose beneficial owner has been unknown since last year drifted at under half a knot along the Europe India Gateway and Transworld cables between October 21 and 26, in waters it had never entered in two years of tracking. Then it sailed north into Iranian waters and went dark.
Fishing in Iranian waters requires a state license, Windward noted, and the Revolutionary Guards’ navy has organized fishermen and their boats into a naval Basij that its commander has called a shadow navy. Iran has used civilian hulls as intelligence platforms before: the cargo ships Saviz and Behshad fed targeting data to the Houthis off Yemen, and on October 6 US forces destroyed an Iranian-linked dhow in the Gulf of Oman that CENTCOM said was watching American warships.
The ships’ movements tracked a run of Iranian warnings. On October 12 Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, said “data centers and artificial intelligence facilities will be destroyed” if the war resumes. On October 19 the Guards’ spokesman, Hossein Mohebbi, said seven cables ran under the Strait of Hormuz and that “new targets and new weapons shall be unveiled.” On October 21 the Guards’ political deputy, Yadollah Javani, said the cables would be hit in retaliation for attacks on Iranian infrastructure.
Two days later, two senior Iranian security officials told Iran International that Tehran had detailed plans to target the cables if the United States and Israel attacked again, and would try to prevent repairs to prolong any outage. That was the day the gas carrier turned around.
Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar depend entirely on cables under the strait for their international connectivity, the FT reported, citing TeleGeography. The cables’ owners include Meta, Vodafone, Orange, AT&T, Verizon, BT and China Mobile.
Masha Kotkin of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told the FT that damage would slow financial transactions and disrupt cloud computing in Persian Gulf states that are betting on digital business to diversify from oil. Threats alone had already halted construction on several cable projects, she said.
Iran International reported last month that the strait carries less than one percent of the world’s international bandwidth and that the main Europe-Asia routes run through the Red Sea, so an attack would hurt Iran’s neighbors far more than the global internet.
The experts the FT consulted held back from conclusions. Sidharth Kaushal of the Royal United Services Institute said the maneuvers could be coincidence but that “Iran might be trying to demonstrate its capacity to damage undersea infrastructure if there is a war.” Jon Pentreath, a retired Royal Navy rear admiral, said almost any vessel could be fitted to lay mines. Celestial Sea’s owner did not respond to the FT.
Three of the four ships were still dark when Windward published. Where they reappear, it said, will show whether the cables were the destination or a stop on the way.
Turkey's approval of a defense pact with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan has paved the way for military support to Riyadh amid attacks by Iran-backed Houthis, though deploying Turkish troops would still require separate parliamentary approval.
Turkey's parliament approved the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement on Thursday by 279 votes to 119, completing a major legislative step toward Ankara's participation in a security arrangement that treats an attack on one member as an attack on all three.
The agreement, signed in August, provides for intelligence sharing, military coordination, joint deterrence and defense industry cooperation. It does not automatically authorize Turkish troop deployments, which would require separate parliamentary approval.
The pact builds on an earlier Saudi-Pakistani defense agreement and reflects Riyadh's efforts to diversify its security partnerships amid the wider conflict involving Iran, the United States and Israel.
Although the pact predates the latest attacks on Saudi Arabia by Iran-backed Houthis, those attacks have given its collective-defense commitments more immediate significance.
Houthi attacks put defense commitments to the test
The three countries agreed during consultations in Riyadh in September to implement collective-defense measures, including arrangements for the rapid deployment of agreed military forces and capabilities to Saudi Arabia.
The decision came as fighting intensified in Yemen, with Houthi forces launching missile and drone attacks against Saudi targets and Riyadh resuming military operations against the group.
The Houthis have described some of their attacks as retaliation for Saudi airstrikes in Yemen. Reuters reported in September, citing Iranian and regional sources, that Iran's Revolutionary Guards had helped direct a Houthi offensive along Yemen's Red Sea coast and that Tehran had encouraged further attacks on Saudi Arabia.
Yemen's internationally recognized government made further allegations this week, accusing Iranian and Hezbollah personnel of directly helping manage Houthi military operations.
Interior Minister Ibrahim Ali Haidan said Tuesday that 14 members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards and seven Lebanese Hezbollah experts were involved in planning operations, developing missile and drone capabilities, and coordinating attacks on international shipping.
Haidan said decisions were made in Tehran and announced in Sanaa, accusing Iran of moving beyond financing, arming and training the Houthis to directly supervising their military activities.
Iran's Foreign Ministry denied Thursday that Iranian military experts were operating in Yemen. Hezbollah rejected the allegations Wednesday, saying it had no personnel working with the Houthis and describing the accusations as baseless.
The allegations and denials come as Saudi Arabia weighs how to respond to Houthi attacks and what military assistance it could receive from its new defense partners.
Turkish officials have indicated that Ankara's contribution would initially focus on equipment, intelligence and weapons systems, Reuters reported. Defense Minister Yasar Guler has said Turkey does not envisage its troops engaging in combat or offensive operations against the Houthis.
Opposition lawmakers warned during Thursday's parliamentary debate that the agreement could draw Turkey into regional wars. Government representatives said any troop deployment would require separate parliamentary approval, according to the Associated Press.
Defense partners keep diplomatic channels with Tehran open
Despite their expanding military cooperation, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan have also pursued direct talks with Iran in an effort to prevent another regional escalation.
Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman, Pakistani army chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin met Iranian officials in Tehran on October 26 to discuss ways to prevent renewed regional fighting.
Saudi Arabia said the visit was intended to open negotiating channels and prevent renewed military escalation.
The discussions took place as Washington and Tehran remained divided over terms for ending their confrontation, including sanctions, the US naval blockade of Iranian ports and the future of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
Turkish and Pakistani officials have maintained that the Mecca agreement is defensive and is not directed against Iran or any other country.
For Ankara, the immediate question remains how much practical military support it will provide Saudi Arabia. The defense agreement establishes a collective commitment, but the scope of any Turkish deployment and its role in the confrontation with the Houthis have yet to be determined.
President Donald Trump's sweeping midterm defeat has sparked a debate in Tehran over whether Iran should seize the opportunity to negotiate a deal with Washington or maintain pressure through its control of the Strait of Hormuz.
Reformist and pragmatic conservative publications have urged Iranian leaders to exploit the shifting political climate in the United States to secure economic concessions, while hardline outlets argue that Tehran should preserve its maritime leverage regardless of the election outcome.
The debate comes as Iran faces mounting economic pressure, with inflation nearing triple digits, industrial shortages and shipping restrictions disrupting supplies of essential goods.
Reformist newspaper Shargh focused on the country's economic struggles, welcoming Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi's proposal for implementing de-escalation measures in the Strait of Hormuz within two days.
Pragmatic conservative Khorasan, which is close to Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, urged lawmakers to pursue a negotiated settlement while ensuring parliamentary oversight of the proposed two-day mechanism.
The convergence suggests that support for exploring a deal extends beyond Iran's reformist camp, despite differences in political priorities.
‘Rescue the economy’
Sobh-e No, another conservative newspaper aligned with Ghalibaf, argued that Tehran should make the most of Trump's defeat to secure binding economic commitments.
Even Hamshahri, owned by the hardliner-led Tehran Municipality, called for swift diplomatic action, warning that shipping disruptions in the Persian Gulf were straining domestic supply chains and contributing to soaring food prices.
The US naval blockade has compounded Iran's economic crisis, effectively halting its oil exports and disrupting other maritime trade. Iran has not loaded oil for export since mid-August, according to shipping data from Kpler.
Together, these arguments reflect a calculation that Iran's maritime leverage may be more valuable if converted into immediate economic relief than maintained indefinitely.
‘Maintain pressure’
Hardline publications, however, showed little enthusiasm for changing Tehran's position.
Kayhan argued that the political balance in Washington had no bearing on what it described as Iran's "operational dominance" in Hormuz.
Javan similarly maintained that Tehran should continue using the strategic waterway to pressure Washington, regardless of which party controls Congress.
The English-language Tehran Times argued that the elections had changed neither Iran's ability to restrict maritime traffic nor its conditions for de-escalation.
Some conservative commentary also portrayed Vice President JD Vance's diplomatic outreach as evidence that the Trump administration was under pressure from high energy prices and difficulties securing maritime traffic.
Under this interpretation, the election results reinforced Washington's vulnerability but offered little reason for Tehran to soften its demands.
‘Beware miscalculation’
Other conservative publications struck a more cautious tone.
Resalat warned against assuming the election results would fundamentally change Washington's approach to Tehran, arguing that the United States remained an unreliable negotiating partner regardless of which party controlled Congress.
Jomhouri Eslami, meanwhile, cautioned that assuming Washington would indefinitely tolerate the closure of Hormuz could invite a wider regional war.
The competing assessments come as Tehran pursues diplomatic contacts beyond Washington.
On Thursday, Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow and delivered a message from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, Iranian state media reported.
The question facing Iranian policymakers is whether Trump's electoral setback offers a chance to secure concessions or whether maintaining pressure will yield better terms, and how long Iran can afford to wait.
Iranian hardliners are calling for continued pressure on Washington following the US midterm elections, arguing that the war has exacted a political price on Republicans but that Democratic gains offer little prospect of a change in US policy toward Tehran.
The argument featured prominently on Iranian state television on Thursday, where commentators urged Iran to maintain its leverage through the Strait of Hormuz, warning that easing pressure could allow the United States to continue its naval blockade even after the war formally ends.
Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei dismissed hopes that changes in the balance of power in Washington could lead to a softer American approach.
In a message published Wednesday to mark Iran's National Day of Fighting Global Arrogance, Khamenei described as "seriously mistaken" those who retain "even the slightest hope for a change in behavior or shifts in political parties and factions" in the United States.
He warned that even a limited inclination toward surrender would weaken the government's domestic support and encourage further American demands.
Keeping up the pressure
Vahid Khazab, a regular panellist on the state television programme Be Vaght-e Iran (Iran Time), said Democrats were unlikely to oppose the US naval blockade of Iran on principle.
"I have not heard anyone come forward and say that a naval blockade is wrong," he said. "They would not oppose a blockade unless it became costly too."
Khazab argued that Iran should keep the Strait of Hormuz completely closed to make the US naval blockade as costly for Washington as the war itself, warning that the blockade's continuation could effectively prolong the conflict even after hostilities formally end.
The remarks reflected an argument among hardline commentators that Tehran should preserve its economic and strategic leverage rather than interpret the Democratic victories as an opening for compromise.
Claiming a political victory
Senior Iranian officials and pro-establishment media have portrayed the Democrats' gains as a consequence of the political and economic costs of the war.
Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, wrote on X that Iran had inflicted a strategic defeat on Trump on the battlefield and in the Strait of Hormuz, as well as a political defeat in Washington.
The hardline newspaper Javan, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, declared that "Iran won the election in America," describing the Democratic victory as a political aftershock of Trump's conduct of the war.
Khazab pointed to rising gasoline, diesel and fertiliser prices, arguing that the war had contributed to Republican losses in agricultural states such as Iowa and Kansas.
"What caused the high prices of gasoline, diesel, and chemical fertilizers?" he asked. "Was it Trump's personality? Was it Trump's corruption and that of his sons? Was it Elon Musk? No, it was the war."
The programme's presenter said the significance of the elections lay not in a Democratic victory but in "the defeat of the Republicans because of the policies they adopted" toward Iran.
No expectations of Democrats
The commentators also warned against repeating what they regarded as misplaced optimism following Joe Biden's victory over Trump in 2020.
Nima Akbarkhani, another regular panellist, criticised reformists who had expected Biden to restore the 2015 nuclear agreement after Trump withdrew from it in 2018. Although Biden returned the United States to several international agreements abandoned by Trump, his administration did not rejoin the nuclear deal.
"Why didn't he return to the JCPOA?" Akbarkhani asked, referring to the agreement by its formal abbreviation. "Because they were telling themselves that this was once again the time to enter new negotiations and secure further concessions."
Mohammad Saleh Jowkar, a member of parliament, echoed Khamenei's warning in comments to the Mehr News Agency.
"It is absolutely unacceptable for some to assume that the arrival of the Democrats, a change in the composition of the US Senate or House of Representatives, or political developments in that country have created conditions for negotiations and concessions," he said.
Khazab added that the US elections were worth examining, if only because "understanding the enemy's camp is essential," he said.
Iran stepped up diplomatic efforts on Thursday, submitting a new nuclear proposal to Washington, seeking Russian support and reaching out to regional powers a day after President Donald Trump's party suffered a sweeping defeat in the US midterm elections.
Tehran sent Washington a nuclear proposal through Qatar, Reuters reported, citing a senior Iranian official who said any discussion of its contents would depend on the United States first meeting Iran's seven demands.
The official said Washington was reviewing the proposal.
Trump has acknowledged that the war contributed to Republican losses in Tuesday's elections, while Democratic leaders have vowed to use their new congressional majorities to push for an end to military operations against Iran.
For Tehran, the election results have raised the prospect of negotiating with a politically weakened president, although Iranian officials continue to insist on concrete concessions before relaxing their grip on the Strait of Hormuz.
Putin offers support for ending war
Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei travelled to Moscow, where he delivered a message from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Rezaei told Iranian state television that Khamenei had wanted the message conveyed to Putin as soon as possible. He did not disclose its contents.
According to Rezaei, Putin condemned US and Israeli attacks on Iran, including strikes on its nuclear facilities, and offered Russian assistance in ending the war.
"He believed this was an unjust war and that it should end as soon as possible," Rezaei said. "He said, 'We are ready to cooperate in any way we can to help end the war.'"
Rezaei said Putin welcomed recent consultations among four regional countries in Tehran and supported a security framework that would exclude outside powers.
"Like our Chinese friends, we believe there should be regional arrangements and that foreign countries should not interfere in the region's security," Rezaei quoted Putin as saying.
Rezaei's involvement may also indicate a willingness among influential figures in Iran's security establishment to explore a negotiated settlement.
The New York Times reported, citing two Iranian officials and an American official, that Rezaei had privately expressed openness to discussing Iran's nuclear programme.
According to the report, he has been involved in negotiations with Qatari mediators alongside Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.
Regional diplomatic outreach
Araghchi also held separate telephone conversations Thursday with his counterparts from nine countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Oman and the United Arab Emirates, according to Iranian state media.
The calls, which also included Pakistan, Jordan, Kuwait and Cyprus, focused on regional developments and efforts to end the war.
The breadth of the diplomatic activity suggests that discussions extend beyond Iran's foreign ministry to senior figures in its security and political establishment, although Tehran's willingness to compromise remains unclear.
The central obstacle is the sequence of concessions. Iran wants Washington to meet its demands before substantive nuclear discussions can proceed, while the United States has yet to indicate whether it will accept those conditions.
