A group of hardline women wearing white burial shrouds rallied outside the Revolutionary Guards headquarters in Tehran, accusing the armed forces of defying Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei amid demands for retaliation over threats against him.
The protest drew a sharp rebuke from Tabnak, a news website linked to Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Mohsen Rezaei, which published commentary accusing the demonstrators of turning against state institutions and warning that action against their movement had begun.
Protesters carried placards warning of threats to Khamenei’s life. “The Imam’s life is in danger. Act now. Tomorrow will be too late,” read one handwritten sign.
A yellow banner addressed military commanders, saying Khamenei’s October 31 order for an “immediate, effective strike without geographical limits” in response to threats remained unfulfilled. “They have threatened the Imam again!” it declared. “Obey before it is too late.”
A speaker over a loudspeaker cited Khamenei’s statement before protesters chanted: “Beware, O armed forces, of defying the leader! Shame on us [if we stand by]!”
An IRGC representative came out to address the protesters, delivering what he said was a message from the Guards commander. He said conditions prevented commanders from meeting them in person and urged them to leave: “This area is not safe. The enemy could exploit the situation at any moment. Please clear the area.”
A woman leading the protest then issued an ultimatum: “If the threat against the Imam’s life is not avenged within 24 hours, we sisters will turn this place into Fatima’s House of Sorrows,” invoking a Shiite symbol of mourning associated with the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter.
The hardliners previously held a similar rally outside the headquarters of Iran’s Armed Forces General Staff, where they described their sit-in protest as an “affectionate reprimand.”
They said they were tired of “empty boasts.” Their statement also equated calls for sustainable development and lasting peace with disarmament, arguing that such ideas were preventing military retaliation against the enemy, according to Ensaf News.
Journalist Masoud Kazemi told Iran International the group, known as Toueh, viewed itself as representing Mojtaba Khamenei’s positions and demanded full implementation of statements attributed to him.
Its demands included dissolving the Supreme National Security Council, and returning its powers to the supreme leader, Kazemi said. The protesters opposed negotiations and regarded those conducting them as traitors, he added.
The rally held on November 5 follows months of pressure from hardliners demanding revenge for Ali Khamenei’s killing in a February 28 airstrike. His son and successor pledged in July that retaliation would be carried out, intensifying pressure on officials pursuing diplomacy with Washington.
Tabnak quoted Hossein Soleimani, editor-in-chief of the IRGC-affiliated Mashregh News, identifying the protesters as the same group that previously occupied Ravagh-e Keshvardoust, a Tehran mourning site near where the former leader was killed.
In June, the site closed after the shroud-wearing hardliners staged a three-day sit-in demanding vengeance. The protesters had also called for the execution of officials involved in negotiations with the United States.
Soleimani accused the group’s leaders of convincing followers that virtually the entire establishment had betrayed the leader, nation and country. Their confrontation, he wrote, targeted state institutions rather than Israel or the United States.
He said the group had been monitored and repeatedly warned but had mistaken the Islamic Republic’s tolerance for permission to continue. Describing the movement as a worsening “cancerous tumor” requiring “surgery,” he added: “That surgery has already begun.”
The conservative newspaper Khorasan also criticized the rally, suggesting the women had either come to believe repeated accusations of betrayal against officials or were being deliberately fed selective information by a political faction exploiting their emotions to pressure commanders.
The hardliners’ ability to rally outside military headquarters stands in stark contrast to the treatment of anti-government protesters. Security forces have repeatedly used lethal force to suppress demonstrations across Iran, including during January’s protests and earlier waves of unrest, while loyalist demonstrators have been able to gather outside some of the country’s most sensitive military sites.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Saturday that restrictions on the range of the country's ballistic missiles had been lifted, raising the prospect of strikes against targets farther afield if US or Israeli attacks resume.
Iran has long maintained that it voluntarily restricted the range of its ballistic missiles to 2,000 kilometres (about 1,200 miles), sufficient to reach Israel and US military installations across much of the Middle East.
Referring to a recent directive from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to respond to threats with “no geographical limits,” IRGC spokesman Hossein Mohebbi said: “That restriction has been lifted for us.”
He did not say whether Iran had developed or deployed missiles capable of exceeding its previously declared range limit, saying only that the country's capabilities should be demonstrated in practice, not through public statements.
Ali Bilali, an adviser to the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, said Saturday that Iran's missiles had a range of about 2,000 kilometres and were capable of precision strikes.
The question of whether Iran possesses longer-range weapons gained prominence during the war in March, when US and British officials said two ballistic missiles had been launched towards Diego Garcia, a joint American-British military base in the Indian Ocean nearly 4,000 kilometres from Iranian territory.
British Defence Secretary John Healey said one fell short and the other was intercepted before reaching its target. Iran denied responsibility for the attempted strike.
Iran's ballistic missile programme has repeatedly featured in US demands for restrictions on Tehran's military capabilities, although it appears to have receded from more recent diplomatic proposals, which have focused primarily on the nuclear programme.
Missiles are central to Iran's military deterrence, especially after two rounds of war that severely degraded its air defences and other conventional capabilities.
Regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, press for a negotiated settlement between Tehran and Washington, seeking to avert another round of fighting that could threaten their security, disrupt energy supplies and inflict further economic damage across the region.
Speaking at a news conference marking the IRGC's Aerospace Week, Mohebbi said the late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had previously directed the military to halt increases in missile range at certain times and authorised extensions at others.
He also claimed that the Guards had moved missile and drone production underground during the wars with Israel and the United States, allowing manufacturing to continue despite bombardment.
“Any point from which we sense a serious threat against our country can become our target,” Mohebbi said, warning that further attacks on Iran would carry a heavy price for its adversaries.
While Tehran celebrates Donald Trump's midterm defeat and the economic pain the Iran war has inflicted on Americans, soaring prices and stagnant wages are pushing ordinary Iranians deeper into a cost-of-living crisis at home.
Senior Iranian officials have come close to claiming credit for the Democrats' sweeping election victory, frequently pointing to US officials' acknowledgment that the war contributed to Republican losses.
Many Iranian newspapers have followed suit, dwelling on America's economic and political troubles while portraying Iran as a country growing stronger despite the war.
"Ever-Stronger Iran on the Road to Progress," one economic daily declared on its front page on Thursday. Another proclaimed "American Humiliation Continues," alongside a photograph of a seemingly dejected Trump.
The hardline daily Kayhan highlighted what it described as €127 billion in European losses resulting from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, presenting the economic damage as a measure of Tehran's success.
Largely absent from those triumphant headlines was the economic crisis that matters most to ordinary Iranians: the soaring cost of living.
The labour-focused news agency ILNA offered a starkly different picture, reporting that the estimated cost of basic household necessities had nearly doubled in seven months to 85 million tomans a month, almost six times the monthly earnings of an ordinary worker.
Labour expert Hamid Haji-Esmaeili told ILNA that inflation had become "normalised" in the thinking of Iranian officials, criticising the government's inadequate response and calling for wages to be revised midway through the year.
Pay levels set at the beginning of the Iranian calendar year no longer reflected economic realities, he argued, warning that the crisis was no longer confined to low-income workers but also affected civil servants and large sections of the middle class.
Economist Ali Ghanbari, also quoted by ILNA, described Iran as facing a "livelihood crisis", warning of a severe decline in the purchasing power of lower-income households.
Another ILNA report highlighted delayed wage payments for contract workers in Iran's southern oil-producing regions, adding to the uncertainty facing employees already struggling with inflation.
Growing calls to expand food-support programmes suggest that wages alone are no longer sufficient to protect many households from the rising cost of essential goods.
Years of inflation, currency depreciation, sanctions and inadequate investment had already eroded living standards. Two rounds of war in 2025 and 2026, and the subsequent US blockade of Iran's maritime trade, have compounded those pressures.
The government's response has come under increasing criticism, particularly over its failure to adjust wages and pensions to reflect the rapidly rising cost of living.
Pensioners have been among the most vocal groups demanding action. ILNA reported calls for authorities to restore their purchasing power immediately, as housing, healthcare and other essential expenses consumed an increasing share of their incomes.
In another report, a representative of military pensioners' organisations criticised repeated discussions about wage increases that had produced no concrete results.
He warned against creating "false hope" among pensioners frustrated by promises of financial relief that have yet to translate into higher payments.
Pensioners are among Iran's more organised social groups and have staged repeated demonstrations in recent years over inadequate incomes and rising prices.
Yet the emphasis in hardline political rhetoric remains on the costs Iran has imposed on its adversaries.
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz and its impact on international energy markets have been presented as evidence of Tehran's leverage over Western economies.
Such claims of success sit uneasily alongside accounts of hardship emerging from Iran's own media, where journalists operate under restrictions on reporting deemed damaging to the Islamic Republic's image.
For workers awaiting overdue wages and pensioners demanding relief, the economic pain inflicted on Iran's adversaries offers little consolation. Their immediate concern is whether they can pay next month's rent and put food on the table.
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.
A US military official urged Iranian civilians to remain indoors and stay away from Revolutionary Guards positions if military tensions escalate, telling Iran International that the IRGC was placing weapons and command centers in residential areas.
The official said the United States was concerned about the safety and security of the Iranian people.
“The IRGC has been placing military assets like weapons and command centers inside civilian neighborhoods and near homes,” the military official said.
The official accused Iran’s leadership and the Revolutionary Guards of using civilians to shield military assets while sheltering in protected locations.
“The Islamic Regime does not care about the people of Iran, as evidenced by Regime leaders and the IRGC using innocent civilians as human shields while they hide. They are hiding in fortified facilities and underground bunkers.”
The official also outlined precautions for civilians in the event of heightened tensions.
“If military tensions escalate, Iranian civilians should take appropriate precautions by remaining indoors and staying far away from the IRGC.”
“The safest place for Iranian civilians during heightened tensions is inside their home.”
The remarks follow an Iran International investigation published in March that found Iranian security and military forces had moved personnel, weapons and equipment into at least 70 civilian sites across 17 provinces during US-Israeli airstrikes.
Those sites included 34 schools, alongside hospitals, stadiums, universities, mosques, parks and government offices. Iran International could not independently verify every account but geolocated visual evidence from seven sites, all schools. Iranian officials have repeatedly denied using civilians as shields.
The warning comes amid renewed diplomatic efforts to avert further fighting. President Donald Trump said Friday that talks with Iran were ongoing.
Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani urged Washington and Tehran on Friday to accept a good deal rather than pursue a perfect one, saying the two sides had failed to reach a comprehensive agreement.
Bloomberg reported Friday, citing a diplomat familiar with the talks, that Iran was studying Qatari proposals involving nuclear issues previously off the table.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters a day earlier that Tehran had sent Washington a nuclear proposal through Qatar, but would discuss it only after the United States met its seven demands.
Iran sent security chief Mohsen Rezaei to Moscow to request S-400 air defense systems in a personal letter from Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to President Vladimir Putin, The Telegraph reported Friday, citing a senior Iranian official.
A senior Iranian official told the newspaper Tehran was “optimistic” that Putin would deliver the systems, which Iran has sought for years.
Rezaei visited Moscow on Thursday, where he met the Russian president. The report did not establish that a deal had been finalized or give a delivery timetable.
The Telegraph also said confidential documents showed a secret parliamentary committee had recommended strengthening military ties with Russia and China before the war began in February. Its proposals called for building “strategic relations, especially military ones” with those powers and bolstering Iran’s “air defense, missiles and drones.”
The visit followed a phone call between Putin and Rezaei on Monday, after which no new military commitments were announced.
Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Iran International that Moscow would help Tehran so long as doing so did not risk direct confrontation with Washington.
Iran’s pursuit of the S-400 reflects the damage inflicted on its air defenses during the war, which exposed nuclear facilities and senior commanders to attack. But Moscow has stopped short of supplying the systems for years, wary of damaging relations with Israel and other regional states, analysts and regional officials told The Telegraph.
Russia’s own needs could also complicate any delivery. Analysts cited by the newspaper said Ukrainian drone and missile attacks had placed Russian air defenses under sustained pressure, limiting the systems Moscow could spare.
The talks add to evidence of expanding military cooperation. The Financial Times reported Thursday that Russia had agreed to supply Iran with 90 helicopter-mounted launchers for precision-guided missiles. A Russian production schedule identified the customer under a code used for Iran.
The partnership has developed in both directions: Iran supplied Russia with Shahed attack drones and helped establish Russian production. But analysts say Moscow continues to balance assistance to Tehran against its own war in Ukraine and relations with Washington and Middle Eastern powers, leaving the extent of its support uncertain.
