Where do Iran’s political factions stand on the US peace deal? | US-Israel war on Iran News
Tehran, Iran — Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has expressed reservations about the country’s interim peace agreement with the United States, a stance that has strengthened the hardline political factions opposed to any concessions to Washington.
Khamenei has effectively shifted the responsibility for the deal to President Masoud Pezeshkian, a relative moderate who is now facing criticism from hardliners who believe conflict with the U.S. could reignite.
The agreement, signed by Pezeshkian and U.S. President Donald Trump with mediation from Pakistan, Qatar, and other nations, has faced challenges from various political factions in Israel, which advocate for military action against Iran to weaken its influence and its allied groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon.
In a brief statement attributed to him, Khamenei outlined his stance on the Iran-U.S. deal, stating, “I, as a matter of principle, held a different view,” but permitted the agreement following “explicit acceptance of responsibility” by Pezeshkian as head of the Supreme National Security Council. He noted that Pezeshkian had stated any excessive demands from the U.S. would not be accepted, emphasizing that upcoming negotiations should not be seen as a concession to the “enemy.”
Khamenei reportedly conditioned the deal on the approval of at least three-quarters of the council members, including military commanders. While it is believed that most members supported the deal, specific details regarding the voting remain unverified.
The Supreme National Security Council has reassured Khamenei of its commitment to safeguarding “the rights of the Iranian nation and the resistance front,” while also acknowledging the sacrifices of Iranian leaders during the conflict with the U.S. The council plans to engage in negotiations with a posture of “total distrust” toward the U.S. and will retaliate if any violations occur.
Pezeshkian described the agreement as a “historic document” that signals a powerful Iran ready for peace based on mutual respect. He emphasized that the text reflects a nation unwilling to sacrifice its dignity under pressure.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the parliamentary speaker and chief negotiator, expressed gratitude to Khamenei for his guidance, noting that while the agreement consolidates gains from previous conflicts, it marks just the start of a challenging journey. Ghalibaf articulated a desire for decision-making authority during negotiations, stating, “I am not someone who remains without a decision.”
Meanwhile, economic challenges persist as the ongoing conflict worsens existing structural issues in Iran’s economy.
Supporters of Khamenei have voiced that Iranian negotiators must maintain control over the Strait of Hormuz and suggested abandoning talks if the U.S. does not accommodate this demand.
State-backed rallies have emerged across Iranian cities, where criticism of Pezeshkian, Ghalibaf, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi—figures linked to the moderate camp—has intensified. Some hardline members of parliament have called for a return to regular sessions, arguing that the legislative body should have the authority to block any detrimental agreements with the U.S.
In Mashhad, influential cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Alamolhoda reiterated that the struggle against the U.S. continues, emphasizing a legacy of resistance over compromise.
As the workweek began in Iran, newspapers prominently featured Khamenei’s message regarding the agreement. Conservative dailies acknowledged the Supreme Leader’s conditional endorsement but reported on the complexities ahead in the pursuit of peace with the U.S. In contrast, the reformist newspaper Etemad framed the memorandum of understanding as a “victory document,” highlighting the differing perspectives on the deal.
