Iran’s nuclear programme, a battleground between ultra-conservatives and reformists
Talks between Iran and the E3 countries on sanctions resumed yesterday in Geneva. Iran’s foreign minister says his government is open to "indirect talks" with the US if the latter abandons the military option. Domestic tensions are growing between camps divided over the nuclear programme and talks. According to HRANA, executions increased by 54 per cent between July and August in 2025 over the same period last year.
Tehran (AsiaNews) – A new battle is underway pitting Iran’s ultra-conservatives against reformists over uranium enrichment and a hard line vis-à-vis the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the international community. Iran’s hardliners want to continue the country’s nuclear programme, rejecting calls for a "suspension" from the opposing camp.
In a climate of renewed hostility, with the possibility that war with Israel, frozen for now after the 12-day war in June, might resume, domestic repression is getting harsher, with the hangman working overtime.
According to the latest report by Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), the Islamic Republic carried out at least 160 executions in the Persian month of Mordad (23 July-22 August).
With a rate of five executions per day, this represents 54 per cent increase over the same period in 2024, when 106 people were hanged. Since the start of the year, at least 818 people have been executed, including 21 women.
The fate of nuclear power
On the diplomatic front, nuclear talks resumed yesterday in Geneva, Switzerland, between Iran and the so-called E3 countries (Germany, France, United Kingdom).
With a packed agenda, the focus is on lifting sanctions, which have caused severe damage to the country's economy in recent years.
Two deputy foreign ministers, Kazem Gharibabadi and Majid Takht-Ravanchi, head the Islamic Republic's delegation that met with German, French and British diplomats to move discussions forward.
For its part, the IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said that a team of inspectors is “back in Iran”, the first to enter the country since the war with Israel and the United States, during which nuclear sites hit.
Iran suspended cooperation with the agency for its "inability" to condemn the attacks on its nuclear sites.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei outlined his government’s position at yesterday's meeting with E3 representatives, threatening "consequences" if UN sanctions are reintroduced through the so-called snapback mechanism.
However, the senior Iranian official added that both sides will continue talks in the coming days in an attempt to reach a satisfactory agreement.
“Our focus is on preventing actions or incidents that may be costly for the country,” said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei during a weekly press conference.
Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left the door open to negotiations with the United States, stressing that Tehran is ready to resume "indirect negotiations" with Washington if the other side guarantees that further military options will not be considered.
“We are prepared to engage in indirect negotiations with the United States, provided the Americans assure us that they will not launch any military aggression during the negotiations,” said Abbas Araghchi in an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat published on Tuesday.
Radicals vs reformists
Meanwhile, in Iran, reformists have come under fire from ultra-conservatives, the judiciary, and the religious camp linked to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei for publishing an appeal for a suspension of nuclear enrichment, free elections, and negotiations with the United States.
The 11-point statement, released on 17 August, has drawn sharp criticism from government officials, pro-government media, and religious institutions, who accuse the reformists of betraying the country's interests amid rising tensions with Israel and the West.
Senior officials have called the document a “surrender letter” and called for legal action against its authors. Some critics have even compared it to foreign-backed coup attempts.
The head of Iran's judiciary, Gholamhossein Mohseni-Eje'i, told reformists to “declare their mistake and return from this path” or face criminal prosecution, with the Tehran prosecutor ready to act “according to his duty under the law”.
Specifically, in the statement, the Iranian Reform Front (IRF) urges the Islamic Republic to voluntarily suspend uranium enrichment, accept IAEA supervision, and thus ensure the complete lifting of sanctions.
Critics also slammed the government's policy of “tactical negotiation to buy time”, along with a call to support national reconciliation and start structural reforms.
Finally, the IRF statement proposes a general amnesty for political prisoners, the lifting of restrictions on certain political figures, and a shift in governance toward national development.
Internal instability
The publication of the reformist appeal comes at a particularly volatile time, with some political forces openly discussing a "post-Islamic Republic era" while others call for a referendum on the future of the system.
In response, Hossein Mozaffar, a member of the powerful Expediency Discernment Council, accused the reformists of having “Crossed rationality and the system’s red line”. He dismissed the statement as “a slander” aimed at promoting “despair, polarization, and new sedition”.
Saeed Jalili, another Council member and a former presidential candidate, accused the reformists of seeking solutions in “the West’s embrace” rather than strengthening “domestic opportunities and unity”.
The most hardline media also joined the chorus of accusations. The daily Agah described the reformists a “surrenderists”, claiming that they have no agenda beyond "attacking" the system, “freeing political prisoners," and “giving a green light to the Agency," i.e. the IAEA.
Criticism and accusations against the reformists intensified, particularly since the statement comes after the 12-day war between Israel and Iran in June, with conservative and radical camps accusing the reformist camp of undermining national unity at a time of external threat.
The country's religious (Shia Muslim) establishment also entered the fray, serving as a sounding board for the criticism.
The Society of Seminary Teachers of Qom accused the reformists of “prescribing change and surrender out of fear of the enemy”, while the Islamic Coalition Party condemned what it called a “surrender letter”, arguing that the proposals amounted to “strategic disarmament of the country”.
The Front of Islamic Revolution Stability accused the reformists of attempting a "transition from Pezeshkian” project, a reference to current Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.
The group compared the statement to previous reformist attempts during the presidency of Mohammad Khatami and to the 2009 Green Wave protests, which were brutally repressed and resulted in many reformists going to prison.
These accusations are rejected by reformers, who are, however, divided.
IRF leader Azar Mansouri insisted that the statement was "the product of a collective decision," approved by 38 votes after an internal debate. “This statement was written and published within the framework of a democratic mechanism,” she said.
Former member of parliament (Majles) Parvaneh Salahshouri told Radio Farda that most of the statement’s clauses "have been raised for years,” while Abbas Abdi, another reformist, told BBC Persian that the statement offered “no new points”.
Mohammad Ghouchani, a prominent reformist media figure, criticised the statement’s timing, warning that it could weaken the government's negotiating position, strengthen extremists, and fuel political distrust.
.png)
