Iran

MARANA, Ariz. — Michael Falk was heading into the Pima County branch library to drop off his ballot when he stopped to discuss Tuesday’s midterm election.

Pima County, in south-central Arizona, is home to one of the most competitive congressional races in the country. Falk, a 66-year-old retiree and political independent, was casting his vote for the Democrat, JoAnna Mendoza, even though he hardly knows a thing about her.

But Falk knows — and loathes — a good deal about President Trump.

“From the very beginning, when he stepped on the political stage, he made it quite clear to the people who were silenced for a long time, the bigots of the United States, he gave them a voice, and he told those people, ‘It’s OK for you to think the way that you do.’

“And then that just took off like wildfire,” Falk said, sweeping his arm like a moving wall of flame, “and that’s why we have all these laws that are against brown people and illegal people.”

Gregory Corron confessed he’s not too familiar with Mendoza’s opponent, the Republican incumbent Juan Ciscomani.

But Corron, a 67-year-old computer programmer, voted for Trump three times and believes the president is moving the country in the right direction.

Gregory Corron likes the way things have gone under Trump and wants him to continue unimpeded by a Democrat-run Congress.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

“I think, for instance, exposing fraud is a big thing. Technology is taking off. I’m totally excited about that,” said Corron, who was killing time at a strip mall in Oro Valley while the tires on his Lexus were being replaced. “I think the economy is strong. The stock market is doing well. Employment is doing well.”

For that reason, Corron cast his ballot for Ciscomani, fearful of what might happen if Democrats take control of Congress. “The reforms that Trump started,” Corron said, “need to continue.”

Mendoza and Ciscomani have assaulted the voters of southern Arizona for months, overwhelming their senses and curdling the airwaves with a ceaseless barrage of acrid advertising. Together, the two rivals and their allies have spent tens of millions of dollars on the contest, which both parties have made a top priority.

And yet, to a large degree, Mendoza and Ciscomani are mere stand-ins, their candidacies serving as little more than proxies for the president and his opposition.

Laura Lentner, another Oro Valley resident, allowed as how Ciscomani has done some good things. He is not, the Democrat said, a bad man.

“But his continued support of Trump negates it all for me,” said the 73-year-old retired dental hygienist. It’s about time, Lentner suggested, Republican lawmakers stand up and “stop being afraid of [Trump] and his constituents.”

Arizona’s 6th Congressional District is anchored in eastern Tucson and its suburbs, sprawling north toward Phoenix, east to New Mexico and south all the way to the U.S.-Mexico border. The arid landscape is creased with rugged mountain ranges, cleaved by scenic canyons and filled with vast stretches of open space interrupted by midsize cities and small towns that spring like oases from the desert floor.

In recent years, the terrain has been some of the hardest-fought political turf in the nation.

Joe Biden carried the district in 2020 by less than a percentage point. Four years later, Trump flipped it by the same tiny margin.

Ciscomani, bidding for a third term, has won two nail-biters. He’s facing a fresh opponent in Mendoza, a Marine veteran and former congressional staffer.

The district has a significant Latino population — Ciscomani and Mendoza are Mexican American — and a sizable number of seniors, veterans and military personnel. Mendoza has leaned into her Navy and Marine Corps service. “Battle Tested. Ready To Lead,” her billboards declare, including one near the Ft. Huachuca Army base. (His signs tout “Veterans For Ciscomani.”)

Mendoza has attacked the incumbent as a “spineless” tool of Trump, putting the president front and center in her avalanche of advertising. Ciscomani’s incessant ads tout his bipartisanship — he hails from the establishment wing of the Republican Party — and portray Mendoza as a tool of the unhinged left.

In that way their campaigns distill the push-pull of this midterm election, which, like every one before, amounts to a referendum on the occupant of the Oval Office.

For Trump supporters, that means explaining away vexations like inflation and the war with Iran, twin anchors dragging down the president and fellow Republicans.

Higher costs, Trump voters said, are a hangover from Biden’s time in office, a needed sacrifice or an inconvenience that will pass. Echoing the president, they said the record-breaking cost of gas was a trade-off — and a good one — to keep Iran from building a nuclear weapon.

“I wish gas prices were lower,” said Susan Summers, a Republican who stopped to chat while grocery shopping in Vail. The old railroad town has become a destination for retirees like Summers, 74, a former administrator at Cal State San Bernardino, and for commuters who don’t mind the roughly 25-mile drive to Tucson.

But, Summers went on, she’s willing to accept higher gas prices “because I think it was important to stop a fanatical regime from acquiring nuclear weapons that would actually threaten us in the longer range. Once there is some kind of resolution … prices will come down somewhat and it will make life easier for a lot of people.”

Merilyn Prentice, 78, is another refugee from the state next door. She moved to Benson (population 5,500) from Southern California after a career in nursing. She praised Trump for demonstrating a resolve that other presidents lacked.

“They’re terrorist supporters, and we have terrorist cells in this country,” Prentice said of Iran. “No one wants to talk about that. None of the other presidents wanted to touch it.”

An early voting center and ballot drop-off location at the public library in Marana, Ariz.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

If backers of the president often seemed defensive — justifying, rationalizing, urging patience — Trump critics were seething.

In Sierra Vista, Ann Nichols, 72 and a Democratic-leaning independent, could scarcely get the words out fast enough as she cataloged her outrage.

“Let’s not forget how the tariffs have wrecked the economy,” she said, “how the war that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu tricked Trump into declaring on Iran has wrecked the economy, driven up gas prices, and the rampant corruption in the government, and how the Environmental Protection Agency might as well be known as the Environmental Pollution Agency, and the attempt to wreck the Education Department, and we’ve got a twit who knows nothing about medicine in charge of medicine.”

Nichols paused to adjust her N95 mask. She spent decades as a medical librarian at the Ft. Huachuca Army base.

Her vote for Mendoza, Nichols said, was a vote to leash Trump and start undoing some of the damage he’s inflicted over the last two years.

For all that passion, however, it would be wrong to assume a blue wave — should one come Tuesday — means there’s great regard or overflowing affection for Democrats.

Clayton Surratt, 63, a retired actor and screenwriter, was passing out boxes of groceries — veggies, protein, a loaf of bread — at the food bank in Vail when he paused to share his unhappiness with both Trump and the Democratic Party.

“I think our current government thrives and lives on cruelty,” he said as a steady stream of cars pulled up for delivery. “It upsets me to see our world, our leaders, acting in ways that we would punish an 8-year-old at school if they behave that way.”

At the same time, Surratt said, he’s not sure what Democrats stand for, beyond opposition to Trump.

Adam Thompson, a Democratic-leaning independent, was blunter still. “I don’t like either party,” he said. The 39-year-old lives in Tanque Verde and travels throughout south-central Arizona, delivering soda and snack foods to major retailers. He’s particularly upset these days with Trump.

Why, Thompson asked, are so much time and resources being devoted to matters overseas?

“We need to take care of the people here,” Thompson said. “The war in Iran, the war in the Middle East is not helping me put food on my table. I work my ass off. But at the end of the day, I have to pay that price because … we’re so busy fighting wars for other people.”

The big question is how many discouraged Trump voters sit the election out. Their level of apathy and absenteeism will spell the difference between a good and a great night for Democrats.

Alex Lagerberg, a 35-year-old tattoo artist and libertarian, is a three-time Trump voter. He was initially attracted by his seeming authenticity and background as a New York real estate developer. “He was a good option because he was not a politician,” Lagerberg said outside a mercado in Casa Grande. But, he continued, it turns out that Trump’s supposed entrepreneurial prowess wasn’t all Lagerberg thought it was, or that Trump purported it to be.

“Treating the country like a business was a good thing for a little bit, but it really hasn’t helped,” Lagerberg said. “We haven’t seen much change.”

He’s not particularly motivated to vote, Lagerberg said, or decide between Ciscomani and Mendoza, especially with the two heaving so much mud at each other.

Alex Lagerberg is disappointed in Trump and not very motivated to vote on Tuesday.

(Cassidy Araiza / For The Times)

Rick, who declined to give his last name because he doesn’t want to be hassled for his opinion, has made up his mind. He’s done voting — forever.

The 67-year-old retired government worker, a right-leaning libertarian, soured on politics and politicians long ago. “Democrat, Republican,” he said, “it’s all the same thing.”

He voted for Trump in 2024, giving the political system one last shot. And now? Trump promised “no new wars. What do we have?” Rick asked. “New wars. Taxes are still too high. And Medicare? Medicare sucks.” So no, he said, he’s not bothering with the election.

As he left Vail’s thrift shop, steamed about Trump, Mendoza, Ciscomani and the whole lot, Rick clutched his purchase, a compilation of Ray Price’s greatest hits. One song by the country singer seemed to sum up Rick’s attitude: “You Done Me Wrong.”

He’s not alone.

Iranian officials have been speaking with Qatari mediators about a two-day plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, according to Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, in the latest effort to find a diplomatic path out of the US-Israel war on Iran that has caused a serious global energy crisis.

But even amid signs of diplomatic progress, officials from both sides say they are ready for renewed military escalation.

President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly suggested the United States could attack Iran after the November 3 midterm elections, said the latest negotiations were “going fine”, but added that the US still had several Iranian targets to “take care of”.

Meanwhile, Araghchi has also said Iran’s military was more prepared than ever for renewed war, while the country’s security chief, Mohsen Rezaei, threatened Iran would use “new weaponry” in response to any future attack.

Here’s what we know about the latest diplomatic efforts and the sharp rhetoric from both sides, and what it could mean for what lies ahead:

What is the status of talks?

Araghchi said on Saturday that an Iranian delegation, including one of his aides, travelled to Doha to meet Qatari mediators. Earlier, Qatari officials also travelled to Tehran for consultations.

The latest discussions in Doha centred on a plan that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint, within two days and restart peace talks with the US, provided Washington meets a set of demands from Tehran, Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

Those demands include the lifting of recently imposed US sanctions, the reinstatement of oil waivers granted in June, a reduction in the US military presence in the region, recognition of new shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz designated by Iran and Oman, and an end to the conflict on all fronts, including Israel’s attacks on Lebanon, said Araghchi.

Qatari and Pakistani mediators were “continuing consultations regarding our conditions”, said the top Iranian diplomat.

Pakistan has been mediating between the US and Iran, with its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, visiting Tehran several times as part of the diplomatic efforts to end the war. Doha and Islamabad played key roles in the signing of the June memorandum of understanding (MoU) that collapsed in August.

Iran’s Rezaei said the US had “indicated its readiness” to accept its conditions, although Washington has not confirmed this.

On the US side, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed Qatar-led talks were ongoing, but said he was not aware of a timeframe for them.

“There are multiple talks. Talks have actually never stopped,” said Rubio. “If there is a diplomatic solution, we would be open to it.”

Why has Iran noted a change in the US’s ‘tone’?

The renewed diplomatic activity comes after US Vice President JD Vance sent a letter earlier this week to Rezaei, reportedly seeking to gauge the prospects of restarting negotiations and averting another round of military escalation.

Rezaei confirmed on Saturday that he had read the letter, whose tone he said had “completely changed” compared with earlier correspondence from Trump.

Araghchi also said he had studied Vance’s letter, which he described positively.

“The American side’s attempt to open the door to dialogue and understanding more broadly is a positive step,” Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

However, he warned, “If Washington’s goal in sending this letter is to stir up discord, it would be yet another mistake to add to its previous ones.”

What has Iran said about prospects for peace and war?

Iranian officials have said they are open to new peace talks if the US meets their conditions, but also ready to act more aggressively in any new military confrontation.

“I know that our armed forces are more prepared for war than any time before, and we are ready for any scenario,” Araghchi told Al Jazeera.

In the event of any new military threat from the US or Israel, Iran’s response would be “immediate” and “without geographical limitations”, according to a statement by Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei.

Khamenei ordered commanders to update Iran’s target list to include “all types of tangible and intangible assets belonging to the American-Zionist enemy”.

Rezaei told Al Jazeera that Iran would use “new weaponry” in its response to any future attacks. He also said Iran’s government was weighing a change to its “nuclear doctrine”, which currently includes a ban on nuclear weapons.

Iran’s nuclear programme has been a major point of contention in the conflict with the US, and Trump has repeatedly said Iran must never be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon. Tehran insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes.

What is the latest from Trump?

The US president has sent mixed signals about the status of peace talks. On Saturday, he said negotiations were “going fine” but added that they were “not very reliable”.

He also said the US military still needed to “take care of” several Iranian sites, singling out a suspected underground nuclear complex known as Pickaxe Mountain.

Trump added that the US could achieve its military objectives “very quickly” and was not in a hurry.

Previously, he threatened to renew attacks that would “finish off” Iran, while the US has reportedly warned its Gulf allies to prepare for a short, high-intensity round of conflict after the midterm elections.

Rubio said Trump had not yet decided on whether to carry out new strikes, but warned the US “can achieve military objectives if we seek to”.

How could Israel play into the calculation?

Israel, which joined the US in initiating the war against Iran in February, is preparing for another round of potential conflict right after the US midterm elections, according to a senior Israeli official cited by Israel’s Ynet News site.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel has a “historic, one-time opportunity … to remove the Iranian threat once and for all”. While Netanyahu’s coalition lost its parliamentary majority in recent legislative elections, the 77-year-old leader remains in office as caretaker until a new government is formed.

Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of security studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Netanyahu’s threats complicate Iran’s calculus because Tehran fears “even a nuclear agreement with Washington may not end the threat of another Israeli attack”.

Brigadier-General Yadollah Javani, the deputy for political affairs of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, said Iranian forces are operating on the assumption that the US or Israel could strike at any moment.

What explains the parallel diplomatic efforts and war rhetoric?

Hamidreza Azizi, a senior Iran analyst with the Crisis Group, said Tehran is pursuing diplomacy while also “attempting to redefine” the military implications of another potential conflict.

“For now, diplomacy and military preparations are proceeding simultaneously,” he wrote in a post on X. “The emerging Iranian position seems to be that an agreement remains possible, but another war would be fought under different rules and on a much wider battlefield.”

He added, “Whether Washington takes these warnings as credible deterrence or further escalatory threats could significantly influence what happens next.”

Krieg said the November 3 elections give Iran an incentive to delay concessions to deny Trump a diplomatic victory. But that calculus could change afterwards when he has fewer domestic political restraints on military action.

“We could therefore reach a situation where Iran becomes more willing to compromise precisely when Washington becomes more willing to strike,” said Krieg.

A small boat in the Strait of Hormuz approached a tanker and placed two explosive devices on the hull above the waterline, causing a blast that started a fire in the engine room, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) center reported. The attack on the Dubai-owned tanker Louise 1 was carried out by Iranians using limpet mines, Financial Times reported. The incident took place Thursday and was the first of its kind since June 2019, when a Japanese and a Norwegian ship were hit with limpets, the publication noted.

This is the first indication of the successful use of these mines during the current Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) wave of strikes against shipping in the Strait of Hormuz following Operation Epic Fury. The attack also highlights the challenges of keeping ships safe in a busy and complex littoral.

“The apparent ability of a small craft to approach a transiting tanker, deploy explosive devices and withdraw presents a significant security concern, particularly in the Strait’s congested shipping lanes,” Greece-based maritime ​risk management group Marisks said ​on ⁠Friday, Reuters reported.

TWZ covered the 2019 attacks extensively, including sharing the following video showing an Iranian Navy or IRGC fast boat going back to remove a dud limpet mine from the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous’s damaged hull.

Limpet Mine Attack in the Gulf of Oman: JUNE 13, 2019

Earlier Friday morning, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) commander Adm. Brad Cooper said the waterway was cleared of sea mines. He was not addressing the limpet mine claim.

He stated on X that after “we sank Iran’s navy earlier this year, we also successfully cleared the strait’s internationally recognized primary transit routes of Iranian sea mines, and today U.S. forces remain highly vigilant and present to ensure that all primary transit routes in the Strait of Hormuz remain free and clear.”

“This week we reached a significant milestone, having now assisted Gulf partners in exporting more than 1.5 billion barrels of crude oil since summer,” Cooper added.

Recalling a recent flight over the Strait of Hormuz, Cooper noted that he “saw our U.S. assets in the air and on the water, including a squadron of advanced sea drones that were on patrol supporting a defensive layer. Here’s what I didn’t see: I didn’t see the IRGC out there at all.”

Also known as uncrewed surface vessels (USVs), the sea drones are part of an increasingly uncrewed armada of air, land and sea assets that are supporting the safe corridor through the Strait.

The USV type shown in the following video, a Saronic Corsair, made history twice in the battle against Iran. In July, the USVs were used as a strike weapon in combat for the first time by the U.S. A month earlier, a Saronic Corsair USV rescued the crew of a U.S. Army AH-64 Apache that crashed in the Gulf of Oman after it was downed by Iran.

Despite the heavy presence of CENTCOM forces, this month is turning out to be particularly dangerous for shipping in the region.

“October has seen the highest number of ship attacks on record,” Noam Raydan, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said last week, according to the BOE Report, an oil industry publication. “Raydan, who maintains the institute’s interactive shipping incident map, has recorded 28 confirmed and reported attacks in the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding waterways in October and 113 since the US-Israeli war with Iran began on February 28.”

These strikes, combined with ongoing Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure, have already placed tremendous pressure on a global economy relying heavily on fossil fuel from the region. As of Friday morning, Brent crude topped $117 per barrel, the highest level in more than four years, according to OilPrice.com.

The American oil industry, meanwhile, is making a fortune on this situation.

“The war with Iran has been very lucrative for American oil companies, which have earned more than $130 billion in profit as people pay much higher prices for gasoline, diesel and other fuel,” The New York Times reported on Friday. “That is a conservative estimate based on the performance of more than 50 large U.S. oil and gas companies, most of them producers or refiners, in the six months from April through September. It does not reflect profits earned in March, the first month of the war, or in October.”

“The United States oil and gas business is making hundreds of billions of dollars,” Trump said at an Oct. 24 campaign rally, describing how the war is affecting the industry.

TRUMP on HIGH GAS PRICES: We’re making money like we’ve never made before. They’ll say: President Trump is bragging about all the money they’re making while people are suffering at the pump. I don’t give a damn. We’re making a freaking fortune. pic.twitter.com/KZ2pYsTPyR

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 25, 2026

The Latest

Qatari mediators returned to Tehran on Friday in another bid to try to pull the Middle East region back from the brink of war. The visit takes place as the U.S. and Israel are gearing up for a possible new round of strikes against Iran that could come as soon as next week after America’s midterm elections.

U.S. President Donald Trump has frequently stated that he could order new strikes, likely with Israeli assistance, after control of the next Congress is settled. While Trump could be gearing up to hit Iran again, leaks about war planning could also be messaging to compel Tehran back to the bargaining table.

“It’s going to get wrapped up soon,” Trump said Friday morning in an interview with Kansas City radio station KCMO. “We need a guarantee there’ll never be a nuclear weapon.”

Whether this latest Qatari effort can stop the clock winding down toward a resumption of hostilities remains questionable. Washington and Tehran seem far apart in their goals for achieving an agreement to stave off war.

The U.S. wants nuclear issues ​included from the start of negotiations while Tehran ​demands that the U.S. first end its port blockade ‌and ⁠lift oil export sanctions, Reuters reported on Friday.

A senior Iranian official has already dismissed a plan presented by Qatar as “unacceptable,” the outlet added. “The proposal presented by Qatar sets ​a seven-day timeline addressing both Tehran’s and Washington’s concerns, laying out daily confidence-building steps that each side must take,” the news outlet reported on Oct. 28, citing an official briefed on the negotiations.

The Qatari mediation is the latest diplomatic effort to prevent new fighting. On Monday, major regional powers met in Tehran to find a peaceful way forward.

Regardless, American forces are locked and loaded for a possible new round of strikes against Iran. Israel also continues ramping up attack plans in coordination with the U.S. in the wake of a so-far inconclusive national election that could result in the end of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s career.

“Cooper rarely briefs Trump in person, so the meeting could signal that the U.S. is moving closer to significant military operations,” the publication stated. “He met with the president in July, when the two huddled with Hegseth and Caine on Air Force One in Delaware.”

CENTCOM declined comment when we asked to confirm the meeting as described. The Pentagon referred us to the White House, and the White House did not respond to our request for comment.

While the Journal offered no specific details about the plans discussed at the White House meeting, previous reporting has suggested Trump is seeking a short, intense bombing campaign.

“According to several people familiar with the war plans, any new US-Israeli assault would be intense, lasting some three days and targeting nuclear facilities, regime assets and civilian infrastructure including power plants,” Financial Times reported on Thursday.

A top Democratic senator said he was briefed on plans and was shocked by what he heard.

“I will just say this: their plan is insane,” Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut said. “It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law.”

“There’s been open reporting as to what we may be planning and the civilian infrastructure that we may be targeting,” Murphy added. “The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that will be devastating for our security interests.”

Trump is reportedly planning to restart war with Iran after the election.

Some of us have been briefed on the war plan. And while I cannot disclose any details, I can say this: the plan is insane. It will not achieve objectives and will set off a new cycle of escalation. pic.twitter.com/adWJfHVIok

— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) October 29, 2026

As the White House continues to put the finishing touches on new attack plans, the U.S. is bolstering its forces in the Middle East as we noted at the top of this story.

“The U.S. military is sending an additional Patriot system to Israel from Texas to beef up its missile defenses in the country, according to flight-tracking data and two officials with knowledge of the movement,” the Journal reported on Wednesday. “The U.S. has also moved troops off bases in the Middle East where they were vulnerable in preparation for an escalation.”

“U.S. forces in the region have been restocking their munitions, and bomber aircraft and jet fighters are preparing for strikes, some of the officials said.”

As we previously noted, there have been other signs that a major new round of U.S. and/or Israeli strikes on Iran might be looming on the horizon. Fox News reported that the Nimitz class aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt and the rest of its carrier strike group, as well as the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group carrying the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), are heading to the Middle East, citing unnamed U.S. officials.

“The ships will arrive in the Middle East by the end of November,” the officials said, according to a post on X from Fox’s Jennifer Griffin on Tuesday. “These new deployments will add about 10,000 sailors and Marines to the Middle East.”

You can find out more about the locations of the U.S. Navy’s fleet of flattops in our “Where Are The Aircraft Carriers?” feature.

There have been indications of increased U.S. military air activity in the Middle East recently, as well. Observers have called attention to the particularly significant influx of aerial refueling tankers to bases in the region, as well as in Europe, which would be critical to any new major air campaign.

US Tanker Fleet Update 21/OCT/2026 #IranWar‌

Overall numbers across CENTCOM and Europe have now stabilised back to the levels they were at back at the start of September, around 190-195. There are a few tankers dotted around at other sites temporarily (Glasgow Prestwick and… pic.twitter.com/taKi8op7Tv

— DefenceGeek 🇬🇧 (@DefenceGeek) October 21, 2026

America and Israel struck hard at Iranian logistics during Operation Epic Fury, and the U.S. Navy maintains a blockade on Iranian ports. Still, the IRGC has managed to bring in materiel critical to its drone and missile programs.

A new Reuters investigation examines how.

“Iran has created a secret network of military agencies with global reach to import at least $2 billion in hardware, explosives and heavy-duty trucks since January 2025, evading both the US naval blockade and Western sanctions,” the investigation found. “Hidden behind names starting with the letters MOD, for the Ministry of Defense, are more than 5,000 agencies that form a formidable financial and military machine. Their financial footprints are on bills of lading and other shipping data dating back to 2016. Some are tied to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and to business conglomerates known as bonyads that are controlled by Iran’s elite.”

“The findings offer a window into one of the war’s great mysteries,” the outlet explained. “How is the IRGC replenishing its missile and drone arsenals while firing them in their thousands?”

Amid events in the Persian Gulf region, fighting between the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen and Saudi Arabia rages on.

On Friday, Saudi Arabia said it intercepted and destroyed a Houthi drone near Islam’s holiest city, a claim the Houthis denied.

On Thursday, the Houthis claimed attacks on a half dozen targets across the kingdom, including oil facilities and airports. Saudi officials, for their part, said they intercepted ballistic missiles.

Adding to regional jitters, there were fresh reports of explosions near Iran’s Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz Thursday night. However, these incidents often turn out to be air defense activity, warning shots fired at ships or nothing at all.

CENTCOM on Friday pushed back against claims that the command acknowledged attacks on Iranian targets.

“The reported notion that CENTCOM claimed any recent attacks is false,” Capt. Tim Hawkins, the command’s spokesman, told TWZ.

For now, the world is waiting nervously to see whether the Middle East again erupts into war. We should have a clearer picture in the coming days.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Iran’s top diplomat tells Al Jazeera Tehran has reached a plan with Qatari mediators to reopen Hormuz within two days if the US meets its conditions.

EXCLUSIVE

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi tells Al Jazeera Tehran doesn’t rule out attack, is ‘prepared for all scenarios’.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says a United States effort to open dialogue with Tehran is “a positive step”, but that there are currently no plans for meetings with US officials.

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Saturday, Araghchi said Iran had studied a letter sent by US Vice President JD Vance in high-level meetings, and set out Tehran’s conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which he said would pave the way for renewed negotiations with Washington.

He added that an Iranian delegation has travelled to Doha, a day after Qatari mediators were in Tehran in an apparent bid to negotiate a revival of the US-Iran ceasefire. Araghchi said one of his aides is in Qatar to continue consultations.

“The American side’s attempt to open the door to dialogue and understanding more broadly is a positive step,” the foreign minister told Al Jazeera.

However, he warned: “If Washington’s goal in sending this letter is to stir up discord, it would be yet another mistake to add to its previous ones.”

‘No need to meet with the Americans’

Araghchi played down talk of upcoming meetings between the two sides.

“What is being circulated in this regard is merely media speculation,” he said.

“We see no need to meet with the Americans at this stage. Our conditions are clear, and mediators are continuing their consultations regarding them,” he added.

He said whether Iran would hold direct or indirect talks with the US depended on Tehran’s conditions being met.

“Mediators have presented proposals concerning the nuclear dossier, which we are currently reviewing as part of the second phase,” he said.

“Qatari and Pakistani mediators are continuing consultations regarding our conditions,” Araghchi said.

Conditions for Hormuz

Araghchi said talks with Qatari mediators had shortened the time needed to implement Iran’s proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“The Qatari side proposed shortening the implementation period of the Iranian proposal to five days. We have reached a proposal at this stage that reduces the implementation period to two days,” he said.

“Our conditions include lifting the sanctions imposed following the Islamabad memorandum and reducing US forces in the region,” he said, adding, “We demand the restoration of oil waivers and the release of all our frozen funds, including those held in Qatar.”

Iran is also demanding recognition of shipping routes through the strait that it had discussed with Oman, and the closure of other routes, he said.

‘Prepared for all scenarios’

Araghchi also said his country does not rule out the possibility of an attack against Iran.

“We are prepared for all scenarios,” he said.

“We have upgraded our weaponry, addressed our vulnerabilities, and tested new arms. Our forces are at the highest level of readiness.”

Vatican confirms the pope submitted a mail-in ballot in his native Chicago ahead of November 3 midterm elections

Pope Leo XIV has become the first pontiff to vote in a United States general election after casting a mail-in ballot in Chicago, where he was born.

The Vatican confirmed on Friday that the pope submitted a mail-in ballot in the city ahead of the November 3 midterm elections, citing his longstanding belief in civic participation.

Leo, formerly Robert Prevost, “has exercised his right to vote as a United States citizen”, as he has done “whenever he was eligible to do so”, the Vatican’s press office said.

“The Holy Father expresses his belief in the right and the duty of citizens to participate in democratic processes,” it added.

The Vatican did not say which candidates Leo voted for.

In a note commenting on Leo’s vote, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops urged Catholics to put “our faith before our politics” and “uphold human dignity and the common good”.

“In voting, our Holy Father sets the example that encourages each citizen to exercise their civic responsibility,” said the conference’s director of public affairs, Chieko Noguchi.

Leo is a citizen not only of the US but also of Peru, where he lived as a priest and bishop for more than 20 years, as well as of the Vatican, where he is head of state.

US federal law allows citizens living abroad, even those working for foreign governments, to vote via absentee ballot.

Americans working for foreign governments are not automatically at risk of losing their US citizenship, but the US State Department says on its website that it may “actively review” the citizenship status of Americans who “serve as a foreign head of state, foreign head of government, or foreign minister”.

A regular voter

In this year’s midterm elections, voters in the solidly ⁠Democratic state of Illinois, where Chicago is located, will select a successor to retiring Senator Dick Durbin and choose whether to re-elect Governor JB Pritzker.

Leo requested a mail-in ballot on October 3, just 10 days before he underwent surgery to remove a cancerous tumour from his right lung. He has slowly been resuming his activities at the Vatican after being released from the hospital on October 17.

Since 2000, Leo has voted in five primary elections as Prevost, requesting Democratic ballots twice and Republican ballots three times, according to records held by the Illinois State Board of Elections, which do not show which candidates he supported.

Illinois voters must declare a party preference to receive a primary ballot.

While registered in heavily-Democratic Cook County, Prevost requested Democratic primary ballots in 2008 and 2010. After moving to the more conservative Will County, he requested Republican primary ballots in 2012, 2014 and 2016.

Clashes with Trump

Since Leo’s ascent to the papacy in May 2025, US President Donald Trump has clashed with the pontiff several times.

Trump criticised the pope for repeatedly condemning the US-Israel war on Iran and for challenging his administration’s crackdown on immigrants.

Earlier this year, Trump called Leo “weak” and captive to the “radical left”, kicking off a remarkable back-and-forth argument.

Leo responded by telling reporters: “I’m not afraid of the Trump administration or of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel, which is what the church works for.”

Over the past week, Washington and Tehran have sent mixed signals about whether their eight-month war is heading back to full-scale strikes or towards a peace deal.

On Thursday, the head of United States Central Command (CENTCOM), Admiral Brad Cooper, briefed US President Donald Trump on options for renewed attacks on Iran, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported.

The US and Israel have drawn up joint plans to attack Iran after the November 3 US midterm elections, The New York Times (NYT) reported last week.

Yet on the same day, The Washington Post reported that Vice President JD Vance had offered to meet Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, in person to negotiate an end to the war.

On Friday, Qatari mediators returned to Tehran for talks coordinated with the US, an official told Reuters.

So is Washington heading back to war, or towards a deal? Here’s what we know:

Why are there conflicting reports?

Essentially, Washington is preparing for war while keeping a diplomatic channel open.

The WSJ reported that the US has boosted air defences and munitions in the region and moved some troops away from bases vulnerable to Iranian retaliation.

Ten US military cargo planes landed at the Ovda and Nevatim air bases in Israel’s Negev region on Thursday, with more sent to Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the Israeli public broadcaster Kan reported.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who said he had been briefed on the plans, called them “insane” and warned of a devastating escalation.

Can diplomatic efforts hold off a return to strikes?

Diplomacy has not stopped.

Vance’s letter, delivered to Rezaei through Qatari mediators on Sunday, proposed direct talks led by Vance, with Iran’s nuclear programme on the table from the start, according to the NYT, in a bid to prevent a renewal of strikes.

Whether it might have any influence over what happens next is a matter for debate. Rouzbeh Parsi, an Iran analyst who is an affiliated researcher at Lund University’s Department of History and Human Rights Studies in Sweden, described Vance as the “voice of reason” on Iran within the Trump administration, saying his signals have been “the least volatile and unpredictable”.

But he also told Al Jazeera that Vance’s position has “never proven to be sturdy enough to actually sway Trump”.

“Thus, while the optics with Vance look better than anyone else in the Trump administration, I doubt that they [Iranian officials] give the outreach much credence until Vance proves able to actually deliver something on his own,” he said.

Furthermore, Nader Hashemi, a professor of Middle East politics at Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera that “Rezaei is just one voice among many” adding that the “reality is that decisions are made collectively inside the Islamic republic”.

Wolfgang Pusztai, a security and defence analyst and Austria’s former defence attache to Libya, has a different view, however, telling Al Jazeera, “There is no doubt that the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] currently calls the shots in Iran.”

In February, Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in the initial attacks by Israel and the United States, and his son became the new supreme leader, but Pusztai says he “simply does not have the influence his father did”.

“Without the IRGC’s approval, there will be no agreement with Iran,” Pusztai said, adding it is safe to assume that when Rezaei makes a statement or endorses a proposal, “it reflects the position of the IRGC leadership” and that the US was “absolutely right to negotiate with him”.

Pusztai said it is unclear whether Rezaei is indeed ready to make a serious compromise, but under sustained US pressure, Rezaei, who holds a doctorate in economics, could come to see that “Iran’s interests and the regime’s survival can be better secured without nuclear weapons and through a less aggressive foreign policy”.

“He certainly knows that peak oil is approaching and that time is running out for Iran’s economic recovery through the use of its oil revenues,” he said.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said progress depends on Iran’s seven conditions being met – including the lifting of sanctions, ending the US naval blockade of Iranian ports, guarantees to an end to US-Israeli strikes, and the unfreezing of Iranian assets – adding that the “carrot-and-stick approach has no effect on Iran”, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency.

Vance, meanwhile, told Fox News on Thursday that Trump would “never” let the conflict become “a forever war”.

Which of all these signals matter most?

The diplomacy may say more than the threats.

Andreas Krieg, an associate professor of security studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Vance’s offer of direct talks “suggests that the Americans do have second thoughts” and that they are less ready to strike than they publicly suggest.

But he warned that Cooper, whom he called “quite hawkish”, could give Trump false confidence “that there is a military way out of it, when in reality there isn’t a military way out of it”.

“This idea that there is a short and crisp military operation to solve this issue is obviously an illusion,” he said.

Paul Musgrave, an associate professor of government at Georgetown University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera the White House could be sending signals to coerce Tehran, but that “the better interpretation is the simplest one”.

He believes “the United States is getting ready to carry out substantial attacks relatively soon”. He said he does not expect Washington to accept what he called the unfavourable deal Tehran is offering “without another round of attacks”.

Pusztai said Trump’s main focus is now the midterms, making it “very unlikely that he will order another large-scale attack on Iran before the elections”.

“Starting in mid to late November, there could be a major wave of attacks aimed at advancing the American agenda,” he said, adding that the aim would be to weaken the IRGC enough to push it towards a deal on US terms.

Whatever the vote’s result, “in the short term it will not change much”, Musgrave said.

A strong Republican showing could encourage more aggressive tactics, while a Democratic win could push Trump to show his unilateral powers, including by attacking, he said.

Hasn’t this all happened before?

It has. Iran was attacked by Israel or the US while talks were under way in both 2025 and 2026.

“We’ve seen this pattern of behaviour before from the United States,” Hashemi said, describing it as “talking diplomacy while preparing for war”.

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched major strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites, two days before a sixth round of US-Iran talks was due in Oman. The US joined on June 22, bombing Iran’s Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan nuclear sites.

This year, the US and Israel attacked on February 28, two days after talks in Geneva that mediator Oman said had made “significant progress”.

A day before the strikes, Oman’s foreign minister said Iran had agreed to reduce its nuclear stockpiles to “the lowest level possible”.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told Al Jazeera in September that Iran no longer trusts negotiations with Washington because attacks had come during previous rounds of talks.

Hashemi said he suspects “the same pattern is repeating itself”, with the US preparing “a massive bombing campaign in Iran, replete with war crimes like we haven’t seen before”, citing his reading of Murphy’s comments.

What is blocking a deal?

“The issue is mostly around sequencing and the lack of trust on the Iranian side that the Americans will actually follow through with their commitments,” Krieg said.

Tehran wants sanctions and the US naval blockade lifted quickly, fearing that a slow process gives Trump room to backtrack, he said.

Some IRGC hardliners do not necessarily see war as a bad thing if it tightens their grip on the Hormuz strait, he added, and “the Iranians have been prepping for this war for the last three weeks, so they are ready to fight”.

Krieg said he expects “nothing is going to happen until the 3rd of November [the date of the US midterm elections]”. After that, he said, the likelihood of war will “increase exponentially”.

Any new escalation would be worse than in February and March, he said, with Iran readier to strike critical infrastructure in Gulf countries.

He said the threat to the Gulf “will be unprecedented”.

Oil flows out of the Gulf have increased substantially, easing the huge supply disruption caused by the United States/Israel war on Iran.

Crude exports from the Gulf averaged 24.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in the week to October 18, exceeding the pre-war average, according to market intelligence firm Kpler.

Yet, oil prices continue to rise.

Brent crude, the global benchmark, is trading at its highest prices since April, up more than 60 percent compared with before the war.

On Friday, Brent crude front-month futures – contracts for oil deliveries in December – rose more than 2 percent to briefly top $117 a barrel.

The climbing prices reflect anxiety about the possibility of renewed hostilities in the US war on Iran, dwindling oil stocks, and the increased costs of transporting supplies out of the region, according to market analysts.

“The market is doing exactly what it is supposed to do: It is telling us there is plenty of prompt oil, but there is no end to this war in sight – in fact … escalation is very likely,” Adi Imsirovic, a lecturer in energy systems at the University of Oxford, told Al Jazeera.

“Therefore, futures markets reflect that expectation,” Imsirovic, a veteran oil trader, said.

Oil producers have become increasingly adept at responding to the volatile climate in the Middle East to keep supplies flowing.

Facing the threat of Iranian attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, shipping lines have established a shuttle system involving ship-to-ship transfers off Oman and the United Arab Emirates to reduce the distance any one vessel must travel in perilous waters.

Shuttle boats carry the oil through the strait and load it onto waiting tankers once they are out of the danger zone.

In August, more than 70 percent of the crude that crossed the strait did so via ship-to-ship transfers, according to Kpler.

Oil producers have also ramped up exports that bypass the strait altogether via Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline, which carries oil supplies from its eastern oil fields to its Yanbu port on the Red Sea in the west, and the United Arab Emirates’ Habshan-Fujairah pipeline.

As of September, 40 percent of exports from the Gulf were bypassing the strait, a conduit for one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies during peacetime, compared with 17 percent before the war, according to Kpler data.

The soaring cost of delivery

Such workarounds have nonetheless come at a cost.

Freight costs have reached as much as $40 per barrel in recent weeks, about 10 times the usual rate, according to data from the London Stock Exchange Group, the surge driven by elevated insurance premiums in addition to logistical challenges.

October has been the deadliest month for attacks on commercial vessels since the start of the war, with 32 incidents logged by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) as of Friday.

“So barrels are moving, but neither smoothly nor reliably. That should not be read as a sign of normalisation,” Isabel Figuerola-Ferretti, an expert in oil markets at Comillas Pontifical University in Madrid, Spain, told Al Jazeera.

“Delivering a barrel has become far more expensive,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

While market intelligence data has shown exports reaching pre-war levels at various points in recent weeks, the longer-term supply trend is less clear.

Pavel Molchanov, an investment strategist at Raymond James & Associates, expressed scepticism that supply has returned to the pre-conflict trend.

“The IEA’s most recent production data – for September – shows OPEC Gulf production at 15.8 million bpd, which equates to 75 percent of the pre-war baseline,” Molchanov told Al Jazeera, referring to the International Energy Agency’s latest energy outlook.

“That slightly surpassed July’s 74 percent to reach the highest level since the start of the war, but it’s still a considerable distance from 100 percent.”

Meanwhile, oil stockpiles, a buffer during supply disruptions, are waning.

Observed inventories fell by 10 million barrels in September, taking the global stockpile to 509 million barrels below its pre-war level, according to the IEA.

“The market has moved to a chronic squeeze, driven by concrete supply risks: Hormuz transit, shipping and depleted inventories,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

No reprieve anytime soon

With no permanent end to the Iran war in sight, few analysts see prices returning to normal anytime soon.

Brent futures for delivery in October 2027 stood at more than $90 a barrel on Friday, in a sign that markets see normality as a long way off, still.

“When could prices return to $70? Not soon,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

“It would need durable de-escalation, a return to normal transit and shipping conditions through Hormuz, rebuilt inventories and freight costs back to normal,” she added.

Molchanov, the investment strategist, said he did not believe supply could realistically exceed 85 percent of pre-war levels without a permanent diplomatic solution to the war.

“Once the political groundwork is in place, the next steps will be logistical: Demining Hormuz, bringing shipping crews back to work, and resuming production at currently shut-in oilfields,” he said.

Iran claims to have brought down what looks to be a U.S.-made MQM-170C Outlaw G2 drone largely intact. A video shows it has a notable feature on top of its nose. In U.S. military use today, Outlaw-series drones are best known as an aerial target for use in training and testing.

The footage in question, and the accompanying claims, should be treated with caution given that the regime in Tehran and the country’s media outlets do routinely make exaggerated and unverified claims. That being said, so far, the footage looks to be credible. Furthermore, the U.S. military has pushed back on Iran’s version of events, but has not explicitly denied having lost one of these drones in the region recently.

For its part, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) says it captured the MQM-170-series drone following what it described as an “offensive electronic warfare operation” somewhere to the “west of the Strait of Hormuz.” The IRGC also claims that the uncrewed aircraft was conducting reconnaissance on Iranian air defenses positioned along the country’s Persian Gulf coast. At the time of writing, no firm evidence has been provided to support either of these assertions. The IRGC has released the aforementioned video, seen below, which it says shows the drone being tracked via an infrared camera, as well as after its recovery.

“In the past weeks and months, the IRGC has repeatedly lied out of desperation, and today is no different,” U.S. Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, spokesperson for U.S. Central Command, told TWZ when asked about the specific Iranian claims.

“We’re not going to waste our time. U.S. forces remain vigilant and laser-focused on our assigned missions,” Hawkins said in response to a follow-up question about whether CENTCOM could confirm or deny the loss of an MQM-170-series drone for any reason.

As an aside, Iran recovered an Anduril Dive-LD uncrewed underwater vehicle (UUV) largely intact last month in what the IRGC claimed had been a “complex intelligence and operational action.” U.S. authorities ultimately confirmed the loss of the advanced UUV, but said it was the result of a malfunction.

As mentioned, the drone seen in the IRGC video does look to be an MQM-170C, or at least a closely-related variant thereof. It has an interesting feature on top of its nose: a single forward-looking aperture. This is something that is commonly associated with staring-type optics, which drones often use to aid with navigation. There is a possibility that it could be a seeker, if the drone were to be configured as a one-way-attack munition, but this seems unlikely.

MQM-170C’s manufacturer, Griffon Aerospace, which refers to this design internally as the Outlaw Gen 2 (G2), does say on its website that it can be configured as “an inexpensive payload development platform offering great endurance, payload size, weight, and power.” The company’s website also says that the target configuration of the G2 has a gross weight of 150 pounds, but that this can grow to 225 pounds when used as a more general-purpose drone.

The drone, which is nearly 11 feet long and has a wingspan of 16 feet, otherwise has a stated maximum endurance of eight hours, top speed of 126 knots, and the ability to reach altitudes of more than 16,000 feet. The design is propelled by a 2-cylinder, 2-stroke combustion engine driving a single pusher propeller. The G2 gets into the air via a catapult-type launcher and can be recovered, either after a glide-in landing on suitable terrain or via parachute.

Griffon Aerospace also offers an ‘expanded’ G2E version with fixed tricycle landing gear as an “open and customizable platform for ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] missions, subsystem testing, and R&D [research and development].” This version has a lower maximum takeoff weight and total endurance compared to the baseline G2, according to the company’s website. The IRGC video does not show any evidence of landing gear, but it could have broken away when the drone came down.

The larger Outlaw family, which traces back to the early 2000s, also includes the Gen 1 MQM-170A, which has a completely different design from the subsequent G2 drone. Griffon also developed a derivative of the Gen 1 design with a twin-boom tail, called the Outlaw Boomer, which the U.S. military designated the MQM-170B. There is also a twin-engine, twin-boom derivative of the Outlaw G2 that the U.S. military has at least tested in the past.

This brings us to the additional matter of a contract the U.S. Army awarded to Griffon Aerospace, valued at nearly $68 million, for the procurement of a Gen 3 version of the Outlaw on June 3. When the Pentagon first announced this deal, it was explicitly said to be “in support of Operation Epic Fury” against Iran. That portion of the announcement was quietly deleted sometime thereafter.

“A company official declined to provide details about the Gen 3 design,” Breaking Defense reported in a story published on June 5.

On August 25, Griffon received an additional contract from the Army, valued at just under $133 million, “to procure Griffon Outlaw systems, support equipment and field service representatives for system use and employment.” That announcement made no mention of operations against Iran.

At the time of writing, Griffon Aerospace’s website does not appear to make any mention of the Gen 3 Outlaw. TWZ has reached out for more information about this drone.

Given the known breadth of Outlaw designs to date, it is possible that the Gen 3 drone is substantially, if not entirely, different from any of the existing types. At the same time, the June contract announcement does establish a link between the Outlaw family and U.S. military use outside of training and testing, and specifically as part of real-world operations aimed at Iran.

There remains the potential that Iran simply captured an Outlaw target drone that U.S. forces lost control of during training or testing in the region. The drone seen in the IRGC video lacks the high-visibility orange markings typically seen on aerial targets, though these could easily have been painted over. Iranian authorities could have still fabricated the recovery, in part or in whole, though there is no firm evidence of that at present, either.

Another non-U.S. operator region could also be employing versions of the Outlaw, including in non-target drone roles, such as for surveillance and reconnaissance, or as decoys.

All of this does now come amid growing signs that the United States, as well as Israel, are preparing to launch a new major campaign against Iran. As TWZ reported recently, stimulating Iranian air defenses to glean key intelligence about their current capabilities and positions would be critical in the lead-up to any such operation.

“Stimulating Iran’s air defenses is critical,” our own Tyler Rogoway wrote on X earlier this month following unconfirmed reports of unusual Israeli air activity. “By Iran operating as if a full scale attack could be coming, their air defenses can be detected, categorized and geolocated. This is absolutely critical prior to a major air operation. Surveilling them during times of lower alert does not provide the same fidelity of actionable intelligence. Knowing where those threats are and how they are operating can mean the difference of life and death and/or will help standoff munitions make their way to their targets as those defenses can be suppressed, destroyed, or avoided entirely via careful mission planning.”

In September, claims had emerged that Iran had shot down a U.S.-made ADM-160 Miniature Air-Launched Decoy (MALD), but that remains unconfirmed. There were also reports of unusual, UAP-like objects flying over Iran, which have similarly not been confirmed.

Iran has sentenced award-winning filmmaker Jafar Panahi to five years and one month in prison and ordered the seizure of of all of his assets.

The “It Was Just an Accident” director was sentenced Monday, according to the Associated Press. The charges against Panahi, who’d returned to the country in March, remain unclear, per the outlet.

One of Iran’s most politically outspoken filmmakers, Panahi has been critical of the country’s leadership and condemned violence against anti-government protesters. He has previously been convicted of “propaganda activities against the system” and has repeatedly been imprisoned, banned from traveling and put under house arrest by Iranian authorities over the years.

Panahi filmed the Palme d’Or-winning “It Was Just an Accident” clandestinely in Iran following his release from a seven-month stint in prison in 2023 after he declared a hunger strike.

“I felt a huge burden on my shoulders when I left prison that made me feel I owed something to my fellow prisoners who were left behind,” Panahi told The Envelope earlier this year.

Panahi was detained by Iranian authorities in 2022 after inquiring about the arrests of fellow filmmakers Mohammad Rasoulof and Mostafa Al-Ahmad. Authorities then reimposed a six-year prison sentence that had never been enforced stemming from a 2010 conviction related to a documentary he was making about the disputed reelection of Iran’s then-president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the protests that followed.

“This arrest was more like banditry and hostage-taking than the execution of a judicial sentence,” Panahi said in a statement from Tehran’s Evin Prison at the time.

Panahi’s lawyer, Mostafa Nili, told Iranian news site Emtedad that the filmmaker was currently involved in three open legal cases but had not been notified of the hearing date for the latest one, according to a report by the Guardian. Nili also said that the court imposed a two-year travel ban and has barred Panahi from using social media for two years.

Gulf countries have stepped up diplomacy with Iran in a bid to de-escalate tensions across the Middle East, amid fears of renewed US strikes on Tehran and intensifying hostilities between Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and Saudi Arabia.

The three nations that signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement in August – Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye – and diplomats from Qatar met with high-ranking Iranian officials on Monday in an effort to prevent the resumption of all-out war.

Underscoring the high stakes, the meeting in Tehran was attended by Saudi Minister of Defence Prince Khalid bin Salman Al Saud, just days after Iran-aligned Houthi fighters struck Saudi airports, ports and oil facilities.

Meanwhile, during a diplomatic visit to the United Kingdom’s University of Cambridge on Monday, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi called for a regional security framework, including a “non-aggression pact”, between the Gulf countries and Iran under which the United States would no longer be the primary provider of security.

While Gulf countries appear determined to avoid another round of conflict – which has already restricted passage through the Strait of Hormuz, disrupted global oil and gas supplies and wreaked havoc on energy facilities and infrastructure in Gulf states – questions remain over whether a regional agreement is possible and where it would leave relations between the US and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

Regional security or de-escalation?

On Friday, US President Donald Trump repeated warnings that Washington may carry out another military operation against Iran as rising fuel prices weigh on the US midterm elections scheduled for November 3. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said Iran would respond more forcefully to any renewed US military action, stoking fears of an even wider escalation.

While this week’s talks in Tehran mark the first high-level ‌contact between Iran and the Mecca mutual defence pact nations since the US-Israel war on Iran began on February 28, reports suggest they have stopped short of landing an agreement.

Reuters reported that Qatari mediators ⁠presented ⁠Iran with a draft deal on Sunday, which Tehran was expected to respond to by the end of the week. On Wednesday, the news agency quoted Iranian officials as saying Qatar had put ‌forward ideas that were unacceptable and that Tehran would ⁠show ⁠no flexibility regarding the nuclear ‌issue.

Khaled Batarfi, a Saudi political analyst and academic, said the visit to Tehran indicated that Saudi Arabia was willing to give Iran a “last warning” and “submit to the region’s concerns”, but that Iran has so far refused.

“The gap is [wide] and what makes it worse is that there is no trust,” Batarfi told Al Jazeera.

Observers say diverging views are unlikely to turn the current diplomatic efforts into a lasting infrastructure. “It’s really hard to see a regional security framework coming out in the coming months or even years,” Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, an associate fellow at Chatham House in London, told Al Jazeera.

“What we are seeing is more small groups, flexible groups of countries that are taking the lead in trying to reach either bilateral or multilateral solutions,” the analyst said. “A regional security framework would need the same vision for the region, which is not necessarily shared… among the GCC countries themselves.”

Challenges ahead

Hamidreza Azizi, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, said Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye share concerns that a prolonged confrontation between Iran and the US could further destabilise the region.

“The main obstacle remains the fundamental disagreement between Tehran and Washington over the sequence of commitments,” Azizi told Al Jazeera. “The US wants Iranian concessions, particularly on the nuclear issue, while Tehran insists that its conditions for ending the war must be met first.”

“Regional mediation could help bridge this gap, possibly through an interim arrangement, but the willingness of regional actors to facilitate an agreement does not necessarily mean that the two principal parties are prepared to make the necessary compromises,” he added.

As for a new security order, Azizi said regional countries do not share a common understanding of what it should look like and what role the US – which has so far been the GCC’s main security partner – would have left to play.

Iran has long advocated for a regional security architecture that would reduce or eliminate the US military presence. “Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, however, remain deeply integrated into the US security system, and there is little indication that they intend to abandon it,” Azizi said.

“The recent war has certainly raised questions about the reliability of American security guarantees, but this has encouraged these countries to diversify their security partnerships rather than fundamentally redefine their strategic alignments.”

Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi has arrived in Damascus to meet with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on the first visit of an Iraqi prime minister to Syria since the fall of Bashar al-Assad.

The visit comes as the two neighbours seek to strengthen bilateral ties and boost economic and oil cooperation.

According to the official Iraqi News Agency (INA), the two leaders discussed the export of Iraqi oil through the Baniyas line, increasing the volume of trade exchange and joint work to develop the agricultural sector to achieve food and economic integration.

Iraq has recently begun exporting limited quantities of oil through Syria following the outbreak of the US-led war on Iran.

Last July, the two countries signed agreements to revive the Haditha Baniyas pipeline to transport Iraqi oil in addition to signing a memorandum of understanding with a consortium of three companies, most notably the American oil major Chevron to implement the project.

“The Iraqi and Syrian people are one people in two countries,” Zaidi said according to INA, noting that “work to develop partnership and joint cooperation in various fields especially economic and social affairs, enhance security co-operation, unify positions on regional and international issues, and work to achieve peace and stability in the region”.

For his part, the Syrian president expressed his “great appreciation for the visit of al-Zaidi and his accompanying delegation,” stressing “the depth of bilateral relations and Syria’s keenness to achieve the highest levels of cooperation between the two countries”.

Al-Sharaa and al-Zaidi had previously met last September in New York on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, where they discussed ways to strengthen political and security coordination and expand economic and trade cooperation.

As the U.S. and Israel once again mull decisions on whether to resume strikes on Iran, regional powers held an unprecedented meeting in Tehran today in an effort to find ways to stave off a further conflict. The gathering of officials from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey reportedly also addressed the ongoing war between Riyadh and the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen. Frequent Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure are adding to strain on the global economy that relies heavily on Middle Eastern energy supplies.

“The participants agreed to continue the dialogue to strengthen cooperation amongst the four regional countries, including for peace and security in the region,” the four nations said in a joint statement after the hastily called, last-ditch meeting concluded.

The meeting was the first meeting between Iran and the other three countries since they formed a new military alliance in August called the Mecca Joint Defense Agreement. The attendance of Saudi Arabia is of particular note as Iran struck Saudi Arabia repeatedly during Operation Epic Fury and Saudi Arabia hosted U.S. forces that attacked Iran. Iran’s proxies in Yemen, the Houthis, have been pummeling the Kingdom with drones and missiles as of late, too.

Regardless, details about the conclave are sparse, with officials saying this was just the first of what is expected to be a series of such efforts.

“Very good discussions took place between us,” Mohsen Rezaei, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, told Iranian state television. “I feel that a new atmosphere is emerging in the region… I sensed a very positive atmosphere in the discussions among the gentlemen.”

“We have reached an understanding with Pakistan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia that the security of the region is achieved through its countries,” Rezaei added.

#عاجل | أمين مجلس الأمن القومي الإيراني: توصلنا لتفاهم مع باكستان وتركيا والسعودية بأن أمن المنطقة يتحقق عبر دولها pic.twitter.com/ILuUTH9k2r

— قناة الجزيرة (@AJArabic) October 26, 2026

The Tehran visit was called “as part of the continued efforts by the Makkah Joint Defense Agreement countries for de-escalation between parties involved in the ongoing crisis, and promoting dialogue and diplomatic solutions, in support of the mediation efforts carried out by the State of Qatar and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan,” Saudi Deputy Minister for Public Diplomacy Rayed Krimly said Monday on X before the meeting began. He used an alternative English spelling of the Saudi holy city.

HRH Prince Khalid bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Minister of Defense, leads the Kingdom’s delegation to the meetings that will be held today in Tehran, capital of Iran, between Makkah Joint Defense Agreement countries and officials from the Islamic Republic of Iran, with…

— AMB Dr. Rayed Krimly (@Rayedkrimly) October 26, 2026

Both Qatar and Pakistan have been key to previous efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the U.S.-Iran conflict. The two countries helped broker a 14-point Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed on June 17. The MoU provided a 60-day extension of the ceasefire to iron out an agreement to end fighting throughout the region, including Lebanon, prevent Iran from seeking nuclear weapons, end U.S. sanctions, and resume the flow of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz among other points.

That effort soon fell apart as the U.S. and Iran resumed striking each other. It has been more than a month, however, since the two nations traded direct blows.

“The visit underscores the pivotal role of Makkah Joint Defense Agreement countries in reinforcing regional security and stability, and working with all countries in the region to achieve that goal,” Krimly added about today’s Tehran meeting.

The Mecca Joint Defense Agreement was created as a pact designed to assist the Kingdom in its fight against the Houthis. An attack on one is supposed to be considered an attack on all. However, the agreement has evolved to take on the larger issue of overall regional stability amid concerns about the individual members’ own national security interests.

The Tehran meeting was attended by high-level officials, Krimly noted. Saudi Prince Khalid bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Minister of Defense, led the Kingdom’s delegation, he stated. In addition, Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistani Chief of Army Staff, and Ibrahim Kalin, Director of the Turkish National Intelligence all met with the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian, and Rezaei.

Before the meeting, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei ⁠said the discussions on regional security would include “Israel’s expansionist policies, developments in the Palestinian territories and Lebanon, and the repercussions of U.S. and Israeli military action against Iran,” according to Reuters.

Baghaei said the meeting, ​proposed during a visit by Munir to Tehran last week, could be a first step towards establishing regional security mechanisms based on the interests of countries in the region.

Iranian officials told Munir ahead of today’s meeting that there would be no talks with Washington until Tehran’s demands were met, Reuters reported, citing Iranian media.

It is unclear at this point whether any results from this round of meetings will change whatever plans U.S. President Donald Trump is drawing up for Iran. Before the meeting began, a senior U.S. official downplayed it to us when we asked about it.

“The United States is in a very strong position with control of the Strait of Hormuz and the Iranian economy collapsing,” the senior U.S. official told us in response to our question about whether the Tehran meeting will influence any decisions by Trump on his next moves toward the Islamic Republic. “Iran has been decimated, and one way or the other, the conflict in Iran will be over very soon. President Trump holds all the cards and will do whatever is best for the United States.”

The Tehran talks took place after Trump once again claimed he was at an inflection point on deciding his future approach toward Iran. On Sunday, the American leader said it’s “getting to be decision time” on whether he will make a new deal with Tehran or resume attacks as Iranian and Houthi threats against Americans in the Middle East continue to grow.

“I have a decision to make: Do I finish it off, which would be very easy to do, or do I make a deal? That’s all,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures. “We don’t play games.”

“There won’t be a strike today,” he told reporters later Sunday as he left the White House. On Friday, U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack suggested the U.S. could strike Iran as early as this past weekend, but that failed to materialize.

Still, tensions in the region are increasing.

U.S. forces in the Middle East “are prepared to launch new, potentially major, military operations against Iran ‘within 96 hours of receiving’ an order from President Donald Trump,” CNN reported on Sunday, citing two U.S. officials.

“Sufficient forces are now deployed in the region to carry out the potential attacks,” the sources told the network. “The scope of new U.S. military operations would likely go beyond efforts to simply ‘mow the lawn’ or maintain the status quo by striking radars, launchers and other Iranian assets that can be quickly reconstituted — as has been the case since Trump halted full combat operations earlier this year.”

You can read more about how the U.S. is deploying additional Navy, Marine and Air Force assets to the Middle East in our report about that here.

Adding to U.S. concerns, on Saturday, The Wall Street Journal reported that “U.S. intelligence suggests Iranian preparations to attack Americans throughout the Middle East have reached ‘advanced stages,’ prompting a sudden exodus of personnel from embassies and military bases throughout the region.”

Jay Clayton, the director of national intelligence, “summarized that finding in a brief memo Friday to Secretary of State Marco Rubio,” the newspaper added.

“Iran has substantially increased efforts to target U.S. personnel. The lethal plotting efforts by the Iranians against U.S. citizens have reached advanced stages in both the Middle East and certain other countries,” Clayton wrote.

The U.S. in recent days also “ordered the departure of diplomats and staff from the embassy in Saudi Arabia and other countries, initially citing threats from the Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen,” the Journal noted. “The U.S. also has evacuated personnel from military bases across the region in preparation for renewed fighting, according to U.S. officials familiar with the planning.”

Trump on Sunday told reporters that there “are two very different sets of intelligence reports on Iran. I have them both. They are very different.”

Israel too appears to be continuing its planning for renewed hostilities with Iran. Its previous attacks during Operation Epic Fury were carried out in close coordination with the U.S., a cooperative effort that is ongoing.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday repeated his warning that Iran or its proxies could launch an attack before the close election to disrupt the vote, citing intelligence.

“The (military) is ready both to defend and to strike,” he said in a video statement. “You will suffer disproportionate blows far greater than you can imagine.”

⚠️ 🇮🇱 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Sunday that Iran and its regional allies could launch attacks intended to disrupt Israel’s October 27 election, declaring that the Israeli military is prepared for both defensive and offensive operations.

Speaking in front…

— The Tectonic (@thetect0nic) October 25, 2026

In addition, Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir “clashed over a military action that could renew the conflict with Iran days before Israel’s elections,” according to the Jerusalem Post. 

“Recently, Zamir received a directive from the political echelon to carry out an action, which security officials told N12 would ‘trigger a rapid escalation into a confrontation with Iran,’” the newspaper added. “Due to the sensitive nature of the action, N12 reported that Zamir requested an in-depth discussion and formal authorization before moving forward with the action.”

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz disputed those reports.

“I state unequivocally that there was no intention on Israel’s part to initiate an attack on Iran before the elections in Israel—when we made clear that if Iran attacks Israel, we will respond with great force, and all reports on the matter are entirely false,” Katz stated on X. “The attempt by opposition figures to exploit these reports to attack the Prime Minister and me and to cast doubt on our judgment—at a time when we are prevented for understandable reasons from addressing the details of the Iranian issue—is shameful and irresponsible. We will overcome this too.”

הפרסומים על פערים בין הדרג המדיני לצה”ל בנושא איראן הם מופרכים ושקריים לחלוטין.

מאז כניסתי לתפקיד שר הביטחון התיאום בין רה”מ וביני לבין צה”ל בנושא איראן הוא מלא – עם הישגים היסטוריים חסרי תקדים לטובת ביטחון מדינת ישראל.

זהו השיקול היחיד – וכך יהיה גם בעתיד.

אני קובע באופן חד…

— ישראל כ”ץ Israel Katz (@Israel_katz) October 26, 2026

Last Monday, in a phone call with Trump recorded live on Monday and posted on his X account, Netanyahu suggested future operations against Iran.

“Donald, we have a job to finish [in Iran]…and we’ll finish it together,” the Israeli leader told Trump. “We’ll finish it, and no one else will do it.”

That post appears to have been since been deleted.

Actions by both Trump and Netanyahu are taking place against a backdrop of heated domestic politics in their respective countries.

With continued Republican control of Congress on the line, the Nov. 3 midterm elections are a huge factor in Trump’s plans. The president has previously said the war with Iran would end “immediately after the election” and has reportedly told aides he expects to resume strikes on the Islamic Republic after the midterms. Domestic U.S. polls show the ongoing conflict continues to be deeply unpopular with voters, who are also eager to see it concluded.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu faces a vote on his future tomorrow in a nationwide parliamentary election, and there are concerns, as we noted last Friday, that the Israeli leader could use a new conflict with Iran to bolster his hold on office. Given the fractious nature of Israeli politics, election results will not necessarily immediately determine who Israel’s next prime minister will be.

“Coalition negotiations can take weeks or even months as parties attempt to reach agreements on who will govern and under what terms,” The National noted. “Israel has a history of political deadlock. Between 2019 and 2022, the country held five elections as parties repeatedly struggled to form stable governments.”

Iran isn’t just threatening the U.S. and Israel.

“Following the intensification of Berlin’s anti-Iranian stance, Tehran has warned of the consequences should Germany directly enter the military conflict, emphasizing that facilities and military installations associated with Germany in the region could become targets within the scope of Iran’s legitimate defense,” the semi-official Iranian Fars News Agency reported on Sunday.

BIG: Iran has warned Germany that all German military bases and facilities across the region will be considered legitimate targets if Berlin openly joins military action against Iran.

Source: Iran’s Fars, citing information obtained by its security and defense correspondent

— Clash Report (@clashreport) October 25, 2026

As mentioned earlier in this story, officials meeting in Tehran also addressed the ongoing fighting between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia and its proxies in Yemen.

“The urgency of the initiative was underscored by fresh explosions in Riyadh overnight and warnings of a hostile aerial threat, as the Houthis claimed another attack on the Saudi capital’s international airport,” Gulf News reported. In addition, the Houthis are expanding their attacks on oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia, including a recent strike near the Shaybah oilfield. Combined with a spike in Iranian attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the Houthi strikes on Saudi oil interests have sent the price of Brent crude rising. However, the Tehran talks may be tempering things. According to OilPrice.com, the per-barrel price of Brent crude was over $115 as of Monday evening, a slight drop from Friday, when it was more than $117.

With the issue of oil flow in mind, Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), visited the Strait of Hormuz on Oct. 25 as U.S. forces reached “the milestone of assisting Gulf partners in exporting more than 1.5 billion barrels of crude oil since summer,” Cooper said.

Cooper “observed the current operational environment while flying in a U.S. Army CH-47 Chinook over the international waterway,” according to a CENTCOM post on X. “More than 3,000 commercial vessels have successfully transited the Strait of Hormuz with support from CENTCOM forces over the last six months.”

“We continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Gulf partners and the shipping industry,” said Cooper. “This visit underscores our strong commitment to continued freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.”

CENTCOM added that “American forces successfully cleared the strait’s international shipping lanes of sea mines laid by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).”

“Today, primary transit routes in the Strait of Hormuz remain free and clear of Iranian sea mines thanks to incredible efforts by our people,” said Cooper. “We remain intensely focused on keeping commercial traffic flowing as we work with our teammates in the U.S. interagency, Gulf Cooperation Council, and shipping industry.”

In recent months, “over 95% of ships navigating the Strait of Hormuz have sailed through safely despite the IRGC’s unwarranted aggression, clearly demonstrating that the United States and regional partners control the international waterway,” CENTCOM claimed. TWZ cannot independently verify this.

That the four-way meetings between Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey will continue to seek a peaceful way forward is a positive sign. Still, how much, if at all, this effort changes the threat picture are open questions and the answers will be provided by Washington, Jerusalem and Tehran in the coming days and weeks.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Doha, Qatar – African countries are feeling the economic fallout from the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, with rising fuel and fertiliser prices threatening to drive up food costs, according to trade ministers from the region and the United Nations’ top trade official.

The crisis around the Strait of Hormuz due to the United States and Israel’s war on Iran needs to be resolved “sooner rather than later”, Luz Maria de la Mora, director of the Division on International Trade and Commodities at UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), told Al Jazeera at the World Investment Forum on Monday. She warned that soaring fertiliser prices could affect harvests next year.

“Prices of fertilisers have risen dramatically … so many countries have decided to reduce the use of fertilisers, which will have an effect next year in terms of crops,” she said.

“It may have an effect on availability of food and prices of food.”

The US-Israel war on Iran has highlighted the world’s heavy reliance on the strategic waterway, through which one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade previously passed.

Against this backdrop, Doha hosted UNCTAD’s World Investment Forum on October 25 and 26, bringing together heads of state, policymakers, CEOs and investors to discuss global investment and sustainable development.

The Strait of Hormuz’s disruption has rippled through African economies. In Zimbabwe, rising fuel and fertiliser prices are a critical concern in a country where more than 70 percent of the population depends on agriculture, Monica Mutsvangwa, the country’s minister of women affairs, community, small and medium enterprise development, told Al Jazeera.

Uganda, another heavily agrarian economy, has also been hit, with fuel prices more than doubling, Sanjay Tanna, the country’s minister of trade, industry and cooperatives, told Al Jazeera.

The impact extends beyond the immediate cost of energy. Rising oil prices have disrupted supply chains, with effects lasting longer than anticipated, according to de la Mora.

“The effects are lasting longer than we would have expected or would have wanted,” she said.

‘Friend to all, enemy to none’

The shock has also exposed differences in how African economies weather global disruption.

Uganda’s reliance on subsistence farming has helped cushion the impact, with domestic food production offering some protection from international market volatility, said Tanna.

But the country has not been insulated from financial pressures: its currency has lost 10 percent of its value against the US dollar, the minister said. The Ugandan shilling has steadily declined since mid-2026.

For Zimbabwe, the crisis has reinforced the importance of attracting investment while maintaining economic ties across geopolitical divides.

Amid the simmering trade war between the US and China, Harare considers itself a potential partner to investors from either side, Mutsvangwa said.

“We are a friend to all and an enemy to none,” she said.

“Money has no color … If we get an investor who comes into our country, follows the rules and regulations of the country, makes his money, and Zimbabwe develops, that’s what we want.”

The official pointed to Zimbabwe’s deposits of more than 60 critical minerals, including lithium and graphite, as well as its tourism potential.

Trade in an unequal system

But attracting foreign capital remains a challenge for developing economies, with investment concentrated in a relatively small number of countries.

That concentration is “very understandable”, de la Mora said, arguing that investors need confidence that their money will generate returns.

“Capital is risk averse. Capital needs to have certainty that its investment is going to yield returns and it’s going to come to fruition,” she said.

Governments can help build that confidence through transparent institutions, the rule of law and investment in infrastructure, including reliable electricity, energy supplies and digital connectivity, she added.

The question of whether the international trading system treats all countries equally prompted a more blunt assessment from Uganda’s trade minister.

“Of course not,” said Tanna. “The world cannot be equal … It’s unfair, but we believe that, within the space that we are in, we are in a good space.”

Uganda was well placed for the future, he argued, because it produces its own food – an advantage at a time when international supply chains are under pressure.

For both Uganda and the Republic of Congo, building resilient economies also means investing in younger generations.

The Republic of Congo’s Deputy Prime Minister for Coordination, Development Infrastructure and Land Planning, Jean-Jacques Bouya, said the country had aligned its national development plan, Vision 2063, with the African Union’s broader development ambitions.

Connectivity – through electricity, digital infrastructure and physical links – is central to that strategy, he told Al Jazeera.

The Republic of Congo also wants to expand local processing so that more value from its natural resources remains within the country.

“Africa can no longer be a reservoir of raw materials, and neither can Congo – a place where raw materials are extracted, taken elsewhere, processed and then sold back to us at a much higher price. We cannot go on like this,” Bouya said.

As the threat of a new war with the United States looms, the Front of Islamic Revolution Stability, a hardline political faction also known as the Paydari Front, has asked the Iranian parliament and the Supreme National Security Council to initiate a withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

This move has been interpreted as a call for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, with the Paydari Front saying these military endeavours should happen “as quickly as possible”.

It is the latest bold and defiant message by Iran’s hardliners against Washington, after the US and Israel launched a war on Iran on February 28 on the pretext that Tehran was trying to develop nuclear weapons.

The war has seen the Strait of Hormuz largely closed to shipping, massive damage to Iranian and Arab infrastructure in missile and air strikes, and huge disruptions to global energy supplies.

The past eight months have also marked an ongoing existential power struggle between moderates and centrists, such as President Masoud Pezeshkian, who generally favour talks with the US, and hardliners in the Paydari Front who do not.

Ultimately, the moderate camp wants a swift end to the conflict to save Iran’s crumbling economy. Hardliners believe Washington only understands the language of force, so the war should continue until the US capitulates to Iran’s demands.

The domestic rivalry can be seen in the public squares of major Iranian cities, where for the past 200 days supporters of the hardline faction have rallied at night.

Initially, these gatherings were a way for people to express public support for the government and protest the unprovoked US war on Iran. Over time, they have evolved into highly organised political rallies where activists can publicly express their strong opposition to moderates’ efforts to end the war through diplomatic channels.

The hardliners’ slogans include “No compromise, no surrender – the fight against America” and “Negotiating with the enemy is a betrayal of the homeland”.

They also protested against President Pezeshkian’s return to Tehran from the UN General Assembly in September, where he condemned the US war but also extolled the virtues of diplomacy. The pickets were viewed as a way for their “anti-negotiation” message to be heard by the president.

This bloc has considerable power beyond these activist circles. Hardliners have a strong presence in Tehran’s municipal government, the parliament, among religious preachers and eulogists, and academia and the media.

Amirhossein Sabeti, a member of parliament aligned with the Paydari Front, said in a statement that negotiations with the US will not begin unless Washington’s siege on Iran’s southern ports or sanctions end.

“The enemy’s objective of destroying Iran has not changed. It is simply waiting for the right moment to launch another surprise attack. Those who thought negotiations could prevent war, or that the United States would lift sanctions through negotiations, did not understand how the world works and were deluding themselves,” he said. “The only language the world understands is the language of power.”

The political faction to which Sabeti belongs has filed a motion in the Iranian parliament to impeach Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, following his visit to New York for the United Nations General Assembly. Iran’s parliament is also considering a law to criminalise interviews with foreign media outlets, which would be another win for hardliners.

But as the impeachment motion against Iran’s foreign minister moves through parliament, the political camp supporting the government continues to advocate for a diplomatic solution to the current conflict.

Davood Heshmati, a journalist considered close to Pezeshkian, said there are signs that US forces have foregone the grand ambition of overthrowing the Iranian government and have instead opted for more modest aims, which makes a diplomatic solution more likely.

“There are several ways to achieve those other goals, one of which is war. But, in any case, to prevent a war, all alternatives to military action must first be tested. Negotiations and a diplomatic agreement are among those alternatives, and they should always take precedence over war,” Heshmati told Al Jazeera.

“Those who say the Strait of Hormuz must not be reopened are people who believe the war must not end. From the perspective of Iran’s anti-negotiation camp, the war between Iran and the United States has no end. What they do not explain is what outcome they expect from this war. They seem to believe that, after several rounds of fighting, the United States will simply walk away from the conflict. But that idea does not appear to be consistent with the logic of what we are witnessing.”

He indicated that for any war to end, there needs to be an understanding with the US that respects Iran’s territorial integrity.

“Those in Iran who support negotiations argue that a balance of power does not necessarily have to be achieved through war, although, given everything that has happened along the diplomatic path, the distrust that exists is understandable,” he said.

Political analyst Negar Mortazavi argues that hardline groups are a powerful domestic force, but they currently have limited influence over Iran’s foreign policy.

“Iran’s hardliners are not a marginal political force. They are a well-organised and deeply entrenched part of [Iran’s] political establishment. Their strength lies in their ability to mobilise supporters, shape political discourse, pressure the government, and raise the political cost of diplomacy,” she said.

“But political influence should not be confused with ultimate decision-making authority. Decisions about war, peace, and negotiations are made at the highest levels of Iran’s leadership and national security establishment.”

Hardliners can continue to confront negotiators, threaten impeachments against those who propose talks with the US, and try to obstruct diplomatic endeavours, she said. But they cannot prevent an agreement being reached if it is backed by the country’s main powerholders, including Supreme Leader Mujtaba Khamenei and the Supreme National Security Council.

“The [hardliners] are powerful enough to complicate diplomacy, but not necessarily powerful enough to stop it. [They] are a highly visible and vocal political force, but they are not calling the shots,” Mortazavi told Al Jazeera.

“Throughout the war, Tehran has kept the door open to diplomacy, and the decision at the highest levels of leadership has been to pursue negotiations with the United States and seek an agreement. The hardliners have been unable to stop that. The real test of their power is that they could not stop the JCPOA [nuclear agreement] under [former President Barack] Obama, and they could not stop the more recent MoU [memorandum of understanding] with Trump. Ultimately, the decisions were made above their heads.”

Street rallies and television programmes opposing a peaceful solution to the US-Israeli war against Iran will continue. But the delay in scheduling the foreign minister’s impeachment hearing, alongside continued diplomatic engagement with mediators to end the war, suggests that the moderates are still a force to be reckoned with.

Tehran, Iran – Ministers and senior security officials from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkiye – the three nations that signed the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement – are in Tehran to discuss regional security issues amid threats of new US strikes on Iran.

Saudi Defence Minister Khalid bin Salman Al Saud, Pakistani military chief Asim Munir and Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin met Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian and will discuss tensions with security chief Mohsen Rezaei.

The meetings are among the highest-profile dialogues held in Tehran in recent months. While there is still little information on what might be discussed, the meetings come amid a flurry of diplomatic activity to deal with a new escalation between the United States and Iran.

But analysts broadly believe the visit to Tehran by the three signatories of the Mecca Joint Defence Agreement, a regional defence alliance, will be enough to prevent a new outbreak in violence between the US and Iran.

“The Mecca pact’s 11th-hour visit to Tehran is an attempt to tip the balance in favour of those willing to compromise before the guns start blazing again,” said Ali Vaez, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the International Crisis Group.

“But unless they arrive with a credible formula to bridge the US-Iran divide, they may find themselves with little more than goodwill in a race against the clock.”

The talks are expected to address the waves of missile and drone attacks carried out by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, who are allied with Tehran, on Saudi Arabia, which supports Yemen’s internationally recognised government.

“I believe that parties to the Mecca agreement lack options of military engagement with the Houthis, but Riyadh is certainly asserting greater pressure for more, and its expectation of its partners has grown in parallel with the offensive from Yemen,” Ayesha Siddiqa, a senior research fellow in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera.

But despite the collective security arrangement in the Mecca defence pact, Saudi Arabia’s allies Turkiye and Pakistan cannot “afford to commit troops on the ground” in Yemen, said Siddiqa.

The latest diplomatic push is likely linked to visits by Pakistani army chief Asim Munir to Saudi Arabia and Iran last week, Siddiqa said, and coincides with Islamabad’s restrictions on overland border trade with Tehran amid the US blockade on Iran.

Iranian authorities have said they favoured “security originating from within the region” as they prepared for the meetings.

Umer Karim, who researches Saudi foreign policy and its implications for regional security, said the Tehran meetings are unlikely to reduce the risk of a renewed war between Iran and the US, which would likely lead to more regional turmoil.

“Therefore, these talks perhaps are more concerned about the security of Saudi Arabia and involve an attempt by Turkiye and Pakistan to compel Iran to reach a compromise,” he told Al Jazeera.

US President Donald Trump is said to be considering new attacks to break the diplomatic deadlock with Iran, which has refused to agree to any peace agreement with Washington unless several of its demands are met.

The US and regional powers want international shipping and transit through the Strait of Hormuz to resume without impediments or attacks. Washington also wants to rein in Tehran’s nuclear programme and bring in international inspectors to assess Iran’s highly enriched uranium. Israel says it wants to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

Tehran wants to lift the US naval blockade of Iran’s southern ports, which has halted crude oil exports and disrupted most trade, and return to a memorandum of understanding agreed between the two countries in June.

The US has refused this, with President Trump saying he is left with a choice to “finish the job” by launching major strikes on Iran’s civilian infrastructure. This could prompt Iran to lash out at its neighbours, as it did earlier in the war with strikes on US bases in Arab states and infrastructure.

Meanwhile, the US Department of State issued an October 21 order for nonemergency US government employees and their family ⁠members to leave Saudi Arabia for their safety’s sake, given the Houthi threat.

As talks involving Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkiye continue in Iran, analysts say these Mecca Joint Defence Agreement signatories will likely try to minimise the impact on Saudi Arabia if war does break out again.

“However, since little has changed from an Iranian strategic calculus and the actors involved don’t have the kind of leverage needed to affect Iran’s strategic thinking, these negotiations are going to yield little,” Karim said.