Foreign News
Tehran selling deal with US as victory – but for Iranians it was necessity
Iran’s leadership is trying to present its emerging memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the US not as a retreat, but as the result of resistance and victory. That is not an easy argument to make.
The country has just gone through a damaging war, the economy is under severe pressure, and parts of the Islamic Republic’s own support base have spent months denouncing any compromise with Washington.
There are also Iranians, both inside the country and abroad, who see the crisis not as a moment for diplomacy, but as an opportunity for regime change.
This is the divided political landscape in which Tehran is now trying to sell the deal.
Senior Iranian officials have framed the deal as a win. Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, the Speaker of parliament and the leading Iranian figure in the talks, said Iran had taken “a long step towards final victory”.
President Masoud Pezeshkian has described the understanding as potentially transformative, saying that if fully implemented it could resolve many of Iran’s problems and create “a different world” in Iran and the Middle East.
Qalibaf’s role is significant because he is not identified with Pezeshkian’s moderate camp; his public support suggests the deal has backing from more powerful parts of the system even within Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guards.
The leadership is also presenting the agreement as a victory because, in Tehran’s argument, the US and Israel failed to achieve their main objectives.
They did not force Iran into surrender, did not remove the Islamic Republic from power, did not end Iran’s nuclear programme through military action, and did not break Iran’s links to Hezbollah.
Instead, Iran is still at the negotiating table, with Lebanon included in the framework and sanctions relief being discussed.
But this official narrative is contested inside Iran.
One hard-line MP, the deputy chair of parliament’s National Security Committee, has reportedly described the draft deal as a document that would turn Iran into an American colony.
He also accused negotiators of ignoring the supreme leader’s directive not to re-open the Strait of Hormuz to shipping.
That criticism matters because it does not come from outside the system. It comes from within one of the institutions meant to oversee national security.
For months, hard-line voices in parliament, state-aligned media and nightly pro-government gatherings have argued that the US cannot be trusted.
They point to the fact that diplomacy was still taking place shortly before the war began, and say the Trump administration used negotiations as cover while Israel and the US prepared military action. For them, any deal with Washington risks looking like appeasement.
Yet some of these voices appear quieter now. That may suggest that the decision to proceed has been authorised from the highest levels of the state. It does not mean there is full unity.
It might suggest that, for now, the centre of power has judged that the cost of rejecting a deal may be greater than the cost of absorbing hard-line anger.
Economic pressure is central to that calculation.
Iran’s leadership may present the agreement as the result of military leverage, including pressure around the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on US and regional energy interests. But the economy has also forced Tehran’s hand.
The war, sanctions, restrictions on shipping, reduced access to oil markets and hard currency, and very high inflation have all squeezed the country and ordinary Iranians.
For many families, the question is not whether the agreement sounds like victory, but whether it lowers prices and reduces fear of another round of war.
US Vice-President JD Vance has said Iran would not receive taxpayer money but could gain access to billions of dollars if it fulfills its commitments and sanctions are eased. That allows Tehran to sell the deal as a path to investment and reconstruction rather than dependency on America.
Still, the risks are obvious. The details of the memorandum have not been fully published, and negotiations are expected to begin in Switzerland on Friday.
The most difficult issues, the future of Iran’s enriched uranium, the level of enrichment allowed, verification, sanctions relief, Hormuz and Lebanon, remain to be discussed in the talks.
There is also uncertainty over Israel. Its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has rejected reports that Israel will withdraw from southern Lebanon, saying Israeli forces will remain in Lebanon for as long as necessary.
Donald Trump, meanwhile, has publicly criticised Israel’s conduct in Lebanon, saying too many people have been killed. He also said he was unhappy with an Israeli strike on Beirut shortly before the Iran-US deal was reached, while insisting his relationship with Netanyahu remained excellent.
For Tehran, this visible friction between Washington and Israel is useful. It can be presented as evidence that Iran’s pressure has complicated Israel’s freedom of action. But it also makes the deal fragile.
If Israel continues operations in Lebanon, Iran will face pressure to respond. If Washington cannot restrain Israel, Tehran’s claim that Lebanon is covered by the memorandum may quickly be tested.
The reaction from BBC Persian’s audience suggests the official victory narrative is landing unevenly.
One audience member said they had been very worried about another Israeli attack, but even after hearing about the agreement, they had “no trust” and were worried about whether the country would be properly managed if the deal lasted.
Another anti-regime Iranian, who initially supported US military action, asked what the US attack had achieved, since if it did not lead to political change in Iran: “Our hope was that the ruling system would change. But apart from misery, inflation, and further damage to the economy, what benefit did it have for people?”
Others were more sympathetic to the government’s line. One audience member described Iran as the winner, saying the war showed sanctions are lifted not through “begging”, but through the use of power.
Another welcomed the agreement more cautiously, saying it allowed people to return to work and life with greater peace of mind. “I think it is temporary,” they said, “but we needed a few months of breathing space and calm.”
That may be the most realistic reading. The Islamic Republic is selling the deal as victory because it cannot easily sell it as necessity.
But for many Iranians, its success will not be measured by slogans. It will be measured by whether the war stops, whether prices ease, whether sanctions relief arrives, and whether the leadership can manage the next phase without another sudden escalation.
[BBC]
The Philippine Coast Guard says it has recovered 41 bodies from the wreckage of a ferry that caught fire this week, bringing the total death toll to 76.
More than 130 people were on board the MV June Aster when the blaze erupted on Wednesday as it neared its destination at the tourist hotspot of Coron, after departing from Manila.
The coast guard said on Saturday the number of survivors remained 43, with many receiving treatment in hospital, but 13 people remain unaccounted for.
Recovery of bodies had been hampered due to toxic fumes and lingering heat, which meant authorities were unable to board until Friday.
Geronimo Tuvilla, an official for the Philippine Coast Guard, said the priority was identifying victims and determining the cause of the blaze.
Kristine Ablana, a tourism official in Coron, said relatives were being asked to help identify family members through personal items and DNA testing.
“Once someone is able to verify that this photo or these belongings are indeed those of their relative, they will be asked to provide a DNA sample,” she said.
Coast Guard spokesperson Commodore Noemie Cayabyab said the fire began in a cargo hold before spreading.
She said survivors had described hearing a loud explosion, “the appearance of smoke and then fire. It spread very quickly”. She added that those who had made it off the ship did not have time to put on lifejackets.
A survivor who was hauled to safety on a rescue boat told the BBC he had heard frantic cries onboard when the fire erupted, and was trampled by panicked people as he tried to escape.
The ferry, built in 2002, held valid safety certificates and passed an enforcement inspection in March, but investigators are looking into potential manifest discrepancies, cargo loading integrity, and crew emergency response protocols, the Palawan Daily reported.
The vessel was carrying 117 passengers and 17 crew members.
Atienza Interisland Ferries, the vessel’s operator, has pledged full co-operation with the inquiry.
[BBC]
A dress worn by Princess Diana to a party in London hours after a documentary was televised in which the then-Prince Charles admitted to committing adultery during their marriage is going up for auction.
Her dramatic arrival at the Serpentine Gallery in 1994 in a custom-made black silk evening dress by designer Christina Stambolian became an iconic pop-culture moment.
The media dubbed her outfit the “revenge dress”.
Auction house Sotheby’s expects the dress to sell for up to £220,000 ($300,000) when it goes under the hammer on 9 December.
A press release from Sotheby’s said it is the first time the dress has been offered at auction since 1997, when the late princess sold 79 of her dresses to raise money for charities.
Morgane Halimi, Sotheby’s Global Head of Handbags and Fashion, said in a statement that Princess Diana “understood instinctively” that fashion can be a language in its own right.
“On her own terms, Princess Diana turned the dress into one of the most powerful messages she ever made, during one of the most scrutinised and emotionally charged episodes of her life,” Halimi said.
“She walked into a moment in which so much of her story was being told for her and, through what she chose to wear, reclaimed the narrative for herself.”
According to Sotheby’s, Anna Harvey, her stylist at the time, said Diana “wanted to look a million dollars”.
The princess made a last-minute wardrobe change for the fundraising dinner and chose the strapless evening dress by the Greek designer Christina Stambolian – which she accessorised with a royal jewel, a black clutch and black heels.
The vintage Jaguar XJ40 car that Diana arrived in at the event was sold at auction earlier this year for £66,250.
The revenge dress is expected to fetch a considerably higher price.
If it does, it will not be the first time an item from the princess’s wardrobe has sold for a significant sum.
Princess Diana’s sweater featuring a black sheep among rows of white ones was sold for £920,000 at an auction by Sotheby’s in New York in 2023.
[BBC]
A Pakistan Under-19 cricket team suddenly became the centre of focus when it was mistaken for a group of asylum seekers in Portsmouth. A group of protesters gathered outside the Marriott Hotel in Portsmouth after reports that asylum seekers were staying there. The situation had to be later diffused when it was ascertained that the hotel was hosting the Pakistan Under-19 team.
According to the Guardian, the situation became tense when a crowd gathered outside the Marriott hotel after reports that about 40 men who did not seem to be English arrived at the hotel. George Madgwick, a Reform councillor, called the hotel to mediate between the Pakistan Under-19 staff and the assembled crowd, following which the crowd dispersed.
“I spoke to the coach of the team, who was very understanding,” Madgwick told the Guardian. “I went out to the protesters and told them, ‘You’ve got it wrong guys, it’s a cricket club.’ They left within a couple of minutes. It was a massively unfortunate incident.
“From the perspective of the people of Portsmouth who are already on high alert, this was a coach from the same company which was turning up with about 40 foreign men.”
The ECB has been in touch with the Pakistan management following the incident and is reviewing security arrangements.
The Pakistan Under-19 team played a four-day game against England Under-19 in Arundel from September 2 to 5, which they lost by ten runs. The two teams faced off in a Youth ODI on September 9, with Pakistan winning by 177 runs. Pakistan’s senior men’s team are also playing the third and final Test against England at Edgbaston.
[Cricinfo]
Showers about 75 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central and Southern provinces
Brook, Buttler, Baker star as Sri Lanka slump to 119-run rout
Where is Gnanasara Thera?Police pass buck to court
Russian citizens in Lanka to vote in State Duma elections
Euro 110,000 research drive to tackle plastic waste in food sector
New SAU-RCSS pact to boost South Asian dialogue
‘Dates have the highest sugar content to fight Coronavirus’
Sunday Island 27 December – Headlines
#SundayIsland 17th December – Headlines
Sunday Island – 28th March
Sunday Island Headlines – 21 March
Sunday Island – 21st February – Headlines
-
Sports5 days agoDDS set to lose Test captaincy
-
News5 days agoSri Lanka faces new grid challenge as rooftop solar surges: former CEB GM
-
Latest News5 days agoShafali, Deepti power India into sixth T20 Asia Cup final
-
Latest News4 days agoSri Lanka thwart Fatima Sana challenge to secure Asia Cup final spot
-
News3 days agoGnanasara Thero absconding after SC ruling
-
Features6 days agoLost for 90 years: Rare Goby resurfaces in Jaffna
-
News4 days agoAmmunition cache found in old Kandy bungalow
-
Latest News7 days agoItalian Naval Vessel ‘ITS Giuseppe Garibaldi’ arrives in Colombo