Nuclear Understanding Between Iran and IAEA, Cafés in Iran Face Fresh Seals as Hijab Enforcement Escalates, Khamenei Warns Against “No War, No Peace,” and More

Cairo Nuclear Understanding Offers Iran a Fragile Opening Amid Snapback Countdown

In the past ten days, Tehran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) edged toward a conditional, fragile reopening of nuclear oversight even as the snapback clock ticks down at the UN Security Council. The centerpiece is a new “modalities paper” reached in Cairo between Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi, with Egypt mediating. From Iran’s perspective, the document is a pathway to manage safeguards under extraordinary security conditions—not an immediate green light for intrusive access—and it will remain valid only if there is no escalation such as UN Security Council Resolutions snapping back later in September.

Araghchi noted Iran and the IAEA have launched intensive talks to build a new operational mechanism for implementing safeguards obligations that also accounts for Iran’s “legitimate security concerns” after recent strikes on nuclear sites. Under the Cairo understanding, Iran will submit a report on its uranium stockpiles, followed by negotiations on verification steps and access parameters. The agreement, Iranian officials note, addresses the number of inspectors and the scope of their authorities, but does not itself authorize inspections today. Any access, Araghchi says, must be approved by the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC). Facilities damaged by attacks require environmental and safety measures before any activity—let alone foreign inspection—takes place. Above all, Araghchi framed the new understanding as conditional: if “hostile actions” occur—explicitly including the reimposition of UN sanctions via snapback—Tehran will consider the cooperation steps void.

This conditionality reflects a deeper trust deficit with the IAEA. Iranian officials and commentators argue that the standard NPT safeguards template was never designed for a state whose safeguarded facilities have been deliberately attacked. Iranian distrust toward the IAEA was significantly heightened during the war. The timing of Israel’s initial attack on Iran on June 13 followed a June 12 declaration by the IAEA Board of Governors that Iran was in breach of its safeguards obligations.

Iranian officials and commentators have also asserted that, in their view, the IAEA failed to condemn those attacks sufficiently and that Grossi himself avoided a clear denunciation, creating the impression in Tehran that the Agency is functionally aligned with U.S. and allied priorities. While it may not be appreciated in Iran, Grossi did issue statements in opposition to Israel’s attacks at the time, stating “This development is deeply concerning. I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment. Such attacks have serious implications for nuclear safety, security and safeguards, as well as regional and international peace and security.” Grossi expressed a similar statement following the U.S. strikes on Iran on June 22. Regardless, recent events have fostered a widely-held belief in Iran that accepting new IAEA conditions without guarantees yields little: more exposure, more files, and no tangible security or economic benefit if snapback proceeds anyway.

Grossi’s emphasis on the new IAEA arrangement with Iran is, unsurprisingly, different from Araghchi. He told the IAEA Board that the Cairo understanding enables early inspections of damaged facilities and full accounting for nuclear material, including 60% enriched uranium, and he called for immediate implementation: comprehensive inspections across safeguarded sites, updated design-information questionnaires, and detailed reporting on stocks. For the IAEA, modalities exist to clear logistical barriers so inspectors can deploy quickly. For Iran, they represent the beginning of a negotiation on timing, scope, and conditions, under domestic law and security constraints.

Snapback is the immediate stress test. Two weeks ago the E3 (France, Germany and the United Kingdom) notified the Security Council, triggering a 30-day countdown to restore the UN resolutions suspended under Resolution 2231 unless a new resolution halts the process—something very hard to achieve because any veto from a permanent member of the Security Council sinks it. Roughly two weeks remain. The E3 say they remain open to diplomacy during the 30 days but insist on visible action now: full safeguards compliance and access, clarification of the status and location of 60% material, and resumption of direct, unconditional talks with Washington - all seemingly within the window that expires later this month.

A narrow path exists: Massimo Aparo, IAEA Deputy Director General speaking with the BBC has hinted that if Iran fully implements the Cairo modalities, the Europeans might consider a limited extension to the snapback timeline—but only if implementation is concrete and immediate. Yet, this appears highly unlikely on the Iranian side, which is dangling the prospect of enhanced inspections only if snapback is delayed.

From Tehran’s vantage point, the bargain still looks asymmetrical. Iranian officials contend that the “benefit” on offer is merely avoiding sudden escalation, not gaining durable relief or security assurances. They argue that every new monitoring step becomes a permanent baseline, while any promised restraint by others is discretionary and reversible, especially if the snapback clock continues. Inside Iran, the agreement has already drawn hardline criticism, with opponents warning against concessions while the IAEA remains silent on attacks against safeguarded facilities. To sustain cooperation, the government must show that Iran’s sovereignty, security, and legal red lines are respected—for example, by routing access decisions through the SNSC and sequencing site visits only after safety work is completed.

This is why symbolic and procedural elements loom large for Iran. Araghchi has floated the idea that a Russian-backed extension of Resolution 2231 could create a “clearer horizon” for talks, signaling that stability at the Security Council is a prerequisite for accelerated cooperation. Tehran also seeks explicit condemnation of attacks in the diplomatic record. Without such moves, Iranian officials argue, IAEA cooperation risks becoming a one-way street: more disclosure without reciprocal restraint, and exposure without protection.

Even if a short “time-for-access” trade is struck—faster Iranian implementation of modalities in exchange for a one-off extension of the snapback clock—the strategic calculus in Tehran remains cautious. For over two decades, the benefits on the table have steadily shrunk, from promises of economic normalization to the narrow aim of preventing immediate escalation, while the coercive tools have multiplied, culminating in the pending single-switch restoration of UN sanctions. Iranian officials point to this trajectory to justify conditional, step-for-step engagement and to warn that cooperation will cease if legal or kinetic pressure intensifies.

The Cairo understanding, viewed from Tehran, is thus not a concession but an instrument: a way to manage safeguards amid extraordinary security conditions while testing whether the other side will restrain escalation. If, in the coming days, concrete access and verification proceed in parallel with measurable de-escalation at the Security Council, Iranian policymakers will argue the approach is working. If instead the process devolves into demands without guarantees and the snapback clock runs out, Tehran will claim it gained nothing by opening the door—and will close it by curtailing cooperation under the very conditions it warned about. The next two weeks will show whether paper modalities can transform into reciprocal steps fast enough to stop the clock—and whether the IAEA can, in Iran’s eyes, demonstrate the independence and fairness needed to sustain a new phase of engagement.

Cafés in Iran Face Fresh Seals as Hijab Enforcement Escalates

Over the past two weeks, Iranian authorities have sealed multiple cafés in Tehran, Khuzestan, and now Qom, citing violations of compulsory hijab and “chastity” rules. The closures highlight how businesses remain a frontline target in the government’s contested enforcement of dress codes, even as debate over stricter legislation has stalled. Confirmed cases include the shuttering of a café in Tehran’s Niavaran district after it promoted an event for women motorcyclists, the closure of at least five cafés in Dezful, Khuzestan, for “not observing hijab and chastity,” and the permanent sealing of a café in Qom and the owner facing the prospect of long-term imprisonment.

The most prominent case in Tehran emerged in early September, when a popular café in Niavaran posted an advertisement for a Friday gathering of women motorcyclists. The flyer, which also mentioned a DJ set, quickly circulated on social media. Within days, police and municipal inspectors sealed the venue, posting the standard “temporary suspension” notice on its door. The café’s Instagram account confirmed the closure, posting a photo of the seal alongside an apologetic caption to patrons. No patrons were arrested, but the incident sent a strong message: simply promoting an event challenging gender norms can trigger a business closure.

On September 5, the prosecutor in Dezful announced that five cafés had been sealed simultaneously. The charge was explicit: failing to enforce hijab and chastity regulations. Local press published photos of shuttered entrances bearing official seals. The prosecutor also warned other venues of similar punishment unless they tightened enforcement. Local civil-society channels reported additional inspections and closures that same week, suggesting the operation extended beyond the five publicly-named cafés. Authorities framed the sweep as part of a broader campaign to “protect public morals,” aligning it with national directives on hijab enforcement.

In Qom, the campaign reached a new level of severity. A local café was permanently sealed and its owner sentenced to a long prison term. Colonel Ali Faramarzi, head of the Qom Amaken Police, stated that the café had violated regulations and that, according to the provincial Security Council, no further licenses for cafés would be issued in Qom. This decision effectively ends the licensing of cafés in the city.

Mustafa Molayi, a member of Qom’s city council, went further, thanking the prosecutor’s office and judiciary for what he described as decisive action against “corruption.” He confirmed that the café manager was imprisoned, his business license permanently revoked, and a corruption case opened against him. Molayi openly celebrated that “thanks be to God, the long-term imprisonment and permanent sealing happened,” and called for the continuation of such crackdowns in Qom, which he described as the holy city and “birthplace of the revolution.”

Yet alongside these closures, the resistance of women against mandatory hijab has not subsided. In many cities, women continue to appear unveiled in public, on transport, in shops, and in offices. Videos circulate daily of unveiled women walking freely, a visible rejection of the state’s rules. The government, aware that direct confrontations with millions of women would be costly, has shifted its strategy. Rather than arresting individuals en masse, authorities now appear to place heavier pressure on businesses, institutions, and public venues to enforce hijab indirectly. The closure of cafés, gyms, restaurants, and even hospitals illustrates this approach.

These closures illustrate how multiple state organs cooperate in policing dress codes. Prosecutors issue closure orders and act as spokespeople. Police and Amaken (Supervision of Public Places) inspect venues, place seals, and enforce bans. Municipal and licensing bodies coordinate to revoke or suspend operating permits. Together, these agencies maintain a flexible toolkit. By sealing businesses rather than prosecuting patrons, authorities apply economic pressure without the spectacle of mass arrests. This strategy has been honed since at least 2023, when waves of cafés, bookstores, and gyms were shut down after the “Women, Life, Freedom” protests.

Compulsory hijab remains embedded in Iranian law, and businesses can be punished for allowing unveiled women to enter. In 2024, parliament and the Guardian Council approved a stricter “Chastity and Hijab” bill, mandating heavier fines and penalties. Implementation, however, has been delayed amid political controversy. In practice, enforcement has relied on existing statutes and broad “public order” powers. This ambiguity gives local authorities significant latitude—explaining why a women’s motorcycling event flyer in Tehran, coffeehouses in Dezful, and a permanent closure in Qom could all be justified under the same rubric.

For businesses, even a “temporary” seal can be devastating. Cafés operate on thin margins; losing a week or more of revenue can mean layoffs or permanent closure. Repeat sanctions also complicate license renewals. In cities where youth and women gather in cafés as rare semi-public spaces, closures are felt as both an economic and cultural blow. The Niavaran case underscored the chilling effect: event organizers across Tehran canceled or rebranded gatherings, fearing punishments. Dezful’s sweep signaled that provincial cities are equally under scrutiny. The Qom case, with its permanent closure and celebratory tone from officials, marks a serious escalation: sealing cafés is no longer merely temporary but can result in the total elimination of the sector.

As Iran navigates political debate over hijab legislation, the café closures show that enforcement remains active and adaptive. Cafés have become symbolic spaces in Iran, hubs for young people, artists, and women seeking autonomy. Their visibility—and reliance on licenses—make them vulnerable. By sealing cafés, authorities simultaneously punish business owners, discourage social gatherings, and broadcast the reach of hijab enforcement. Each seal affixed to a café door reverberates through local communities, warning that gender norms remain policed at many levels.

Khamenei Warns Against “No War, No Peace” and Urges Government to Prioritize Economy, Housing, and Energy

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei met with President Masoud Pezeshkian and members of his cabinet, delivering a comprehensive set of instructions that touched on the economy, energy, housing, diplomacy, and national morale. His remarks combined warnings about external threats, demands for immediate domestic reforms, and praise for government efforts.

Khamenei described the state of “no war, no peace” as a dangerous condition that adversaries are trying to impose on Iran. He urged the government to overcome this through a spirit of work, determination, and hope, warning that passivity would cause “harm and danger” to the country.

The Supreme Leader identified livelihood and housing as the most pressing national priorities. He called for urgent steps to curb uncontrolled price increases and emphasized the need to guarantee the supply of essential goods. Khamenei stated: “Act in a way that people can obtain about ten basic goods without the fear of sudden price hikes—not that prices double overnight.” He endorsed vouchers (kalabarg) as a way to ensure stable access to essential goods, echoing the call by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who argued that electronic vouchers would guarantee every Iranian a minimum daily calorie intake and keep consumer prices stable throughout the year.

Khamenei highlighted the urgency of fixing Iran’s energy imbalance, calling for plans to import natural gas for winter, expansion of oil production using modern methods, and diversification of oil export customers. He stressed that factories must not face power cuts except in emergencies, since production is the key to economic progress. He also demanded that imports of essential goods be competitive, not monopolized, to reduce costs for consumers. The Supreme Leader warned against waste in government institutions, citing unnecessary travel, expensive hotels, and excessive utility use. He urged a shift toward efficiency and cost control.

Despite these demands, Khamenei praised President Pezeshkian’s motivation, energy, and hard work, particularly highlighting his recent trip to China, which he said opened up valuable political and economic opportunities. He also commended government officials who had shown “sacrifice” during the recent 12-day conflict, though he did not provide details. He called on media outlets, writers, and officials to highlight Iran’s strengths and achievements rather than focusing solely on weaknesses.

In his address, President Pezeshkian acknowledged continued challenges but emphasized progress. He apologized for power and gas cuts, citing Iran’s energy imbalance, but said new steps—such as installing 7,000 megawatts of solar power capacity and raising fuel reserves to over 3 billion cubic meters—would ease shortages. On social policy, Pezeshkian pledged to issue monthly vouchers to seven income deciles as part of his government’s strategy to boost social welfare and reduce household expenses. He also cited the construction of 2,400 new schools, expansion of the family physician program, and reforms in the budget and banking system to fight inflation.

On foreign policy, the president said Iran’s relations with neighbors are stronger than before, insisting that Europe and the U.S. cannot defeat Iran with sanctions. He highlighted agreements with Russia, China, Turkey, Iraq, and Eurasian states, stressing that all parties are determined to turn signed agreements into practical outcomes.

The meeting underscored Khamenei’s strategy of domestic resilience combined with selective foreign engagement. His demands for price control, food security, and energy stability reflect the regime’s recognition of public frustration over rising costs and recurring shortages. His warnings against the “no war, no peace” scenario highlight the leadership’s fear of prolonged stagnation under foreign pressure.

However, analysts note that sanctions, entrenched corruption, and chronic mismanagement remain the main drivers of Iran’s economic and social problems. Khamenei’s remarks appeared to place responsibility on external actors and government officials without acknowledging his own role in shaping these conditions. Without meaningful structural reforms, it remains unclear how the country can address these deep-rooted challenges.

By praising Pezeshkian’s energy and outreach, Khamenei signaled continued support for the president, even as reformist figures elsewhere in government face mounting pressure. The emphasis on unity, discipline, and hope was designed to bolster morale, while the call for efficiency and anti-waste measures pointed to frustration with bureaucracy. In sum, Khamenei’s message was clear: solve the people’s economic problems, strengthen national power, and avoid dependency on external developments—while keeping the country united and resilient under pressure. Yet the path forward remains uncertain without addressing the systemic causes of Iran’s crisis.

Gradual Removal of Reformists from Government: Pension Fund Restructuring and Cultural Shake-Up

In recent days, the Iranian government has carried out a series of high-profile dismissals, seen by many as part of a broader trend of removing reformist and moderate figures from positions of authority. These changes have affected both the financial and cultural sectors, provoking sharp political reactions and fueling debate over the direction of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration.

According to Shargh Daily, the government had recently approved the merger of the Pension Fund for Steel Employees with the National Pension Fund, a decision that resulted in major leadership changes. Hossein Alaei, CEO of the Steel Pension Fund, and Hojjat Mirzaei, CEO of the National Pension Fund, were both dismissed. In their place, Alaeddin Azouji was appointed as acting head of both funds by Minister of Labor Ahmad Meydari, tasked with overseeing the integration process.

At the same time, in the cultural sector, Nadereh Rezaei, the first female Deputy Minister for Arts at the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, was removed from office. Minister Seyed Abbas Salehi, while praising her efforts, appointed Mohammad Mehdi Ahmadi—senior advisor to the minister and head of the ministry’s presidential office—as acting deputy until a permanent replacement is chosen.

These dismissals have been widely interpreted as evidence of intensifying hardline pressure on the government. Sadegh Zibakalam, a well-known reformist political analyst, sharply criticized President Pezeshkian, writing: “Your only pride was in appointing managers like Nadereh Rezaei and Hossein Alaei. For God’s sake, show some courage and stop bowing to extremists who, with barely five percent of the vote, have dragged the country into this condition. Their goal is to repeat the ‘purification policies’ of the late Raisi era. Do not surrender.”

Other political figures joined in the criticism. Ahmad Zeidabadi noted that this pattern has repeated for years—moderate governments appoint reformist-leaning managers, only for them to be sidelined under hardline pressure. Former vice president Mohammad Ali Abtahi praised Rezaei as “the only deputy who worked for the people,” while former government spokesperson Abdollah Ramezanzadeh described her dismissal as a “return to factory settings” that would embolden conservatives.

Nadereh Rezaei, born in 1981 in Tehran, holds a PhD in sociology and business management. Her background is varied, spanning publishing, municipal and governmental committees, automotive industries, and even the founding of a catering company. Critics consistently pointed to her lack of direct artistic experience, but her appointment also marked a historic moment as the first woman to hold the deputy minister role in the arts.

During her tenure, she supported greater openness in cultural policy, including delegating licensing authority to the House of Music and backing the National Music Plan. However, these decisions angered conservatives. The most controversial episode came when she approved a planned concert by Homayoun Shajarian at Tehran’s Azadi Square. Hardliners claimed she had acted without proper coordination, and the concert was later canceled by Tehran’s municipality. Rezaei publicly apologized, expressing regret over the “mistreatment” of Shajarian.

Other incidents added to the controversy: her alleged “like” of a video featuring a female singer performing without mandatory hijab, and her presence at exhibitions where artists appeared without head coverings. Conservative media portrayed these as proof of her unsuitability for the position.

The pressure culminated when 170 members of parliament signed a letter calling for her removal, accusing her of “disrupting the cultural structure and national unity.” Within a week, Rezaei was dismissed.

For many observers, these dismissals highlight the ongoing clash between reformist-leaning officials and entrenched conservative factions. Critics argue that President Pezeshkian’s willingness to bow to hardline demands risks alienating his moderate base and accelerating the gradual purge of reformists from government.

As Iran faces growing social and political pressures, the recent wave of changes demonstrates the fragile standing of reform-minded figures in power. Whether these shifts consolidate hardliner control or provoke wider discontent among the public and artistic community remains an open question—but the trend of sidelining reformists is becoming increasingly clear.

When the Music Ends in Exile: Remembering Hooshmand Aghili and Jacqueline Derdarian

The Iranian music world is mourning the loss of two beloved figures who, like many of their peers, spent their final years far from the country they loved. Hooshmand Aghili, the renowned singer and composer of Persian classical and popular songs, and Jacqueline Derdarian, known as Jacqueline, one of the few pioneering women songwriters in Iranian pop music, have both passed away in recent days in the United States. Their deaths are a painful reminder of the fate of many Iranian artists in exile—artists whose bodies of work remained deeply tied to their homeland, but whose dreams of returning were never realized.

Hooshmand Aghili, born on July 25, 1937 in Isfahan, grew up in a family that valued both education and art. After completing his studies in mathematics in high school and English literature at university, he pursued further education in cooperative development in London through a UNESCO scholarship. Although he initially worked for Tehran’s municipality and later the Ministry of Cooperation, music remained his lifelong calling. Encouraged by his father, he studied under some of the greatest masters of Persian vocal traditions, including Taj Esfahani, Mahmoud Karimi, and Esmail Mehrtash. His professional career began in 1955 with the release of “Saqi-nameh”, and his reputation grew quickly, leading him to perform at the inauguration of Iranian National Television alongside celebrated composers.

After emigrating to the United States in 1977, a year before the Iranian Revolution, Aghili continued to perform and record prolifically. His albums—among them Tomorrow You Will Come, Eastern Love, Parandeh-ha-ye Mosafer (“Traveler Birds”), Fal, and Mergh-e Sahar—became staples for listeners both inside and outside Iran. Known for his versatility, he performed both romantic ballads and socially conscious songs such as Homeland, What News from Iran, and Wish for Peace. Though the death of his wife led him to briefly step away from music, he eventually returned, encouraged by his children and admirers. Over the decades, he produced hundreds of songs, many of which became timeless pieces in Persian music.

Aghili passed away in Los Angeles on September 5, 2025, at the age of 88, following a long illness and cardiac arrest. His passing reignited conversations about the fate of Iranian artists who die in exile, their dreams of returning home unfulfilled. Tributes poured in from fans, lyricists, and fellow musicians, underscoring his enduring influence.

Just days later, the Iranian diaspora community mourned the loss of another important cultural figure: Jacqueline Derdarian, who passed away on September 8, 2025, at the age of 72, after years of battling cancer. Born on December 16, 1952 in Tehran, Jacqueline was the elder twin sister of actress Aylin Derdarian and the daughter of Vigen, the iconic “Sultan of Jazz” in Iran. Growing up in a household where art was inseparable from daily life, she pursued music from an early age, becoming one of the few women in Iran’s modern music history to establish herself as a songwriter and composer. At 17, she composed her first song, Parandeh (“The Bird”), which was later performed by Googoosh and became a breakthrough success. Over the years, Jacqueline wrote and composed more than 400 songs, many of which were performed by major Iranian singers including Ebi, Shahram Solati, and Shohreh.

Her compositions reflected both personal emotion and broader social themes. Despite her Armenian Christian background, she wrote spiritual songs inspired by her reverence for Imam Ali and Imam Reza, emphasizing her belief in unity across religious traditions. She often said that she sought to break down barriers between people of different faiths, and her lyrics conveyed a vision of cultural inclusivity. Beyond music, Jacqueline was deeply involved in philanthropy, using her artistic reputation to support charitable causes such as fundraising for the Kahrizak nursing home.

Her death was announced by her younger sister Catherine, who revealed that Jacqueline had recently completed chemotherapy and was optimistic about recovery, but her heart grew too weak to continue. She will be laid to rest near her father Vigen in Los Angeles, symbolically reuniting them in music for eternity.

The nearly simultaneous passing of Hooshmand Aghili and Jacqueline Derdarian marks a profound moment of loss for Persian music. Aghili embodied the bridge between Iran’s classical vocal traditions and modern popular song, while Jacqueline broke barriers for women in the male-dominated world of composition, leaving behind an extensive and influential body of work. Both represent the painful reality of Iranian artists whose legacies blossomed in exile, far from their homeland, yet whose music continues to resonate deeply with generations of Iranians. Their voices and compositions remain timeless testaments to the richness of Persian musical heritage, ensuring that their artistry will endure long after their passing.

Both Aghili and Jacqueline were cherished members of the Iranian-American community, where their work gave voice to a generation living between two worlds. Their lives, like those of many artists in exile, carried a bittersweet truth: while they built new audiences abroad, they longed to perform freely in Iran again. Political realities made that return impossible. Like countless Iranians in the diaspora, they carried with them the unfulfilled wish of going back to their homeland, a longing that accompanied them to their final days.

NIAC extends its deepest condolences to the families, friends and admirers of Hooshmand Aghili and Jacqueline Derdarian, and to the millions of fans around the world who found comfort, pride, and a sense of belonging in their music. Their stories reflect the broader struggle of Iranians abroad, torn between love for their homeland and the barriers that prevent their return. In mourning them, we also honor their contributions to the cultural identity of Iranians everywhere.

Today, Iranians at home and abroad remember two artists whose voices once carried joy, sorrow, and hope across generations. Though they passed away in exile, their music ensures that they will always remain close to the heart of Iran.

NIAC Insights

Discussion about this post