Tamadon Novin Eslami is one of the newest political formations to emerge within Iran’s conservative spectrum, founded and led by Yaser Jebraili, a political strategist and former government official with experience in policymaking and economic planning. The party presents itself as a vehicle for reviving Islamic governance through what it calls a “New Islamic Civilization”—a vision combining religious values with modern administrative and developmental goals. Yet, despite its confident debut and civilizational rhetoric, many observers question whether it represents genuine innovation or a rebranding of Iran’s existing conservative establishment.
The party officially launched during its first general assembly on October 9, 2025 in Tehran, an event attended by prominent conservative figures including Hojjatoleslam Alireza Panahian, Seyed Yaser Jebraili, and Hossein Samsami, a former economic official and academic associated with Iran’s conservative economic circles. The gathering was presented as the formal beginning of the party’s political, cultural, and social activities. During the congress, members of the Central Council were elected for a two-year term, after which the council was tasked with selecting the party’s chairman and secretary-general. The assembly also announced the creation of national policy commissions and provincial offices, outlining three core priorities: discourse-building (goftaman-sazi), cadre training (kadrsazi), and policy planning (barname-rizi).
In his speech, Jebraili described the party’s purpose as an effort to align Iran’s politics with “servitude to God” and to promote a moral, disciplined governance model that remains loyal to revolutionary ideals while improving bureaucratic performance. He argued that the current management system suffers from inefficiency, speculative economics, and a detachment from Islamic principles. His statements called for greater state control over financial markets, a focus on value-added production, and an end to rent-seeking and speculative behavior in currency exchange and import sectors. These themes reflect Jebraili’s long-standing criticisms of what he calls “neoliberal influence” in Iran’s economy, as well as his emphasis on social justice and transparency.
While Tamadon Novin Eslami positions itself as a movement of reform within the system, it has faced widespread skepticism. Critics argue that the party’s rhetoric remains abstract, dominated by slogans about “civilizational progress” without providing measurable or enforceable policy mechanisms. Political analysts also highlight that the party has avoided clear stances on key domestic issues such as civil rights, the judiciary’s authority, media independence, and political participation, suggesting that its priorities remain confined within the conservative mainstream. Others note that the presence of figures like Panahian and Samsami—both well-known for their ideological and institutional ties—signals that the new party’s foundation is more an extension of existing networks than a break from them.
Yaser Jebraili’s own background has further fueled questions about the party’s independence. Before founding Tamadon Novin Eslami, he was associated with President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration, reportedly serving as an advisor in economic planning and contributing to the drafting of parts of Raisi’s economic platform. Although he did not hold a cabinet position, his proximity to Raisi’s policymaking team positioned him within the government’s strategic planning structure. This experience has been seen by some as evidence of his competence, but by others as proof that he is part of the same establishment he now claims to reform.
Moreover, Jebraili is closely aligned ideologically with Saeed Jalili, the former nuclear negotiator and secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Jalili’s political school of thought—often described as “principlist hardline”—emphasizes resistance to Western influence, expansion of ties with Russia and China, and strict adherence to revolutionary ideology. Many commentators consider Jebraili a disciple or intellectual ally of Jalili, noting the overlap in their discourse about Islamic civilization and sovereignty. However, there is no formal confirmation of organizational ties between the two, and Jebraili has presented his movement as distinct and independent in structure, though ideologically close in outlook.
Beyond ideology, Tamadon Novin Eslami faces structural obstacles that challenge all new political movements in Iran. The political environment is dominated by powerful institutions such as the Guardian Council and entrenched factions that control access to elections and funding. The party also lacks a proven grassroots network or broad social base, relying primarily on elite connections and university-linked supporters. Some media outlets have noted that its inaugural congress featured highly choreographed visuals and branding, reminiscent of electoral campaigns rather than grassroots political activism, reinforcing perceptions of a top-down movement rather than a popular initiative.
Critics within conservative circles have also voiced caution, arguing that the party risks fragmenting the right-wing bloc by competing for influence among already overlapping constituencies. Reformist commentators, meanwhile, have dismissed Tamadon Novin Eslami as a cosmetic renovation of the same ideological framework, pointing out that despite its academic language, it offers no tangible mechanism for political pluralism or institutional accountability.
In essence, Tamadon Novin Eslami embodies the duality of Iran’s political evolution—seeking to renew revolutionary ideology while remaining firmly within its boundaries. Yaser Jebraili’s insider experience gives the party technical and bureaucratic insight but undermines its claim to be a fresh alternative. The inclusion of Panahian and Samsami strengthens its conservative credentials but also tethers it to Iran’s existing centers of power. Whether the party can transform its civilizational vision into concrete governance or merely remain a symbolic extension of the conservative establishment remains an open question. Ultimately, the party’s success or failure will depend on its ability to demonstrate policy realism, independence from entrenched factions, and responsiveness to broader social demands—qualities that have so far eluded many political newcomers in Iran’s tightly controlled system.