Since the beginning of the nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, the Iranian press and websites have been writing in an almost uniform language. The criticism against the negotiation process or against the Iranian team almost does not exist, and the press—both conservative and moderate—has been trying to support the process and promote a message of understanding that the negotiations are taking place “for the sake of the needs of the Iranian public.”
It should be noted that the sharp criticism toward the United States and its policy has almost completely disappeared. On the ground, the regime is even making sure to hide insulting evidence against the US administration, such as burning American flags or trampling on them in the street.
This extreme change in the Iranian press is backed by the regime, of course. The adviser to the Supreme Leader Khamenei and a member of the Iranian National Security Council, Shamkhani, went even further, declaring that “the negotiation team is conducting the talks with the full authority of the leader,” and that the most important priority at this stage is to safeguard Iran’s interests and to demand that the United States restrain Israel so it will not try to sabotage the negotiation process.
Officials affiliated with the regime have also moderated their tone in other formal public forums. For example, Friday prayer preachers have reduced their criticism of the United States. In their sermons, they have emphasized that while hostility toward the American administration still exists, it’s important to support the negotiating team for the good of the people and the state.
A large segment of the Iranian public, which had previously hoped that the Trump administration would weaken the Iranian regime or even overthrow it, now finds itself in a state of confusion, as that expectation has become irrelevant. That same segment of the population sees the regime as actually becoming stronger simply by engaging in negotiations.
The situation described here depends on the continued progress—or failure—of the negotiations with the United States, as public and media support or criticism will appear according to the regime’s interests.
Since the beginning of the nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, the Iranian press and websites have been writing in an almost uniform language. The criticism against the negotiation process or against the Iranian team almost does not exist, and the press—both conservative and moderate—has been trying to support the process and promote a message of understanding that the negotiations are taking place “for the sake of the needs of the Iranian public.”
It should be noted that the sharp criticism toward the United States and its policy has almost completely disappeared. On the ground, the regime is even making sure to hide insulting evidence against the US administration, such as burning American flags or trampling on them in the street.
This extreme change in the Iranian press is backed by the regime, of course. The adviser to the Supreme Leader Khamenei and a member of the Iranian National Security Council, Shamkhani, went even further, declaring that “the negotiation team is conducting the talks with the full authority of the leader,” and that the most important priority at this stage is to safeguard Iran’s interests and to demand that the United States restrain Israel so it will not try to sabotage the negotiation process.
Officials affiliated with the regime have also moderated their tone in other formal public forums. For example, Friday prayer preachers have reduced their criticism of the United States. In their sermons, they have emphasized that while hostility toward the American administration still exists, it’s important to support the negotiating team for the good of the people and the state.
A large segment of the Iranian public, which had previously hoped that the Trump administration would weaken the Iranian regime or even overthrow it, now finds itself in a state of confusion, as that expectation has become irrelevant. That same segment of the population sees the regime as actually becoming stronger simply by engaging in negotiations.
The situation described here depends on the continued progress—or failure—of the negotiations with the United States, as public and media support or criticism will appear according to the regime’s interests.