(Translated Excerpts from the Editorial of Nameh Mardom, issue no. 1266, published Monday 10 August 2026)

Iran remains in the limbo of "no war, no peace", embroiled in growing political-economic crises, and a victim of the regime's machine of repression and executions…

In an interview broadcast on Iranian television on Wednesday 5 August, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian made clear references to the power struggle that is currently taking place in the power circles of the Islamist regime…  Pezeshkian also pointed to the corruption that exists at all levels of decision-making.  In part of his speech, he referred to the popular protests of January 2026 and the deaths and victims of these protests, saying, "I still cannot forget these events, and we should not have reached that point."  While he omitted to state who was responsible for the several thousand killed [in the January unrest], he himself did not deny that these killings had taken place.  [This is not an insignificant factor in the context of the current dialogue and politics of the Islamic Republic regime.]  In another part of his speech, he said that given the difficult conditions caused by sanctions, war, and economic restrictions, the government considers reform to be an inevitable necessity for the future of the country.

Of course, what Pezeshkian envisages regarding economic reforms is a repetition of the same neoliberal and failed policies of the past decades, which have played a key role in creating a nationwide economic crisis and the pushing of tens of millions of hardworking Iranians below the poverty line.  According to Pezeshkian, "The right way is for our factories and companies to be truly managed by the private sector [...] Of course, these tasks are very difficult.  Change is always hard [...] Managing this situation is with God's help, otherwise it is not that simple."

At the beginning of his third year in office, Pezeshkian made these remarks while, according to statistics published by the Statistical Center of Iran, annual inflation has increased by 4 percent to 66 percent, which is the highest inflation in all the years since the 1979 Revolution.  In addition, the latest statistics show that poverty and deprivation are rampant in the country, with nearly 40 percent of Iran's population living below the poverty line defined by the Islamic Republic itself.  In his remarks, Pezeshkian did not make clear how the needs of the country's working people and retirees would be met, a contingent of Iranian society who have been demanding improvements to their dire living conditions in recent weeks in numerous protest actions across Iran.

In addition to the growing economic crises and the intensification of conflicts within the ruling circles, the developments of the last few days related to the war have once again put Iran and the region in a situation that can perhaps best be described as "no war, no peace."  The threat of a full-scale military confrontation remains real and serious, but diplomatic courses continue to be pursued to prevent one; threats continue, but so do negotiations, while governments in the Middle East make plans for a new security order in the region as they try to avoid escalation and a broader war.  The security and defence agreement reached between Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia is an event that the Islamic Republic cannot ignore that: Pakistan is a nuclear power; Turkey is one of the region's most important military powers and a member of NATO; and Saudi Arabia has rapidly been increasing its political, economic, and military weight in recent years.  The rapprochement in interests between these three countries within the framework of the 'Mecca Agreement' could signal the formation of a new balance of power in and around the region, which is no longer necessarily defined by the old axis of "Iran vs. the Arab states of the Persian Gulf."  The sharp reaction of fundamentalist circles and hardline representatives in Iran to this development is also noteworthy in this aspect.  The issue is not just about the spectre of another military deal [between neighbouring middle powers in the region].  The bigger question for the Iranian regime should be: Is the primary goal of these new regional security arrangements to curb Iran's power and role in the region?  We think so.

In this regard, the talks between Iran and Oman on the Strait of Hormuz in recent days are also of particular importance.  Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi pointed to the good progress of the talks and the reaching of an agreement but cautioned that it does not mean the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.  It is clear that if these negotiations lead to a lasting agreement, it will be important not only in restoring relative security to shipping. The Strait of Hormuz now represents a junction at which several crises intersect: the security of the Persian Gulf, oil and energy exports, Iran's relationship with its Arab neighbours, and, most importantly, the risk of a direct confrontation between Iran and the United States.  Therefore, any practical agreement on the Strait of Hormuz can be seen as the first significant sign of de-escalation.  But it would be a mistake to equate the reduction of tensions with a complete resolution of the crisis.  A stable political framework for regulating US-Iran relations or the region's security order has not yet been formed, and as long as such a framework does not exist there is still the possibility of a quick return from the negotiating table to the battlefield.

The joint military aggression of US imperialism and the criminal apartheid regime of Israel against Iran over the past few months has been a great disaster for our homeland, and its negative consequences for the future of Iran cannot and should not be ignored or downplayed.  The massive US attack upon the country's critical infrastructure has undoubtedly had catastrophic consequences for the Iranian people and the entire region and will continue to do so.

On the other hand, while diplomats are negotiating and the world's media is discussing Trump, the Strait of Hormuz, and the new regional balances, the machine of repression and killing employed by the authoritarian and anti-people regime in Iran is at work inside the country.  Executions continue, death sentences are issued, and pressure on political prisoners, civil society activists, and ethnic and religious groups remains part and parcel of the country's daily reality.  The "no war, no peace" situation has become an opportunity for the regime to continue to suppress popular protests while working to fill the power vacuum in its top echelons post-Ali Khamenei, consolidate its position, and survive.

In recent decades, the Islamic Republic has repeatedly shown that its line between political opposition and "national security threats" is a blurred one through its constant resorting to accusations of foreign danger and conspiracies.  Thus, bona fide criticism and opposition to the regime's anti-national policies is interpreted as collaborating with the enemy, while protesting the increasingly dreadful living and conditions in the country is seen as "endangering national security" and a justification for the violent and bloody repression of popular protests.  That is why war, foreign aggression, and domestic repression should not be clinically considered as separate and mutually exclusive issues.

Dealing with this situation is a crucial political test for progressive forces, both in Iran and in other countries.  Progressive politics cannot support bombing Iran, destroying the country's infrastructure, or "regime change" by means of war.  The cases of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the many other wars to have blighted the region should be enough to dispel the illusion of "freedom through bombing."  But opposing the aggressive policies of US imperialism and the criminal regime of Israel cannot and should not be an excuse to defend, directly or indirectly, the Islamic Republic of Iran and remain silent in the face of the brutal and bloody repression of the Iranian people.

It is conceivable to oppose the US military aggression against Iran and at the same time call for a halt to executions in Iran.  It is possible to oppose the expansion of militarism and the arms race in the region, while at the same time defending the release of political prisoners and the right of the Iranian people to peacefully protest.  It is plausible to oppose sanctions that are destroying the lives of ordinary and hardworking Iranians while holding the Islamic Republic regime responsible for its serial violent and bloody violations of the fundamental rights of Iranian citizens.  These positions do not contradict each other.

In the current situation, as the Islamic Republic's judiciary's death machine continues to hang another young person every day, widespread opposition and struggle against the death penalty is becoming urgent.  The campaign against the death penalty in Iran could also be the rallying point of a broader range of democratic and progressive forces, from those whose top priority is to prevent war to those focused on human rights and the struggle for political freedoms.  This is the moment when international solidarity with the Iranian people takes on a very specific meaning: not to support the war to overthrow the regime through foreign intervention, not to remain silent in the face of the violent and bloody repression of the Iranian people in the name of anti-imperialism, but to simultaneously try to prevent war on Iran and stop the machine of execution and repression inside the country from continuing.

Externally, negotiations with Oman may be able to reduce the risk of war over the Strait of Hormuz for a while; new regional security arrangements may eventually create a new balance of power; and Trump may continue to erratically veer back and forth between military threat and negotiations; but for someone who is awaiting execution in prison, these geopolitical developments do not have the same meaning and importance.  Diplomacy may stop the war between states, but the other important issue is what pressure can be brought to bear to stop the Islamic Republic regime's war against Iran's domestic opposition and legitimately disgruntled people.

For the progressive forces, the answer is clear: no to imperialist aggression against Iran, no to repression and dictatorship, an immediate halt to executions, and the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience!

From Nameh Mardom (The People's Paper), Monday 10 August 2026