Revamped Iranian leadership wary ahead of US peace talks

Follow our live coverage here.

TEHRAN - Across Iran, the government has used the pause in bombardments provided by the two-week ceasefire with the US and Israel, to stage long-awaited public mourning rituals for its slain Supreme Leader – Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The killing of Mr Khamenei by an Israeli air strike on Feb 28 was the opening salvo in a war that is likely to bring dramatic long-term geopolitical changes to the Persian Gulf.

US-Israeli air strikes have killed more than 3,000 people in Iran, according to the authorities, and brought significant damage to infrastructure.

Retaliatory strikes by Tehran have stretched from Israel to Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, leaving scores dead and shattering the Gulf states’ reputation for safety and security.

Mr Khamenei’s death and the subsequent war have also accelerated a reconfiguration of the country’s leadership, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – already a hugely powerful military force – cementing its dominant position across the economy and society.

Well-placed politicians close to the Guards and to Mr Khamenei’s successor, his son Mojtaba, mean the IRGC now wields even more influence than it did pre-war.

The Iranian delegation arrived in Islamabad late on April 10, the semi-official Iranian news agency Tasnim reported, ahead of the talks opening on April 11. 

But earlier on April 10, there had been conflicting reports in Iranian state media about whether the delegation would even attend, with regime supporters in Tehran appearing to be divided over how the country should respond to the ceasefire. 

Unverified videos shared on social media showed some staunch supporters of the IRGC and the regime arguing for the war to continue.

There are reasons to believe that Mr Mojtaba Khamenei – who has yet to make an appearance since becoming supreme leader – and the senior leadership want to pursue the truce and talks.

Mr Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the state-funded Kayhan newspaper, who is directly appointed by the supreme leader, published an editorial on April 8 criticising the two-week ceasefire.

By April 10, he said he supported the move and claimed his first piece was printed before news of the truce had been reported.

The peace talks could precipitate a new dynamic between Tehran and Washington: One that reflects new realities both in the Islamic Republic and more widely in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz – through which in normal times a fifth of global oil production flows. 

Iran has effectively weaponised the waterway and leveraged it to successfully hold the world to ransom and force the US to negotiate.

At the head of the Iranian delegation in Islamabad is IRGC veteran and speaker of Iran’s Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has emerged as a key figure in the country’s wartime leadership. 

With US Vice-President J.D. Vance – who has seemingly taken a back seat during the war – on the other side of the table, the negotiations are expected to take on a different meaning compared with previous rounds when Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held indirect talks with US special envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. 

“The talks being conducted on a high level reflects more seriousness on both sides,” said professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies Vali Nasr, who was a former adviser to the US State Department.

He added that as one of the three or four most important figures in the Islamic Republic, Mr Ghalibaf is “trusted by Mojtaba, he’s trusted by the IRGC and he’s directly Mojtaba’s emissary there”.

Despite conflicting reports in state media, Mr Araghchi, who has spoken to key counterparts in Russia, France and Saudi Arabia, since the ceasefire was announced, is also part of the delegation in Islamabad.

Another name floated as part of the team is the recently appointed secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr. A former IRGC commander and political hardliner, he has few, if any, diplomatic credentials or experience dealing with foreign officials.

Already frustrated with Mr Witkoff, officials in Tehran concluded after Israel’s 12-day war with Iran in June 2025 that they needed to circumvent the appointed envoy, according to Prof Nasr.

“The upgraded seniority in each delegation is a signal that they both mean business,” said Mr Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group.

“The Iranian delegation reflects both the diplomatic and political/security elements of the regime.”

Mr Ghalibaf and many of the hardliners are also pragmatists who want to protect their interests and those of the IRGC, which has risen from a branch of the military established to protect the 1979 Islamic revolution to a major economic and political force.

It owns one of the country’s biggest construction conglomerates responsible for building several key projects, some as a consequence of US sanctions blocking foreign companies from investing in Iran. 

If there is an economic upside to be had from talks with the US, it is likely that the Guards would want to ensure that it can also reap some of the rewards. 

Mr Vaez said: “The IRGC, or at least elements of it, have previously acted as spoilers to diplomacy within the Iranian system, either to ideological hostility to any deal with the US or the fact some of its ranks benefit from sanctions.

“Someone like Ghalibaf may be able to secure some buy-in, but any potential agreement is likely to be met with some internal pushback.”

Selling a ‘trillion dollar opportunity’ 

A major driver of this shift is Iran’s ravaged economy. The removal of both primary and secondary sanctions is one of the country’s main conditions for entering the talks. But comprehensive sanctions removal would be a huge ask.

It requires a major reversal in Washington and support from a political community that has been largely united on Iran policy – across party lines – for much of the past half-century.

In Iran, it would also face resistance from regime stalwarts suspicious of any US or Western financial influence in the country.

In 2025, ahead of the first round of talks between the Trump administration and Mr Araghchi, the diplomat tried to promote Iran – a country with the third largest oil reserves in the world – as a “trillion dollar opportunity” for the US should it agree to a deal over Tehran’s nuclear programme.

The brutal suppression of January’s nationwide uprising when Iranian security forces killed thousands of protesters acted as a reminder of why so many Iranians have become angry and frustrated at a leadership that is seen as corrupt and largely to blame for the country’s economic isolation.

There are several additional reasons to remain sceptical about what the talks can achieve.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has opposed renewing diplomatic efforts to end the war, according to a report by Bloomberg News.

Iran had insisted that the ceasefire must include all its allies and the region as a whole. But disagreement over the inclusion of Lebanon in the ceasefire proposal remains a major stumbling block.

Israel’s mass air strikes on the country on April 8 killed more than 300 people and came without warning, leaving some observers to believe it was a deliberate attempt to derail the talks. 

In the aftermath, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian said the air attacks in Lebanon violated the tentative agreement and rendered negotiations with the US meaningless.

Key for Iran, therefore, will be Mr Trump’s ability and willingness to manage Israel and its behaviour. 

“The Iranians don’t trust Trump at all because they’ve been bombed twice during negotiations and they’re very keen for the US to show that it can control Israel and that it’s willing to do certain things that, when they reach an agreement, will be implemented,” Prof Nasr said.

The conditions that the US and Iran have set for agreeing to a permanent end to the fighting are as disparate as they were prior to the war; only this time, much more is at stake now Tehran has transformed the Strait of Hormuz into a huge bargaining chip.

Complicating prospects is Mr Trump’s approach. Throughout the six weeks of fighting his statements have vacillated between extremes of showing interest in ending the conflict to threats of destroying Iranian civilisation.

He has flipped between promoting the idea of sharing control of the Strait of Hormuz with Iran and threatening Tehran over its proposal to charge tankers a fee to pass through the narrow waterway.

On April 9, Mr Trump said Iran’s leaders were “much more reasonable” than how they appear in the media and also hinted that Israel’s bombardments on Lebanon would ease, in an interview with NBC News. 

Iran’s leadership has other political challenges to confront at home. The population is exhausted by the war and has largely welcomed the pause in the air strikes.

While the regime has framed it as a victory and the ultimate test of its resilience and survival, the fighting remains unpopular with many sections of society who are facing intense scrutiny from the security forces.

Scores of people have been arrested on national security and spying charges since the war began and the judiciary has started to execute people arrested during the winter’s unrest.

Slipping back into war would anger a public that is already bruised and indignant over the unprecedented levels of violence used by security forces to suppress the uprising in January.

“If Ghalibaf and Vance meet, it will be a signal that both countries are open to a transformation of their bilateral relations.

“But even if the two men find a rapport and come away committed to fundamentally changing US-Iran relations, Ghalibaf will have to convince the many players in the Iranian system and Vance will have to convince the singular figure of Trump,” said Bourse & Bazaar Foundation think-tank founder and chief executive Esfandyar Batmanghelidj.

For now the best case scenario in terms of the outcome of the talks is a second meeting, according to Prof Nasr.

“They have to arrive at an agreement that there is a pathway forward.” BLOOMBERG