Iraq’s prime minister has ordered the formation of a high-level committee to investigate allegations of corruption and smuggling of Iran's oil after the US Treasury sanctioned a network accused of exporting Iranian crude under falsified Iraqi origin.
The prime minister’s office said the committee, composed of relevant government agencies, will review information and reports pointing to corruption and suspicious operations in Iraq’s ports and territorial waters.
The US Treasury on Tuesday imposed sanctions on a vast network accused of blending Iranian oil with Iraqi crude and selling it as exclusively Iraqi, generating hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for the Islamic Republic.
Washington said the network covertly blended Iranian and Iraqi oil through ship-to-ship transfers in the Persian Gulf and in Iraqi ports.
The sanctions target Waleed Khaled Hameed al-Samarra’i, based in the United Arab Emirates, along with his firms Babylon Navigation DMCC and Galaxy Oil FZ LLC, and nine Liberia-flagged tankers.
The Treasury estimated the operation generated about $300 million annually for both Iran and al-Samarra’i.
“Iraq cannot become a safe haven for terrorists, which is why the United States is working to counter Iran’s influence in the country,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.
“By targeting Iran’s oil revenue stream, Treasury will further degrade the regime’s ability to carry out attacks against the United States and its allies.”
The measures follow sanctions announced in July against another network accused of blending Iranian and Iraqi oil.
At least five people have died in recent months in incidents linked to electricity outages across Iran, the reformist daily Etemad reported on Saturday.
Two children were killed on August 5 in a village in northern Golestan province when a gas leak ignited as power was restored, the paper said.
Ten days later, two youths aged 16 and 18 in Fars suffocated after sheltering from the heat in a running car inside a garage; and a Tabriz resident died in an elevator-related accident as power disruptions multiplied,” according to Etemad.
“I wish we had never had electricity. It took the lives of my two children. They had just begun to live, had just stepped into society full of hopes and dreams. Suddenly, when the power came back, my house exploded. I came and saw the wall had collapsed on my daughter. Blood was coming from everywhere,” the bereaved mother said in a video shared after the Golestan blast.
Fatal incidents and urban hazards
Fire officials in Isfahan reported a 284% jump in elevator entrapments over a one-month period tied to outages. In the southwestern city of Yasuj, up to 20 people were trapped at once during blackouts, while reports from Khorramabad in west put such incidents at three to four times last year’s level, Etemad wrote.
Etemad interviewed 11 people across Yazd, Tehran, Ahvaz, Shiraz, Ardebil and Urmia, including patients with butterfly disease and people with spinal cord injuries.
A young woman in Shiraz said a routine 10-minute eye procedure stretched to over an hour because a surgical microscope repeatedly failed.
“Power fluctuations burned the microscope lamp in the middle of my eye surgery,” she said, adding that repeated replacements failed until the device was swapped out, leaving lasting damage to her right eye.
Patients with chronic conditions described blackouts as dangerous and costly. Frequent cuts forced daily dressing changes and purchases of pricier creams, A butterfly disease patient in Yazd said.
A man with a spinal injury in rural Urmia feared his anti-bedsore mattress would fail in surges: without it, he said, pressure ulcers were likely. Others said that when electricity goes, well pumps stop and mobile networks and home internet also drop, compounding risks for those needing help.
Strain on daily life and business
Shopkeepers and small businesses reported spoiled food and lost inventory; one confectioner filmed trays of discarded cakes, blaming a single outage for rent, labor and waste. Poultry farmers in Dezful, Khuzestan province, cited higher mortality and reduced chick placement amid daily cuts.
Etemad’s reporting underscores how prolonged outages—often four to five hours a day—are cascading through homes, clinics and city infrastructure. The accounts point to a growing public safety challenge where routine power cuts are now measured not just in inconvenience, but in injuries and deaths.
Billions of dollars belonging to South Africa’s MTN Group, the founding investor of Irancell, Iran’s second-largest mobile operator, remain blocked in Iran under US sanctions, the company confirmed in a recent financial update.
MTN now faces a “liquidity dead-end” in Iran after years of trying to withdraw funds, the investment analysis website GuruFocus reported on Friday.
“Our minority stake in Irancell is effectively a frozen asset,” chief executive Ralph Mupita said, citing sanctions that prevent any movement of capital.
MTN has been seeking to exit Iran since 2016, when it announced plans to pull back from the Middle East. While it once repatriated about $430 million in loan repayments and accumulated dividends between 2011 and 2016, its later attempts have failed.
The company’s difficulties deepened with US President Donald Trump’s renewed sanctions against the Islamic Republic during his second term. MTN disclosed in 2021 that it still held $204 million in Iran, largely linked to loan repayments and dividends, but no transfer has been reported since.
Mupita stressed the lack of operational influence. MTN has “zero operational control” over Irancell, GuruFocus cited him as saying, writing that sanctions have left the group powerless to access cash flow from its Iranian venture.
Partnerships under scrutiny
Irancell is majority owned by Gostaresh Electronic Sina, a subsidiary of the Mostazafan Foundation.
The foundation was established in early 1980 following the Islamic Revolution. It succeeded the Pahlavi Foundation and inherited extensive assets confiscated from the Pahlavi era.
Legally, the foundation is neither public nor private—it is a nonprofit entity that answers only to Iran’s Supreme Leader.
It is the second-largest commercial enterprise in Iran—behind only the National Iranian Oil Company—and the largest holding conglomerate in the Middle East.
The foundation controls over 350 subsidiaries and affiliates, employs more than 200,000 people, and its holdings span diverse sectors like agriculture, industry, transportation, tourism, construction materials, mining, and media.
According to the foundation’s 2016 accounts, Irancell was its most profitable asset. The operator is also a major shareholder in the ride-hailing platform Snapp.
MTN’s entanglement with sanctioned entities has drawn international attention. The group is cooperating with a US Department of Justice grand jury inquiry into past dealings in both Afghanistan and Iran, though no charges have been filed and the company says it has made no legal provisions related to the probe.
Broader repositioning
MTN has already divested from Afghanistan and continues to scale back its Middle East exposure, while scanning for growth opportunities in its home market. Mupita has pointed to South Africa’s saturated telecom sector and tighter profit margins as drivers behind potential mergers, including revived talks with Telkom SA, according to Bloomberg.
For now, MTN’s stranded billions in Iran remain a stark reminder of the risks for foreign investors entangled with the Islamic Republic. The company’s minority stake, once a prized foothold in a lucrative market, has instead become a financial liability locked by geopolitics.
Several newspapers in Iran have warned that the return of UN sanctions and threats of renewed conflict with Israel could plunge the country into crisis, while also noting that some officials downplay the risks.
In the hardline Kayhan daily, columnist Jafar Bolouri described the country’s situation as “extraordinary,” cautioning that a new war could erupt at any moment alongside worsening economic and social pressure. He said the government’s priorities “do not match the situation,” accusing it of focusing on secondary issues instead of inflation, which “creates openings for enemies to exploit.”
The IRGC-linked Javan wrote that Western powers, unable to achieve their goals in the June 12-day war, are now using the snapback process as part of a “cognitive war” to inflame the economy and provoke unrest. “Supporters of the Zionist regime…exploit the snapback and hostile media to stir inflation, currency volatility and social unrest,” the paper said, warning that “domestic infiltrators” amplify these pressures.
The reformist Ham Mihan criticized what it called complacency among officials. “Snapback leads to the return of Security Council resolutions and gives sanctions a binding legal character. Evading them will be very difficult and costly,” the paper said. It added: “Some believe snapback adds little to existing sanctions. Such an interpretation is completely wrong.”
Snapback countdown
On August 28, Britain, France and Germany triggered the UN snapback mechanism, demanding that Tehran return to talks, grant inspectors wider access and account for its uranium stockpile. Under Resolution 2231, sanctions will automatically return after 30 days unless the Security Council votes otherwise.
Tehran has rejected the step. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas in Doha on Thursday that the decision was “illegal and unjustifiable,” and insisted that the EU should “play its role in fulfilling its responsibilities to neutralize moves against diplomacy.”
IAEA report raises alarm
A confidential report by the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% remains “a matter of serious concern” after inspectors lost visibility following Israeli and US strikes in June. The report noted Iran had 440.9 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium as of June 13, a short step from weapons-grade levels.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told Reuters: “It would be ideal to reach an agreement before next week. It’s not something that can drag on for months.”
Officials downplay risks
Not all voices share the newspapers’ sense of alarm. IRGC political deputy Yadollah Javani called snapback talk a “psychological operation” to mask Western defeat in the June war. Babak Negahdari, head of parliament’s research center, argued that “the real pressure on Iran has come from US secondary sanctions,” and said any UN measures could be blunted by Russia and China, though he acknowledged “psychological and economic side effects if not handled carefully.”
Former presidential chief of staff Mahmoud Vaezi stressed that “some individuals do not understand the sensitivity of this moment” and warned against rhetoric that fuels division. He said the 12-day war had proved “national cohesion has completely overturned the enemy’s calculations,” and urged leaders to focus on preserving unity.
Time is running out to avert a nuclear crisis, Nicole Grajewski of the Carnegie Endowment said, describing Iran's nuclear program as a complex file where diplomacy is limited, military strikes are insufficient, and Europe’s snapback of UN sanctions risks sparking fresh conflict.
Grajewski told Iran International's Eye for Iran that only Washington can break the deadlock by re-engaging directly with Tehran and backing a short extension that ties International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections to credible security guarantees.
In June, Israel waged a 12-day air campaign against Iranian nuclear and military sites; the United States followed with bunker-buster attacks on fortified facilities at Natanz, Esfahan, and Fordow.
Tehran responded by restricting IAEA access. Soon after, Britain, France, and Germany — the E3 — formally invoked snapback under UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The mechanism automatically restores pre-2015 UN sanctions in 30 days unless the Council unanimously endorses continued relief.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accused Europe of “acquiescing” to Washington and Israel and warned any reinstated sanctions would be “null and void.” Iranian lawmakers have threatened to quit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)—the cornerstone pact that obliges Iran to cooperate with the IAEA — if UN sanctions return.
Grajewski warned that such a step could be a trigger for war.
“Iran could withdraw from the NPT. And this is where you might see another conflict between Iran and Israel, more Israeli strikes on Iran’s program,” she said. “They’ll use the excuse that now we can’t see Iran’s nuclear program. We no longer have inspectors.”
She also cautioned against overreliance on force. “It’s unclear what we could have achieved with diplomacy. And it’s also clear that military action alone can’t solve the Iranian nuclear issue,” she said. President Donald Trump, for his part, has defended the June strikes as necessary.
What can Washington do now?
Grajewski urged the United States to resume direct or indirect talks, press for restored IAEA access, and offer a narrow, conditional assurance: no new strikes on nuclear facilities during a brief extension, so long as Iran meets inspection and transparency benchmarks. That package, she argued, could unlock a six-month snapback extension and lower the odds of escalation.
Moscow has floated a counter-resolution at the UN and, as Grajewski noted, is adept at using UN procedures to delay investigations and enforcement.
Grajewski tied today’s impasse back to the collapse of the 2015 nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
“Had the JCPOA remained in force, we probably wouldn’t have seen the 12-day war,” she said. But she added that Tehran overplayed its hand: “Iran has made so many terrible decisions… showing off their capabilities” exposed weaknesses and hardened adversaries’ resolve.
For now, the file sits on a knife-edge. “A crisis is not inevitable,” Grajewski concluded. “It’s possible and it’s somewhat likely — either a diplomatic crisis with NPT withdrawal or potentially something kinetic. But it’s not a foregone conclusion.”
Watch the full Eye for Iran episode on YouTube, or listen on Spotify, Apple, Amazon, or Castbox.
Tehran’s approach to diplomacy may be best summed up by a Persian phrase: refusing with one hand and accepting with the other. But does the moribund economy show that the equivocating strategy has finally run out of road?
Britain, France and Germany last week triggered the so-called snapback mechanism which is due to reinstate UN sanctions by month's end, sending Iran’s fragile economy into a tailspin.
Iran’s currency, the rial, now trades at more than one million to the dollar, having lost nearly a third of its value since Donald Trump won the US presidential election last November.
Even the country’s private sector has sounded the alarm, but fast regretted it.
The Iran Chamber of Commerce—an institution run by business elites under heavy state oversight—published a report warning that UN snapback sanctions could spark a “deep crisis,” with inflation hitting 90 percent and GDP shrinking by three percent.
The report was swiftly deleted. Tasnim News, tied to the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), blasted it as “dangerous and inflammatory,” saying it could fuel panic and speculative inflation.
Within hours, IRGC intelligence officers raided the Chamber, interrogated staff, and pressured the board into silence. It was yet another display of the regime’s instinct: shoot the messenger.
Official bravado
Government officials have chosen defiance over honesty.
Deputy Foreign Minister for Economic Diplomacy Hamid Qanbari declared that Iran’s “economy is so big and self-sufficient that it will not break under sanctions.”
Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad admitted snapback could tighten restrictions on oil exports but boasted that “our hands are not tied.”
The message is meant for domestic consumption, but Iranians have heard it before: decades of promises that sanctions are survivable, even beneficial. Few believe it now.
Rial’s dead cat bounce
The rial’s collapse has not been a straight line.
On March 24 it hit a historic low of nearly 1.1 million to the dollar. But in April, as Tehran and Washington engaged in Oman-mediated nuclear talks, the currency clawed back 31 percent.
Officials convinced themselves they could entice the Trump administration into a deal that would preserve Iran’s nuclear leverage, maintain funding for regional proxies, and leave intact its growing missile and drone programs.
But surprise Israeli strikes on June 12 torpedoed the talks, upended markets and erased the rial’s temporary gains, initiating the next slide.
An economy in ruins
Iran’s economic woes go beyond currency freefall. Inflation and joblessness are grinding daily life, while water shortages, blackouts and environmental crises repeatedly halt basic activity.
Public anger simmers but has not so far erupted.
Meanwhile, Tehran’s military capacity has been gutted. Missile stockpiles are depleted, air defenses degraded, and armed allies from Gaza to Lebanon weakened by repeated blows. Once a symbol of strength, Iran’s arsenal is now a reminder of vulnerability.
And yet, the clerical establishment shows no sign of recalibrating.
Faced with looming UN sanctions, domestic crisis and international isolation, it clings to the illusion that a mix of propaganda, repression and tactical stalling can buy survival.
Talk therapy as diplomacy
For years, Tehran has treated negotiations less as a path to resolution than as a pressure valve—a way to appear engaged, delay enforcement and test the patience of counterparts.
That strategy may have worked when the global community was divided or distracted. It no longer does.
The snapback mechanism is proof: Europe has abandoned its posture of indulgence, siding with Washington in reimposing penalties.
Iran’s rulers now face the consequences of years spent refusing with one hand and pretending to accept with the other.
For ordinary Iranians, the result is an ever-shrinking future: savings vaporized, wages worthless and hope steadily eroded.
Tehran remains content to offer the world more of the same—talk therapy instead of genuine negotiation, illusion instead of strategy—while hoping for divine intervention.
