Iran International
Rising prices for essential goods, inflation above 73%, and a surging dollar amid a fragile “no war, no peace” environment, US naval pressure, and political divisions have heightened concerns among some officials about internal instability.
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned in a radio message on Wednesday that the United States had entered a new phase of the war to weaken Iran from within, or even make it collapse, through economic pressure, media campaigns, and a naval blockade.
Ghalibaf’s warning reflected a broader concern among political observers inside Iran that a prolonged naval blockade could impose escalating costs and, over time, prove more damaging than a direct military conflict.
Economic dissatisfaction is increasingly visible across media and social networks. Even before the recent conflict, rising economic pressures—reflected in the sharp increase in the dollar—had already driven days of protests and an exceptionally bloody crackdown in cities across the country. Those pressures have since intensified.
International affairs analyst Ali Bigdeli described the social climate in an interview with Khabar Online: “People are in an exhausting situation. At the societal level, signs of fatigue and restlessness are completely evident.”
He warned that a US naval blockade could be more dangerous than war itself and argued that authorities should move quickly toward negotiations with Washington, showing flexibility—even if that means temporarily halting parts of Iran’s nuclear program. “Ultimately, if no concessions are given to the United States, more complex internal social and political consequences may arise,” he added.
One reader commented: “I constantly have the feeling that people might pour into the streets soon—because of rising prices, internet shutdowns, and unemployment. Send this article to Mr. Ghalibaf so they move faster on reaching a deal; otherwise, things could turn.”
Risk of losing core supporters
Among government supporters, the current ceasefire period is described as a “war of resilience.” However, some warn that worsening economic conditions could erode the loyalty of core supporters—often referred to by conservatives as “The Street”—who backed the Islamic Republic during the conflict, while undecided “gray” segments of society may shift toward opposition.
Conservative figure Ali Gholhaki wrote that the war has entered a new phase, pointing to sharp increases in car prices, surging housing costs despite security risks, and rising currency and gold prices as signs of negative developments:
“The economic phase of the war is an essential part of the war itself. A new plan must be devised before the ‘street’ is lost!”
A user on X expressed similar concerns: “These days my fear is that the patience of the gray class will run out and, God forbid, we may experience another street conflict—even with revolutionary supporters present.”
Post-war economy under pressure
The fears are being amplified by a series of post-ceasefire indicators showing pressure spreading from prices and currency markets to employment.
According to the Statistical Center of Iran, the consumer price index rose 5% in Farvardin (March–April) compared to the previous month, reaching 73.5% year-on-year—over five percentage points higher than figures reported by the Central Bank of Iran earlier this week.
After a period of relative stability with the dollar below 1,600,000 rials, the exchange rate in the informal market rose to around 1,820,000 rials on April 30. While fears of renewed conflict played a role, rising inflation is also a key driver, analysts say.
Unemployment has surged sharply. A deputy labor minister said the 40-day war left 2 million people jobless. However, labor activist Hamid Haj Esmaeili estimates that including informal sectors and digital platforms, the real figure could be between 3 and 4 million.
The war has also disproportionately affected women’s employment. Zahra Behrouz Azar recently stated that nearly one-third of unemployment insurance claims filed over the past 40 days were submitted by women. Given their lower participation in formal employment, she described the figure as significant, noting it indicates a higher rate of women exiting the labor market—many of whom are heads of households.
According to new estimates by the International Monetary Fund, Iran’s economy is expected to contract by 6.1% due to the war, potentially leading to further unemployment and deepening poverty.
Expanding poverty and social risks
As inflation and unemployment rise, more Iranians are falling below the absolute poverty line. The head of Iran’s Welfare Organization reported in January that the population living in absolute poverty has doubled since 2018, reaching 44% (around 35 million people), with an additional 4 million experiencing extreme poverty.
Economic analyst Majid Goudarzi warned that if current trends continue, Iran could face “a combination of widespread unemployment, declining purchasing power, and rising poverty that will be very difficult to manage.”
Several of those affected said they were told to leave by the end of the week after calls from Tehran’s crisis management body, even though official inspections had deemed their homes uninhabitable.
“I was told I had to leave the hotel by the end of the week, even though my home is unsafe and I have nowhere to go,” one resident said, describing a call from a municipal official who noted reconstruction had not begun due to lack of funds.
Unsafe homes, no rental support
A resident, who lived in a seventh-floor apartment damaged by a nearby missile strike in March, described shattered windows and debris that rendered both the unit and building access unusable. Emergency services later confirmed the structure was unsafe.
Despite this, the resident said no rental assistance or deposit support had been offered. “They told me I should find housing myself because there is no budget,” the resident added.
Other displaced residents reported receiving similar instructions. Many said they lacked the financial means to rebuild or secure new housing, leaving them at risk of homelessness.
Under earlier municipal pledges, affected households were to receive temporary accommodation, rental support, and reconstruction assistance.
Updated figures increased aid for household goods to 4 billion rials (about $2,200), rental deposits to 20 billion rials (about $11,000), and monthly rent support to 400 million rials (about $220).
However, residents said these commitments have not been consistently fulfilled.
Average income in Iran is around $150 to $200 per month, while the minimum wage is typically below $100.
Delays and conditions on compensation
Some families whose homes were destroyed said they were instructed to pay for basic household items upfront and submit receipts for reimbursement, which could take up to 10 months.
Others said even smaller grants had limited impact. One resident who received 2.5 billion rials (about $1,400) said it was insufficient to replace essential items such as a refrigerator, stove, and bedding.
“We lost everything in the strike and could not even recover clothes,” the resident said. “With that money, we could only buy a few basic items.”
In some cases, families forced to leave hotels reported moving into improvised spaces. One household said they had lived for months in a 30-square-meter storage room after being unable to afford rent.
Insurance payouts also stalled
Residents with damaged vehicles described similar difficulties in seeking compensation. Several said they were told by representatives of insurance that earlier claims from a previous conflict in June had not yet been settled.
“They told me there is no timeline for paying these damages,” one vehicle owner said after visiting an insurance office.
Official figures show that thousands of vehicles and tens of thousands of residential units were damaged in the 40-day conflict, adding to earlier destruction from a previous 12-day escalation in June.
City council response highlights gaps
A spokesperson for Tehran’s city council acknowledged reports of inconsistencies and said cases of forced eviction without support should be reviewed.
“This should not happen, and if such cases exist, they must be followed up,” Alireza Nadali said, adding that municipal policy ties the end of hotel stays to securing alternative housing.
The official also pointed to the scale of damage and budget constraints, adding that assistance programs were introduced voluntarily and may face delays.
At the same time, the council emphasized that reconstruction responsibilities differ depending on the level of damage and local planning rules, which has led to varied outcomes across districts.
Oversight concerns emerge
The accounts raise questions about the oversight role of the city council and the implementation of municipal commitments. Residents interviewed said many promises remained unfulfilled months after the initial damage.
Efforts to obtain direct comment from municipal crisis officials were unsuccessful, according to the report.
Despite a history of sectarian and political friction, recent statements from Taliban officials point to an alignment with the Islamic Republic during a period of heightened regional confrontation.
Differences over border clashes, water rights from the Hirmand (Helmand) River and the treatment of Afghan refugees remain unresolved.
The clearest articulation came from Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, who said the group does not favor war but supports Iran’s right to respond to attacks.
“We are not in favor of war… Iran is right; defense is Iran’s right,” Mujahid said in a February 15, 2026 interview with radio. “Whatever happens, Afghans are ready to sympathize with Iran in times of war and hardship and cooperate within their means.”
Mujahid added that any assistance would depend on Iran making a request and said that diplomacy remains preferable to escalation.
The spokesman had earlier condemned Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets on June 13, 2025, describing them as a “violation of international law and national sovereignty.”
Foreign ministry stance
Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi also conveyed support in direct contacts with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi.
In a March 2, 2026 statement, the foreign ministry said Muttaqi condemned what he described as “US and Israeli aggression against Iran” and expressed sympathy following the reported death of Iran’s supreme leader.
Muttaqi urged a diplomatic resolution, calling “violations of national sovereignty unacceptable under international norms.”
Haqqani network figures
Figures linked to the Islamist Haqqani network reinforced this position through social media activity. Mohammad Jalal, a senior member of the Taliban’s cultural committee, circulated images of damage in Israeli cities after Iranian missile strikes, framing Tehran’s response as “legitimate self-defense.”
Jalal also shared posts by Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf promoting a campaign encouraging volunteers to defend Iran, aligning with broader anti-Israel rhetoric within Taliban circles.
Anas Haqqani, another senior figure, published a poem referencing the Strait of Hormuz in support of Iran.
Pro-Taliban commentators
Media figures close to the Taliban have gone further, portraying Iran as a model of national unity. Abdullah Raihan, a Kabul-based commentator, praised defiance following US threats to target Iranian infrastructure.
“Afghans should learn patriotism from Iranians,” Raihan wrote earlier in April, describing scenes of civilians gathering on bridges in response to threats of bombardment.
Raihan contrasted this with Kabul’s 2021 fall, arguing that “even critics of Iran’s government did not undermine national infrastructure.” He also condemned attacks on civilian sites and adding that foreign intervention is worse than domestic political shortcomings.
State media mirrors official line
Taliban-controlled national radio and television largely reflected official statements without advancing independent advocacy for Iran. Coverage focused on Mujahid’s interview and foreign ministry statements, framing developments through concerns about regional escalation and sovereignty.
Programming remained largely domestic in focus, though Iran-related coverage rose sharply during the most intense phases of the conflict.
Whether this limited convergence translates into tangible cooperation remains unclear, given enduring Iran-Taliban disputes and the Taliban’s preference for avoiding direct involvement in the conflict.
