SAEDNEWS: Last week’s troubling events revealed hidden forces seeking to disrupt the government’s work and perhaps even overthrow it. They seemed to believe that removing a popular national government would be easy.
According to Saed News, the newspaper Jomhouri Eslami argued that certain political factions may be seeking to place President Masoud Pezeshkian in direct confrontation with Iran’s leadership, push him toward resignation and isolation, and undermine his credibility by accusing him of compromise and of deviating from the directives of the Supreme Leader.
The article further claims that these groups seek to weaken the National Security Council and its leadership, while encouraging hardline factions and staunch supporters of Iran’s nuclear program to take to the streets, disrupt negotiations, and accuse the government, foreign minister, negotiating team, and National Security Council officials of making concessions. According to the newspaper, such developments could ultimately paralyze the political system and create conditions for the rapid implementation of an agenda involving what it describes as social, economic, and cultural “purification.”
The newspaper warns that radical political movements can ultimately become dangerous because of their inability to understand the complexity of society and governance. It also argues that infiltrators can operate within extremist groups while adopting even more radical rhetoric, potentially leaving the country and its people vulnerable to severe consequences.
The article nevertheless portrays Iran’s Supreme Leader as alert and President Pezeshkian as a legitimate leader who received the support of a majority of voters. It says that a message from the leadership, which was initially published publicly and later delivered to state media, neutralized what the newspaper describes as divisive rhetoric and attempts to derail the political process.
Regarding the ongoing conflict, the newspaper says little can be expected from hardline groups that oppose peace and negotiations. It argues, however, that the government and Iranian negotiators should avoid statements that could further antagonize neighboring and regional countries or serve Israel’s interests. Instead, it calls for efforts to reduce tensions and transform the current level of warfare, destruction, and confrontation into an opportunity for de-escalation and dialogue.
The article points to Israeli military strikes in Lebanon, including areas such as Beirut’s southern suburbs and Tyre, as evidence of what it describes as an attempt to undermine calm and diplomatic efforts. It argues that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pursuing an objective similar to that promoted by domestic Iranian hawks: making prolonged warfare appear increasingly normal.
According to the newspaper, those advocating continued conflict believe that a prolonged war could deepen sectarian and ethnic divisions between Shia and Sunni Muslims and between Arabs and Persians, while weakening or destroying the wealth, infrastructure, and resources of Iran and other Muslim countries. The article also claims that making populations accustomed to wartime conditions and life amid destruction would serve Israel’s strategic interests.
The newspaper describes the transformation of Iran into a country resembling Libya, Syria, or Afghanistan as what it portrays as Israel’s ultimate objective. It claims that Israel initially sought to promote the fragmentation of Iran through its western and southeastern provinces but failed to achieve that goal. The article concludes that the focus has now shifted toward a longer-term strategy of normalizing hostility and warfare while maximizing destruction.
