Asked about the setbacks in negotiations with Iran, Vance cited two factors: “Number one, the Iranians are extraordinarily difficult people. Number two, they have a fractured system.”
“There are people within their system that want the war to be over and there are also people in their system that are crazy radicals who want the war to continue,” he said.
“Our job is to navigate through that and get the best outcome for the American people and for the President of the United States as well.”
In the mid-1980s, Rezaei became involved in secret contacts with the United States during the Iran-Contra affair, in which Iran received American weapons while proceeds from the arms sales were diverted to support the Contra rebels in Nicaragua.
Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani once told local media that his nephew, Ali Hashemi, a key intermediary in contacts with the administration of then-US President Ronald Reagan, had informed him and, subsequently, Rezaei about meetings with American officials.
It is worth recalling that the conflict did not begin over disputes about the Strait of Hormuz. As recently as February 28, commercial ships transited the waterway without restriction.
(…)
With the US maintaining the naval blockade during the ceasefire period, Iran responded by stopping and, in several cases, attacking vessels attempting to cross the Strait without its approval. Insurance rates spiked, shipping lines rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope, and transit times increased by up to three weeks.
Wars of this nature benefit no party in the long term, and they rarely reach a logical conclusion. Their primary victims are innocent civilians who have no role in the conflict. Many civilians in Iran and Lebanon have lost their lives directly to strikes.
It was in this climate that a leaked video of Mohammad-Bagher Kharrazi, the brother-in-law of Masoud Khamenei, the younger brother of Iran’s supreme leader, emerged as part of what critics describe as a broader hard-line campaign.
In the video, Kharrazi claimed that Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei had “formally and publicly announced” that if Pezeshkian attempts to resign one more time, his resignation would be accepted.
(…)
Soon afterward, however, another audio file surfaced in which Ali Saeedi, a conservative senior figure close to the Khamenei‘s office, claimed that the supreme leader had expressed support for the negotiations and criticised hard-line opposition to diplomacy.
According to Saeedi, Khamenei told one of his brothers: “I have never opposed negotiations, and I still do not. I was the one who authorised the negotiations, and I am not satisfied with the hard-line positions adopted by some people.”
Saeedi also claimed that Khamenei supports Ghalibaf, saying: “He is like [the late Quds Force commander] Haj Qassem Soleimani.”
Khoshcheshm noted the appointments could also herald a major restructuring of Iran’s security and military apparatus, with a greater focus on pre-emptive strikes and more powerful responses to any US attack.
While he does not believe Iran would attack the US “offhand with no reason”, he says the new leadership is preparing Iran to develop its capabilities for pre-emptive strikes and stronger attacks on US military forces and positions in the region.
He described the appointments as creating a “more offensive-minded leadership for Iran’s security establishment across the board”.
Rezaei is a commander who holds some of the most closely guarded secrets of the 1980s Iran-Iraq war and the IRGC‘s founding years, and for just as long, he‘s been a favorite target of Iranian political satire. Now, at 71, he‘s back at the center of the Islamic republic‘s security decision-making.
Rezaei traded his uniform for politics in 1997 and ran for president four times, dropping out before the vote in 2005, then losing in 2009, 2013, and 2021, never pulling in more than about 3.9 million votes.
The appointments came one day after Khamenei named Major General Mohsen Rezaei as his representative to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and appointed outgoing SNSC secretary Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr as his political adviser.
President Masoud Pezeshkian separately appointed Rezaei as secretary of the SNSC, replacing Zolghadr.
Cenk Uygur and John Iadarola discuss how Trump’s war with Iran is pushing Tehran to dig in for a prolonged conflict.
(August 6, 2026)
In recent weeks, Iran has gone on the offensive, striking commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz and launching a surprise attack on U.S. forces in Jordan. From a distance, these moves look like self-defeating escalation. Why should a badly damaged state, under severe economic pressure, lash out at the U.S. instead of pushing for a ceasefire?
The answer, simply put, is that Iran is digging in for a long war. Whatever Washington‘s intentions, Tehran increasingly interprets sanctions, negotiations, temporary ceasefires and military strikes as different instruments aimed at a single objective: regime change.
As long as this primary objective remains, Iran expects no sanctions relief or meaningful de-escalation. My conversations with Iranian foreign policy analysts suggest that Tehran now believes the war will continue in different forms until the end of Donald Trump‘s presidency.
(July 19, 2026)
Irgendeine Gruppe oder Fraktion hat die Staatsführung des Iran übernommen, in deren Interesse nicht der Iran selbst, sondern die Fortführung des Krieges auf unabsehbare Zeit steht. Welche Rolle dabei der Sohn des in der ersten Angriffswelle auf den Iran am 28. Februar ermordeten „Obersten Führers“ („Supreme Leader“) Ali Khamenei, Mojtaba Khamenei spielt, erscheint völlig unklar. Bisher ist er nicht in der Öffentlichkeit aufgetreten. Ausgerechnet über israelische Medien wird gestreut, dies werde so bleiben bis zum unabsehbaren Ende des Krieges. Die formal dem „Obersten Führer“ unterstellten Revolutionsgarden agieren gegen die iranischen Interessen. Gewinner des Krieges sind u.a. Ölmagnate, Kriegsproduzenten und der internationale geheimdienstliche Komplex, nicht zuletzt in der Russischen Föderation, sowie der zum Machterhalt auf Krieg und externe Bedrohung angewiesene Machthaber in Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Dabei ist das Interesse der Kriegsgewinnler auf allen Seiten den Westasienkrieg insgesamt noch auszuweiten.
(May 21, 2026)
They’re mad at Massie. Why? One Republican out of 217 who hasn’t taken money from the Israeli lobby. Why are they so mad at him? Why was it so important for the Israeli lobby to spend tens of millions of dollars to crush this guy?
It wasn’t stopping really the status quo in any way. He did help get some of the Epstein files released, and God bless him for that. He tried his hardest. But one man against 216 other members of his party is not going to get very far by definition, so why don’t you just leave him alone? Why force the issue?
On one side, the ultra-hardliners who oppose any negotiations with the United States are pressing for total victory in the war. Known as the “Paydari” movement – Persian for “stability” – they are hard-core ideologues who want to enforce the Islamic Republic’s control over society.
On the other, those who support President Masoud Pezeshkian and powerful parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf — who doubles as Iran’s chief negotiator — see military pressure as a way to win a negotiated deal with the United States. This camp is also spurred by concern over the economic toll Iran is suffering from the war and the need to adapt to social change in the country.
When House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries sent out a recent “dear colleague” letter, its second sentence cited “the position articulated by… pro-peace organizations like J Street.” The congressman and J Street were opposing an amendment to block $3.3 billion in military shipments and other aid to Israel.
Jeffries (NY) contended that the measure was “overly broad.” On the same day, using the same phrase “overly broad,” J Street issued a statement declaring that “we support Leader Jeffries’ decision to oppose the amendment.”
Both Jeffries and J Street respectfully noted that many members of Congress had understandable reasons to back the measure. The next day, July 15, a record 103 Democrats voted in favor of blocking weaponry to Israel.
This included a media campaign in the Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, The Guardian and latterly CNN; private warnings by David Cameron, then foreign secretary, who told him Britain would defund the ICC and withdraw from the Rome Statute if the warrants were issued; Republican senators who told him: „Target Israel and we will target you“, and being named publicly as a suspect before he had even had the chance to defend himself by the president of the Assembly of State Parties (ASP), Finland‘s Paivi Kaukoranta.
Danon threatened Mamdani with the same fate as Khan. „@NYCMayor Zohran Mamdani, take note: using Israel as a political weapon will not shield you from accountability,“ Danon posted.
(July 1, 2026)
Despite the messages and activity on social media channels, there has been no concrete proof that Mojtaba Khamenei is even alive after the February 28 attack that also killed his wife Zahra Haddad Adel and other members of the Khamenei family.
The broadcaster, whose head is appointed by the supreme leader, issued a response on Saturday rejecting the government’s “accusations and improper attributions”, and emphasised that it has a duty to prevent “an incorrect and unreal suggestion of duality in the country’s leadership pillars”.
In his speech, Pezeshkian had pointed out that after last year’s 12-day war with Israel, former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei publicly said there would be no negotiations with Washington – but privately had given his approval.
Doch Richter des Gerichtshofes stellten nach Darstellung von Khans Verteidiger fest, dass „kein Fehlverhalten oder eine Pflichtverletzung“ nachgewiesen worden sei.
Vor dem Hintergrund dieser Affäre hatte die US-Regierung kürzlich ihre Attacken gegen das Gericht noch verstärkt. Die USA verhängten bereits Sanktionen gegen Richter und Mitarbeiter. Die USA und Israel gehören dem Gericht nicht an.
(July 20, 2026)
Over the past year, he has submitted four expert‘s opinions commissioned by Khan‘s legal team to the 21-member bureau of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP), criticising the manner in which the investigation into misconduct allegations facing the prosecutor was conducted, and the subsequent handling of the process by the bureau.
In his latest submission on 28 June, obtained by Middle East Eye through independent sources, Swanson denounced the 8 June decision by the bureau, which suspended the prosecutor after concluding by a majority that he committed “serious misconduct”.
The bureau’s decision departed from the unanimous conclusion of a panel of three judges it appointed, which in March concluded that the facts presented in the UN investigation „do not establish misconduct or breach of duty under the relevant framework“.
“The Assembly has decided by a majority of 82 States Parties that…prosecutor Karim Kahn committed serious conduct and a serious breach of duty…and to remove [him] from office,” the Assembly president announced, calling for the dignity and privacy of all those involved.
Assembly of States President Päivi Kaukoranta said 82 of the court’s 125 member states voted in favor of the prosecutor’s removal, concluding that Khan “committed serious misconduct and a serious breach of duty.”
The vote will take place during a special session of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP), the ICC‘s governing body, at UN headquarters in New York.
The 125 member states will decide by secret ballot, with an absolute majority of at least 63 votes required to remove Khan from office.
In May 2024, Khan’s office requested arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Hamas leaders over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity linked to the Gaza war.
The ICC later issued warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif. The move drew fierce condemnation from Israel and the US, culminating in US sanctions targeting several ICC officials, including Khan.
Member states of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are set to gather at the United Nations headquarters in New York on Friday for a controversial vote which could see the court‘s chief prosecutor Karim Khan dismissed from his job over alleged misconduct claims.
It will be the first time in the ICC‘s 24-year history that member states have been asked to decide whether to remove a sitting chief prosecutor from office.
The Assembly of States Parties (ASP), the court’s governing body that is made up of its 125 members, will vote by secret ballot requiring an absolute majority of 63 states to remove the prosecutor.
Khan’s lawyers said they have been denied accreditation to attend Friday’s session and to mount a defence prior to the vote. They added that the president of the ASP “has closed every formal channel” through which they can address the assembly, and has asked all state parties not to meet with the legal team.
The committee of technocrats, which is based in Cairo, is chaired by Ali Shaath, a Gaza-born engineer and former official with the Palestinian Authority. It has a mandate to restore essential services and oversee civilian affairs under the supervision of the U.N. and the Board of Peace.
The Palestinian group Hamas has announced the dissolution of the body that has governed Gaza for nearly two decades, paving the way for a technocratic committee to implement civilian rule in the war-ravaged, besieged territory.
The move on Monday marks a significant political shift by Hamas, which has governed Gaza since its fighters seized control from rival Palestinian movement Fatah in 2007 after Hamas won legislative elections the previous year.
Previously, the procedure was expected to consist of a two-stage vote in which members would first vote on whether misconduct had occurred and its gravity, with a second vote on removal triggered only if they found „serious misconduct.“
The ASP, which is made up of diplomatic representatives from the international court‘s 125 member states, is due to vote on Khan‘s future at the United Nations‘ headquarters in New York City on 24 July.
It comes after the bureau, a body of diplomats from 21 member states, determined by a two-thirds majority last month that Khan had committed „serious misconduct.“
This was despite a judicial panel, appointed by the bureau to review the findings of a United Nations investigation into complaints against Khan, concluding that the evidence against him was insufficient to establish any level of misconduct.
(video)
The push to put a billionaire tax to a popular vote in blue California has exposed deep divides on the left, even as Democratic politicians across the country rally around calls for the wealthy to pay more. The issue is pitting the populist mood of the public against many Democrats’ fears that the measure will push the ultrawealthy to join a broader exodus from the state and take their tax dollars with them.
(June 25, 2026)
SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West President Dave Regan refused to back down on the billionaire tax.
(January 12, 2026)
The conversations, reported here for the first time, have occurred intermittently for months as SEIU-UHW’s ballot initiative targeting billionaires migrated from the backrooms of California politics to the center of a raging debate about Silicon Valley and income inequality, sparking tech titans’ wrath and vows to move out of state.
“We’ve been at this for four months,” Newsom said in an interview with POLITICO, describing an “all-hands” effort that has included him meeting one-on-one with SEIU-UHW’s leader, Dave Regan.
A compromise does not appear imminent. A union official cast doubt on the possibility of a deal, saying the two sides do not currently have another meeting scheduled and framing a ballot fight as an inevitability.