Three-minute read
The snapback of UN sanctions has pushed Tehran into crisis-management mode. Regime-aligned outlets alternately downplay the move and warn of “consequences worse than war,” while the state imposes information controls and financial clamps within hours. The dissonance is striking: public claims of composure alongside actions that betray alarm.
What Returned
From the evening of September 27 into September 28, 2025, the UN reactivated Resolutions 1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835 and 1929. Domestic coverage concedes that, in legal terms, Iran is again treated as a threat to international peace and security under the UN Charter.
Officials and loyalist media try to minimize the change, casting it as a mere repetition of “unjust” measures. Yet the same coverage lists political, military and economic effects that start immediately, contradicting the minimization line.
The split narrative matters. When authorities insist nothing has changed but simultaneously warn of “worse than war,” they reveal not confidence but anxiety about enforcement and isolation.
#Khamenei Rejects U.S. Talks, Vows Enrichment Will Continue as Snapback Deadline Nearshttps://t.co/Q0Ug6uBUgs
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) September 23, 2025
Economic Stress
By late September, point-to-point inflation reached 45.3%, a 28-month high. Food inflation hit 57.5%, and bread—the staple—has roughly doubled in a year. Monthly inflation again edged toward 4%, signaling renewed pressure on household budgets.
Foreign-exchange markets mirrored the strain. In the unofficial market, the U.S. dollar approached 113,000 tomans on Saturday as traders priced in legal risk and supply constraints. Even regime-adjacent commentators predict further depreciation absent policy change.
This is the real ledger behind the rhetoric of “national pride.” The program is defended as prestige; families face shrinking purchasing power and soaring food costs.
Emergency Controls
Roughly twelve hours after snapback confirmation, the Tehran Prosecutor warned domestic media not to disturb “psychological security,” threatening action against outlets reporting price spikes and currency moves. The message was plain: control the narrative as much as the market.
In parallel, IRGC-linked Tasnim amplified the risk that Tether could freeze Iranian-linked assets, asserting “thousands” of addresses have already been blocked. Whether new or recycled, the framing encourages flight from informal hedges and chills capital mobility.
The Central Bank then capped annual purchases of dollar-pegged stablecoins at $5,000 per person and total holdings at $10,000, ordering compliance within a month. Officials tied the measure to mitigating snapback fallout—another tacit admission that the sanctions architecture matters.
#Iran’s Regime Prepares to Rig Presidential #Election Results in Crisis Management Strategyhttps://t.co/RPzVhxEd5b
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) June 16, 2024
Fractures and Escalation
The press spectrum is splintered. Revisionist-leaning outlets such as Etemad and Jahan-e San’at emphasize legal and security exposure in a “post-snapback” environment, warning that Iran now looks condemned—not merely accused—under international law. Others, including Setareh-e Sobh and Shargh, recast the episode as a Western-Israeli regime-change design.
Extremist papers, led by Kayhan and Javan, blame Hassan Rouhani, Mohammad Javad Zarif and Abbas Araghchi for a “JCPOA disaster,” while resurfacing old boasts that snapback “did not exist.” The tone is accusatory, not strategic—more about settling scores than solving the crisis.
Escalatory prescriptions surfaced fast. Tehran MP Kamran Ghazanfari urged withdrawal from the NPT and openly advocated nuclear armament to deter the United States and Israel, while also accusing the current government of “pleading” for talks. The policy signal is unambiguous: raise the stakes.
The death of the Iranian regime’s president Ebrahim #Raisi, along with FM Hossein Amir-Abdollahian and several other high-ranking officials pushed #Tehran into crisis management mode once again. pic.twitter.com/YgMCfbZszt
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) May 27, 2024
Khamenei’s Line
The regime’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei doubled down on defiance. In remarks recorded earlier and published on his official website on September 27, he rejected U.S. demands to end enrichment, calling it “burning a great achievement” for which the country had paid dearly. He framed any negotiation conducted under pressure as bullying that “no wise statesman” would accept.
He also re-packaged the nuclear program as a domestic good—medicine, agriculture, industry—and vowed that Iran “did not and will not surrender.” The claim aims to turn a security liability into a symbol of sovereignty.
But the ground reality is harsher. If snapback truly “added nothing new,” there would be no need for prosecutors to threaten the press, the central bank to cap crypto holdings, MPs to call for leaving the NPT, or hardline papers to trade blame over the JCPOA. At the same time, factional rifts are widening, protests remain a constant risk, and Iran stands once again condemned under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The regime is not projecting strength—it is juggling simultaneous crises: internal conflict, social unrest, economic meltdown, and deepening international isolation.