In the early hours of April 9, following a late-night ceasefire agreement, many Iranians experienced a complex mixture of relief and apprehension as hostilities between Iran and the United States were paused. The ceasefire came 90 minutes before a deadline set by U.S. President Donald Trump to agree on terms aimed at ending the conflict, which had inflicted severe damage, particularly in Tehran and its surrounding areas.

Civilians across Iran expressed cautious optimism tempered by deep concerns about the future political and social landscape. Fatemeh, a human resources manager who evacuated Tehran with her young son, described the emotional toll of the conflict, likening her situation to that of a prisoner uncertain when execution might come. Others, like Maral, a teacher near Tehran, acknowledged the immediate relief but voiced disappointment that the war had not resulted in regime change as some had hoped.

Iranian authorities have framed the ceasefire as a victory. The country’s supreme national security council declared that nearly all wartime objectives had been met, portraying the armed forces’ efforts as a historic defeat for their adversaries. State media adopted a similar triumphalist tone, emphasizing the resilience of the Iranian state despite losses suffered, including the death of the late supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in February.

However, human rights advocates warn that the regime may respond to internal dissent with increased repression. Since the conflict began, at least 13 political prisoners have been executed, with activists warning that many more remain at risk. Sardar Pashaei, executive director of the Washington-based Hiwa Freedom Foundation, criticized the war’s outcomes, asserting that ordinary Iranians were likely to bear the cost of continued conflict and internal crackdowns.

At the same time, some voices within Iran hope the ceasefire could prompt authorities to address long-standing political and economic challenges. Negar, a translator in Tehran, expressed a desire for the regime to recognize its waning legitimacy and the urgent need for reforms, including reintegration into the international community following years of isolation.

Iran’s political structure remains complex and fragmented. The late supreme leader’s son, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, is widely seen as his successor, though reports vary on his current capacity to lead following the February airstrike that killed his father. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a powerful military and political force within Iran, affirmed its loyalty to Khamenei and signaled readiness to respond aggressively to any perceived threats.

Negotiations are set to continue, with Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of Iran’s parliament and a figure closely tied to the IRGC, slated to meet with U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance in Pakistan. Ghalibaf’s role is viewed as a move to project a tougher stance compared to his predecessor, Abbas Araghchi, who was associated with the reformist wing of Iranian politics.

Fundamental differences remain between the negotiating parties. The United States demands that Iran halt its nuclear program, cease ballistic missile development, and end support for proxy militias—key pillars of Iran’s strategy and ideology. Iran, meanwhile, insists on a permanent end to hostilities without foreign interference. These opposing positions maintain significant obstacles to a lasting agreement.

Looking ahead, the Iranian leadership faces difficult decisions about the regime’s future direction. Some analysts suggest Iran could follow a path similar to China’s post-Mao reforms, leveraging economic development and limited social liberalization to strengthen internal stability. This would require substantial concessions, particularly on nuclear policy and regional military activities.

However, past experiences, including the 2015 nuclear deal, raise doubts about the regime’s willingness to moderate. Following that agreement, Iran reportedly expanded missile programs and continued support for allied militias despite sanctions relief. The IRGC has reiterated its mistrust of Western intentions and warned that any aggression will be met with stronger retaliation.

As the ceasefire holds, the Iranian government must balance pressures from hardline elements and domestic restlessness. The outcome of upcoming talks and whether both sides can bridge their deep divides will significantly shape the country’s trajectory in the months ahead. For many Iranians, survival amid ongoing uncertainties remains a primary concern.