Factional divisions persist within Iran’s leadership over ongoing negotiations with the United States, but experts say internal opposition is unlikely to halt the diplomatic process. The talks, which resumed after a recent five-week conflict ended by an accord earlier this month, involve US Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. The discussions, held in Switzerland with mediation by Qatar and Pakistan, aim to reach a final agreement.

Despite these efforts, the path to a deal remains complex. Iran’s strategic control over the Strait of Hormuz offers significant leverage in global economic affairs, while the US, under President Donald Trump, has threatened military action if negotiations collapse. Both Tehran and Washington are navigating pressures from internal factions critical of the talks. In Iran, hardliners continue to denounce compromise with the US, long regarded as the “Great Satan” since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Analysts note that while opposition exists, those opposing the negotiations lack the institutional power to significantly influence outcomes. Yale University lecturer Arash Azizi described hardliner factions as unable to block or steer the talks effectively at present. This sentiment is echoed by Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, who views the current environment as favorable for pursuing talks and testing Trump’s willingness to reach a deal.

Signs of dissent appeared visibly in June when protesters gathered outside the Iranian foreign ministry offices in Mashhad, criticizing negotiators including Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Reports also indicate resistance among some officials, notably ultra-conservative former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili. Nonetheless, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei has publicly endorsed the agreement and expressed readiness for direct talks, despite reportedly holding different views.

The Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani, representing a key security faction often associated with hardliners, publicly praised the negotiating team, highlighting unity between Iran’s military resistance and diplomatic efforts. This marks a rare endorsement of the talks from traditionally conservative elements of the regime’s power structure.

In the United States, President Trump has expressed unexpected praise for Iran’s leadership, calling them “smart” and “very rational” during the recent G7 summit. Vice President Vance supported this characterization, suggesting pragmatic officials within Iran are gaining influence, and contending that hardliners are recognizing the drawbacks of antagonistic policies toward the US.

Bagher Ghalibaf and Abbas Araghchi have emphasized their firm stance on protecting Iranian interests, with Araghchi comparing their resolute approach to the heroics of national football goalkeeper Alireza Beiranvand. To avoid political backlash, the Iranian negotiators have refrained from publicizing joint appearances with US officials that could be construed as overly conciliatory.

Commentators caution that Iran’s political system remains opaque and destabilized, particularly following the killing of several leaders earlier in the conflict and amid ongoing fears of further strikes. Azizi noted that while anti-American sentiment remains entrenched, newer leaders may display less ideological rigidity than Ali Khamenei and could potentially steer the regime toward transformation—a process likely to be prolonged and fraught with uncertainty.

Both Iran and the US contain hardline factions, but analysts suggest those opposing diplomacy are more easily marginalized within the Iranian system. As the talks move forward, the balance of power between pragmatists and hardliners on both sides will remain a critical factor shaping the future of US-Iran relations.