In Iran, ongoing peace talks with the United States are being hindered by deep-seated distrust within the Islamic Republic’s fractured political system, as well as internal opposition from powerful hardline factions. More than 100 days into a new supreme leadership, enigmatic and unseen by the public, Tehran faces significant challenges in reaching an agreement with Washington.

The government structure in Iran consolidates ultimate authority under the unelected supreme leader, a role held for decades by Ali Khamenei and now assumed by his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, who lacks the same level of control. Meanwhile, elected institutions such as parliament operate beneath this authority but suffer from internal divisions and skepticism over the negotiation process.

Hardliners within the parliament, the military, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are actively undermining the peace efforts. They oppose any concessions to the United States, viewing negotiations as a betrayal of the revolution’s principles. Actions such as laying sea mines and provoking missile strikes during ceasefire periods have raised tensions and risk derailing the talks entirely.

A significant obstacle is the pervasive information vacuum among Iranian officials. Many learn about progress and terms of the negotiations only through media reports rather than official channels, breeding suspicion and rumors. This lack of transparency allows hardline factions to fill the void with worst-case scenarios, alleging that negotiators may be surrendering Iran’s core interests without broader government approval.

Recent talks held in Doha involved key figures, including parliament speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and foreign minister Abbas Araghchi. However, even these discussions were marked by uncertainty following the U.S. refusal to release billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets—a central sticking point in the negotiations. Tehran insists that no agreement can be finalized until such funds are accessible, citing past instances of U.S. backtracking on commitments.

The fundamental mistrust of the United States is deeply embedded in Iran’s revolutionary ideology and reinforced by decades of antagonism, including military strikes by the U.S. during negotiations and coordinated actions with Israel against Iranian leadership figures. Hardliners perceive any deal as a capitulation to American hegemony.

Despite official parliamentary support for the negotiating team, with 261 out of 290 members endorsing them, a vocal minority aligned with figures like Saeed Jalili and the hardline Paydari Front remain opposed. They advocate for a complete halt to talks, insisting that Iran must first end all conflicts, lift sanctions, reclaim frozen assets, demand war reparations, and assert control over strategic regions such as the Strait of Hormuz.

The IRGC leadership shares these concerns, with former commander Mohammad Ali Jafari recently calling for an end to negotiations until these conditions are met. Such demands underscore a formidable challenge to diplomatic efforts, particularly as military actions continue during the talks.

With both sides engaged in a cycle of mistrust and internal opposition, the prospects for a swift and stable agreement remain uncertain, highlighting the difficulties of pursuing peace amid ongoing conflict and entrenched political divisions in Tehran.