As the United States and Iran prepare to sign a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the war, a wave of protests has erupted among hardline supporters of the Iranian regime, exposing a significant rift within the conservative camp. In Mashhad, dozens gathered outside the foreign ministry's representative office on Saturday, chanting slogans such as “Death to the traitor Araghchi” and waving red and black banners. Similar demonstrations took place in Tehran's Ibn Sina Square, where protesters directed their ire at both Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, shouting “Araghchi, have shame, leave the country” and “Qalibaf, Araghchi, what about my leader's blood?” The protests come after US President Donald Trump announced that the agreement would be signed on Sunday, following Araghchi's statement that a draft understanding would be signed remotely once finalized, possibly within days.

Viewed from Tehran, the demonstrations are particularly significant because they involve individuals described as close to the hardline Paydari Front, a faction known for its uncompromising stance. The protesters' chants, including “Qalibaf, Araghchi, resign, resign,” indicate a direct challenge to the leadership's negotiating strategy. State-linked media, such as Fars News Agency, described the events as “bitter” and noted a “lack of trust” in decision-makers, criticizing what they termed “concessions.” This internal dissent underscores the delicate balance the regime must strike between pursuing a deal to lift sanctions and placating its most ardent supporters, who view any accommodation with Washington as a betrayal of revolutionary principles.

From Washington's perspective, the timing of the protests is awkward, as the Trump administration has framed the agreement as a victory that would immediately reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international shipping. However, Iranian officials have been more cautious, with foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei describing any potential understanding as merely a framework for continued talks, not a final agreement. This discrepancy in messaging highlights the divergent expectations on each side and the fragility of the negotiating process.

Analysts in London note that the protests reveal a deeper fracture within Iran's political establishment, where hardliners fear that the deal could undermine the narrative of resistance that has sustained the regime's legitimacy. The chants referencing “my leader's blood” suggest that some supporters view the negotiations as a betrayal of the supreme leader's sacrifices. As the signing approaches, the regime faces the challenge of managing internal dissent while maintaining a unified front in negotiations. The coming days will test whether the government can contain this backlash or whether it will escalate into a more significant political crisis, potentially derailing the agreement altogether.