Why Iran persists in electricity exports despite shortages?

This criticism comes amid growing concerns about the composition of Pezeshkian's cabinet, casting doubt on its ability to effectively navigate the challenges ahead. The backlash from both the media and the public has grown so intense that Pezeshkian has called on the nation to withhold judgment, urging citizens to evaluate the cabinet based on its future performance rather than immediate perceptions.

"In selecting Aliabadi for the Ministry of Energy, the electricity crisis is set to worsen, virtually guaranteeing the failure of Pezeshkian's administration," wrote the Tehran-based Rouydad24 news outlet on Thursday. The outlet further warned that "the fallout from this decision will be keenly felt by the Iranian people in the next four years, just as the lingering effects of his extended leadership at Mapna are now exposing the nation to this summer's searing heat."

Aliabadi, who has been proposed as Minister of Energy, previously served as Iran's Minister of Industry, Mines, and Trade under the hardline government of Ebrahim Raisi in 2023. His appointment even stirred discontent within Raisi's government, with many questioning the rationale behind his selection. Aliabadi stepped in following the impeachment and subsequent dismissal of Raisi's previous minister by parliament, a move that only added to the controversy surrounding his role.

Rouydad24 described the country’s ongoing energy crisis as one of Aliabadi's "greatest betrayals to Iranians," asserting that "the current situation alone serves as a compelling indicator of Aliabadi's managerial abilities and capacity to govern."

This criticism is made as Iran grapples with its most severe heatwave in half a century, which has led to widespread power outages nationwide. The government, already burdened by a staggering fiscal deficit, is struggling to address the crisis.

The roots of Iran's energy crisis run deep, with years of underinvestment and systemic mismanagement at the heart of the problem. The halt in investment in the electricity sector, coupled with stagnation in the development of new power plants and an aging, deteriorating grid, has resulted in a significant electricity shortage. The country now faces a crippling 14,000-megawatt deficit, leaving ordinary citizens to bear the brunt of prolonged blackouts and extreme heat.

Experts warn that the government's continued failure to address these critical issues is pushing Iran toward an increasingly unsustainable future. The situation underscores the urgent need for comprehensive reforms in Iran's energy policy to avert further catastrophe.

Adding to the controversy, Aliabadi's fifteen-year tenure as CEO of the Mapna Group, a major Iranian conglomerate responsible for constructing power plants and oil facilities, is now under scrutiny. The group’s ties to the Islamic Republic's political elite have raised alarms, particularly following revelations by the German newspaper Bild in April. The report suggested that Mapna Group's Düsseldorf-based subsidiary, Mapna Europe, may be involved in circumventing international sanctions.

Further concerns were raised by the British government, with Mapna Europe GmbH reportedly appearing on a European list of companies suspected of engaging in activities related to the production or procurement of weapons of mass destruction. Bild's investigation suggested that the Islamic Republic might be using Mapna Europe, along with its subsidiaries in Dubai, China, and Turkey, to conduct suspicious transactions aimed at evading international sanctions.

Aliabadi, a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and an alumnus of Iran’s defense educational institutions, resigned from his role at Mapna shortly after assuming his government position. However, Bild asserted that Aliabadi continues to exert influence over Mapna Europe's operations behind the scenes, further complicating his already contentious nomination.

Although Tehran was not attending the talks, Qatari prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, spoke with Iran’s acting foreign minister Ali Bagheri-Kani to brief him on the first day of negotiations. Talks are continuing Friday, with some observers saying that a successful outcome will not be easy.

Iranian government-controlled media was largely silent about Tehran’s stance and role in the negotiations, limiting itself to brief reporting about the talks.

More attention was focused on what former US President Donald Trump and the Republican candidate in November said about Iran at a press conference he held at a golf club on Thursday.

Trump, in his typical fashion held out both a stick and a carrot for Tehran. “I'm not looking to be bad to Iran. We're going to be friendly I hope with Iran. Maybe but maybe not. But we're going to be friendly I hope we're going to be friendly, but they can't have a nuclear weapon…and we were all set to make sure that they don't.”

Iran’s Islamic regime insiders have been visibly nervous about Trump’s return, expecting him to be tough in enforcing sanctions. Trump has insisted that under his watch Tehran would not have had the financial resources to organize the October 7 attack on Israel. After he imposed crippling oil export sanctions in 2018, Iran’s main source of revenues dried up. Following President Joe Biden’s election, China began buying large shipments of Iranian oil, boosting Tehran’s exports from around 250,000 barrels per day in 2019-2020 to around 1.5 million currently. This has provided Iran with up to $60 billion in additional revenues.

Trump made it clear on Thursday that he will try to reduce the Chinese imports of Iranian oil. “I said to China and everybody else if you buy from Iran you can't do business in the United States and I'm not looking to be bad to Iran we're going to be friendly I hope with Iran maybe but maybe not but we're going to be friendly,” he said.

He once again emphasized that his main demand is major Iranian concessions over its nuclear program. “They can't have a nuclear weapon and we were all set to make sure that they don't have a nuclear weapon because once they do it's a whole different world it's a whole different negotiation.”

Iran has acted cautiously after the killing of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh last month in Tehran. Despite repeated threats to harshly retaliate against Israel, it has so far refrained from an escalation that could turn into a costly military conflict not only with Israel but also the United States.

Instead, it uses the threat of an attack on Israel to get concessions from the United States, which has committed itself to preventing a wider conflict. President Joe Biden has indicated that a Gaza ceasefire can prevent Iran's potential retaliation. This position appears to be a response to Iran’s repeated demands of a Gaza ceasefire, while Hamas is still holding around 100 Israeli hostages.

According to the Washington Post, Hezbollah will not launch any retaliation during the Gaza cease-fire talks to avoid being blamed for disrupting a potential agreement. 'The retaliation can wait; it is not urgent or has a time limit,' a source told the paper.

The fear of a wider war it cannot win was apparent in Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s remarks this week, when he urged his followers not to be intimidated by the perception of adversaries having superior military power. Khamenei condemned "enemy’s psychological warfare" aimed at forcing Iran to reconsider retaliation against Israel in the wake of Haniyeh’s assassination.

“We are moving additional capabilities in the region so that regional tensions can calm. We are bolstering our security presence should we need to defend Israel if Iran were to attack,” Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh told Iran International reporter Aref Yaghoubi on Thursday during a press briefing.

Since the killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31, the Islamic government has been threatening a harsh punishment against Israel, which it says was responsible for the explosion that killed the Hamas leader.

When asked about the Pentagon’s strategies to counter potential threats from Iran’s proxies in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen if they were to coordinate an attack with Iran against Israel, Singh stressed that the US is committed to defending its interests and allies, including Israel.

“If there were to be an attack on our forces whether it be in Iraq or Syria. We aways reserve that right to respond at a time and place of our choosing.”

Singh reiterated the Pentagon’s warning to Tehran, stating, “We’ve been very clear with Iran directly, publicly, and privately that we don’t want to see this broaden out into a regional war.”

Singh declined to comment on recent remarks by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who had warned against Iran showing weakness in response to the killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran. However, she emphasized that the US stands ready to defend Israel. “We are bolstering our security presence to ensure Israel’s protection if Iran were to attack. We don’t want to see that happen.”

Khamenei on Wednesday said that any non-tactical retreat—be it military, political, or economic—invites "divine wrath," as per the Holy Quran.

The Pentagon also addressed concerns about Iran's potential coordination with regional proxies and allies, including Russia. Singh acknowledged the deepening military cooperation between Moscow and Tehran, which has been a key supplier of weapons for Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“We’ve seen a deepening co-operation between Iran and Russia as Russia continues to engage in its unlawful war in Ukraine. We’ve seen Russia continue to seek weapons out from Iran”

While Singh did not comment on specific developments, she highlighted that any threat against Israel would be met with a robust US response.

The spokesperson dismissed doubts about the effectiveness of the US deterrence, citing the success of previous defensive operations during Iran’s April 13 missile and drone attack on Israel. “We demonstrated our airpower… Over 90% of what was shot toward Israel was taken down by either our forces, partner forces, or Israeli forces. If I were Iran, I would be thinking about that.”

As tensions mount, the US has been calling for restraint and de-escalation as it vows to support Israel against an attack. “If Israel were attacked, we would absolutely come to Israel’s defense,” Singh stated.

Sarraf’s nomination is particularly significant given the recent history of Iran’s universities as hotbeds of political dissent. The Woman, Life, Freedom uprising, sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, reignited a wave of student activism that shook the foundations of the Islamic Republic.

Protests erupted across more than 130 universities, with students and professors standing in solidarity against the government. These acts of defiance were met with crackdowns, including arrests, judicial rulings, and the mass dismissal of dissenting faculty members.

Given this backdrop, the choice of Sarraf—a figure with years of clerical training and deep ties to Iran’s conservative establishment and a history of involvement in the system’s ideological purification of universities—sends a clear message: the Islamic Republic is doubling down on its efforts to stifle academic freedom and silence opposition.

Simayi Sarraf’s background is a testament to his alignment with the system’s hardline ideology. Born in Mashhad, he was groomed from a young age to follow in the footsteps of the clerical rulers.

His father’s close ties to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his own military involvement in the Iran-Iraq war set the stage for his rise within the government. After two decades of seminary education, Sarraf transitioned into the academic sphere, where he pursued studies in Islamic jurisprudence and law. His work, steeped in conservative Shia thought, has produced over 50 publications advocating for the integration of Islamic principles into Iran’s legal system.

His tenure in various governmental roles, including his time as Director General of the Legal Office of the Ministry of Science and as Deputy for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, has been marked by his efforts to align the country’s academic institutions with the system’s ideology.

During Rouhani’s administration, he played a key role in the purge of universities, targeting faculty members who dared to challenge the status quo.

The appointment of such a figure to the ministry of science is an indication that the system intends to continue its assault on academic freedom. The ministry, under Simayi Sarraf’s leadership, is likely to intensify efforts to Islamize universities further, pushing out any remaining voices of dissent and reinforcing the control over Iran’s educational institutions.

100%

The revelation comes after the early exit of Mohammad Javad Zarif, a key figure in Pezeshkian’s circle, an event that continues to make waves. Scrutiny has intensified over the cabinet nominees in which candidates, some holdovers from Ebrahim Raisi’s administration and others relatively obscure figures, seem unlikely to bring the meaningful change that Iran’s sectors, particularly its universities.

Instead, the list of nominees reflects a continuation of the status quo rather than the progressive change that many had anticipated.

100%

It is particularly alarming in light of the recent purges that began under President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration. Following the widespread protests that erupted after Mahsa Amini’s death, the government launched an aggressive campaign to root out opposition within universities.

Observers believe that the appointment of Simayi Sarraf signals a renewed commitment to silencing dissent and erasing any remnants of academic freedom in Iran and that its academic purges are far from over.

The network known as the Iran Experts Initiative was exposed in a joint investigation by Iran International and Semafor last September.

Last month, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) initiated an investigation into Gordon’s ties. The inquiry focuses on Gordon’s longstanding association with Pentagon official Ariane Tabatabai, a senior Department of Defense official involved in an Iranian government operation to expand Tehran’s influence in the United States.

Harris did not respond to an August 9 deadline from Cotton and Stefani to explain Gordon’s ties to Tabatabai and the pro-Tehran network.

"You failed to respond by my deadline or to appropriately address this threat to national security emanating from your staff," Cotton wrote in a letter to Harris on Thursday.

"The presence of such an obvious security risk in your inner circle should have elicited your utmost attention. It raises the question of whether you've been aware of Mr. Gordon's possible links to the Iranian regime and simply find your policies aligned enough with Tehran's interests that ties to that regime don't concern you."

Earlier this month, top lawmakers overseeing US foreign policy threatened to subpoena the State Department following the agency’s failure to provide information about suspended Iran envoy Robert Malley.

In a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Jim Risch and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul expressed deep frustration with the State Department's lack of transparency regarding the suspension of Robert Malley's security clearance.

Malley was appointed by President Joe Biden in early 2021 to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, advocating for sanctions relief in exchange for nuclear restrictions. Despite efforts, the deal has not been reinstated since Trump's 2018 withdrawal. In April 2023, Malley was placed on leave and had his security clearance suspended. Iran International first reported the incident two months later, but the State Department blocked all attempts to find more information about Malley’s case.

As the US elections approach and Iran-Israel tensions rise, the Biden-Harris administration is under increased scrutiny regarding its handling of national security matters.

The unresolved questions about Gordon’s ties to the Iran Experts Initiative and the State Department’s lack of information on Robert Malley’s suspension are drawing attention, highlighting the administration’s approach to sensitive foreign policy issues during a critical period.