Mojtaba Khamenei's First Test: How A Leaked Letter Exposed Power Tussle In Iran Over US Talks

Published 22 June 2026 · world

Mojtaba Khamenei's First Test: How A Leaked Letter Exposed Power Tussle In Iran Over US Talks Written By, Last Updated: June 22, 2026, 08:13 IST

Mojtaba Khamenei's First Test: How A Leaked Letter Exposed Power Tussle In Iran Over US Talks Written By, Last Updated: June 22, 2026, 08:13 IST The broader context is a growing fear among Iran’s hardline camp that a deal with Washington could reshape the country’s political balance Rapid Read For months, Mojtaba Khamenei’s authority rested on an assumption that he had inherited not only his father’s office, but also his father’s ability to arbitrate among competing factions. (AFP) Until this week, one of the defining features of Mojtaba Khamenei’s brief tenure as Iran’s supreme leader was the absence of visible elite dissent. Since succeeding his father earlier this year, he has projected an image of centralised control, especially over diplomacy and national security. However, a new controversy over leaked “secret correspondence" may be the first public indication that his authority is being tested from within. The immediate trigger, according to The Guardian, was an extraordinary appearance by hardline MP Mahmoud Nabavian on Iranian state television. Nabavian claimed he had seen confidential letters from Khamenei regarding negotiations with the United States and alleged that Iranian negotiators had exceeded the limits set by the supreme leader. He claimed the supreme leader had set 11 conditions for continuing the negotiations, including receiving compensation from the US, maintaining the right to uranium enrichment, lifting sanctions, releasing Iran’s frozen assets and exercising full sovereignty over the strait of Hormuz, including the immediate charging of fees. ALSO READ | US-Iran Talks End In Switzerland: 60-Day Roadmap, Hormuz Security Among Key Outcomes Guardian, quoting Nabavian, said Khamenei pushed for “Iran’s monopoly on the management of the Strait of Hormuz, collecting tolls from passing vessels, restrictions on enemy ships, and allocating the revenues from the tolls to the people, families of martyrs, and veterans". The interview was abruptly cut off and later removed, while political figures began demanding an investigation into who leaked the information.

But the significance of the episode lies less in the letters themselves than in what they reveal about a struggle inside the Iranian establishment. Stronger Control, Louder Dissent? Ironically, the dispute emerged just as reports suggested Khamenei was becoming more personally involved in negotiations than his predecessors typically were. According to the Guardian report, he had laid down a series of conditions for any agreement with Washington, including sanctions relief, compensation, preservation of uranium enrichment capabilities and Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. Nabavian’s allegation was that negotiators had moved beyond those instructions. If true, that presents two uncomfortable possibilities for the new supreme leader. Either his directives were ignored by officials conducting the talks, or rival factions are using his name as a weapon in their campaign against diplomacy. Neither interpretation projects unquestioned authority. ALSO READ | Invisible Supreme Leader: Why Iran’s Negotiators May Prefer Mojtaba Khamenei Stays Out Of Sight When Khamenei took office, a Guardian analysis had noted that the central question was always “how he will relate with other centres of power inside Iran". The current controversy suggests that relationship is proving more complicated than many expected. Why Hardliners Are Nervous The broader context is a growing fear among Iran’s hardline camp that a deal with Washington could reshape the country’s political balance. The New York Times, reporting on debates within Iran, had described anxiety among hardliners that a successful agreement could strengthen pragmatic factions around the government and reduce the influence of ideological power centres that gained prominence during years of confrontation with the West. Those groups have increasingly portrayed negotiations as crossing “red lines" and have mounted public campaigns against compromise. Babak Dorbeiki, a London-based political analyst and former official at Iran’s Strategic Research Center, told German broadcaster Deutsche Welle that the backlash from the hardliners is about far more than disagreement over diplomatic wording and the political atmosphere of negotiation does not benefit hardliners, who thrive off of confrontation.