Hossein Shariatmadari, the editor of Iran’s conservative newspaper Kayhan, has publicly opposed the proposed two-week ceasefire with the United States, arguing that negotiations would benefit Iran’s adversaries and undermine battlefield gains.
In a sharply worded editorial, Shariatmadari criticized Iranian authorities for not releasing the full details of the proposed ceasefire package to the public while allegedly sharing it with opposing parties.
He said withholding the full text from the Iranian people amounted to unfair treatment and raised concerns over transparency in the negotiation process.
Hardline Criticism Targets US Trustworthiness
Shariatmadari also argued that even if Washington accepted Iran’s conditions, the United States could not be trusted to uphold any commitments.
He described Iran’s confrontation with what he called the “system of domination” as an existential struggle that would continue until one side fundamentally changed.
According to the editorial, the United States and its allies seek to dominate Iran and would do so if not deterred by resistance.
He further claimed that battlefield developments indicate Iran currently holds the upper hand while its adversaries are acting out of desperation.
Editorial Reflects Hardline Resistance to Diplomacy
Shariatmadari warned that a ceasefire and negotiations would allow opponents time to regroup and prepare for renewed conflict.
He described any pause in hostilities as a strategic concession that would hand the enemy a valuable opportunity.
The veteran editor also claimed public sentiment in Iran favors continuing the conflict until victory rather than pursuing negotiations.
His remarks highlight resistance among hardline factions to diplomatic engagement even as Tehran moves forward with ceasefire-related talks.
Analysts say the editorial underscores internal debate within Iran over whether diplomacy serves national interests or weakens Tehran’s position during a period of heightened regional tensions.
