• العربية
  • فارسی
Brand
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Theme
  • Language
    • العربية
    • فارسی
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
All rights reserved for Volant Media UK Limited
volant media logo

Explained: Iran's frozen assets around the world

Maryam Sinaiee
Maryam Sinaiee

Iran International

Jun 5, 2026, 18:08 GMT+1

Access to frozen assets has emerged as one of Tehran's key demands in negotiations with Washington, with Iranian officials seeking the release of at least part of the tens of billions of dollars held abroad.

According to recent media reports, negotiators are discussing a package worth roughly $12 billion that could become available if a preliminary agreement with the United States is reached.

The issue matters because even partial access to blocked funds could affect Iran's currency market, imports, government finances and broader economy.

Iranian officials estimate that more than $100 billion in assets remain inaccessible because of sanctions, banking restrictions and legal disputes that have accumulated over decades. Not all of that money would necessarily become available even in the event of an agreement, as some assets remain tied up in court cases and other restrictions unrelated to sanctions.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf recently traveled to Qatar, where discussions reportedly touched on the release of frozen Iranian funds.

Saeed Ajorlou, a member of the media team accompanying Iran's negotiating delegation, said in a televised interview on June 2 that the talks had been successful. He stated that once a framework agreement receives final approval, a portion of Iran's blocked assets should become available to the Central Bank of Iran in a manner that could not easily be reversed.

He also indicated that Tehran is seeking guarantees that access to the funds will continue and has linked the release of assets to the implementation of any future agreement.

Why the funds matter

A large share of Iran's blocked assets consists of oil revenues accumulated in foreign banks after the United States withdrew from the 2015 nuclear agreement in 2018 and reimposed sweeping sanctions.

Secondary sanctions made it difficult for countries purchasing Iranian oil to transfer payments directly to Tehran, causing substantial sums to accumulate in overseas accounts.

Economists say that even partial access to these resources could provide a significant boost to Iran's economy.

One immediate effect would be an increase in the Central Bank's foreign currency reserves, strengthening its ability to manage exchange-rate volatility. Additional funds could also be used to finance infrastructure projects, pay government obligations and support imports of essential goods, industrial equipment, raw materials and technology needed by domestic industries.

South Korea

South Korea once held one of the largest pools of frozen Iranian funds.

Roughly $6 billion in oil revenues accumulated in two South Korean banks before being transferred to accounts in Qatar in 2023 as part of a prisoner-exchange agreement between Tehran and Washington.

Although Iranian officials initially described the funds as released, access has remained subject to significant restrictions and the money has largely remained beyond Tehran's direct control.

Iraq

Iraq represents another major source of Iranian claims.

Much of the money stems from Iraqi purchases of Iranian natural gas and electricity. While neither side has publicly confirmed an exact figure, Iranian officials have repeatedly said that outstanding payments amount to several billion dollars.

Some of these funds have already been used for humanitarian purchases under arrangements approved by the United States. Estimates suggest that Iran could eventually gain access to between $10 billion and $12 billion held in Iraq if restrictions are eased.

China, India and Japan

China and India present a more complicated picture.

Iranian officials often avoid describing funds held in those countries as formally frozen, arguing that mechanisms exist to use at least part of the money for trade and imports.

Nevertheless, transactions remain difficult because banks and intermediaries facilitating such transfers risk exposure to US sanctions.

Iranian estimates place holdings in China in the tens of billions of dollars, while funds in India are believed to total roughly $7 billion.

Japan also holds Iranian funds linked to oil sales. Estimates generally range from $1.5 billion to $3 billion, although the exact amount remains unclear. Japanese authorities have occasionally allowed limited payments for humanitarian imports and Iran's obligations to international organizations, but most of the money remains inaccessible.

Europe

In Europe, Iranian assets are spread across multiple countries and financial institutions. Their status is shaped not only by sanctions but also by legal disputes, court rulings and anti-money-laundering regulations.

Total Iranian assets affected by these issues are estimated at anywhere from several billion dollars to as much as $20 billion.

One of the most prominent disputes involves approximately $1.6 billion to $2 billion connected to accounts belonging to Iran's central bank in Luxembourg. These assets have been tied up in litigation involving efforts by holders of US court judgments to obtain compensation related to terrorism cases.

While the exact amount of Iranian assets that could ultimately be released remains uncertain, access even to a fraction of these funds could strengthen Iran's foreign-exchange reserves, ease pressure on imports and provide the government with a significant financial cushion.

For that reason, frozen assets have become one of the most important economic components of the ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington.

Most Viewed

Iran sidelines ultra-hardliners from pro-government nightly rallies
1
EXCLUSIVE

Iran sidelines ultra-hardliners from pro-government nightly rallies

2

Stolen Revolution: new book traces Iran’s path from revolution to mafia state

3
INSIGHT

Tehran hardliners demand escalation as Trump says talks are progressing

4
VOICES FROM IRAN

Citizens report growing use of children in Iran security activities

5
INSIGHT

As US talks stall, Iran moderates warn of renewed unrest

Banner
Banner

Spotlight

  • Can Trump crack Iran's negotiating playbook?
    PODCAST

    Can Trump crack Iran's negotiating playbook?

  • Explained: Iran's frozen assets around the world

    Explained: Iran's frozen assets around the world

  • Iran turns to Iraq’s Umm Qasr as new hub to bypass US blockade
    EXCLUSIVE

    Iran turns to Iraq’s Umm Qasr as new hub to bypass US blockade

  • As US talks stall, Iran moderates warn of renewed unrest
    INSIGHT

    As US talks stall, Iran moderates warn of renewed unrest

  • Iran's services imports surge as goods trade slumps
    ANALYSIS

    Iran's services imports surge as goods trade slumps

  • Citizens report growing use of children in Iran security activities
    VOICES FROM IRAN

    Citizens report growing use of children in Iran security activities

•
•
•

More Stories

As US talks stall, Iran moderates warn of renewed unrest

Jun 5, 2026, 03:59 GMT+1
•
Behrouz Turani
As US talks stall, Iran moderates warn of renewed unrest
100%
Residents gather along the Zayandeh Roud in Isfahan to celebrate the return of water to the river, June 3, 2026

As indirect contacts between Tehran and Washington continue and regional actors push to keep negotiations alive, competing signals continue to emerge from Iran's political establishment.

On Thursday, the Revolutionary Guards said no lasting calm would be achieved in the region unless Israel withdrew from Lebanese territory and halted attacks, while senior adviser Mohsen Rezaei insisted Iran would not give a “green light” to negotiations until all of its demands were met.

Against that backdrop, two political insiders from different camps have issued unusually direct warnings about Iran's domestic vulnerabilities, arguing that economic hardship and the widening gap between the state and society could fuel renewed unrest.

In a June 1 interview with the moderate daily Etemad, prominent centrist politician Hossein Marashi described a deep structural and cultural disconnect between the state and society.

He warned that unless the political system adapts by addressing economic inefficiencies, acknowledging cultural differences and creating channels for dissent, unrest will continue to recur.

The leadership in Tehran, Marashi argued, remains at odds with a large segment of the population over cultural and political issues and should align governance with the expectations of at least 70% of society.

According to him, the divide between state and society has become so entrenched that many Iranians now separate their attachment to the country from their view of the government.

Marashi also said one of the Islamic Republic's fundamental failures has been its inability to build a strong economy and a trusted judiciary. Protests, he argued, should not be viewed as isolated incidents but as repeated expressions of accumulated public frustration.

A similar theme emerged this week in an op-ed by reformist commentator Nasser Zakeri in Sharq newspaper.

Reviewing Iran's recent military and geopolitical challenges, Zakeri contrasted what he described as the resilience of Iran's defense sector with decades of economic underperformance marked by unemployment, chronic inflation and weak productivity.

He argued that policymakers should use the experience of the past year to identify which institutions proved resilient under pressure and which did not.

Zakeri also challenged those who portray revision as a betrayal of the Islamic Republic's core principles, arguing that even policies once considered successful must be reassessed when circumstances change.

Such arguments remain politically sensitive in a system where calls for reform or revision are often portrayed by hardliners as attempts to weaken the ideological foundations of the state.

Although Marashi and Zakeri approached the issue from different angles—one focusing on public dissatisfaction and the other on institutional performance—both arrived at a similar conclusion: military strength and crisis management alone cannot guarantee long-term stability unless the political system addresses deeper economic, social and political grievances.

Late on Thursday, reports emerged that Pakistan's Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi would return to Tehran as part of efforts to keep the Iran-US negotiating track alive.

The diplomatic process remains uncertain. But the warnings from Marashi and Zakeri suggest that, for some voices inside the establishment, the more pressing question may be whether the state can address the domestic challenges that persist regardless of whether negotiations succeed.

Tehran hardliners demand escalation as Trump says talks are progressing

Jun 4, 2026, 22:37 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
Tehran hardliners demand escalation as Trump says talks are progressing
100%
CCTV footage shows fire and smoke rising following a strike on Kuwait International Airport, in Kuwait City, Kuwait June 3, 2026, in this screengrab from a video.

Iranian officials and hardline media are signaling a tougher stance toward Washington after the most serious US-Iran military exchange in weeks, even as President Donald Trump says negotiations are progressing and an Iran deal may still be within reach.

The latest escalation began early Wednesday, when the United States struck an Iranian telecommunications tower on Qeshm Island. Iran responded by announcing attacks on US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain.

Kuwaiti authorities said an Iranian drone struck Kuwait International Airport, killing one person and injuring dozens of others. The IRGC, however, denied targeting the airport.

The confrontation has put new pressure on the 56-day ceasefire between Washington and Tehran, with President Trump seeking to preserve the truce while Iranian hardliners argue that recent military action has strengthened Tehran’s position.

Trump keeps talks alive

Despite the latest confrontation, Trump has publicly remained optimistic about diplomacy, saying talks are progressing well and suggesting that an agreement could be reached by the end of the week.

He has described the latest American strike as severe but framed Iran’s response as retaliatory, a distinction that appears intended to leave space for diplomacy.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Trump privately told advisers that he wants to preserve the current ceasefire and would only consider resuming large-scale military operations if American service members are killed.

The message has left Washington in a delicate position: seeking to deter further Iranian attacks while avoiding steps that could collapse the ceasefire and end the negotiations altogether.

Iran’s rhetoric hardens

In Tehran, however, the public messaging has moved in the opposite direction.

Iran’s English-language Press TV argued that the country’s period of restraint had ended and described recent military action as part of a doctrine of “qualitative asymmetry,” under which Iranian responses would not necessarily remain proportional to the original attack.

The article said any hostile action by the United States, regardless of scale, could trigger a significantly broader Iranian response.

Hardline political figures have echoed that argument.

Kamran Ghazanfari, a former hardline lawmaker, accused officials of limiting the armed forces because of what he described as fruitless negotiations. He said Iran should respond to attacks with significantly greater force rather than seek compromise.

“Under no circumstances should we back down before the enemy, and if they hit one of our ships, we must hit three or four of theirs,” he said.

Such statements reflect growing pressure from hardliners who believe recent military action has strengthened Tehran’s position and that negotiations should not be allowed to restrain Iran’s military options.

Araghchi warns regional states

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also adopted a sharper tone Thursday, saying Iran had previously warned regional countries about allowing the United States to use military bases on their soil.

His comments followed Iranian attacks on US military facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain, which Tehran announced after the United States struck an Iranian telecommunications tower on Qeshm Island in the early hours of Wednesday.

The exchange marked the most serious confrontation between Washington and Tehran since the ceasefire came into effect and immediately raised questions about its durability.

Kuwaiti authorities said an Iranian drone struck Kuwait International Airport, killing one person and injuring dozens of others. The IRGC denied targeting the airport.

A spokesperson for the force claimed that damage to the passenger terminal was caused by a malfunction involving a US-supplied Patriot missile system, arguing that interceptor missiles had fallen on the facility after failing to stop incoming Iranian projectiles.

Washington denied that Iranian missiles successfully struck American military installations. Iranian media outlets, however, published satellite images they said showed damage to a shelter used for drones and aircraft at Kuwait’s Ali Al Salem Air Base.

Iranian state media and IRGC-affiliated outlets have also dismissed photographs that purportedly show damage to Kuwait Airport, describing them as fabricated images intended to support what they called a false narrative.

Regional alarm grows

The attacks have deepened concern among regional governments that the ceasefire could unravel.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry condemned the Iranian missile and drone attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, warning that escalating hostilities could derail efforts to resolve the conflict through peaceful means.

Islamabad called on both sides to exercise maximum restraint and noted that formal negotiations between Tehran and Washington, which Iran suspended after recent US military actions, have not yet resumed.

The Pakistani statement underscored the widening regional stakes of the confrontation. While Trump has continued to emphasize the possibility of a deal, Iran’s suspension of direct message exchanges through mediators has left the diplomatic track vulnerable to further military escalation.

Lebanon adds pressure

Developments in Lebanon have added another layer of uncertainty.

Iran has linked continued negotiations with Washington to ceasefires across all regional fronts. But despite an earlier truce arrangement, Israel launched new attacks in southern Lebanon on Thursday.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem criticized agreements reached by the Lebanese government and said the group remains committed only to a complete cessation of Israeli attacks, a formal ceasefire and a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory.

The IRGC reinforced that position, saying a comprehensive ceasefire, including in Lebanon, remains a prerequisite for ending the broader regional conflict.

Some Iranian media outlets, including Iran View 24, have argued that Israeli military activity in Lebanon is intended not only to violate ceasefire arrangements but also to test Iran’s deterrence and the resilience of allied groups across the region.

Risk of unraveling

The longer talks remain unresolved, the greater the risk that military incidents and hardline pressure could overtake diplomacy.

Canada-based analyst Shahir Shahid Saless argued in a post on X that as negotiations drag on and Iranian leaders gain confidence from recent attacks on US positions in Kuwait and Bahrain, Trump may eventually reconsider his commitment to the ceasefire.

His assessment points to the central danger facing both sides: Trump is still signaling that he wants a deal, but Tehran’s public posture is becoming less conciliatory, and the ceasefire now depends not only on the US-Iran track but also on events in Kuwait, Bahrain and Lebanon.

For now, both governments continue to leave room for diplomacy. But the latest exchange has narrowed that room, giving hardliners in Tehran more space to argue that military pressure, not negotiation, is what has shifted the balance.

Lebanon emerges as new obstacle to Iran-US talks

Jun 3, 2026, 17:55 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
Lebanon emerges as new obstacle to Iran-US talks
100%
Smoke billows from southern Lebanon, following Israeli strikes, as seen from Nabatieh, Lebanon, June 2, 2026.

Lebanon has emerged as a key obstacle to negotiations between Tehran and Washington, as Israel says it will continue striking Hezbollah and Iran insists that any ceasefire must apply across the region.

The dispute intensified after Tehran suspended talks with Washington on Monday, arguing that Israeli military operations in Lebanon violated the broader ceasefire framework established after the recent US-Iran conflict.

While US President Donald Trump described the interruption as a temporary “little glitch,” Iranian officials have since made clear that a halt to Israeli military operations in Lebanon remains a prerequisite for renewed diplomatic engagement.

On Tuesday, Fars News Agency, which is affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), cited an informed source as rejecting Trump's claims about ongoing, high-speed negotiations.

According to the source, exchanges of messages between Tehran and Washington had stopped “at least for a few days,” while Iran's latest communication to the United States was described as “a clear warning regarding Lebanon.”

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of parliament and head of Iran's negotiating team, accused the United States of failing to uphold ceasefire commitments, saying on X that enforcement of a naval blockade and Israel's attacks on Lebanon were “clear evidence of US non-commitment to the ceasefire.”

“Every choice has a price, and the bill comes due,” he added.

Ghalibaf later said he had informed Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that Iran would not only suspend negotiations but would also be “in direct confrontation with the enemy” if Israeli attacks on Lebanon continued.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi echoed that position, writing on X that a “ceasefire between Iran and the US is unequivocally a ceasefire on all fronts, including in Lebanon.” He added that any violation on one front “shall be considered a violation across all fronts.”

Tehran sees leverage in talks

With Tehran linking progress in negotiations to developments in Lebanon, the fate of any future agreement increasingly appears tied to the trajectory of the Israel-Hezbollah confrontation.

Some Iranian lawmakers believe Washington will ultimately seek to restrain Israel to prevent a broader crisis.

Ahmad Bakhshayesh, a member of parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, told Tabnak that the United States would likely increase pressure on Netanyahu's government to avoid further escalation.

Tabnak itself argued that Tehran could use the negotiations as leverage.

“Given that Hezbollah—Iran's most powerful regional ally—entered the conflict immediately following the attacks on Iran, Tehran could leverage the threat of walking away from ongoing negotiations to pressure the United States into restraining Israel,” the outlet wrote.

Growing doubts about a deal

Despite such expectations, several analysts expressed pessimism about the prospects for a final agreement between Tehran and Washington.

Hassan Hanizadeh, a senior analyst on Middle Eastern affairs, told Fararu that Israel's intensified military campaign in Lebanon was “directly designed to pressure Iran and can pose a major risk to the formation of any understanding between Tehran and Washington.”

He argued that Tehran views the attacks as part of broader Western pressure tactics and added: “Evidence shows that Trump has no desire for a comprehensive agreement in the current atmosphere.”

Amir-Ali Abolfath, an expert on US affairs, also questioned the likelihood of a breakthrough.

Speaking to Fararu, he said Israel's confrontation with both Iran and Hezbollah had made negotiations significantly more complicated than in previous rounds.

“The Americans are negotiating to not reach an agreement,” he said. “America proposes conditions that make it seem as though they are shouting: ‘We do not want to reach an agreement with the Islamic Republic,’ because their conditions are unfeasible.”

Other commentators voiced similar doubts. Reza Ghobeishawi, writing in Asr-e Iran, argued that Trump has concluded a deal with Tehran is unattainable and is instead using discussions over reopening the Strait of Hormuz to buy time.

Calls for diplomacy grow in Tehran amid fresh escalation

Jun 3, 2026, 16:18 GMT+1
•
Behrouz Turani
Calls for diplomacy grow in Tehran amid fresh escalation
100%
Children play along the shore in Bandar Abbas, southern Iran, with cargo vessels visible in the Persian Gulf behind them, June 2, 2026

As Tehran reviews US proposals and influential figures increasingly speak openly in favor of negotiations, developments on the ground are pulling Iran and the United States in the opposite direction.

The contrast was on display this week as senior Shiite cleric Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani publicly endorsed negotiations with Washington while fresh military exchanges across the Gulf highlighted the risk of renewed escalation.

Quoted by several Iranian outlets on Tuesday, Sobhani said “we should back negotiations and follow a good outcome from them, and a good negotiation must be based on the collective and national interests of the country.”

The remarks were among the clearest signs yet that influential clerical circles are prepared to publicly back diplomacy.

Several newspapers also published composite images showing chief negotiator and parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf alongside IRGC commander Ahmad Vahidi, appearing to emphasize unity among senior officials as Tehran reviews US proposals.

Ghalibaf has also been quoted as saying Iran is examining Washington’s suggestions, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this week that negotiations over the language of a possible agreement could be be concluded within days if progress continues.

Yet the diplomatic signals have coincided with renewed escalation on the ground. Iranian attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain, and US strikes on Iranian targets in the early hours of Wednesday, underscored how fragile any diplomatic opening remains.

At the same time, hardline rhetoric has continued inside Iran. A group of lawmakers on Tuesday called for expanding the range of Iran’s missiles until they could reach Washington.

The competing narratives were also laid bare in an interview with veteran diplomat and US expert Abbas Maleki in Sharq newspaper, and another with conservative analyst Hassan Hanizadeh published by Fararu.

Hanizadeh outlined ongoing indirect contacts between Tehran and Washington while warning that President Donald Trump’s approach could amount to a delaying tactic aimed at securing broader strategic advantages.

Yet unlike many conservative commentators, he did not reject negotiations outright. Instead, he acknowledged that Iran had already conveyed a five-point proposal to Washington through Pakistani intermediaries and argued that talks could be acceptable if they safeguarded national interests and delivered sanctions relief.

Maleki placed greater emphasis on diplomacy itself, describing it as a pillar of national power and pushing back against factions that rely primarily on military force.

He characterized the current phase of Iran-US relations as one of “suspension,” requiring diplomatic engagement to manage the aftermath of the conflict and protect Iran’s interests.

Despite their differences, both men portrayed negotiations as a necessary component of statecraft rather than a concession.

The limits of establishment support for diplomacy were also underscored by the conservative daily Farhikhtegan, which revisited the experience of the 2015 nuclear deal and described it as a “strategic error.”

The paper argued that any future agreement must satisfy two conditions: reversibility and multilateral guarantees.

Iran, it said, should retain the ability to immediately reverse any commitments if Washington defaults, while financial and political mechanisms should involve other international actors to raise the cost of a future US withdrawal.

While influential clerics, politicians and commentators increasingly portray negotiations as necessary, military confrontation continues to shape the political environment.

The result is a moment in which preparations for a deal and preparations for further conflict appear to be unfolding simultaneously.

Iran's internet is back, but still broken

Jun 2, 2026, 04:20 GMT+1
•
Maryam Sinaiee
Iran's internet is back, but still broken
100%

International internet access has largely returned to Iran, but users and experts say the network remains degraded, unstable and significantly worse than before the war.

Despite the easing of restrictions, many websites, apps and online services continue to experience disruptions, slow speeds and intermittent outages.

Experts say the current wave of disruptions appears highly systematic, targeting core internet protocols that underpin everything from VPNs and video calls to websites and cloud services.

While restrictions on international internet traffic have reportedly been lifted significantly, internet quality still varies widely by province, provider and mobile operator.

Users across Iran report that connectivity remains noticeably worse than it was in the month before the war, when access had largely been restored following a 10-day shutdown triggered by nationwide unrest in January.

Many cite extremely slow connection speeds, repeated cycles of disconnection and reconnection, and severe difficulties accessing foreign websites and online services that were previously available.

Broken network environment

Rather than a return to normal internet access, many users describe what they call a “faulty” or “half-broken” network environment that imposes a more complex form of restriction and traffic manipulation.

At the same time, users and technology observers say a substantial share of DNS-based restrictions introduced during the shutdown remain active. The unresolved filters continue to disrupt email delivery, notifications, cloud services and other internet-dependent applications.

Public frustration is evident on social media and in comments posted on online news platforms.

“We have never experienced a normal, stable, and real internet at any period of time,” one user wrote in a comment on the Khabar Online news website.

Another user wrote on X that the situation had pushed many people to buy Starlink terminals or Iraqi SIM cards, while others were considering emigration. “They cut it in one go and restore it drop by drop. One can’t even be sure that this level of access will continue.”

An online poll conducted by Gadget News, while not necessarily representative of the broader population, illustrates the extent of dissatisfaction. According to the survey, 48.4% of respondents said they could access the internet but experienced low speeds and malfunctioning filtering systems. Another 26% reported effectively having access only to Iran’s national intranet.

VPN access still disrupted

Many Iranian internet users rely on Apple’s App Store and Google Play to download VPN applications that provide access to thousands of restricted websites and platforms.

Although authorities have technically removed filters blocking the app stores, users report a frustrating catch-22: network conditions often prevent VPN applications from downloading updates or functioning properly.

One user on X summed up the mood succinctly: “They want to make people get fed up and give up using the international internet.”

Core internet protocols targeted

Internet expert Vahid Farid told Gadget News that User Datagram Protocol (UDP) traffic—which underpins latency-sensitive services such as voice and video calls, online gaming and live streaming—has been almost completely disrupted.

As a result, many VPN protocols have either stopped working altogether or become highly unstable.

According to Farid, Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) traffic, which powers most websites and online services, is also experiencing persistent interference. The result is a cycle of VPN disconnections, stalled downloads and unreliable access to web services.

Farid said the apparent targeting of these protocols is effectively disabling widely available VPN tools and pushing users toward more complex and expensive alternatives, making access to the international internet both financially and technically burdensome.

Digital businesses struggle to recover

According to a report by Donya-ye Eghtesad newspaper, many digital businesses have been unable to return to normal operations because of the continuing disruptions.

Companies that depend on both domestic and foreign internet infrastructure report persistent difficulties maintaining critical services and data flows.

The restrictions have also affected search engine visibility, reducing traffic for e-commerce platforms, digital media outlets and startups that rely heavily on Google referrals.

Compounding the problem, network disruptions have interfered with the automated renewal of SSL security certificates. As a result, users are increasingly confronted with “Your connection is not private” warnings.

Industry observers say the alerts erode customer trust and further damage online businesses. Together with the broader disruptions, they reinforce a growing perception among users that while the shutdown may be over, many Iranians are still navigating a damaged version of the internet.