Iran has reached a preliminary understanding to allocate land at Chabahar to Taliban-run Afghanistan to build infrastructure for moving its goods to the sea, an Iranian lawmaker said.
Mohsen Zangeneh told Sahar TV during a visit to Afghanistan that the arrangement envisaged about 10 hectares along the waterfront inside Chabahar port and more than 100 hectares in the special zone in an initial phase. The Afghan government would invest in developing the facilities, he said.
“He proposed that we set aside an area in Chabahar for Afghanistan—in other words, that Afghanistan could have land of its own in the free zone at Chabahar port,” Zangeneh said, referring to Afghanistan’s industry minister.
Zangeneh did not specify whether the land would be leased or transferred into Afghan ownership. He said the Afghan side had requested more space within the port itself, but limited coastal land made that difficult.
“We reached this preliminary understanding during this visit and, God willing, we will follow up on it,” he said.
The discussions also covered wider industrial cooperation, a joint industrial park and a goal of increasing bilateral trade to $10 billion, according to Iranian media reports. Zangeneh described the land proposal as a way for Afghanistan to develop the infrastructure needed to transport its goods through Chabahar.
Baloch activists questioned how local residents would benefit, pointing to longstanding problems with housing, employment, infrastructure and access to basic services. They said arrangements for Afghan economic activity in Chabahar dated back to 2012, but questions about the share of development going to Baloch communities remained unanswered.
The Balochistan Human Rights Documentation Network said more than half of Chabahar’s population had at one point lived in informal settlements, with their expansion becoming a major problem for the area.
Against that backdrop, the group said, allocating land for foreign economic activity without disclosing its precise location, ownership arrangements, contract terms or duration of use had heightened concerns. It also questioned the lack of detail about local participation and employment.
Activists called on authorities to identify who would receive the land, disclose investment commitments and explain what obligations would apply to hiring local workers. They also sought clarity on how local communities would share in the revenue and business opportunities generated by the project.
More than 56,000 people took part in the October 8 poll, with 68% saying ordinary people bear the greatest burden of US pressure. Another 23% said both the public and the government suffer, while 9% said the authorities are affected most.
Men accounted for approximately 76% of respondents and women for 24%.
The largest age group was 25 to 34, representing about 38% of participants, followed by those aged 35 to 44 at 29%. Respondents aged 18 to 24 and 45 to 54 each accounted for 12%.
Thousands of comments accompanying the poll reflected differing views on the economic consequences of US pressure, the Islamic Republic's responsibility for worsening living conditions and whether external pressure could bring political change.
Rising prices dominate concerns
The most common concern among respondents who believed ordinary Iranians were suffering most was the deterioration in daily living conditions.
Many cited rising prices, declining purchasing power, shrinking incomes and the growing financial burden on low-income households.
Others pointed to difficulties accessing medicine and medical treatment, arguing that people with fewer financial resources were particularly vulnerable to economic restrictions.
"Only ordinary people are being crushed under the pressure," one respondent wrote.
Several participants argued that even when US measures target the Islamic Republic, their economic consequences ultimately reach households through higher prices and reduced access to essential goods.
Officials seen as insulated from hardship
Another recurring theme was the perceived gap between the living standards of ordinary Iranians and those of government officials.
Some respondents argued that access to wealth, foreign currency, privileged positions and state resources allowed officials and their associates to avoid some of the hardships experienced by the wider population.
"The main burden falls on the people. The government would even be happy to see people becoming poorer every day," one respondent wrote.
Other participants said the Islamic Republic also suffers from economic restrictions through reduced revenues and limited access to financial resources, but can pass some of those costs on to the public.
For these respondents, the issue was not simply whether sanctions hurt the government or the public, but how the economic burden was distributed.
Economic hardship versus hopes for political change
The sharpest disagreement concerned whether the immediate economic costs of US pressure could be justified by the prospect of political change.
Some respondents acknowledged that ordinary Iranians were suffering but considered the hardship acceptable if it weakened the Islamic Republic or helped bring about a different political system.
"People will endure it because this suffering is worth it for a free Iran tomorrow," one wrote.
Others questioned whether worsening economic conditions would produce meaningful political change.
They argued that household finances could deteriorate far more quickly than external pressure could affect the country's political leadership.
Several respondents held both US policies and the Islamic Republic's economic management responsible for the hardships facing Iranians.
Some likened sanctions to a painful medical treatment, reflecting a willingness among certain supporters of external pressure to accept short-term suffering in pursuit of longer-term political goals.
Others rejected that calculation, arguing that the prospect of political change remained uncertain while the immediate costs to families were already evident.
A divided view of US pressure
Although 68% of respondents believed ordinary Iranians were bearing the greatest burden, their answers did not necessarily show opposition to all forms of US pressure.
Some viewed the economic consequences as unacceptable, while others regarded them as a painful but potentially necessary means of weakening the Islamic Republic.
Likewise, respondents who believed the government was suffering most did not necessarily dismiss the economic difficulties facing households.
Citizens accused the authorities of prioritizing financial support for regional allies over the needs of Iranians, contrasting the reported payment with their own incomes, government subsidies and mounting household expenses.
In messages, several people described struggling to afford basic necessities, while others questioned why the Islamic Republic was directing resources abroad during Iran's economic crisis.
Hezbollah payments dwarf Iranian wages
"You give each Hezbollah family 8 billion rials, but deposit a 5000,000-rial food allowance for each Iranian and then take even that back a few hours later. This country's money belongs to its people, not Hezbollah," one citizen said.
Another compared the payments with compensation given to Iranian soldiers.
"A soldier who spent eight months under missile fire with no way to escape received seventy million rials in combat pay. Then you gave Hezbollah 8 billion rials from our money," the citizen said.
Reuters reported on October 7, citing two people with direct knowledge, that Hezbollah received $200 million from Iran in September and planned initial payments of $3,000 per family, prioritizing approximately 50,000 families displaced by the war.
The reported transfer has been disputed by Washington. The US State Department disputed the reported transfer. Spokesperson Tommy Pigott accused Hezbollah of trying to “save face with fake stories about cash influxes from Iran”, saying the group “can claim whatever it wants, but the money is not there”.
Pigott said Tehran was suffering under a US blockade of its oil exports and that Washington would continue targeting Hezbollah's finances through sanctions while supporting the Lebanese government's efforts to rebuild the country's south.
At an exchange rate of approximately 2.67 million rials per dollar on Iran's open market, $3,000 amounts to roughly 8 billion rials.
A teacher in Tehran with 18 years of experience compared the payments with his annual salary.
"My salary for an entire year is about 3 billion rials, yet you gave 8 billion rials of our money to the Lebanese," the teacher said.
A local government employee with 29 years of service and a master's degree said his total monthly income was 350 million rials.
Citizens in Neyshabur and Malard also criticized the reported payments, saying the Islamic Republic was directing national resources toward allied groups abroad while Iranians faced poverty and declining purchasing power.
Islamic Republic officials have not formally confirmed the reported $200 million transfer, and the US government has rejected the account.
"Hezbollah has been decimated and caused misery for hundreds of thousands of innocent Lebanese. It is now trying to save face with fake stories about cash influxes from Iran," US State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said in a statement. "It can claim whatever it wants, but the money is not there."
Families sell belongings to afford basic necessities
Several citizens described the financial pressures facing their families, including difficulties paying for medicine, food and other essentials.
One person said her husband and son had been forced to sell their mobile phones to cover household expenses, contrasting the family's financial difficulties with the reported funding for Hezbollah.
Another described the rising cost of medication for her father.
"I bought just three blood pressure and heart medications for my father, and they cost 85 million rials. I didn't have enough money to buy the rest of his medicines. Insulin is also unavailable. Previously, these medicines did not even cost 5 million rials," the citizen said.
Other citizens described struggling to afford food and household expenses despite receiving government subsidies and food vouchers.
One person said the authorities treated modest increases in food assistance as a financial burden while continuing to spend substantial sums supporting allied groups in Lebanon.
Anger over Islamic Republic's spending priorities
Some calculated how many Iranian households could benefit from the reported $200 million payment, arguing that the money could help tens of thousands of families struggling with living expenses.
One person directed criticism at Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei over the allocation of national resources.
"You have abandoned your own nation and are giving the Iranian people's money to the Lebanese. It is not your father's inheritance. Charity begins at home," the citizen said.
Another questioned the priorities of President Masoud Pezeshkian and his deputy, saying their public emphasis on serving Iranians conflicted with the financial support directed toward Hezbollah.
The citizen also expressed concern that such funding could contribute to continued armed conflict and civilian deaths.
Several others described the reported payment as part of the Islamic Republic's longstanding policy of financing allied armed groups across the Middle East.
Reuters reported in June that Hezbollah was awaiting additional financial support from Iran after suffering heavy losses in its war with Israel.
The US Treasury Department previously said Iran had transferred over $1 billion to Hezbollah during the first 10 months of 2025.
Investigative journalist Yashar Soltani said he had obtained documents indicating that Mojtaba Zolnouri, a lawmaker from Qom and a figure associated with the hardline Paydari Front, was involved in unauthorized digging for historical artifacts and treasure.
“After oil, the Paydari camp is now after treasure,” Soltani wrote on X on Tuesday.
“I have obtained documents indicating that Mojtaba Zolnouri, the lawmaker representing Qom, was involved in unauthorized excavation in search of historical artifacts and treasure,” he added.
Soltani did not publish the documents or say where or when the excavation allegedly took place. The allegation has not been independently verified, and Zolnouri has not publicly responded.
Parliament examining excavation case
Journalist Zahra Abdollahi separately said the issue of a lawmaker involved in excavation for buried treasure had been raised at a recent meeting of parliament’s Internal Affairs and Councils Committee and referred to the body that oversees lawmakers’ conduct.
“At a recent meeting of parliament’s Internal Affairs and Councils Committee, the issue of a lawmaker’s misconduct in connection with digging for treasure and buried antiquities was raised, and it was decided that the matter should be reviewed by the board overseeing lawmakers’ conduct,” she wrote on X.
Abdollahi did not identify the lawmaker, meaning there is no public evidence establishing that the parliamentary case concerns Zolnouri.
She said she had obtained an official document addressed to a prosecutor concerning excavation at a residential property in a historically sensitive area. According to her account, the letter called for the work to be halted.
Abdollahi said she planned to release further details of the document.
Paydari link comes amid oil-sales scrutiny
Soltani tied his latest allegation to a separate controversy surrounding Iran’s sanctions-era oil sales.
“I previously said that one of the four recipients of 85 million barrels of oil was the son-in-law of the Paydari Front spokesperson,” he wrote.
The reference was to Ruhollah Razavi, whose name has appeared in reporting on the network of trusted intermediaries, known in Iran as “trustees,” used to sell sanctioned oil and move the proceeds back to the country.
The wider system has come under growing scrutiny over billions of dollars in oil revenues that were not returned to Iran. An Iran International investigation found that members of one network collectively failed to repatriate $11 billion, while confidential documents showed 86 million barrels of oil had been assigned to four intermediaries who already owed money from previous sales.
Iran International also reported this week that senior IRGC commander Hossein-Reza Sadeghi and his son Saeed played central roles in efforts to preserve an IRGC Intelligence oil-sales network and shift its financial operations from the United Arab Emirates to Russia.
