Since the start of the US-Iranian conflict on February 28, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, has increasingly used English-language posts on the X platform to target the American public.
Since August in particular, financial markets terminology has been used in numerous publications to argue that Treasury Secretary Scott Besent and the Trump administration are unable to contain the inflation and economic turmoil caused by the conflict.
Along with familiar narratives about Iran's military capabilities and Iran's influence over the Strait of Hormuz, the posts appear designed to highlight weaknesses in the US economy and raise doubts about Washington's ability to manage energy prices and financial markets.
Some observers noted that Ghalibaf's English-language messages appeared designed for an American audience, raising speculation about who might help craft their content.
The goal appears to be to shift attention from the costs borne by Iran to those faced by the United States. By focusing on inflation, oil market turmoil, and investor uncertainty, Ghalibaf's messages seek to reinforce the thesis that continued confrontation with Iran could impose significant economic and political costs, especially ahead of the US midterm elections.
What financial terms does Ghalibaf use?
Ghalibaf repeatedly argued that President Trump's administration prioritized Israel's interests over the interests of Americans in attacking Iran. Many of his publications use simple, direct language aimed at a wide audience to warn of the economic costs of conflict, and draw on references from popular culture, including satirical images featuring Homer Simpson (the father figure in the animated series The Simpsons).
But some publications appear aimed at a more specialized audience, particularly those working in the financial field such as hedge funds, analysts and investment banks.
The first high-profile example came on March 29, when Ghalibaf appeared to offer investment advice, claiming that Trump's posts on Truth Social were often a "prelude to profit-taking" and should be treated as a "reverse indicator." He added: "Do the opposite: If they raise the price, bet on it falling. If they lower it, bet on it rising."
Skip the most read and keep reading
Most read
Most read end
The basic message remains consistent: investors should not trust management's ability to manage inflation or volatility caused by disruption to shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
On September 3, Qalibaf accompanied a post on the Analysts are watching these indicators closely when evaluating efforts to contain oil prices.
Hours after the US Federal Reserve raised interest rates on September 16, Ghalibaf published what he called the “Taylor Straits Rule,” referring to the equation that central banks use when determining monetary policy. By adding the Straits of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab as variables, Ghalibaf implied that Iran's influence over key shipping routes had become a major driver of US inflation.
Why is Qalibaf targeting the US Treasury Secretary?
Skip the podcast and keep reading
Worth paying attention to
An in-depth explanation of the most prominent events and topics, to help you understand the most important variables around you and their impact on your life
Episodes
End podcast
Since August, much of Ghalibaf's posts have focused on Treasury Secretary Scott Besent, portraying him as ineffective and questioning his credibility.
Several fliers depicted Besant as Wale E. Coyote (jackal cartoon character).
After Washington revealed on August 24 its strategy called “Economic D-Day,” aimed at increasing pressure on Iran, Ghalibaf ridiculed the initiative, noting that Besant said he did not want to “blow up the global financial system.” He wrote: “Sir, this is not Normandy, it is a night of improvisation and you forgot your script,” adding that it is “a day of the clowns.”
Three days later, he posted: “Scotty, man, your credibility is on the line,” and accompanied his article with a New York Times report on Besant’s market interventions.
In another post, in response to Besant's assertion that the United States had successfully escorted 130 million barrels of oil through the Strait of Hormuz, Ghalibaf wrote: “Liar Liar, yields are on fire,” pointing to rising short-term Treasury yields, which generally reflect investor concern about inflation and borrowing costs.
He also heightened uncertainty in the markets by highlighting a report issued by JP Morgan in September, which stated that the bank no longer had a clear baseline for modeling oil prices due to the conflict. Such uncertainty tends to support higher oil prices, in line with a broader Iranian effort to emphasize the economic costs of the war.
More broadly, Ghalibaf's messages seek to undermine Besant's attempts to reassure investors. In a post dated September 6, Qalibaf rejected Besant’s assertion that the US economy remains “very strong” and that oil prices could fall sharply once the conflict ends. Qalibaf cited rising diesel prices and what he described as widespread selling of US bonds by Japan and the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund as evidence to the contrary.
Besant has become a particular target, in part because he is the public face of Washington's "economic isolation process," which has extended sanctions pressure on sectors including shipping and aviation, and which Iranian officials have repeatedly described as ineffective.
What impact can these messages have?
The Trump administration indicated in August that it was shifting its focus from military action to economic pressure, with officials indicating that this approach may continue beyond the US midterm elections.
