Axios revealed that the administration of US President Donald Trump chose the President of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region, Nechirvan Barzani, to be a back channel to communicate directly with the leadership of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, after Washington had doubts about the powers of the Iranian negotiators to conclude an agreement that would end the war.
The website quoted three sources directly familiar with the communications that, in early May, the White House began to suspect that Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi did not have full authority to conclude an agreement, and that their decisions might be subject to the approval of the Revolutionary Guards.
The doubts came after the US administration thought it was close to an agreement, but Tehran delayed its response for more than ten days.
Around May 10, then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard called Barzani and asked him for help in reaching directly the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, Ahmed Vahidi, according to two sources who spoke to Axios.
Gabbard informed Barzani that the call was taking place with the approval of Trump and his first vice president, J.D. Vance, and that the White House wanted to know whether Vahidi and the IRGC leadership supported what Qalibaf and Araqchi were negotiating, or whether they had different demands.
Washington chose Barzani because of his extended relations with Tehran and Washington. He lived in Iran during the Iran-Iraq war, studied at the University of Tehran, speaks Persian fluently, and has personal relationships with senior Iranian officials, including leaders in the Revolutionary Guard.
Brett McGurk, a former Middle East adviser to four US presidents, told Axios that Barzani “knows almost everyone in Tehran as well as in Washington.”
Direct contact with Wahidi
Barzani agreed to relay the message, but asked to speak directly with Vahidi. On May 14, a Revolutionary Guard official arrived at Barzani’s office in Erbil carrying an encrypted phone to establish a secure connection, according to the report.
Barzani asked Vahidi whether the leadership of the Revolutionary Guards stood behind the Iranian negotiators. Axios quoted a source with direct knowledge of the call that Vahidi replied: “I fully support them, and this is also the position of the Revolutionary Guards.” “We prefer to resolve this crisis through negotiations.”
Barzani informed Gabbard of the response immediately after the call ended, before she conveyed the content to the White House. The website said that the Trump administration then proposed the idea of holding secret talks in Erbil between senior American and Iranian officials.
The Iranians did not reject the proposal, but they expressed security concerns, fearing that Israeli intelligence would try to target the delegation in the Kurdistan region or while it was moving there, and the meeting was not held.
The channel reveals one of the basic problems that Washington faced in negotiating with Tehran after the war, which is determining who has the final decision within the Iranian regime, especially after the killing of Ali Khamenei and a number of senior officials and the growing influence of the Revolutionary Guards.
The website added that Pakistani and Qatari mediators are currently continuing to exchange messages between Washington and Tehran, but without tangible progress.
It was reported from regional sources that some Pakistani assessments appear more optimistic than the actual course of the talks, in an attempt to find momentum that breaks the stalemate.
Barzani finally offered the White House assistance again in resuming contacts between the United States and Iran.
McGurk said the problem is not about the middleman. He added: “The problem is Iran’s policy on the Strait, and it is unlikely to change any time soon.”
US President Donald Trump pledged on Friday to launch devastating strikes on the Iranian economy, the day after Treasury Secretary Scott Besent confirmed that Washington would impose “unprecedented” measures on Tehran, perhaps within days.
The United States, the United Nations, and the European Union have imposed sanctions on Iran, implemented trade restrictions, and frozen Iranian assets since the late 1970s, against the backdrop of the nuclear program, human rights violations, and support for armed groups.
Since the outbreak of the war at the end of last February, Washington has imposed additional sanctions on Tehran, including the maritime, energy and financial sectors, and has also begun imposing a naval blockade on it.
Data from the US Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) show that sanctions have been imposed on more than 1,000 people, ships and aircraft since the start of Trump's second term.
The latest measures targeted the shadow fleet transporting Iranian oil, a number of shipping insurance companies, entities and individuals who facilitate Tehran’s acquisition of weapons, as well as platforms for trading digital assets.
These measures led to the freezing of an estimated $500 billion in cryptocurrencies linked to Iran.
Below are additional options that experts say the Trump administration could resort to to increase economic pressure on Tehran:
Penalties for “teapots”
Independent Chinese refineries, known as “teapots,” represent about a quarter of China’s refining capacity, and operate on limited, and sometimes negative, profit margins.
Data for 2025 from Kpler Analytics show that China buys more than 80 percent of Iranian oil exports, and independent refineries account for a large share of this trade, exposing them to what are known as secondary sanctions targeting entities that assist parties subject to primary sanctions.
Previous US sanctions led to the reluctance of larger independent refineries to buy Iranian oil, but sanctions experts say that independent refineries enjoy relative immunity due to their limited connection to the US financial system.
The US Office of Foreign Assets Control imposed secondary sanctions on smaller entities based in China and Hong Kong, accusing them of carrying out billions of dollars in transactions linked to Iranian oil and helping to finance arms purchases.
The US Treasury Department warned two major Chinese banks of the possibility of being subjected to secondary sanctions if Iranian funds were found to have passed through their systems, but it stopped short of including them on the sanctions list.
Sanctions experts said that targeting these two banks, whose names US officials did not reveal, or imposing additional measures, could have a wide impact on major financial institutions. But experts also warned that targeting Chinese banks could prompt Beijing to take countermeasures.
Trump administration officials sought to reduce tensions between Washington and Beijing ahead of an expected meeting between Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping later this year.
These officials fear that China will reduce exports of critical minerals needed to produce advanced technology, while the United States and its Western allies are still working to develop alternative sources of supplies.
“Whack-a-mole” game
The United States can continue to target Iranian individuals and entities, as well as entities in China and the Gulf region, that help Tehran circumvent sanctions and collect revenues to finance its war efforts. The US Treasury Department recently imposed sanctions on companies established to facilitate the exchange of Iranian oil revenues for imports.
But Brett Erickson, director at Obsidian Risk Advisors, said that such measures resemble a game of “whack a mole” and have not succeeded in changing Iran’s behavior, as Tehran is simply creating new entities to replace those affected by the sanctions.
Mayad Maleki, a sanctions expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that Besant was likely hinting at tightening the application of sanctions on oil shipping companies, buyers and currency exchangers who help Iran pay for its imports.
He added that imposing more sanctions on the aviation sector remains a possibility, with the aim of weakening Iran's ability to transport trade, after the United States imposed a blockade on shipping movement through the Strait of Hormuz.
Land siege
Some American and Israeli officials raised the possibility of imposing a ground blockade on Iran, a step that would require the cooperation of its neighboring countries: Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Armenia.
The Trump administration enjoys varying degrees of close relations with all of these countries, with the exception of Afghanistan, but the Iranian borders are mountainous, and it is very difficult to fully monitor them.
Trump may have pressure cards on Pakistan, which recently sought to obtain a currency swap line worth $10 billion from the US Treasury, and on Turkey, which seeks to return to the US F-35 fighter program.
Imposing a ground blockade would increase pressure on the Iranians by cutting off imports of food, energy and textiles. But experts say that implementing such a step would be extremely difficult, and it may not necessarily lead to the outbreak of protests or increased internal pressure on the authorities.
Secondary customs duties
Trump has repeatedly threatened to impose customs duties on goods coming from countries that trade with Iran, although the Supreme Court invalidated the legal basis on which those duties were based.
Last week, the US Senate approved a wide-ranging bill to impose sanctions on Russia, which also included new sanctions on Iran.
The legislation would give Trump new powers in the field of tariffs, which could be used against countries that aid Iranian trade or arms purchases.
The bill still requires approval by the US House of Representatives. It may face difficulties due to widespread concerns among Democrats and some Republicans regarding procedures related to imposing customs duties.
On Sunday, the Iranian authorities executed Shahram Sadeghi, one of the detainees in connection with the January protests, after an Iranian court convicted him of running over police officers in the city of Karaj, amid mounting international criticism of the implementation of death sentences against protesters and defendants in security cases.
The Iranian judiciary announced the implementation of the ruling, and said that Sadeghi was convicted of “carrying out operational work on behalf of Israel, the United States, and hostile groups against security and national interests.” The court also ruled that his property be confiscated.
Mizan Agency, affiliated with the media platform of the judiciary, reported that the Iranian Supreme Court upheld the ruling before it was implemented.
According to the judicial account, Sadeghi drove his Pride car quickly towards a group of police officers near the Gulzar intersection in the city of Karaj, west of Tehran, on the evening of January 8, and injured seven of them.
Mizan added that the injuries affected the head, legs, hands, and eyes, and that one of the police officers remained in a coma for about three months. He said that Sadiqi set fire to his car after the accident and left the scene, before the security services later arrested him using a false identity inside an addiction treatment center in Alborz Governorate.
According to Mizan, Sadeghi initially said that his car was stolen, before he admitted during the investigations and trial that he drove it toward police officers.
The agency said that the Revolutionary Court in Karaj considered the case in the presence of a lawyer, and issued the death sentence, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court.
The Iranian authorities did not publish independent documents allowing verification of the details of the trial or the evidence on which the ruling was based. No independent information was available about the circumstances of the investigation or the extent to which Sadeghi enjoyed full defense guarantees.
Human rights organizations have for years raised questions about fair trial guarantees in national security and protest cases in Iran, including effective access to lawyers and the use of confessions they say are extracted under pressure.
January protests
Sadeghi was among those detainees linked to the widespread protests that Iran witnessed at the beginning of the year. The protests began in late December against the backdrop of rising costs of living, before expanding into anti-government demonstrations, reaching their peak on January 8 and 9.
The Iranian authorities acknowledged that more than three thousand people were killed during the unrest, but attributed the violence to “terrorist acts” that they said the United States and Israel were behind.
Human rights organizations operating from outside Iran say that the security forces used lethal force against the protesters, and that the death toll exceeded the numbers announced by the authorities.
Since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war against Iran on February 28, the pace of executions in cases related to national security, espionage, and protests has accelerated.
During the past months, the judiciary announced the implementation of dozens of sentences against those accused of “espionage” or “collaboration with the United States and Israel,” in addition to people arrested during the January protests.
The head of the judiciary, Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei, repeatedly called on public prosecutors to expedite examining the files of people who were arrested during the protests or after the outbreak of war, and to implement the sentences issued against them.
Extensive international condemnation
Last week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, said that the Iranian authorities are using executions as part of a policy aimed at spreading fear in society.
According to United Nations data, at least 56 people have been executed since March 19 on charges related to national security, including 27 people on files related to the protests.
Turk warned that more than a hundred other people face the risk of execution on the basis of similar charges, without counting those sentenced to death in other cases.
May Sato, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Iran, said that the Iranian authorities use the death penalty “as a tool to terrorize society and suppress protests.”
Sato added that the number of executions rose sharply over the past year, and that the pace of implementation accelerated after the outbreak of war in February.
Sadeghi's execution came days after the European Union and 32 countries condemned the continued implementation of death sentences against people linked to the protests in Iran.
The signatories, including France, Britain, Canada, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and countries from northern Europe and the Baltics, called on Tehran to stop using the death penalty and release those arbitrarily detained.
The joint statement said that the signatories condemn the continued execution of protesters and the use of punishment with the aim of “silencing opposition voices, intimidating local communities, and punishing people who exercise their fundamental rights.”
He added that applying the death penalty for these purposes “cannot be justified,” calling on the Iranian authorities to take concrete measures to ensure respect for human rights.
The statement called on Tehran to halt the implementation of sentences, release those arbitrarily detained, and listen to the demands of Iranians demanding change.
The initiative began with the signing of 26 countries, along with European Union foreign policy chief Kaya Kallas, before the number of participating countries rose to 32.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said that the Iranian authorities have intensified the implementation of death sentences after months of protests.
He wrote on the “X” platform that “the regime continues to shed blood by intensifying executions,” calling for an end to what he called the campaign of repression.
High numbers of executions
Executions linked to protests and national security issues are part of a broader rise in the implementation of the death penalty inside Iran.
Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, place Iran second in the world after China in terms of the number of death sentences carried out.
Organizations' estimates vary regarding the total number of executions during 2025.
The organizations "Human Rights in Iran", based in Norway, and "Together Against the Death Penalty" said that the Iranian authorities carried out at least 1,639 sentences during the year, which is the highest number they have recorded since 1989.
In the same context, Amnesty International said that the number of executions in Iran during the past year exceeded 2,150 cases.
Human rights organizations attribute the difficulty of reaching a unified number to the limited official information and the failure of the Iranian authorities to announce all executed death sentences.
