Israeli defense minister says he was target of Iranian spy op

The statement, read aloud by parliamentary presidium member Ahmad Naderi during an open session, described the UK’s move as “reckless and hostile”.

“The UK’s potential designation of the IRGC violates fundamental principles of international relations and will provoke lawful, reciprocal action by the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Naderi said.

The parliament’s response came amid rising tensions between Tehran and London following the arrest and charging of three Iranian nationals in the UK under its National Security Act.

British authorities allege the men acted on behalf of Iranian intelligence and conducted surveillance targeting journalists from Iran International, a London-based Persian-language broadcaster critical of the Islamic Republic.

The charges follow counter-terrorism raids earlier this month in which eight people, including seven Iranian nationals, were detained.

UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said on Monday that the Islamic Republic poses an “unacceptable threat” to Britain’s domestic security.

“We will not tolerate growing state-backed threats in the UK,” Cooper told parliament.

Amid pressure from lawmakers, UK officials are reviewing options to strengthen legal measures against IRGC affiliates.

A government terrorism advisor on Monday proposed new powers to sanction individuals and entities linked to the IRGC, calling for measures to criminalize public displays of support, including insignia, and expand arrest and deportation capabilities under what he termed a "Statutory Alert and Liability Threat (SALT)" notice.

The Iranian parliament’s statement listed a long history of grievances against the UK, including the 1953 CIA- and MI6-backed coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, the occupation of Iran during World War II, the 1917 famine, and British support for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war.

“These black marks in British history against the Iranian people are undeniable and shameful,” the statement said.

It also warned that if the UK proceeds with the designation, Iran would respond under Article 7 of a 2020 domestic law mandating reciprocal measures.

According to the law, British military forces and bases in West Asia and the Persian Gulf could be labeled as hostile entities and subjected to retaliatory measures.

“The Revolutionary Guards are a constitutional and sovereign force charged with defending Iran’s territorial integrity,” the statement read. “Labeling them as terrorists amounts to aggression against Iran’s national sovereignty and a breach of the UN Charter.”

Lawmakers in Tehran ended the session with chants of “Death to England,” and Parliament Deputy Speaker Hamidreza Haji Babai said: “The British have never stood with the Iranian people. They have always been our enemy.”

The UK has not formally designated the IRGC a terrorist organization, though it has imposed sanctions on many of its commanders and affiliated institutions. The United States added the IRGC to its list of foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) in 2019.

“There’s a chance that there could be a nuclear deal that doesn’t have some of the shortcomings of the previous nuclear deal that could enable the lifting of sanctions progressively and so forth as confidence is built,” Petraeus said during a panel discussion at the Qatar Economic Forum 2025.

“And that could lead to them being a more constructive player in the region than they certainly have been for many decades.”

Asked whether Iran could be “brought back into the fold” like Syria, Petraeus responded: “That’s overly optimistic.”

He pointed to Iran’s role in supporting its allied forces in the region such as the Houthis in Yemen. “Assuming Iran then also stops some of the terrible activities that they’re doing through proxies in the region which have been so destabilizing, then you can start to see the contours of something that could be much more positive.”

Petraeus said there are signs of narrowing differences between Washington and Tehran, and a possible compromise could include restrictions on uranium enrichment for a limited period.

“Maybe that ends up being for three years and then you have an opportunity to do something small again. But you can actually see this deal starting to come together,” he said.

Amid indirect Iran-US talks, US President Donald Trump has insisted Iran must fully cease enrichment, leading Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to warn on Tuesday that talks look unlikely to progress under those conditions.

On Sunday, Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff told ABC News: “We cannot allow even one percent of an enrichment capability. Everything begins from our standpoint with a deal that does not include enrichment. We cannot have that.”

On the question of regime change, Petraeus dismissed it as unrealistic. “You have to deal with the world the way it is, not the way you would like it to be. And I never thought that regime change was at all realistic, frankly.”

In a scathing editorial, Javan daily criticized the threat of snapback — a mechanism in the 2015 nuclear deal that allows the return of UN sanctions — as a “European stick for blackmail” and warned of punitive and high-cost actions against the economies of the United States and Europe.

The editorial said such sanctions would be countered with restrictions in trade routes and geographies under Iran's control, adding that these areas would expand through alignment with other actors "frustrated by US and European policies.”

"The US and European economies should expect punishment and cost-imposing actions. The sanctions will be followed by bans and restrictions on their access to routes and geographies under Iranian control. These geographies, motivated by other actors frustrated with US and European policies, will expand into major commercial corridors," it said.

While Javan did not name locations directly, the paper implied that Iran could disrupt major trade corridors such as the Strait of Hormuz, where a significant portion of the world's oil passes, and possibly the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, through Tehran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, as has been seen since the militant group imposed a maritime blockade in the wake of the war in Gaza.

“Any new sanctions must be met with real costs,” the editorial said, adding that the current Iranian negotiating position is no longer based on “Westoxicated thinking” but on firm demands for compensation and full sanctions relief from the outset of any agreement.

The paper said that Iran would only allow meaningful negotiations if its rights to enrichment and the preservation of enriched uranium stocks are recognized, and if all material and immaterial damages from what it called “illegal and inhumane” sanctions are paid in full.

'Trump eyes Arab wealth, not Iran investment'

Amid the ongoing indirect US-Iran nuclear talks, the editorial targeted US President Donald Trump, Javan accusing him of having no intention or ability to invest in Iran, saying his only objective is to “loot the wealth of Arab countries” to patch up America’s struggling economy.

“Trump, who is chasing after the pockets of Arab states, has no capacity for investment in any country,” the editorial stated. “He only dreams of healing the crisis-hit American economy.”

The piece mocked Trump’s recent regional tour and his military posture, claiming that US aircraft carriers and advanced weaponry had underperformed in conflicts such as Yemen and South Asia.

It argued that despite Trump’s rhetoric, “the US military's threatening gestures lack economic backing and have led to humiliating failure against Iran and China,” adding that Washington’s strategy had shifted to diplomacy out of necessity.

The editorial dismissed recent remarks by Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, who said that the US would not tolerate even 1% uranium enrichment by Iran, as bluster intended to sway negotiations and distract from Washington’s weak hand.

“This time, Iran is not negotiating with illusions, but with demands. If the West wants a deal, it must stop threatening, start compensating, and lift sanctions from day one,” the editorial added.

On Monday, the European Union and the United Kingdom voiced deep concern over Iran’s expanding nuclear program and its continued imprisonment of foreign nationals, according to a joint statement issued after high-level talks.

A third of Iran’s projected oil revenue for the year ending March 2026—worth $12.4bn—will go directly to the armed forces and military projects, three times more than last year.

The rest of the oil income, along with $33.5bn in gas revenues, will be split between the government’s budget, the National Development Fund (NDF), and the national oil company.

“The best course of action is to deposit all oil revenues into the National Development Fund,” the head of Iran’s planning and budget organization Hamid Pourmohammadi told a forum in Tehran on Monday.

“This way, we can determine at the start of the year how much the government needs, and based on that, the government can plan how much it can spend by year’s end.”

Pourmohammadi offered no detail on the existing arrangements which allow the fund to be bypassed and institutions such as the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) access a portion of Iran’s oil revenue before it reaches the government’s coffers.

He conceded, however, that the administration of moderate president Masoud Pezeshkian lacks consensus on how to implement the NDF-takes-it-all idea.

The NDF was established in 2010 to replace the Foreign Currency Reserves Fund (FCRF). While the FCRF was meant to safeguard oil income for future generations, the NDF has increasingly been used to cover budget deficits, despite the state objective of investing oil revenues.

The fund has long operated under the direct control of supreme leader Ali Khamenei, with administrations needing his approval for withdrawals.

One of Pezeshkian’s first moves in office was to request funds to pay wheat farmers.

In recent years, billions have been syphoned to the IRGC and the state broadcaster, functioning as main vehicles of Khamenei’s hard and soft power.

The NDF’s share of oil and gas revenues dropped from 40% to 20% in the two years ending December 2024, according to Didban Iran citing a deputy of Iran’s budget office Hamid Amani Hamadani.

Iran’s private sector owed $7bn to the fund in January 2025, according to senior NDF official Mehdi Ghazanfari. This is a debt repaid slowly in local currency, which the fund must convert to dollars at below-market rates.

Ghazanfari put the total pay-outs from the fund to the administration at just above $103bn in 12 years. He also said $45bn had been loaned to private-sector in the same period—often to firms with ties to the IRGC or the supreme leader’s office

As of May, the fund’s remaining assets stood at $30.7bn—dragged down by unpaid debts from both government and politically shielded companies.

"Let me be clear, we will not tolerate growing state backed threats on UK soil. The Iranian regime poses an unacceptable threat to our domestic security which cannot continue," Cooper told parliament on Monday.

"The UK will not accept any Iranian state threat activity in the UK."

The sharp statement comes after the arrests of Iranian nationals on UK soil this month in terrorism-related cases.

In two separate operations on May 3, eight men including seven Iranians were arrested by the British counter-terrorism police.

On Saturday, three of the Iranian nationals were charged with offences under the National Security Act, accused of acting on behalf of Iran’s intelligence service and carried out surveillance targeting Iran International journalists.

All three are accused of engaging in conduct likely to assist a foreign intelligence service between August 14, 2024 and February 16, 2025.

New counter-terror powers against IRGC

Meanwhile an advisor to the UK government on Monday recommended new powers targeting Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as calls for the IRGC’s proscription have grown following the spate of arrests.

The UK government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation Jonathan Hall published findings on Monday advising greater powers for ministers to designate people affiliated with the IRGC as terrorists.

Hall's report called for legislation proscribing public demonstrations of support for Iran's paramilitary organization such as displaying its insignia in public and recommended stiffer sentences for those aiding or benefiting from the IRGC.

The Revolutionary Guards cannot be blacklisted the same way non-state actors are, Hall argued, but he recommended its agents and supporters be targeted through a Statutory Alert and Liability Threat or Salt notice.

"It will allow the government to communicate decisive stigma at an international level for certain State and State-backed entities. Naming and shaming in a high-profile manner, accompanied by open reasons, can help address attempts at plausible deniability for serious harm caused to the UK or its allies," the report said.

"The Liability Threat Notice ... (puts the IRGC) on notice that its operations, and its minions and influence networks, are at greater risk of executive action, by way of arrest and prosecution, or deportation, or other forms of disruption, from UK authorities."

On Saturday, over 550 UK MPs and peers in an open letter urged the government to proscribe the IRGC as a terrorist group.