Back to home

Iran desk

SNSC Pro-Deal?

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council is the room that would have to green-light any US-Iran settlement. Here is where each sitting member currently stands: pro-diplomacy, dual-track, or pro-conflict.

Updated 1 September 2026 · Editorial assessment from public statements

SNSC member stances

Council balance

Not a pro-deal majority

12 seats

  • 2 Pro-diplomacy
  • 2 Dual-track
  • 1 Neutral
  • 6 Pro-conflict
  • 1 Vacant

  • Pezeshkian

    Masoud Pezeshkian · President; SNSC chair

    Pro-diplomacy

    Publicly bidding to revive the June MoU

  • Araghchi

    Abbas Araghchi · Foreign minister

    Pro-diplomacy

    Diplomat; talks possible if US drops coercion

  • Ghalibaf

    Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf · Speaker of the Majlis

    Dual-track

    Lead negotiator who also threatens force

  • Rezaee

    Mohsen Rezaei · Supreme Leader’s representative

    Dual-track

    Talks yes, hard red lines, force if talks fail

  • Pourmohammadi

    Hamid Pourmohammadi · Plan and Budget Organization

    Neutral

    Budget technocrat

  • Mohseni-Eje'i

    Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei · Head of the judiciary

    Pro-conflict

    Rejects imposed peace; resistance rhetoric

  • Jalili

    Saeed Jalili · Supreme Leader’s representative

    Pro-conflict

    Ideological no-concession line

  • Vahidi

    Ahmad Vahidi · IRGC commander

    Pro-conflict

    IRGC; offensive ops; blocked early concessions

  • Abdollahi

    Armed Forces General Staff

    Pro-conflict

    Wartime staff chief; force language only

  • Hatami

    Amir Hatami · Minister of defence

    Pro-conflict

    Zero trust; fight for generations

  • Momeni

    Eskandar Momeni · Interior minister

    Pro-conflict

    Security/IRGC interior portfolio

  • Intelligence

    Minister of intelligence

    Vacant

    Vacant

Precedent

The Islamabad MoU passed unanimously

Public stances on this page are not the same as a recorded SNSC vote. The Islamabad memorandum of understanding previously passed the council unanimously.

Hardline rhetoric and a council decision can diverge. A successor US-Iran settlement would still have to go back in front of this room, but the last time a deal was put to the SNSC, every sitting member signed off.

What the SNSC is, and why a deal has to clear it

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council is the statutory forum for war, peace, and nuclear file decisions. The president chairs it. The speaker, judiciary chief, armed-forces staff, budget office, the foreign, interior, and intelligence ministers, IRGC and defence chiefs, and two Supreme Leader representatives sit on it. Determinations become policy only after the Leader’s approval.

That is why a public bid from Pezeshkian or Araghchi is not the same as a council decision. The Islamabad MoU did previously pass this room unanimously. A successor settlement would still have to be put back in front of a council whose public record is now majority-hardline: six pro-conflict seats, a vacant intelligence ministry, and only two members who are openly bidding for diplomacy.

Stance labels are an editorial read of public remarks, not leaked votes. Dual-track means the official will sit in talks and still threaten force. Neutral means the portfolio does not drive the nuclear file.

What is Iran’s Supreme National Security Council?
The SNSC (Showra-ye Aali-ye Amniat-e Melli) is the statutory body that sets Iran’s security and foreign-policy direction. The president chairs it; determinations take effect after the Supreme Leader’s approval. A US-Iran settlement has to survive this room, not just the foreign ministry.
Are SNSC members pro-diplomacy or pro-conflict?
As currently constituted, the council is not a pro-deal body on the public record. Only two sitting members are straightforwardly pro-diplomacy. Two run a dual track: talks plus force. One is a budget technocrat. Six are publicly pro-conflict, and the intelligence seat is vacant.
Did the SNSC previously approve a US-Iran deal?
Yes. The Islamabad memorandum of understanding passed the SNSC unanimously. The current public split is rhetoric, not a recorded vote against a deal.
Who would have to carry a US-Iran deal through the SNSC?
Any new settlement has to be carried by the dual-track centre, Ghalibaf and Rezaee, or imposed over the resistance bloc. Pezeshkian and Araghchi can bid for diplomacy; they do not command a majority on their own. The Islamabad MoU shows the same room can still vote as a bloc when a text is on the table.