In the months following a brief but intense conflict with Israel in June 2025, Iran has found itself at the crossroads of technological clampdowns and economic isolation, as reported by multiple sources including The New York Times and Iranian economic analysts. The government’s decision to throttle Internet traffic and jam GPS signals, intended to tighten state control and stifle potential dissent, has left ordinary Iranians grappling with daily disruptions and a growing sense of unease about their digital privacy.
According to The New York Times, these measures—enacted in the immediate aftermath of the June war—have made even routine online tasks a struggle for millions. Everyday activities, from navigating city streets to accessing banking services or simply communicating with family, have become fraught with delays and uncertainty. The chilling effect has been palpable: “Routine tasks online are a struggle, and fears of greater surveillance are mounting,” the report notes, capturing the anxiety rippling through Iranian society.
But the digital squeeze is just one front in a much broader campaign of economic and political pressure facing Iran. At the heart of the country’s financial woes lies a complicated relationship with the global financial system—one that is shaped by sanctions, international watchdogs, and persistent distrust.
One of the most contentious issues has been Iran’s ongoing debate over whether to comply with the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), as well as related international agreements like the Palermo Convention and the Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) bill. According to Iranian economist Raghfar, who wrote on the subject in October 2025, these institutions are less about fostering transparency and more about exerting political leverage. “In today’s global financial system, economic justice has faded more than ever, replaced by power and political interests,” Raghfar observed, arguing that mechanisms like FATF have become “tools to control and exert pressure on independent countries.”
Raghfar’s critique doesn’t stop at the institutions themselves. He points out the irony that countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom—long recognized as major centers of money laundering—now act as the world’s financial overseers. “The U.S., since the 1950s, established financial havens, while the U.K., through banks such as HSBC, provided formal channels for laundering illicit funds. Even Israel plays a significant role in this network as a hub for the circulation of illicit money,” he wrote. Despite these histories, Western powers now selectively accuse nations like Iran, Russia, and China of non-transparency, a stance Raghfar sees as emblematic of the “structural injustice within the global financial system.”
This distrust, he argues, compels countries outside Western alliances to align their banking systems with the dictates of major powers, often at the expense of their own sovereignty. In Iran, the debate over joining FATF and implementing related reforms has raged for years, with lawmakers and citizens alike weighing the potential benefits against the risks of exposing sensitive financial information to foreign scrutiny.
“The West’s primary concern is not transparency but access to the financial information of key Iranian institutions,” Raghfar asserts. This concern is not without merit: full compliance with FATF standards could inadvertently reveal the very methods Iran uses to circumvent international sanctions, potentially intensifying economic pressure on the country.
Yet, Iran’s refusal to join FATF and similar frameworks has not come without cost. As Raghfar explains, many international banks and financial institutions now refuse to do business with Iran, forcing Iranian businesses and individuals to rely on informal—and often more expensive—channels for international transactions. “This ultimately raises commodity prices and increases pressure on citizens’ livelihoods,” he notes, underscoring the real-world impact of these policy decisions on ordinary people.
There is, however, a glimmer of hope should circumstances change. If sanctions were to be eased, managed cooperation with FATF could help reduce some of the costs associated with foreign trade. But as things stand, with sanctions as tight as ever, the benefits of such cooperation remain limited. Raghfar is clear-eyed about the stakes: “FATF is less a technical body and more a component of Western geopolitical pressure, aimed at increasing the costs of political independence for countries like Iran, Russia, and China.”
He argues that neither joining nor rejecting FATF is a panacea for Iran’s economic challenges. The real issue, he says, lies in the deep-seated distrust that permeates the global financial system, and the persistent reality of sanctions that have all but isolated Iran from much of the international economy. For Raghfar, the solution lies not in capitulating to external demands, but in developing robust domestic mechanisms to combat money laundering—systems that can both protect sensitive information and, over time, enhance global trust in Iran’s financial institutions.
“As long as the global financial system remains dominated by a few major powers, no FATF-like institution can be truly equitable,” he contends. “Countries that serve as primary hubs for money laundering cannot legitimately judge the financial transparency of others.” For Iran, then, the FATF debate is not merely about economics—it’s a political test, a balancing act between maintaining financial independence and mitigating the relentless pressures from abroad.
Meanwhile, the digital restrictions imposed since the war with Israel have only deepened a sense of siege among the Iranian public. The combination of technological clampdowns and financial isolation has created a climate of uncertainty and frustration, as Iranians navigate a landscape where both their information and their money are increasingly difficult to access.
As the government continues to throttle Internet speeds and jam GPS signals, many Iranians worry that these measures are just the beginning. The specter of greater surveillance looms large, fueling fears that the state’s appetite for control could soon extend even further into the private lives of its citizens. For now, daily life in Iran remains a delicate balancing act, shaped by forces far beyond the control of ordinary people—and by a global system whose rules, it seems, are written elsewhere.
Against this backdrop, the debates over FATF, sanctions, and digital freedoms are more than just policy disputes—they are existential questions about Iran’s future. Will the country find a way to assert its independence while re-engaging with the world, or will it remain locked in a cycle of isolation and internal control? Only time will tell, but for now, the struggle continues on all fronts.
