Rewritten Title:
Claims on IRGC Land Sales for Hypersonic Missile Funding Spark Heated Denials
Controversial Claims on Defense Funding Draw Strong Rejections
Recent remarks by Iran’s Minister of Economy, Ehsan Khandoozi, alleging that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sold land to fund hypersonic missile development during the previous administration have triggered sharp denials from former officials.
Khandoozi stated in a televised interview that financial constraints under the 12th government forced the IRGC’s Aerospace Force to sell land from its garrisons to finance hypersonic missile testing. His claims were met with widespread skepticism and swift rebuttals from senior figures of the previous administration.
Former Officials Deny Allegations
Hossein Dehghan, Defense Minister under the 11th government, dismissed Khandoozi’s assertions, stating: “Some claim the Rouhani administration weakened Iran’s missile capabilities during the JCPOA negotiations—this is false. During my tenure, defense and missile capabilities saw significant advancement.”
Hesamoddin Ashena, former head of the Presidential Strategic Studies Center, questioned the legality of the alleged sales on social media: “Was this claim really made on state media? Does the IRGC even have independent legal authority to sell garrisons? Which garrisons, at what price, and to whom?” He later demanded documented evidence from Khandoozi, noting that records indicate land sales for research purposes in 2009, unrelated to the 12th government.
Calls for Transparency
Mohammad Bagher Nobakht, former Vice President and Budget Chief under Rouhani, labeled the claims “false” and urged verification from IRGC officials: “If military authorities confirmed this, let them speak. They can clarify both the inaccuracy of these claims and the substantial support the 11th and 12th governments provided to defense and missile programs.”
Public Skepticism and Political Implications
Khandoozi’s remarks have stirred public debate, with critics questioning whether the allegations—seen by some as politically motivated—risk inflaming tensions rather than clarifying facts. Observers emphasize the need for verifiable evidence before such claims are amplified in the current sensitive climate.
The controversy highlights ongoing discussions over defense financing and intergovernmental accountability, underscoring the importance of transparency in national security matters.
