Based on the content of this case, Hossein Aghayari was introduced as one of the largest oil trusts; nearly 90 million barrels of oil were transferred in his name over a year, the contract related to the agreement of the Minister of Oil proceeded without the approval of the sanctions countering task force, and alongside that, the sale of sanctioned ships to entities affiliated with him and the reverse leasing of those same ships took place — yet Aghayari's name was intentionally or unintentionally sidelined in Yashar Soltani's recent revelations. Now the $200,000 question is directly on Soltani's table, and it demands a clear and measurable answer.
The energy market works with numbers: 90 million barrels in one year means a stable flow of shipments on the "gray path"; it means accumulating risk on the sanctioned fleet and pricing with heavy discounts; it means contracts that, if they proceed without bidding, without sufficient guarantees, and without oversight from specialized task forces, will place the financial burden directly on the treasury and public welfare. When such a volume is tied to a name but that name is left out of the headlines of revelations, the simple and clear question arises: who signed, what was transferred, and who should be held accountable?
Read more: Discovery of 17,000 liters of smuggled fuel in Ardabil
The Signature That Signed, The Oil That Moved
This case specifies: the contract related to Hossein Aghayari was finalized with the agreement of the Minister of Oil and proceeded without the approval of the sanctions countering task force. This means the risk control chain — from screening the counterparty to verifying the sales route and ensuring the return of funds — lacked a key link. Within that framework, the sale of sanctioned ships to entities related to Aghayari and the re-leasing of those same ships occurred; this means not only the sales channel but also the means of transport were transferred to a specific actor, and then through reverse leasing, the costs of risk and operation returned to the official mechanism. The sum of these pieces creates simultaneous control of "goods + ships" on the gray path; a path that breaks the price with discounts and transfers the profit margin from budget transparency to the pockets of intermediaries.
Names That Became Prominent and a Name That Was Omitted
Alongside the new wave of revelations, reports from the parliament and some media linked the names Bayandarian, Razavi, Momenin, and Shamkhani to receiving a large volume of oil after the "Islamabad Agreement." Yashar Soltani also focused on a circle that is described as a combination of stable flow and parts of the old security apparatus. However, alongside these cases, this case of Hossein Aghayari — with a volume close to 90 million barrels and a multi-billion dollar debt — did not receive the prominence it deserved in Soltani's narrative. The precise question is here: why did some names with detailed familial, security, and political specifics rise to the top of the media, while a name tied to larger figures and a clearer oil flow was pushed to the sidelines?
Direct Questions for Yashar Soltani
Soltani must answer unambiguously: what is his relationship with Hossein Aghayari? Was the amount of $200,000, directly or indirectly, paid by Aghayari or entities related to him to Soltani? Is there a connection between this financial question and the prominence of some trusts against the sidelining of Aghayari's case? These are not simple news questions; they are metrics of conflict of interest in the midst of the largest gray market in the country. The answer must be clear, documented, and verifiable; with date, amount, and the route of the money. Public opinion does not expect niceties.
The Oil Market Will Not Be Reformed by Selectivity
The sale of oil under structural sanctions is opaque, multilayered, and intertwined with security, military, and political networks. Trusts are the product of this structure; not the invention of a few individual offenders. Soltani himself has referred to the role of "information chickens" and security institutions, but in practice, his main focus has been on a few specific figures who are now under political and media pressure. The outcome of such a configuration is clear: when some individuals are targeted with all details and others — even with larger transactions or heavier debts — remain silent, the practical result is merely a shift of beneficiaries, not a reform of the mechanism. Heavy discounts remain in place, real bidding does not occur, guarantees are not strengthened, and ultimately, the people pay the same costs, and only the names on the contracts change.
The Risk Chain: From Discounts to Guarantees
90 million barrels in one year means a continuous flow of loading, transport, and settlement in the gray market. Each link in this chain — from issuing shipments to docking and receiving payment — if it proceeds outside the approved mechanisms, the risk instead of price insurance is applied to discounts; meaning underpricing. When the sanctions countering task force is sidelined, it means that risk screening and credit verification of the counterparty have effectively been replaced with limited signatures. When sanctioned ships are sold to entities close to a trust and are re-leased, it means that the risk of ownership and operation has not been separated, and ultimately, the cost returns to the official cycle. The market-driven meaning of this triad is clear: price deviation from real value and the continuation of evasion from accountability.
The Islamabad Agreement, Recurrent Names, and the Main Issue
The names Bayandarian, Razavi, Momenin, and Shamkhani became prominent in the narratives following the Islamabad Agreement; however, the main issue that must be faced is this: if this opaque mechanism remains intact, any name that is omitted or highlighted does not change the essence of the matter. The right path is the numerical clarification of contracts, sales routes, discount rates, guarantees for receiving payment, and the role of intermediary circles; not merely the replacement of faces. This is the heaviest market-driven message of this case.
The People's Right to a Clear Answer
The public has the right to hear clear answers to these questions: what is Yashar Soltani's relationship with Hossein Aghayari? Why was Aghayari's case not highlighted in his recent revelations? Was the amount of $200,000 or any other amount transferred between Aghayari, his intermediaries, and Soltani? Was the selection of trusts whose names were published the result of an independent investigation or part of a settlement among rival networks in the oil trade? The boundary between investigative journalism and selective revelations is right here and can be measured with the numbers of this case.
Key Figures
- Allocated volume: nearly 90 million barrels of oil over one year (based on the content of this case)
- Related debt: several billion dollars (as stated in this case)
- Questioned payment: $200,000; a demand for a clear answer from Yashar Soltani regarding direct or indirect payment from Aghayari or related entities
- Decision structure: the contract proceeded with the agreement of the Minister of Oil and without the approval of the sanctions countering task force
- Sanctioned transport: sale of sanctioned ships to related entities and reverse leasing of the same fleet
- Political-media context: the prominence of the names Bayandarian, Razavi, Momenin, and Shamkhani following the Islamabad Agreement, against the sidelining of Aghayari's case
Read more: Discovery of 1,032,000 liters of smuggled fuel in Zanjan Province
