Iran and the release of Cecilia Sala: reality beyond the rhetoric

We are all happy for the release of Cecilia Sala, no ifs or buts. As an Iranian, I firmly believe that no one should spend a single second in the prisons of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The joy at her release is unquestionable, but now that the journalist is finally safe and sound, it is appropriate that this affair becomes an opportunity to analyse and discuss mistakes, doubts and weaknesses, avoiding triumphalist and rhetorical tones.
The arrest of Cecilia Sala in Iran, followed by her detention in the notorious Evin prison, has brought attention to the practice of ‘hostage diplomacy’ adopted by the regime in Tehran. This strategy of arresting foreign nationals as an instrument of political pressure is unfortunately well established. Sala’s case is not isolated, but represents the continuation of a modus operandi with roots in the 1979 hostage crisis. In recent years, at least 22 Western citizens have been arrested and used as pawns to obtain economic and political concessions.
If the pattern was well known even before Sala’s arrest, the question remains as to how much responsibility lies with those who allowed her to operate in Iran, evidently providing her with the material and professional means to do so. I am referring in particular to her publisher, from whom so far no word of apology has come for having put Cecilia Sala’s life at risk, while exposing Italy to a situation of weakness and blackmail.
Moreover, the political dynamics that led to his release raise questions about the strategies Western governments should adopt to avoid similar blackmail by the Islamic regime, which derives significant geopolitical and diplomatic advantages from it.
Confusing and inconsistent management
A decisive factor in the swift release of Cecilia Sala appears to have been the meeting between Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago in January 2025. During the visit, Meloni allegedly obtained an informal agreement from Trump to avoid the extradition of Mohammad Abedini Najafabadi to the United States, an Iranian technician accused of links with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and of being involved in the production of drones for the regime. This meeting took on considerable significance as Trump considers Meloni one of his main allies in Europe and agreed to go along with Tehran’s request not to extradite Abedini in exchange for Sala’s release.
The Italian government’s statements on Cecilia Sala’s release reveal a confused and inconsistent handling, culminating in an attempt to present the operation as a diplomatic success. However, the reality appears quite different.
Since the first days, the contrasting positions of government representatives had suggested that a prisoner exchange was taking place. While Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani was trying to separate the affairs of Sala and Mohammad Abedini Najafabadi, Justice Minister Carlo Nordio was pushing for Abedini’s imprisonment to be lifted, thus facilitating his release. The almost simultaneous release of Sala and Abedini shows that the real winner in this affair is the Islamic Republic, which got exactly what it wanted.
Although the Italian government tried to present this release as a major diplomatic victory, the prisoner exchange was practically inevitable given the circumstances and dynamics at play. The contradictions in the official statements highlight a lack of transparency and a series of significant concessions by Italy, which gave in to pressure from the Iranian regime.
Italy has chosen to surrender to Tehran
Unfortunately, Italy ended up bowing to the hostage strategy pursued by the Islamic Republic, without demonstrating either the will or the strength to play a truly decisive role, as would have been desirable. Instead of firmly opposing it, our country accepted the exchange, thus reinforcing the regime’s narrative. Moreover, Italy is said to have delivered a message from the Iranian government to Donald Trump, suggesting that any disputes could be resolved through diplomacy. The Islamic Republic, worried by Trump’s possible return to the White House, is in fact seeking allies and mediators to negotiate with the United States, while other countries, such as Germany, have distanced themselves from the regime. Italy, on the other hand, has chosen to continue acting as a ‘way out’ for Tehran.
Immediately after the news of Cecilia Sala’s release, apologetic and pro-regime voices were raised. Italian journalists, authors and analysts (including some Italo-Iranians) appeared on major TV channels and newspapers to argue that it is possible to negotiate with Iran and reach agreements. According to these ‘experts’, it would be possible to resolve disputes and improve international relations simply by sitting down at a table with the Islamic regime.
However, it is crucial to remember that the Islamic Republic is not a ‘normal’ government, but a regime that has supported terrorists and dictators in various parts of the world and continues to threaten regional stability and global security. Moreover, as many Iranians – not only dissidents, but also a large part of the population – point out, the Islamic Republic is not considered a legitimate representative of the Iranian people. The struggle against the ayatollahs’ regime unites millions of citizens who do not want to be ruled by a power that represses and tortures opponents.
Despite this, there are still numerous members of the Italian media scene who seem to support the so-called ‘reformist line’ of the Islamic Republic. This attitude ends up providing indirect legitimisation to the ayatollahs and maintaining a regime that, in fact, is far removed from the principles of justice, human rights and democracy. We should stop reviving ‘reformist’ propaganda and start acknowledging the reality: a system that shows no will to change, but rather continues to strengthen itself by exploiting the diplomatic weaknesses and misjudgments of Western states.
Evin’s conditions and the risks of trusting
No one doubts that Cecilia Sala experienced terrible moments during her detention in Evin prison. In her first podcast after release, she spoke of forms of psychological torture, often referred to as ‘white torture’. However, the details she provided – such as being given food, access to moments outside the cell and even a book – show that her experience, while painful, was different from that of many Iranians locked up in the same place.
For Iranian detainees accused of opposing the regime, Evin is a real hell on earth: inhuman conditions, constant physical and psychological torture, total absence of human dignity. The difference between what Sala experienced and what Iranian political prisoners experience shows how, within Evin, treatment varies depending on the profile of the detainee and the specific interests of the regime.
Another significant aspect, which emerged from the podcast, concerns the precautions Cecilia Sala allegedly took before her trip. According to her account, she relied on the advice of trusted people in her circle of acquaintances, both in Italy and Iran. However, this raises doubts about the real reliability of these contacts. Indeed, for those who have been following Cecilia’s work for years, it is clear that her reference group may have been influenced, albeit unintentionally, by individuals close to the ideas of the regime or to a supposedly ‘reformist current’ of the regime, which, however, does not grasp the true nature of the Iranian political system.
The fact that she had sought help from contacts in Iran to organise the trip also turned out to be a potential mistake. At such a delicate moment, especially after the arrest in Italy of a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), whoever was aware of the situation should have convinced her to renounce or, at least, to leave the country immediately after that arrest. This hypothesis is confirmed by the investigations of the Italian secret services, which are verifying possible holes in Cecilia’s network of trust and possible links between her local sources and the Iranian regime.

Lessons to be learned: the importance of authentic stories
This not only sheds light on the dynamics that led to Sala’s detention, but also underlines how crucial it is to assess sources and contacts very carefully before travelling to a country like Iran, especially at a time of international tensions.
Cecilia Sala’s release, while greeted with relief, therefore raises crucial questions about the future of foreign journalists in Iran. The Islamic Republic has clearly demonstrated that the country is no longer safe even for reporters who adopt ‘soft’ tones towards the regime. Even those who, perhaps out of necessity or out of hope for internal change, avoid openly clashing with the authorities and sometimes revive their propaganda, expose themselves to risks similar to those taken by Cecilia Sala. Iran no longer gives discounts even to those who try to maintain a more conciliatory stance: the regime exploits the good faith of journalists, who can find themselves caught in a web of lies and manipulation.
I hope that Cecilia Sala, having overcome the shock of this traumatic experience, will abandon any ‘soft’ attitude towards the regime. So far her position has appeared rather ambiguous, contributing to the illusion that one can negotiate with a system that has shown no sign of real openness for 46 years. I hope he decides to take a clearer position, aligning himself with those colleagues who are not afraid to openly challenge the ideology of the Islamic regime. This experience, as dramatic as it is, could offer Cecilia the opportunity to reconsider her ideas, confronting herself with voices closer to the Iranian people, who have been fighting against the oppression of the ayatollahs for years. She can no longer ignore the real suffering of the Iranian people, who reject the regime, nor remain silent in the face of the repression of freedom of expression, torture and executions inflicted on anyone who dares to rebel.
Finally, I hope that this story teaches Cecilia Sala the importance of a journalist’s role: to defend the truth without compromise. If there is a lesson to be learned, it will perhaps be the realisation that it is no longer the time to advance cautiously, but to openly side with the truth and those in Iran who need an authentic voice, far from the illusions of ‘reforms’ or negotiations with a regime that has no intention of changing.