In the countryside community of Sirik in southern Iran, heat levels have risen above 45C (113F) recently, leaving locals lining up for containers of water long after reported US attacks harmed two supply points for nearby areas.

Alongside these shortages and the threat of conflict came word of a potential accord between Washington and Tehran. Yet for residents dealing with the fallout, the update offered scant comfort.

"I worry about the unknowns tied to [the peace deal]," remarked Nahid*, a parent in Sirik, who noted how people stood in line for water under intense conditions, concerned the shortages might persist. Though service resumed after half a day, the flow to homes stayed far below what was needed for drinking or routine tasks.

"My young child stirred in tears from thirst and discomfort from irritation due to no water for simple cleaning," she noted.

As the main provider in her household, Nahid, employed in sewing, voiced fears for her child's well-being and prospects.

Nahid's view reflects a range of sentiments voiced by people throughout Iran as the US and Iran edge toward formalizing an accord.

Alborz, 36, an author in Tehran, observed that events have left many sensing the planet is guided "by all the mad men".

"The other day, I roused my spouse to share that a pact was set - with only minor givebacks. We felt thrilled. At minimum, we exhaled in ease," he remarked.

He described local responses falling into three main camps: "Those whose loyalties rest with the regime, those aligned with [the former royal family] the Pahlavis who seek outside armed action, and a third that rejects both."

He noted the third camp seems to be expanding lately.

Among hardliners, who gather most evenings to hail the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' "success" and join drills on Kalashnikov use, the idea of an accord with the "foe" has sparked fury, according to Mina, a scriptwriter in Tehran.

"All feel upset at present, yet each for separate causes. The clerics have urged followers to shout 'Death to America' for years, so any accord with the adversary erodes their hold on supporters. Then there are those like me; I loathe the regime, and I resent how [Donald] Trump let us down," she said.

"While [Barack] Obama did not back the Iranian public and opted to engage the ayatollahs, he behaved as a genuine statesman instead of a trader. We received what we expected from him. But with Trump, we truly faced a betrayal," she added.

Mina backs the return of Reza Pahlavi, the former shah's son, as a "bridge figure" and stated she sees no chance of a true peace accord with the Iranian regime.

She also voiced frustration over what she called a global inconsistency in addressing Iranian losses.

"The US strike on the school [where 120 children died] was terrible and deserves rebuke, and I sympathize with the blameless families hit by the attacks. Yet why overlook the young ones slain on the streets by the regime just weeks prior? How can we rely on your rights advocacy when you only champion causes that fit your aims?" she inquired.

While many in Iran had awaited the diplomatic steps with tension, for some the news sparked almost no response.

Shaghayegh, 24, who joined the Woman, Life, Freedom demonstrations in Tehran and suffered pellet wounds to the head, stated plainly: "Nothing has held meaning since 2022.

"I question whether conflict is truly winding down. What has shifted is our clearer view of real allies. And it grows obvious Trump is not among them."

As doubt grows and views stay split, a common thread of fatigue - and irritation that little has altered - surfaced in many talks.

"I feel eased that fewer innocents will die from US strikes, but can you now consent to return to your pleasant European summers - while we resume being slain by the regime?" asked Shaghayegh.

Alborz described the accord as shaky and unclear. "People discuss how Trump is merely gaining time until the World Cup concludes," he said, forecasting that "much might unfold in the coming weeks".

* Names have been changed