Iran's leadership is experiencing significant internal division, with hardline factions within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) increasingly pushing for confrontation while civilian leaders attempt to maintain diplomatic channels with the West. This power struggle in Tehran, rather than decisions made in Washington, may dictate the future of the ongoing conflict, according to regional sources.
Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has remained out of public view since the February 28 bombing that killed his father, leaving a void that prevents rival factions from being unified. This absence has amplified the divide between civilian politicians, who seek to preserve diplomatic efforts, and the military establishment, which favors continued confrontation. President Masoud Pezeshkian, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf are reportedly working to keep dialogue with the U.S. alive and prevent the escalation of regional conflict. However, their authority has been steadily eroded.
"They can sign [agreements], but they can’t stop the IRGC from acting or parliament from legislating around them," one regional source familiar with Iran’s internal dynamics told The Post. The IRGC has increasingly influenced policy by creating "facts on the ground" through military actions, with hardline lawmakers subsequently enacting legislation to legitimize these actions. "The hardliners don’t need to win internal arguments," the source explained. "They create facts on the ground … and get parliament to legalize them after the fact."
Behnam Ben Taleblu, senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ Iran Program, noted that while some politicians express a desire for dialogue, the driving force behind crucial decisions remains focused on escalation. "Those driving the train, those with their finger on the trigger, those making some of the most important decisions continue to talk and act like escalation is what will secure their survival, not engagement," Taleblu said. He added that Iran appears to be increasingly betting on confrontation, despite potential military losses, believing there are opportunities for gain and that barriers to escalation by adversaries exist.
This internal rift has become more apparent recently. During funeral ceremonies for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, IRGC members occupied prominent positions, underscoring the military's growing influence. Furthermore, some televised speeches by political leaders have been edited before broadcast, raising questions about control over public messaging. The Iranian parliament has also taken steps to undermine diplomatic efforts, with lawmakers declaring a memorandum of understanding with Islamabad effectively void and advancing legislation related to the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf.
Despite these divisions, senior Iranian political figures have recently engaged mediators, such as Pakistan, in an effort to maintain open diplomatic channels. This move may indicate a calculation by the civilian leadership that their influence could grow, especially if the IRGC faces difficulties in securing international arms markets. The prolonged absence of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, who has only appeared through written statements, fuels uncertainty about who is directing Iran's strategic decisions, allowing rival factions more latitude to pursue their agendas. The lack of a unifying figure means "there is no one left to force the two sides into alignment," according to one source.