The president criticizes the military operations and calls for a stop to the escalation: deep divisions emerge in the Iranian leadership while the weight of the security apparatus grows.
Tensions at the top of the Islamic Republic are emerging with growing evidence following the latest developments in Persian Gulfparticularly following the attacks conducted against United Arab Emirates United. An investigation released by Iran International describes an increasingly heated confrontation between the president Masoud Pezeshkian and the military leaders. According to what has been reconstructed, the head of state harshly criticized the operations attributed to him Revolutionary Guards Corps Islamic, key structure of the Iranian security apparatus led by Ahmad Vahidi. The sources cited speak of a clear judgement: the missile and drone raids against the Emirates were conducted irresponsibly and without adequate coordination with the civilian government. The report also highlights the president’s concern about the risk of the conflict widening. Pezeshkian he would have warned that a further escalation with the countries of the region could produce serious consequences on a political and military level. In this context, the president would have asked for an immediate confrontation with Mojtaba Khamenei (assuming he is alive), with the aim of stopping the Revolutionary Guards’ operations against the Gulf States and contain the crisis before irreversible deterioration. In this context, Tehran is considering a relaunch of the diplomatic channel: according to Iran International, Pezeshkian believes it is still possible to safeguard the truce and reopen negotiations. The reconstruction highlights a now structural fracture within the Iranian leadership, with divergent lines between the political and military wings, while attempts at international mediation remain ongoing. An analysis published by Reuters in recent days also contributes to strengthening this picture. The agency highlights how current tensions are part of a broader transformation of the balance of power Tehranfollowing the death of the Supreme Leader Ali Khameneiwhich occurred in the early stages of the war with United States And Israel. According to Reuters, the Iranian decision-making system has progressively moved away from the highly centralized model of the past, with a growing weight assumed by the leaders of the Revolutionary Guards Corps and security apparatus. In this setup, Mojtaba Khameneihaving taken over from his father, would have a more limited role, often oriented towards ratifying decisions taken elsewhere.
In Tehran they command Pasdaran
Strategic choices would today be concentrated in a small group that includes the Supreme National Security Councilthe office of Supreme Leader and the leaders of the Pasdaran, responsible for both military operations and general political direction. A mechanism which, according to various sources, would also have slowed down the diplomatic response capacity of Tehran during the negotiations. In terms of international contacts, the dossier would be managed mainly by the Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and by the President of Parliament Mohammed Baqer QalibafWhile Vahidi would continue to play a central role in operational decisions. The strengthening of the security apparatus emerges as one of the key elements of this phase: analysts and sources agree that the conflict has accelerated the concentration of power in the hands of these structures. In the meantime, the versions on the trend of maritime traffic in the region remain conflicting. On the one hand, US officials argue that trade routes remain operational; on the other hand, Iranian sources speak of restrictions and discontinuities in navigation. The president Donald Trump he downplayed the extent of the latest clashes, stating that there would not be large-scale fighting and that naval traffic would continue without significant interruptions. The dossier, however, remains highly sensitive. According to Iran International, strategic decisions in Iran require coordination at the highest levels, which makes the president’s initiative even more significant. Pezeshkian would have expressed fears for the possible reactions of the international community, warning that new unilateral actions could trigger retaliations capable of hitting critical infrastructures. In this context, internal divisions over the use of force risk further worsening an already unstable crisis, with effects potentially extending well beyond the Persian Gulf theater.
