Kanal13The Iranian political elite, which had long demonstrated unity in the face of external threats, has been deeply divided. Following the ceasefire following the military clashes with the US and Israel, internal tensions between pragmatists and radicals have become extremely acute. Maariv writes about this. The conservatives’ main attack fell on Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf.
The radical wing, represented by the influential Paydari faction, harshly criticized him for his recent contacts with US officials. In particular, they were displeased with the talks in Pakistan, where Ghalibaf met with US Vice President J.D. Vance. Representatives of the ultra-conservatives accuse the negotiating team of deviating from the course set by the new Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei. The radicals’ main complaints can be summarized as follows: Mahmoud Nebavian , a member of parliament affiliated with Paydari, publicly stated that under the current circumstances, dialogue only brings harm to the state. He believes that even discussing the nuclear program during these meetings was a critical strategic mistake.
Ali Khazaryan , another hawk in parliament, went further on state television, claiming that the Supreme Leader is personally opposed to continuing the diplomatic process. The situation is complicated by the mysterious disappearance of Mojtaba Khamenei from public view. According to available reports, the Supreme Leader is recovering from injuries sustained in the attacks that killed his father, Ali Khamenei. This has left the country in a state of uncertainty: foreign diplomats note that security measures have made communication with the leader virtually impossible, paralyzing day-to-day governance.
The second round of talks in Islamabad ended without results. Tehran put forward a number of tough demands, including: Lifting the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Obtaining the right to collect tolls for the passage of vessels. Maintaining the uranium enrichment program. US President Donald Trump took the opportunity to comment on the situation, stating: “There’s tremendous infighting and confusion at the top. No one knows who’s running the show, including themselves . ” Despite the Iranian leadership’s attempts to save face—including a joint statement by Ghalibaf and the Iranian president that there are “neither extremists nor moderates” in the country and that all are “revolutionaries”—experts are convinced of the opposite. Behind the official rhetoric lies a deep personal feud and a struggle for Iran’s future. In this case election of Mojtaba Khamenei as the new ayatollah of Iran signifies a hardline approach, strengthened Revolutionary Guards, and the risk of civil war in Iran, says Iranist Lenka Hrabalová from the Prague-based Association for International Affairs. However, according to her, the election of the assassinated ayatollah’s son confirms the dynastisation of the regime and puts the Islamic Republic in contradiction with itself. “There is an alarming abundance of negative scenarios, and I realistically do not see any positive ones,” she explains. “ Iran is only on its third supreme leader. The first ayatollah founded the Islamic Republic, the second was hand-picked by Khomeini, and this third one is the first to be genuinely elected.
Therefore, it will only be a matter of time to see how the regime itself and the society will react to the situation. Iranian society is deeply divided in this respect. There are people who will reject any ayatollah – regardless of who holds the position, they will always be opposed. On the other hand, there are those who will accept any ayatollah appointed by the regime, because they believe it is the right decision and that the system is functioning as it should. Between these two poles, there is a very broad spectrum of opinions. It is possible to assume that especially a segment of religiously minded Iranians will pause over this election. They will perceive the discrepancy between what the regime declares as its principles and what is actually happening. On the other hand, it is impossible to accurately predict how society will react”, she adds.
