Internal Conflict Deepens Among Iran's Leadership Amid Military Strains

Conflicting communications from Tehran and Washington over recent hours have exposed widening disagreements within the inner circle managing Iran's war efforts.

US President Donald Trump mentioned that American negotiators had engaged with Iranian officials while preparations for broader military strikes were underway. The White House has kept communication channels open as US attacks continued into their seventh consecutive night.

Opposition Iranian sources informed "Irm News" that tensions have escalated between the office of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei and two main factions: a diplomatic group led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and a military faction comprising the leadership of the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters, the Quds Force, and the Aerospace Force of the Revolutionary Guard.

The sources explained that the conflict centers on divergent assessments regarding casualties, the trajectory of the war, and the nature of messages sent to Washington.

Three Factions Within Iran's Leadership

According to these sources, Araghchi has called for establishing a single political channel to convey Iran's position to intermediaries, while the Revolutionary Guard command has continued submitting separate military response estimates and regional front updates to Mojtaba Khamenei's office.

The office of Mojtaba Khamenei reportedly received conflicting evaluations from the Foreign Ministry, the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters, the Quds Force, and the Aerospace Force.

The leadership struggle focuses on three key issues: which entity communicates Iran's position to Washington, which authority sets the limits of military operations, and which party bears responsibility for losses and decisions preceding the expansion of strikes.

Additionally, contacts have taken place between the office of Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf and the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Mohammad Baqer Zolghadr, aimed at supporting a course that prevents field commanders from having full control over Tehran's messaging.

Hardline politician Saeed Jalili and his close associates within the council opposed granting Qalibaf or the Foreign Ministry sole authority to address the Americans, demanding the Revolutionary Guard leadership be involved in shaping the content of communications.

The sources noted that internal disputes within the Revolutionary Guard have evolved into a power struggle over the costs of continued military pressure, with factions aligned with Ahmad Vahidi and Deputy Commander of the Quds Force Mohammad Reza Fallahzadeh pushing to maintain missile escalation and regional confrontations.

Meanwhile, commanders within the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters have urged controlling operations in line with Iran's capacity to absorb strikes and safeguard its military infrastructure.

Leadership Responsibility Disputes Shake Iran's Top Ranks

The sources indicated that the name of Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters commander Ali Abdullah emerged in discussions about unifying military assessments presented to Mojtaba Khamenei.

Aerospace Force commander Majid Mousavi advocates continuing missile and drone pressure despite political objections questioning the effectiveness of repeated operations and their ability to deter Washington from broadening strikes.

According to the sources, the "scorpion struggle" has extended beyond communications with Washington, as figures within Parliament, the Revolutionary Guard, and the Supreme National Security Council have begun compiling files related to military damage assessments, management of the Strait of Hormuz, protection of southern facilities, and leaks of information about US strikes.

The competition to assign responsibility has led each faction to solidify its narrative before any internal review, with hardliners blaming the government and negotiation team for confusing decision-making, while individuals close to Qalibaf and Araghchi accuse military centers of escalating confrontations without considering the state's capacity to withstand attacks.

The sources also pointed out that religious figures within the Assembly of Experts and the management council of religious seminaries in Qom have expressed reservations about shifting decision-making weight to military leadership. The names Ali Reza Arafi and Ahmad Khatami have been mentioned among those advocating for preserving the religious institution's role and preventing Mojtaba Khamenei's office from becoming a channel for relying solely on Revolutionary Guard assessments.

Leadership Crisis Within Iran's Power Structure

The sources confirmed that objections target the circle controlling the flow of reports to Mojtaba Khamenei and the organization of information related to casualties, external communications, and military options, intensifying competition over who formulates decisions before presenting them to the "absent Supreme Leader."

They concluded that this conflict has sparked a confrontation threatening the cohesion of Iran's top leadership, with ruling factions exchanging blame over losses, breaches, and decisions made prior to the expansion of US strikes.

Separately, Mehdi Aghabai, a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, stated that the absence of Ali Khamenei removed the arbitration center that previously managed disputes among regime institutions and resolved rivalries within the power apex, causing postponed conflicts to surface more intensely after the war and broadening accusations among ruling factions.

In an interview with "Irm News," Aghabai said the war has left deep political and security impacts within the regime's structure, pushing competing institutions into fiercer struggles over their positions. He indicated that the ongoing tension reflects a crisis at the leadership's core following the new leadership's failure to fill the void left by Khamenei.

He considered Mojtaba Khamenei's attempt to fill the gap has not yet achieved a stable power transition, with disputes continuing over his legitimacy and ability to manage balances among religious seminaries, the Revolutionary Guard, and ruling factions. He affirmed that the regime has entered a phase of internal erosion as exclusionary and accusatory tools have begun to backfire on the parties involved in their creation.