Iran Attacks: Conflicting Statements & Control of Revolutionary Guard
Conflicting Signals from Iran as Attacks Continue Despite Presidential Apology
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — – Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian apologized for attacks on “neighboring countries” even as missiles and drones continued to target Gulf Arab states, revealing a potential rift within Iran’s leadership over the escalating conflict. The apology, delivered amidst ongoing strikes, underscores the limited authority the country’s political leadership appears to have over its powerful paramilitary Revolutionary Guard.
Pezeshkian, one of three members of a leadership council overseeing Iran following the airstrike that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stated that Iran’s armed forces “should not attack neighbouring countries or fire missiles at them, unless we are attacked by those countries.” He suggested a preference for resolving the conflict “through diplomacy.”
However, this message was quickly countered by more hardline elements within the leadership. Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, the judiciary chief and another member of the three-man council, indicated that Iran’s war strategy would remain unchanged. “The geography of some countries in the region – both overtly and covertly – is in the hands of the enemy and those points are used against our country in acts of aggression,” he posted on X. “Intense attacks on these targets will continue.”
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s Parliament and a former Revolutionary Guard general, further emphasized a hardline stance. He asserted on X that “as long as the presence of US bases in the region continue, the countries will not enjoy peace,” framing the conflict as a response to the American military presence. His statement invoked the guidance of the late supreme leader.
The conflicting statements highlight a struggle for control within Iran’s governing structure. The Revolutionary Guard, which controls the ballistic missiles used in the attacks, appears to be operating with a degree of autonomy, answering to no one in the wake of Khamenei’s death. This raises questions about the ability of the leadership council to effectively de-escalate the conflict.
The attacks have already had a significant impact, disrupting flights at Dubai International Airport and targeting a major Saudi oil facility. Residents of Bahrain have also been forced to seek cover multiple times. The conflict has rattled global markets and weakened Iran’s leadership, which has been subjected to hundreds of Israeli and American airstrikes.
U.S. President Donald Trump has threatened further escalation, warning that Iran would be “hit very hard” and that more “areas and groups of people” would become targets. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed a continued offensive, stating that Israel has “an organized plan with many surprises” for the next stage of the war, with the goal of destabilizing the regime and allowing for change.
Iran’s UN mission suggested, without providing evidence, that strikes on nonmilitary sites “may have resulted from interception by US electronic defense systems.” This claim appears to be an attempt to deflect blame for the damage caused by the attacks.
Despite the conflicting signals, Ali Larijani, a top Iranian security official, asserted in a state media address that “our leaders are united on this issue and have no disagreements with one another.” He also announced that the leadership council has requested the Assembly of Experts to convene to select a new supreme leader, though no timeline was given.
The situation remains fluid and highly volatile. The ongoing attacks, coupled with the internal divisions within Iran’s leadership, suggest that a swift resolution to the conflict is unlikely. The Revolutionary Guard’s continued operation, seemingly independent of political oversight, poses a significant challenge to any efforts to de-escalate the crisis.