Power Dynamics in Iran: Who Really Holds the Strings?

Sat Apr 25 2026 04:21:08 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)

As the Iran war escalates, questions arise about the true leadership and decision-making structure within the country, following the rise of Mojtaba Khamenei as the new supreme leader.

The recent outbreak of conflict involving Iran has prompted scrutiny of the nation's leadership dynamics. Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the late Ali Khamenei, has assumed the title of supreme leader, yet his visibility and control are heavily questioned due to his lack of public appearances and reported injuries. The evident gaps in leadership raise concerns about the decision-making process, which appears less centralized than before, with military factions gaining operational autonomy. In parallel, diplomatic channels remain open but ineffective, indicating a complex political landscape amid ongoing warfare.

Power Dynamics in Iran: Who Really Holds the Strings?

The question hanging over Tehran since the opening strikes of Iran's current war with the US and Israel is simple: Who is in charge?

Formally, the answer is clear. Mojtaba Khamenei has assumed the role of supreme leader following the killing of his father, Ali Khamenei, on the first day of the war on 28 February. In the Islamic Republic's system, that position is meant to be decisive. The leader has the final word on almost anything important: war, peace, and the state's strategic direction.

But in practice, the picture is far murkier. Former US President Donald Trump has described Iran's leadership as 'fractured' and suggested that the US is waiting for Tehran to produce a 'unified proposal.'

Unity was certainly on the minds of Iran's leaders when they distributed a message to Iranians on their mobile phones on Thursday night, claiming that there was 'no such thing as a hardliner or moderate in Iran - there was just one nation, one course.'

Invisible Leader

Mojtaba Khamenei has not been seen in public since taking power. Beyond a handful of written statements, including one insisting the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, there is little direct evidence of his day-to-day control.

Iranian officials have acknowledged that he was injured in the initial strikes but have offered few details. Reports indicate that he may have suffered several injuries that have impaired his ability to lead. This absence matters as authority in Iran's political system is not just institutional but also performative. The late Ali Khamenei signaled intent through speeches and appearances which are now largely missing.

This has created a vacuum in leadership interpretation. Some argue that Mojtaba's wartime elevation has hindered his ability to assert authority, while others question whether he can manage the system at all. Either way, decision-making seems less centralized than prior to the war.

Diplomatically, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi represents Tehran, but with Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf heading the Iranian delegation in negotiations, the operational structure further complicates Iran's strategic approach. Ghalibaf has emerged as a visible figure amid the ambiguity, framing discussions more in pragmatic terms than ideological ones.

Limited Control and Expanded Military Role

The military's role, particularly that of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has burgeoned, with decisions about critical issues like the Strait of Hormuz falling to them rather than to diplomatic leaders. This trend indicates an operational autonomy for the military, prompting actions that appear to set the pace of the crisis, followed by frequent adjustments in political and diplomatic responses.

Claimed or Exercised Coherence?

Taken together, these dynamics reveal a system functioning, but not coherently directed. The supreme leader's authority exists but is not visibly exercised; diplomacy is engaged yet ineffective; military actors hold critical power without a unified, public strategist. This lack of coherent direction could hinder Iran’s capacity to translate its leverage into a strategic framework under pressure.

Despite maintaining control and avoiding collapse, the Iranian leadership's ongoing challenge is clear—whether coherence is genuinely being exercised or merely claimed. As the situation evolves, so will scrutiny over who is truly making decisions in Iran.