HomeIran News NowIran Nuclear NewsIran’s Regime Faces Imminent Fracture as Factions Trade Treason Accusations

Iran’s Regime Faces Imminent Fracture as Factions Trade Treason Accusations

FILE PHOTO: Brawl between MPs in Iran’s parliament (Majlis)
FILE PHOTO: Brawl between MPs in Iran’s parliament (Majlis)

Three-minute read

Following Iran’s 40-day war with the United States and Israel, deep internal rifts within the terrorist regime have erupted into open confrontation over whether to pursue negotiations with Washington. Rival factions are publicly accusing each other of sabotage, capitulation, and even complicity in the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The latest flare-up began on May 7, 2026, when Mahmoud Vaezi, former chief of staff to President Hassan Rouhani, attacked extremist opponents of the talks. In remarks reported by state-aligned media, Vaezi singled out Tehran MP Amir Hossein Sabeti and former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, accusing them of “instrumentalizing the position of the Leader” for political gain. “If the Leader opposed these negotiations in principle, he would have said so clearly,” Vaezi stated. He added that such opposition harms “national unity” and damages the image of internal cohesion, even though the talks have received leadership approval.

Revisionists Launch Attack on Extremists

Two pro-regime newspapers amplified the assault on May 8, 2026. Jomhouri Eslami, in its editions that week, warned that certain “extremist” MPs and state media figures who push for war over diplomacy pose a danger “no less than Netanyahu and Trump.” The paper demanded “decisive and practical action” against those it called “disruptors” whose rhetoric is weakening nightly pro-regime rallies across the country.

Sazandegi newspaper joined the offensive, directly criticizing hardliner Mohammad-Bagher Kharazi, secretary-general of the Hezbollah Party of Iran. The publication highlighted Kharazi’s recent social media post as inflammatory and damaging to regime stability at a time of external pressure.

These coordinated statements reflect a clear strategy to portray rival factions as obstacles to national interests, insisting that the negotiations carry implicit approval from the highest levels of leadership.

Extremists Respond with Threats

Mohammad Bagher Kharazi responded with explicit threats in a post that was initially carried but later deleted by the IRGC-affiliated news agency. Kharazi accused chief negotiator Abbas Araghchi of “capitulation” and suggested a suspicious role in the bombing of the Leader’s location. He warned that if the current talks resemble the 2015 JCPOA, he would not hesitate to help organize street protests and “destroy the Foreign Ministry and the Pezeshkian government.”

Mahmoud Nabavian, deputy chairman of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, echoed the hardline demands on May 9, 2026. Nabavian called for the complete removal of “JCPOA gang” members from the negotiating team led by Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, stating their presence leaves “no hope for a desirable agreement.”

Fellow MP Esmailzadeh went further, declaring any negotiation with America “irrational, unintelligent, and dishonorable” regardless of who leads it. Another committee member, Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani, dismissed factionally balanced teams as guaranteeing “zero output,” underscoring the depth of internal distrust.

Parliament Session Reveals Loyalty and Economic Woes

On May 10, 2026, the Majlis held its first closed-door session of the new year via webinar, with Speaker Ghalibaf absent and Deputy Speaker Nikzad presiding. According to statements released by parliament spokesman Goudarzi and broadcast on state television, lawmakers renewed their oath of allegiance to the new Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, and reaffirmed commitment to the system’s “red lines” in the face of external enemies.

At the same time, participants openly acknowledged severe public anger over soaring prices of basic goods. Goudarzi detailed complaints from citizens about “unprecedented” inflation, particularly in essential items, exposing fractures in economic oversight.

The session further admitted “parallel actions” by four overlapping bodies—Ministry of Industry, Mines and Trade; Ministry of Agriculture (Jihad); Trade Supervision Organization; and guilds—have created chaos and weakened overall management during wartime conditions.

Judiciary Cracks Down on Dissent

Judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni-Eje’i, speaking on state television on May 9, ordered “extraordinary” prosecution of anyone spreading “despair” or rumors that weaken public resolve. He labeled such individuals “enemy foot soldiers” whose actions aid the adversary by eroding national will.

Eje’i specifically referenced cases already filed against state-affiliated figures Abbas Abdi and Sadeq Zibakalam, as well as Etemad newspaper and ANA news agency, for publishing critical statements. He emphasized that security forces and intelligence agencies have full backing to pursue and punish “unity-breakers” and infiltrators without hesitation.

This judicial escalation underscores the regime’s fear that public exposure of internal divisions could accelerate broader discontent amid the ongoing conflict and economic hardship.

Propaganda Efforts Intensify

State media have intensified claims of mass loyalty, announcing on May 10, 2026, that 31.5 million Iranians have registered as “self-sacrificers” for Mojtaba Khamenei. Military commanders, including the head of the Central Headquarters, briefed the new Leader on full operational readiness and vowed total obedience to his commands.

Separately, regime outlets reported that Mojtaba Khamenei sustained minor injuries to his back, knee, and ear in the initial bombing but has now fully recovered, according to an official from the Leader’s office speaking at pro-regime gatherings. Hassan Khomeini, meanwhile, urged the public to support “macro decisions of the system” without question, warning against second-guessing leadership.

These efforts aim to project unity and strength, yet they coincide with unusually blunt public recriminations that reveal underlying paralysis in decision-making.

The infighting is taking place while the regime hasn’t decided about the course—concession or going to war—yet. Once the final decision is made, a major fracture is expected to weaken the regime severely, exposing it to the outburst of social anger that is witnessing these fights and looking for an opportunity to revolt.