Three-minute read
As the Iranian regime grapples with mounting domestic discontent and external pressures, sharp contradictions within its leadership have once again brought the regime’s internal chaos into the spotlight. This week, conflicting statements by two members of the regime’s Parliament laid bare deep rifts over the regime’s handling of espionage, internal threats, and its broader crisis of legitimacy.
Dispute Over “Infiltrators” Exposes Narrative Collapse
IRGC-affiliated lawmaker Salar Abnoosh, a member of the parliamentary Security Commission, publicly demanded a crackdown on what he called “infiltrators and undesirable elements” within government institutions. His remarks reflect a growing climate of fear and paranoia inside the regime, as it seeks scapegoats for recent failures and attempts to tighten internal control.
Yet in a stunning contradiction, MP Mohammad Manan Raisi dismissed one of the regime’s most persistent talking points: the claim that foreign refugees, particularly Afghan migrants, have played a role in intelligence breaches. “Based on reliable intelligence,” Raisi said, “not a single Afghan migrant has been involved in spying.” His admission represents a significant retreat from the regime’s long-standing efforts to shift blame to vulnerable communities as a diversion from systemic corruption and incompetence.
#Iran Regime Shaken by Ceasefire Fallout, Fear of Unrest Mountshttps://t.co/iL8tM2lRNd
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) June 30, 2025
This clash of narratives has highlighted the regime’s increasing inability to coordinate its internal messaging, even among loyal officials. What was once a tightly managed propaganda machine is now riddled with contradictions and public disavowals, pointing to a deeper political and structural unraveling.
Security Breach Sparks Deepening Crisis
Fueling the internal tensions are the unresolved questions surrounding the recent attack on a high-level meeting of the Supreme National Security Council—an incident that sent shockwaves through the political establishment. The precision of the strike raised alarms about how such sensitive details—including the time, location, and escape routes of top state officials—could have been compromised.
Regime-affiliated newspaper Ham-Mihan openly questioned whether this breach was purely the result of technical surveillance or if the regime is once again witnessing “deep internal betrayal” akin to the dramatic purges of the early 1980s. This highlight infighting among regime factions, with security officials, politicians, and military commanders turning on each other to assign blame for what many view as a catastrophic intelligence failure.
#Iran’s Ruling Factions Descend into Confusion and Infighting Amid Mounting Criseshttps://t.co/Ph4mFLOHK4
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) March 12, 2025
Among those reportedly present during the targeted meeting were the heads of all three branches of government, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, senior cabinet ministers, and two appointees of the Supreme Leader. Had the attack succeeded in its apparent objectives, it could have triggered a paralyzing political vacuum at the highest levels of the state.
Panic, Paranoia, and Power Struggles
Instead of presenting a united front or initiating structural reforms, regime officials have descended into finger-pointing and denial, reflecting a leadership in survival mode. The public airing of contradictory claims—such as the alleged role of refugees in espionage, now debunked by internal sources—has further undermined trust within the system.
The regime’s core narrative of external sabotage is rapidly losing credibility. Even conservative outlets now acknowledge a gulf between official statements and ground realities, admitting that the explanations offered by top officials no longer align with what the public sees and hears.
#Iran's Regime Tightens Grip with Harsh New Espionage Law https://t.co/EPfTqGQrbS
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) July 1, 2025
A System Consumed by Its Own Insecurity
The combination of public contradictions, strategic vulnerabilities, and elite infighting points to a regime in disarray. What began as attempts to project strength and control have backfired, exposing deep fractures within the Iranian regime’s governing apparatus.
In a system where fear of internal betrayal increasingly eclipses the fear of foreign threats, paranoia has replaced strategy. And as more voices within the regime challenge official lies, the clerical establishment appears less as a monolith—and more as a crumbling structure held together by repression and denial.