By Kayhan Life Staff
Political rivalries among the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran — those who were not targeted by Israel during the 40-day war, or who survived the military strikes — have significantly intensified in recent days.
The disagreements have reportedly become so deep and consequential that a message attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei, the Islamic Republic’s third supreme leader, has been circulated warning that any action that undermines public trust amounts to aiding the enemy.
On May 28, marking the anniversary of the Majlis’s (Iranian parliament) first session, a message published under Mojtaba Khamenei’s name emphasized the need to “avoid discord and strengthen unity.”
It stated that representatives should “make even greater efforts to preserve the unity of the nation’s cohesive and interconnected ranks and not allow justified or unjustified differences to develop into conflict and division, while serving in both word and deed as symbols of national solidarity and unity.”
On June 4, the anniversary of the death of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, another message attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei was released. This statement expressed the warning even more directly, declaring that “any action that causes people to lose confidence is helping the enemy.”
The message stated: “In its hybrid war, the enemy is focused on two objectives: undermining the resilience of the people and inducing errors in the decision-making calculations of the country’s officials. Its principal tool in both efforts is the spread of doubt, despair, fear, suspicion, and division.”
“The role of officials in supporting these matters is extremely important. Any action that generates pessimism and discouragement among the public constitutes a form of assistance to the enemies of this country and its people,” the message added.
The death of Iran’s former Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — who was killed in an Israeli strike on the first day of the war on Feb. 28 — and the Islamic Republic’s current dilemma between continuing resistance and pursuing negotiations with the United States, have deepened divisions within the ruling establishment.
At the same time, the scale of Israel’s intelligence penetration into the Iranian government — and the widespread belief that Israeli intelligence has recruited collaborators and informants from within the regime itself — has fueled mistrust and further fractured competing political factions.
Against this backdrop, the issue of negotiations and a possible agreement with the U.S.— an outcome that would contradict the Islamic Republic’s 47-year ideological commitment to hostility toward Washington — has prompted hardline factions to adopt increasingly aggressive positions against supporters of a deal and members of the government’s negotiating team.
Spearheading the opposition to the negotiations with the U.S. is the Islamic Revolution Stability Front, commonly known as the Paydari Front, whose ideological leader was the late Ayatollah Mohammad-Taghi Mesbah-Yazdi (1931–2021). Its leading figures include Saeed Jalili, a member of the Expediency Discernment Council, and members of parliament Hamid Rasaei, Mehdi Koochakzadeh, and Amirhossein Sabeti.
The movement is widely regarded as the most conservative — or, more accurately, the most hardline — faction within the regime. Since Ali Khamenei’s death, it has emerged as one of the principal drivers of internal political conflict and has become the leading voice of pro-war forces. The faction is firmly opposed to negotiations with the U.S. and uses every available opportunity to criticize and undermine those pursuing talks in the post-Khamenei era.
The central figure in the negotiating camp is Majlis Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, a former commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), who enjoys the backing of President Massoud Pezeshkian’s administration.
Last week, Rasaei wrote on his Telegram channel, addressing Ghalibaf directly: “Mr. Ghalibaf, leaving a souvenir message on the wall of negotiations with America, is a mistake. Pinning hopes on such talks is also a mistake. (Former Foreign Minister Javad) Zarif and (former President Hassan) Rouhani, who were practically masters of concession and compromise in negotiations, did not gain even a straw through dialogue. Do not repeat the same mistake.”
Beyond disputes on social media and in domestic media outlets, the nightly pro-government gatherings held in city squares since shortly after the outbreak of the 40-day war on March 1 have also become venues for political protest by individuals affiliated with the Paydari Front.
These gatherings initially began as mourning ceremonies featuring religious lamentations following Ali Khamenei’s death on the first day of the war. Over time, however, they evolved into events that critics described as increasingly theatrical, even hosting engagement and wedding ceremonies for Basij-affiliated and ideologically committed young couples.
Political rivalries and factional warnings continued to surface on the margins of these nightly events. Within less than three months, some gatherings had effectively become concert venues. In one of the latest examples, Gheysar, a Los Angeles-based singer, returned to Iran and performed music aligned with government messaging at a gathering in the capital.
Supporters of the Paydari Front have used these events to promote their views through anti-American and anti-negotiation slogans and placards expressing opposition to compromise. Figures associated with the movement, including Rasaei and Sabeti, have appeared among the crowds to voice their opposition to the country’s leadership pursuing negotiations with the U.S.
The London-based satellite television network Iran International recently reported (citing informed sources) that supporters of the Paydari Front had been barred from attending these pro-government gatherings. Among those reportedly prohibited were individuals carrying placards opposing any concessions on the nuclear issue.
According to Iran International, the decision followed requests from President Pezeshkian and Majlis Speaker Ghalibaf.
The network reported in late April that Ghalibaf, during a meeting with his advisers, sharply criticized opponents of a potential agreement with the U.S. and several activists associated with the Paydari Front. He reportedly described figures such as Jalili and Sabeti as “extremist militias” and warned that they “will destroy Iran.”
The Paydari Front, however, has found other avenues through which to create tensions within a government that has experienced severe institutional disintegration over the past three months. One of its most recent initiatives has been an effort to impeach Information and Communications Technology Minister Sattar Hashemi over the partial restoration of internet access that had previously been blocked.
Iran’s connection to the global internet was severed within hours of the outbreak of war on Feb. 28. Eventually, the government approved a measure — communicated by President Pezeshkian to the Ministry of Communications — to restore access. However, the restored service remains more restricted and of lower quality than before the conflict.
The divisions within the Islamic Republic’s already fragile political structure have become so serious that public accusations and threats are now openly exchanged and prominently reflected in domestic media.
For example, the hardline newspaper Jomhouri Eslami, in its June 6 edition, criticized factions and individuals allegedly steering the government’s nightly gatherings “off course.”
The newspaper wrote that “the ominous sounds of division, the creation of distrust toward officials, efforts to obstruct the negotiation process, and slogans directed against particular figures at some gatherings — or displayed on placards — are undoubtedly in the enemy’s interest.”
The article continued: “Mysterious elements are intensifying this deviant trend and, while presenting themselves as righteous, are fueling the flames of discord. This highly dangerous phenomenon must be confronted so that these gatherings, as symbols of Iran’s strength, remain protected and continue for as long as necessary.”
At the same time, the newspaper Ettelaat published an article urging public confidence in the diplomatic team, arguing that “they will make no decision contrary to the wishes of the leader.” The article called for avoiding division and discord and for preventing “any statement, movement, slogan, or action that would undermine national cohesion.”
Reformist political activist Mostafa Hashemitaba told the Tehran-based outlet Khabar Online that “responsible institutions, including the judiciary and prosecutors, must take action against individuals who act against the country’s major decisions and interests, promote division and discord, and advocate such views in public forums. If violations are established, they should face legal consequences.”
Similarly, Rasul Montajabnia, a prominent reformist politician and secretary-general of the Islamic Iran Republic Party, described criticism from Paydari Front lawmakers such as Rasaei and Sabeti as “assistance to the enemy.” He stated: “It is meaningless for a member of parliament to make statements that fall outside the framework of the system.”
The disputes, however, have become so deep and so public that the last two messages attributed to Mojtaba Khamenei have included explicit warnings against divisive behavior and factional infighting.
Taken together, these developments suggest that divisions within the Islamic Republic have become exceptionally deep — and potentially threatening to the regime’s survival.
The fact that messages attributed to the leadership, which, according to this account, has not appeared publicly for three months, are now directly and explicitly addressing internal discord underscores the seriousness of the crisis facing the Iranian political establishment.
