Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian was at the height of his influence in early July, having just succeeded in negotiating a peace agreement with the United States. He had traveled to neighboring Iraq to participate in a huge funeral ceremony for the Iranian Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the war.
Suddenly, he received shocking news.
Iranian forces opened fire on three commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, causing a Qatari oil tanker to catch fire and causing damage to other ships. Iran has become the subject of widespread international criticism.
In apparent anger, Zashkian phoned General Ahmed Vahidi, the commander-in-chief of the powerful Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and in a loud voice described what happened as a reckless act and demanded explanations, according to five Iranian officials and two members of the Revolutionary Guard familiar with the events.
The five officials said that Vahidi told the president that he did not authorize the attack and had no prior knowledge of it. He added that even the Supreme National Security Council, which plays a pivotal role in both the war and the negotiations, was not aware of the operation.
In fact, many of the country's leaders did not know that a fringe militant faction had decided to act on its own. Ultimately, those covert moves scuttled efforts led by more moderate pragmatists in Iran to end hostilities with the United States and repair the country's faltering economy.
Doubts about the authenticity of Khamenei's messages
The hardliners succeeded, in part, because the only person with the authority to resolve such disputes – the new leader, Mojtaba Khamenei – has remained a “ghost” since he took office in March. He did not appear in public, and his voice was not heard. Questions have also been raised about the authenticity of written statements and messages attributed to him, including by Pezeshkian himself, according to three Iranian officials.
Pezeshkian immediately returned to Tehran. The next morning, while the funeral ceremonies were still underway, the United States responded by launching air strikes on Iran, and the two countries returned to war. Senior Iranian officials and a member of the Revolutionary Guard said in interviews that what followed was one of the most turbulent political confrontations within the Iranian leadership in recent memory. Officials entered into altercations and shouting, and two senior generals threatened to resign, while officials exchanged accusations of treason and treachery.
The officials added that the repercussions of these confrontations contributed to a change in the leadership of the Supreme National Security Council, and to the Supreme Leader’s appointment of General Mohsen Rezaei, a veteran politician and former commander of the Revolutionary Guards, to head the council, given the belief that he possesses the necessary skill to mediate between the competing political factions.
Hardliners are in a stronger position
But divisions remain, and the hardliners who pushed Iran toward escalation are in a stronger position. Last week, Iran and the United States exchanged attacks, with Iran repeatedly targeting American warships for the first time, while the United States blew up at least eight Iranian oil tankers.
This report on the internal deliberations of Iran's leadership is based on interviews with eight Iranian officials, three members of the Revolutionary Guard, and four former officials, in addition to a review of dozens of speeches and statements by government officials and military leaders, published in the Iranian press and social media between June and September. The officials interviewed spoke on condition of anonymity, given the sensitivity of issues related to national security.
The influential “intelligence man.”
Three Iranian officials said that investigations conducted by the government and security services concluded that the decision to target the three commercial ships in July belonged to Hussein Taeb, an influential cleric and intelligence official who opposed the peace agreement with the United States from the beginning.
The officials said that Taeb was telling the new supreme leader that Iran had made a mistake by ending the war and approving the agreement. In a recent speech to military families, Taeb said he was not opposed to the talks, but added that “negotiations that ignore the rights of our people and compromise in the face of the enemy’s excessive demands have no place in Iranian politics.”
Khamenei recently appointed Tayeb as head of the Basij forces, which is responsible for suppressing opposition and internal unrest.
Taeb had served for more than 20 years as head of the Revolutionary Guards’ intelligence service, before the former leader dismissed him in 2022 due to failures, including an Israeli infiltration of the ranks of the agency and thwarting a plot in Turkey.
Taeb returned to the forefront after the killing of former guide Ali Khamenei, at the beginning of the war, and played a major role in choosing his son Mojtaba as his successor, according to what officials said at the time.
“Eliminate the prospects for any negotiations.”
Ali Reza Namur Haghighi, an expert on Iranian affairs and a former official who still maintains close ties within the Iranian government, said in an interview from Canada: “The attack on the ships was planned with the aim of torpedoing the memorandum of understanding with Trump, and eliminating the prospects for any future negotiations or agreements.”
When Pezeshkian demanded to know who had attacked the three ships, he was told that field commanders had acted on their own, based on an order that gave them the authority to attack any ship that violated Iran's control of the strait without waiting for approval from Central Command, according to the officials familiar with those discussions.
In one sign of the disagreement, the Revolutionary Guards did not issue any statement claiming responsibility for the July 7 attack, as was usual in other attacks before and after that. Iranian officials conveyed the same story to the United States and some of its regional allies in the first hours following the attacks, blaming rogue elements for what happened, according to American officials who briefed journalists on the developments at the time, and to the three Iranian officials.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi was dispatched to Oman, which plays a major mediating role, in an attempt to calm tensions with Washington.
At the same time, hardliners were in the streets and on Iranian state television, openly attacking the negotiating team and the peace agreement it had reached, while crowds, during night rallies, were chanting to demand a return to war.
* “New York Times Service”
Political movements around the Strait of Hormuz intensified on Sunday, amid American tightening regarding any settlement with Tehran, and Iranian-Omani efforts to reorganize navigation in the strategic corridor, while reports indicate that the Sultanate of Oman is preparing to host a regional meeting to discuss the new arrangements.
US President Donald Trump said that Iran is desperately seeking to reach an agreement with Washington, but he stressed that he would not accept a settlement that he described as “inappropriate,” reiterating his assertion that Tehran will not obtain a nuclear weapon.
Trump said, during a visit to Ireland, that Iran is “continuously calling” seeking talks, adding: “They have to reach an appropriate agreement.” “I will not conclude an inappropriate agreement.”
The US President reiterated his expectation that the war with Iran will end during the current year, suggesting that this will happen before or after the midterm congressional elections scheduled for November. He said that gasoline prices would fall “severely” once the war ended, referring to the direct repercussions of the conflict on energy markets.
Trump is waving the Venezuela option
In an indication that economic interests will be present in Washington's calculations, Trump raised the possibility of continued US involvement in Iran, linking this to the possibility of retaining oil, likening this option to US arrangements related to Venezuela.
The US President said: “We will eventually leave Iran, unless we decide to stay and keep the oil like Venezuela,” adding that American revenues from Venezuela “have paid the price of war many times.”
These statements come as the Strait of Hormuz has become one of the most prominent pressure cards in the war, given its importance to the movement of oil and gas exports from the Gulf region.
Iranian-Omani understanding regarding Hormuz
On the other hand, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian announced that Tehran and Muscat had reached an understanding on a framework for regulating navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. Pezeshkian said on Sunday that the two sides held talks on the Strait and reached a “specific framework and action plan,” with a ministerial meeting in Oman on Monday discussing the details of the understanding.
According to Tasnim Agency, Iran and Oman agreed on new routes to enter and exit the Strait. The agency reported that the understanding does not mean reopening the Strait immediately, but rather lays the foundation for that.
But Pezeshkian clearly linked keeping the corridor open to the United States ending what he described as the “blockade” and its “aggressive actions” against Iran. He said that his country will inform the International Maritime Organization of the results of the ministerial meeting, in a step aimed at giving an official framework to the new maritime arrangements.
Disagreement over sea routes
Iranian positions reveal the continuation of negotiations over the nature of navigation in the Strait, as Tasnim reported that the understanding includes keeping the southern route closed, despite the United States’ insistence on using it. This comes at a time when Tehran had adhered, since the beginning of the crisis, to what it considered its right to manage the movement of ships through the strait, and required coordination with them before crossing.
Thus, the issue of sea routes appears to be one of the most prominent points of disagreement, along with the Iranian condition related to ending the blockade and American attacks on Iranian ports.
According to several media reports, the Omani city of Salalah is scheduled to host, on Monday, a meeting that includes Iran, Iraq and some other countries, to discuss arrangements related to navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. In this context, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said that the participants will review the details of the Iranian-Omani understanding, maps of the new maritime routes, in addition to a draft joint statement.
He added that the documents will later be sent to the International Maritime Organization for registration within the organization’s mechanisms, stressing that the meeting’s agenda is “specific and clear” and is limited to the new maritime arrangements for the strait. Araqchi also indicated that the meeting, despite its focus on Hormuz, may open the door to future consultations on other issues of interest to the countries of the region, considering that holding it in this format represents an opportunity to enhance dialogue and build confidence.
Iran sought to present the meeting as a step beyond addressing the navigation crisis, as the official Iranian news agency, IRNA, said that it represented “the first step towards establishing a regional framework for security cooperation” in the Gulf. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismail Baghaei said that the meeting could constitute a “fundamental foundation for ensuring stability and security.”
Araqchi stressed that Tehran believes that the countries of the region are responsible for its security and stability, calling for dialogue and cooperation away from the interference of forces from outside the region.
But the regional meeting will not include all Gulf countries, as Bahrain announced that it will not participate, justifying this by being exposed to Iranian attacks. The absence of Manama reflects the difficulty of building a comprehensive consensus on security and maritime arrangements in light of the continuing confrontation between Iran and the United States. Oman, which maintains relations with various parties to the crisis, is trying to exploit its position as a mediator in pushing for arrangements that reduce the risks of escalation around the strait.
Hormuz is in the heart of the war
Since the outbreak of war on February 28, the Strait of Hormuz has become a major point of confrontation between Iran and the United States. Tehran responded to the American and Israeli attacks by closing the corridor and imposing restrictions on the movement of ships.
Before the war, the strait was open to international shipping traffic, and about a fifth of the world's oil supplies passed through it, in addition to large quantities of liquefied natural gas.
Tehran is currently seeking to formalize its navigation management arrangements, including imposing a “services allowance” on passing ships, while Washington rejects any arrangements that give Iran unilateral control over one of the most important sea lanes in the world.
While Trump insists on an “appropriate” agreement that does not allow Iran to possess a nuclear weapon, Tehran links any breakthrough in Hormuz to an end to the American blockade. In this context, the negotiations over the strait appear to be part of a broader struggle over the terms of ending the war, and not just a negotiation over navigation rules.
No ships cross the blockade zone
The US Central Command (Centcom) recently announced that its forces changed the course of about 100 commercial ships during the past sixty days, since the United States resumed imposing a blockade, which it called the “steel wall,” on Iran.
The command said that no ship crossed the siege area without obtaining permission from the American forces, stressing that American service members continue to focus their efforts on carrying out this mission.
She added that the measures come within the framework of ongoing US operations to implement the blockade imposed on Iran and monitor commercial shipping traffic in the region.
Trump said on his “Truth Social” account on Saturday that “everything will go well,” in response to a question about whether he could help ensure the smooth flow of shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
It is noteworthy that since the outbreak of the war between Iran and America on February 28, movement has been greatly paralyzed in Hormuz due to Iranian threats to ships. While the Strait usually witnessed the passage of about 125 large commercial ships daily, including oil and gas tankers, bulk cargo ships, and container ships, the number has decreased to dozens.
About 20 percent of the world's daily supplies of crude oil and liquefied natural gas passed through the strait. Meanwhile, the US blockade imposed on shipping traffic linked to Iran has led to the cessation of Iranian crude oil exports since the re-imposition of sanctions in mid-July.
On Sunday, the Strait of Hormuz witnessed two incidents that injured two ships, coinciding with indications of increasing pressure on Iranian oil exports due to the US naval blockade of Iranian ports.
One person was killed and three others were injured in a strike targeting an Iranian commercial ship near Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz, in the latest development that reflects escalating tension around the vital waterway. Iranian authorities reported that a commercial ship was targeted at around five in the morning local time, in the area between Hinjam Island and the Shibdraz coast on Qeshm Island. Qeshm Governor Hossein Amirtimori said, according to what was reported by state television and Tasnim Agency, that one person was killed and three others were injured as a result of the accident.
Tasnim described the projectile that hit the ship as “of unknown origin,” noting that its type has not yet been determined. Reports indicated that several explosions were heard during the night in the vicinity of Qeshm, the largest island in the Strait of Hormuz.
Hours after this incident, the British Maritime Trade Operations Authority said that it had received a report about a ship being hit by an unknown projectile while crossing the Strait of Hormuz, adding that a fire broke out on board following the attack, and that local authorities arrived at the site to help evacuate crew members.
The authority did not specify the exact location of the accident, nor was it immediately clear the extent of the damage or the final status of the crew members or the party responsible for the attack.
Hormuz is at the heart of the confrontation
Since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war on Iran on February 28, the Strait of Hormuz has become one of the most prominent points of confrontation between Tehran and Washington. Iran responded to the attacks by closing the strait and imposing severe restrictions on the movement of ships, while the United States imposed a blockade on Iranian ports. Before the war, about 20 percent of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas supplies passed through this region.
Tehran requires ships wishing to cross the strait to obtain a permit from it, and also requires ships to use a route it has specified along the Iranian coast in the north of the strait, while it is considering imposing fees on the services provided to ships.
As restrictions and attacks continue, the security of navigation in Hormuz has become a major factor in determining the ability of Iran and the Gulf states to export oil, amid repercussions that extend beyond the region to global energy markets.
Tanker Trackers report
The latest tanker movement tracking data shows that the impact of the blockade is not limited to ship movement, but extends directly to Iranian oil exports. Tanker Trackers, a company specializing in tracking oil tankers, said that a review of tanker movement over a period of 60 days until September 12 showed that no new shipment of Iranian crude oil crossed the US naval blockade line in the area separating the Sea of Oman and the Arabian Sea.
On the other hand, tankers carrying oil from Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman continued to cross the region, with an average of about 7.85 million barrels per day during the same period.
On some days, the quantities increased significantly; It reached about 16.6 million barrels on August 9, and approached 14 million barrels on August 25.
The corporation said that the average movement reached about five tankers per day carrying crude oil from the six Arab countries, while “not even one barrel” of Iranian crude oil crossed the line that it monitors during the sixty-day period.
These results are consistent with data from other carrier tracking organizations. Reuters reported earlier in September, citing data from Kpler, Vortexa, and TankerTrackers, that since the resumption of the US blockade on July 14, any new shipment of Iranian crude oil has been unable to cross the Strait of Hormuz and head to China.
Oil crosses the blockade line
On the other hand, the blockade did not stop the movement of Gulf oil exports. Rather, Tanker Trackers data showed that the total oil that crossed the blockade line area during the last seven days exceeded 10 million barrels per day.
Data indicate that some of these exports, especially Omani oil, do not even need to cross the Strait of Hormuz.
