Iran’s IRGC is Leveraging War with America for Political Gain, Risking a Prolonged Conflict
- Nik Vacano and Connor JL Moore
- 6 hours ago
- 3 min read
The IRGC marching during a parade Credit Agence France-Presse — Getty Images.
KEY TAKEAWAY There is high confidence that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is exploiting conflict with America to expand its political power in Iran. Its growing control over military and diplomatic decision-making increases the likelihood that IRGC leaders will resist future attempts to de-escalate the war, risking a prolonged conflict and US goals of concluding the conflict. |
The IRGC has held a significant position in Iranian politics since the 1979 revolution, but the war has given it an opportunity to expand that role. Iran maintains a separate conventional military and civilian government, yet the IRGC (the paramilitary wing of the regime) has spearheaded the war effort and increasingly shaped decisions beyond the battlefield. On August 10, Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei formally appointed multiple IRGC veterans to commanding positions, placing the Guard at the center of Iran’s military and national-security apparatus.
Appointments like Ali Abdollahi as Chief of Staff of the Iranian armed forces have effectively placed Iran’s conventional army in a subordinate position to the IRGC.
The IRGC has long been recognized for a nationalist approach to foreign affairs and an anti-democratic stance.
The IRGC has also increasingly sidelined Iran’s civilian administration in shaping foreign policy. In April, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that the Strait of Hormuz was “completely open” to commercial traffic, yet the following day, the IRGC effectively reversed that position, attacked commercial vessels, and declared the strait closed. Recently, IRGC political deputy Yadollah Javani suggested that Iran’s military actions could take on an “offensive aspect,” potentially signaling further attacks on the Gulf states and more aggressive action against US bases in the region. The Institute for the Study of War assesses that IRGC actions have undermined diplomatic efforts by Iran’s foreign affairs ministry and indicate greater IRGC control over Iran’s decision-making and negotiating positions.
Historically, the strongest opposition to the IRGC has come from civilian leadership that has served as a voice for pro-democratic elements in civil society and has advocated for a friendlier foreign policy with other Middle Eastern countries and the US.
During times of destabilization, like the 2026 Iranian protests, the IRGC has often sought to displace or undermine the presidency and crush all dissent to take a leading role in shaping Iranian policy.
This assessment suggests (1) the IRGC has used its leading role in the war to secure power and position itself as the leading element in Iranian politics. (2) This creates a serious obstacle to ending the conflict, as continued confrontation has strengthened the IRGC’s institutional position, while de-escalation could return greater influence to Iran’s civil society.
About the Authors
Nikolas Vacano is a recent graduate in International Security from the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School. He is Associate Editor at Mooreposts and specializes in the study of geoeconomics and grand strategy. Connor JL Moore is the Editor-in-Chief at Mooreposts and a recent graduate in International Security from the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School.
If you enjoyed this work, please consider sharing our content and website, or donating to Mooreposts to help us cover essential site costs so we can continue spreading credible, high-quality analysis.
DISCLAIMER
Mooreposts publishes independent analysis, commentary, and research for informational and educational purposes only. Content on Mooreposts does not constitute professional advice, nor does it represent any government agency, official position, or classified assessment. Unless explicitly stated, all analyses and interpretations reflect the views and analytic judgments of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Mooreposts, its editorial staff, or affiliated contributors. Mooreposts strives for accuracy, transparency, and rigorous sourcing; however, information may change as events develop. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and exercise independent judgment.
Comments