Iran’s leadership has hardened after the war, with hardliners gaining control and reducing prospects for peace, while disruption to the Strait of Hormuz adds to global energy and geopolitical risks.
Summary:
- Iran’s leadership has hardened following the war, with more radical figures consolidating power.
- The emergence of Mojtaba Khamenei and IRGC-linked figures has reduced prospects for compromise.
- The war has strengthened hard-liners rather than moderates, contrary to US expectations.
- Domestic repression has intensified, with arrests, executions and threats against dissent.
- Iran is leveraging control over the Strait of Hormuz, a key global oil artery that was open before the war but is now disrupted.
- The shift raises the risk of a longer conflict and a more unstable regional outlook.
Iran’s political landscape has shifted decisively toward a more hardline and confrontational stance following the war, raising fresh doubts about the prospects for a negotiated settlement and increasing the risk of prolonged instability in the region.
According to reporting from the Wall Street Journal, the removal of senior Iranian leadership early in the conflict, intended by the US and Israel to weaken the regime or encourage more pragmatic leadership, has instead accelerated the rise of more radical figures. At the centre of this shift is Mojtaba Khamenei, who has emerged as a key figure within a leadership structure now dominated by hardliners and Revolutionary Guard-linked officials.
Rather than moderating Iran’s position, the war appears to have entrenched ideological elements within the regime. New leadership figures, many with long-standing ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and histories of militancy, have taken on prominent roles in both political and security structures. Their approach has been marked by defiance externally and a tightening grip domestically.
Internally, the regime has intensified its crackdown on dissent, with increased arrests, executions and visible displays of force aimed at deterring opposition. At the same time, officials have adopted a more aggressive regional posture, including continued attacks and a willingness to escalate tensions beyond Iran’s borders.
A key strategic shift has been Iran’s effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which around 20% of global oil supply typically flows. Prior to the war, the waterway remained open and functioning as a critical artery for global energy trade. Now, disruption to shipping through the strait has become a central lever of pressure, amplifying global energy volatility and adding another layer of economic risk.
Despite mounting economic pressure and ongoing negotiations, the gap between Iran and the US remains wide. While some officials argue Tehran may ultimately seek a deal, the current leadership’s ideological rigidity suggests any agreement could be difficult to achieve and sustain.
Overall, the war has not reshaped Iran in a way that favours de-escalation. Instead, it has strengthened hardline control, increased regional leverage through energy chokepoints, and raised the likelihood of a more entrenched and prolonged confrontation.
—
Bullish for oil via sustained Hormuz risk premium and prolonged geopolitical tension
