Israel Returns to War in Gaza with Wider Aims and Almost No Constraints 

An Israeli tank maneuvers inside Gaza, in front of destroyed buildings, as viewed from the Israel-Gaza border, March 20, 2025. (Reuters)
An Israeli tank maneuvers inside Gaza, in front of destroyed buildings, as viewed from the Israel-Gaza border, March 20, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Israel Returns to War in Gaza with Wider Aims and Almost No Constraints 

An Israeli tank maneuvers inside Gaza, in front of destroyed buildings, as viewed from the Israel-Gaza border, March 20, 2025. (Reuters)
An Israeli tank maneuvers inside Gaza, in front of destroyed buildings, as viewed from the Israel-Gaza border, March 20, 2025. (Reuters)

Israel's renewed military offensive in the Gaza Strip threatens to be even deadlier and more destructive than the last, as it pursues wider aims with far fewer constraints.

Israel resumed the war with a surprise bombardment early Tuesday that killed hundreds of Palestinians, ending the ceasefire and vowing even more devastation if Hamas doesn't release its remaining hostages and leave the territory.

President Donald Trump has expressed full support for the renewed offensive and suggested last month that Gaza's 2 million Palestinians be resettled in other countries. Iran-backed armed groups allied with Hamas are in disarray.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition is stronger than ever, and there are fewer hostages inside Gaza than at any point since Hamas ignited the war with its Oct. 7, 2023, attack, which gives Israel's military more freedom to act.

It all suggests that the war's next phase could be more brutal than the last, in which tens of thousands of Palestinians were killed, the vast majority of the population was displaced and much of Gaza was bombed to rubble.

“If all the Israeli hostages are not released and Hamas is not expelled from Gaza. Israel will act with an intensity that you have not seen,” Defense Minister Israel Katz said Wednesday.

“Return the hostages and expel Hamas, and other options will open up for you, including going to other places in the world for those who wish. The alternative is complete destruction and devastation.”

Even less US pressure to spare civilians

The Biden administration provided crucial military and diplomatic support to Israel throughout the first 15 months of the war.

But it also tried to limit civilian casualties. In the early days of the war, Biden persuaded Israel to lift a complete siege on Gaza and repeatedly urged it to allow in more humanitarian aid, with mixed results. He opposed Israel's offensive in southern Gaza last May and suspended a weapons shipment in protest, only to see Israel proceed anyway. Biden also worked with Egypt and Qatar to broker the ceasefire through more than a year of negotiations, with Trump's team pushing it over the finish line.

The Trump administration appears to have set no restrictions. It hasn't criticized Israel's decision to once again seal off Gaza, to unilaterally withdrawal from the ceasefire agreement that Trump took credit for, or to carry out strikes that have killed hundreds of men, women and children.

Israel says it only targets fighters and must dismantle Hamas to prevent a repeat of the Oct. 7 attack, when Palestinian gunmen killed roughly 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took 251 hostages.

The Biden administration voiced doubt about those aims, saying months ago that Hamas was no longer able to carry out such an attack.

The offensive killed more than 48,000 Palestinians before the January ceasefire, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. It does not distinguish between militants and civilians in its count but says more than half of the dead were women and children.

Trump has suggested Gaza be depopulated

Trump appeared to lose interest in the ceasefire weeks ago, when he said it should be canceled if Hamas didn't immediately release all the hostages.

A short-lived White House attempt to negotiate directly with Hamas was abandoned after it angered Israel. Trump's Mideast envoy, Steve Witkoff, then blamed Hamas for the demise of the truce because it didn't accept proposals to immediately release hostages.

Hamas has said it will only release the remaining hostages — its only bargaining chip — in exchange for more Palestinian prisoners, a lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, as called for in the ceasefire agreement.

Trump, meanwhile, has suggested that Gaza's entire population be transferred to other countries so that the US can take ownership of the territory and rebuild it for others.

Palestinians say they don't want to leave their homeland, and Arab countries roundly rejected the proposal. Human rights experts said it would likely violate international law.

Israel has embraced the proposal and said it is drawing up plans to implement it.

Netanyahu's government is stronger than ever

Netanyahu came under heavy pressure from families and supporters of the hostages to stick with the truce in order to bring their loved ones home. For months, thousands of protesters have regularly gathered in downtown Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, blocked major highways and scuffled with police.

In restarting the war, though, Netanyahu brushed them aside and strengthened his hard-line coalition.

Israel's far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, who resigned to protest the ceasefire, returned to the government shortly after Tuesday's strikes. He and Bezalel Smotrich, another far-right ally of Netanyahu, want to continue the war, depopulate Gaza through what they refer to as voluntary migration, and rebuild Jewish settlements there that Israel removed two decades ago.

Netanyahu has also fired or forced out several top officials who had appeared more open to a hostage deal.

Hamas and its allies are in disarray

Hamas still rules Gaza, but most of its top leaders have been killed and its military capabilities have been vastly depleted. Israel says it has killed some 20,000 fighters — without providing evidence.

In its first attack since Israel ended the ceasefire, Hamas fired three rockets on Thursday that set off air raid sirens in Tel Aviv, without causing casualties.

Lebanon's Hezbollah, which traded fire with Israel throughout much of the war, was forced to accept a truce last fall after Israel's air and ground war killed most of its top leadership and left much of southern Lebanon in ruins. The overthrow of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad removed a key ally and further diminished the armed group.

Iran, which supports Hamas and Hezbollah, and which directly traded fire with Israel twice last year, appears unlikely to intervene. Israel said it inflicted heavy damage on Iran's air defenses in a wave of retaliatory strikes last fall, and Trump has threatened US military action if Iran doesn't negotiate a new agreement on its nuclear program.

The Iran-backed Houthi militias in Yemen have resumed long-range missile fire against Israel, which has rarely caused casualties or serious damage. The US, meanwhile, launched a new wave of strikes on the Houthis, which could further limit their capabilities.

International criticism could be more muted

The first phase of the war sparked worldwide protests, some criticism from European leaders and action at the United Nations. Israel was accused of genocide at the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Netanayahu.

This time could be different.

The Trump administration has detained foreign-born pro-Palestinian student activists and others, and threatened to pull billions of dollars in federal funding from universities accused of tolerating antisemitism, making a repeat of last year's US campus protests unlikely.

Europe is already locked in high-stakes disputes with Trump over aid to Ukraine and American tariffs, and appears unlikely to push back on the Middle East.

The US and Israel have adamantly rejected the actions by both international courts, accusing them of bias. Trump signed an executive order in early February imposing sanctions on the ICC, of which neither the United States nor Israel are members.



Middle East Power Struggle Faces Defining Moment

Map showing the Strait of Hormuz, alongside a 3D-printed model of US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
Map showing the Strait of Hormuz, alongside a 3D-printed model of US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
TT

Middle East Power Struggle Faces Defining Moment

Map showing the Strait of Hormuz, alongside a 3D-printed model of US President Donald Trump (Reuters)
Map showing the Strait of Hormuz, alongside a 3D-printed model of US President Donald Trump (Reuters)

Perhaps the worst-case scenario long feared in decision-making circles has come true. With the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Washington and Tel Aviv used the same “shock and awe” approach Israel has relied on in recent years, one that delivers rapid gains before losing momentum by the end of a campaign.

This time, however, US President Donald Trump broke a taboo and opened a Pandora’s box, pushing the region into war on shaky grounds and with no clear end. He forced a confrontation of mutual deterrence with an Iranian system that has lost its regional deterrent image.

The expansion of these rival projects in the Middle East, shifting between confrontation and coexistence, has reached a breaking point.

The Khamenei project, which dominated four Arab capitals for decades, has suffered repeated setbacks over the past ten years after peaking in the wake of the Arab Spring. It drained its limited resources and drew the attention of Washington, and Israel’s determination to confront it.

The failure of coexistence made a clash inevitable, one the current US administration has not handled with the patience of a major power.

In the first US military intervention of its kind since 2003, Trump’s war on Iran has lacked a clear endgame. His rhetoric mixed shifting goals with flexible timelines to pressure Tehran. Over time, his administration lost control of the war’s narrative and psychological edge, while hesitating to escalate militarily. The failure to quickly weaken Iran led Washington to conclude that following Israel’s pace would deepen US involvement.

Who decides in Tehran?

Uncertainty also surrounds decision-making in Tehran. The system appears to be paying the price of successive assassinations, from Qassem Soleimani to Ismail Haniyeh and Hassan Nasrallah.

Now it faces a new deterrence phase after Khamenei’s killing, a leader who balanced conservatives and reformists, and the Revolutionary Guard with negotiators.

The new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, deepens concerns over hereditary rule and strengthens the security establishment over the religious one. The transition remains unclear, including loyalties and decision-making centers.

Will power be collective and contested, or will Mojtaba consolidate control, if he is not targeted? His legitimacy depends on the continuation of the war in the near term. Ending it would raise questions about his authority and force decisions on dealing with Washington, including easing the air blockade and rebuilding after war and sanctions.

A fragile deterrence balance

Washington believed the cost of confronting Iran was low, concluding with Israel that military action offered better results than diplomacy. That calculation proved wrong.

The United States destroyed much of Iran’s conventional capabilities but has not stopped its ballistic missile launches or its ability to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran has used the strait as economic leverage, linking pressure on the regime to damage to the global economy.

The result has been the biggest supply disruption since the 1970s energy crisis, forcing the Trump administration to temporarily ease sanctions on Iranian oil.

Iran’s strategy unfolded in three phases. First, survival, preventing collapse and internal unrest. In a leadership vacuum, Tehran’s security system escalated deterrence sharply. As US rhetoric hinted at regime change, Iran treated the war as existential, despite knowing it could not win a conventional fight.

Second, raising the cost of war for Washington and the global economy. Credibility of deterrence became central. Without a response to a strike as major as Khamenei’s assassination, Iran risks appearing defeated, weakening its regional deterrence and internal stability.

Both sides turned to what Thomas Schelling called the “diplomacy of violence,” using constant military threats as pressure.

Another goal for Tehran has been internal cohesion, using external war to limit divisions and strengthen hardliners.

The past week marked a peak in tensions over Hormuz and energy infrastructure. Both sides stepped back from full escalation after recognizing the cost of retaliation would be too high. Signals of restraint emerged, along with a need for communication and clear red lines.

Trump moved first by announcing negotiations, surprising both Iran and Israel. The fight shifted from the battlefield to diplomacy, where the side that moves first shapes the outcome.

Mediation on three tracks

Arab diplomatic sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that mediation is underway, led by Pakistan, Egypt and Türkiye through three channels in Iran: the Revolutionary Guard, the foreign ministry and parliament speaker Mohammad Qalibaf.

Each country is using its own channels. No other states are currently positioned to mediate, especially as these three have not been targeted by Iranian missiles. The sources also point to advanced US proposals seeking a middle ground.

The challenge is timing. Washington wants a quick deal, while Tehran says time is tight, especially with communication risks under Israeli surveillance.

Iran’s proxies under strain

Iran’s regional proxies form the second pillar of deterrence. The idea of unified, simultaneous fronts proved largely unrealistic. It materialized only once after the 2023 “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation before the axis suffered repeated blows.

In the 2025 Iran-Israel war, these groups stayed neutral. Now, after Khamenei’s assassination, they have entered the conflict.

Assassinations by Israel and the United States weakened the network, while sanctions since 2019 cut resources. Supply routes through Iraq and Syria have also been strained.

Iran now leads from the front as its proxy network narrows. Its strategy focuses on expanding battlefields, not unifying them, with centralized control in Tehran. The Revolutionary Guard is now coordinating directly with Hezbollah and Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces.

Hezbollah is fighting with depleted resources and a strained base. The Popular Mobilization Forces, long avoiding direct confrontation with US troops, have now targeted American forces and interests in Iraq and beyond, potentially reshaping deterrence and boosting Iran’s influence.

But the group is divided. Some factions continue attacks, others prioritize political interests. The result is fragmented deterrence and weaker credibility.

What comes next?

The key question is whether Tehran will insist on including Hezbollah in any deal, or whether Israel will impose a new reality south of the Litani River.

Even if Washington ends the war, Israel may keep pressure on Iran. Tehran’s proxies remain under pressure but not defeated. This ambiguity may weaken them over time without leading to full settlements.

Neither war nor truce will resolve local crises across these arenas.

As Carl von Clausewitz said, war continues politics by other means. Tehran is now shifting from deterrence to negotiation as part of its survival strategy. Signals point to pragmatic figures within hardline structures who can engage across factions.

Washington is trying to reach them, while Israel has targeted some, including Ali Larijani.

The key shift is now between Washington and Israel. Trump surprised Israel by considering de-escalation and sending Vice President JD Vance to deliver that message to Benjamin Netanyahu.

Both sides have moved to negotiating under fire, raising stakes while testing intentions. Washington favors Qalibaf, Tehran prefers Vance.

Gains and losses

Victory is relative. For Iran, staying at the table is a win despite heavy losses. Early talk of regime change has faded, even in Israel, under US pressure.

The narrative has shifted from regime change to control of Hormuz. Trump negotiates through pressure, Iran deters through endurance. Nuclear deadlock is now mirrored on the battlefield.

Both sides want to end the war, but on terms they can sell at home.

Russia and China prefer that Trump does not dominate global energy routes. Iran is part of a wider struggle over influence. If Trump falls short, Washington risks its image as a guarantor of global navigation.

Trump has hinted at joint management of Hormuz with Iran’s new leader, echoing US-China competition in the South China Sea.

A limited US intervention, combined with hesitation and economic risks, may give Iran an edge in the near term, strengthening its internal control, though long-term recovery depends on a clear deal with the West.


Why Pakistan Has Emerged as a Mediator between US and Iran

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump looks at Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif speaking following the official signing of the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, during a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump looks at Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif speaking following the official signing of the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, during a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
TT

Why Pakistan Has Emerged as a Mediator between US and Iran

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump looks at Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif speaking following the official signing of the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, during a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump looks at Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif speaking following the official signing of the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, during a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, October 13, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

As fears of a wider regional conflict escalate following US and Israeli strikes on Iran that began in late February, Pakistan has emerged as an unexpected mediator, offering to help bring Washington and Tehran to the negotiating table.

Islamabad isn't often called on to act as an intermediary in high-stakes diplomacy, but it's stepped into the role this time for a number of reasons, both because it has relatively good ties with both Washington and Tehran and because it has a lot at stake in seeing the war resolved.

Pakistani government officials have said that their public peace effort follows weeks of quiet diplomacy, though they have provided few details. They have also said that Islamabad stands ready to host talks between representatives from the US and Iran.

Here's what to know about Pakistan's mediation effort:

Pakistan helped US deliver 15-point plan to Iran

Pakistan’s role in Iran-US negotiations surfaced only days ago following media reports. Officials in Islamabad later acknowledged that a US proposal had been conveyed to Iran.

It remains unclear who has served as Iran’s point of contact in the indirect talks. Iran has maintained it has not held such talks and dismissed the US proposal, but Tehran has acknowledged responding with its own proposals.

According to Pakistani officials, US messages are being passed to Iran and Iranian responses relayed to Washington, though they did not specify how the process is being handled or who is directly communicating with whom. Pakistan's Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said this week that Türkiye and Egypt are also working behind the scenes to bring the sides to the negotiating table.

Abdullah Khan, managing director of the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies, said that Pakistani’s mediation efforts may be contributing to relative restraint in the conflict. He noted that US President Donald Trump has delayed his threats of large-scale attacks on Iran’s energy infrastructure citing diplomatic progress, and Iranian responses toward US interests in the Gulf have been measured in what may be an effort to preserve space for diplomacy.

Ties with both US and Iran set Pakistan up for new role

Previous US-Iran negotiations have been facilitated mainly by countries in the Middle East, including Oman and Qatar, but as they come under Iranian fire during the war Pakistan has stepped into the role.

Analysts say Pakistan’s geographic proximity to Iran — it’s one of its neighbors — coupled with its longstanding ties with the US, gives it a unique position at a time when direct communication between the two sides remains constrained.

Islamabad has good working relations with most of the key parties in the war, including both the US and Iran. It has close strategic ties with Gulf states including Saudi Arabia, with which it signed a defense cooperation agreement last year. However, Pakistan has no diplomatic relations with Israel because of the lingering issue of Palestinian statehood.

Relations between the United States and Pakistan have improved since last year, with increased diplomatic engagement and expanding economic ties. Pakistan also joined Trump's Board of Peace, which aims to ensure peace in Gaza.

Pakistan has a lot at stake in ceasefire talks

The conflict poses some of “the biggest economic and energy security challenges” in Pakistan’s history, said Islamabad-based security analyst Syed Mohammad Ali.

The country gets most of its oil and gas from the Middle East — and, he said, the five million Pakistanis working in the Arab world send home remittances each year roughly equal to the country’s total export earnings.

Rising tensions have already contributed to higher global oil prices, forcing Pakistan to increase fuel prices by about 20% and putting pressure on the government of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s government.

The war is also adding to domestic turmoil, even as Pakistan has been grappling for months with its own conflict with neighboring Afghanistan. Islamabad has accused the country's Taliban government of tolerating militant groups that are behind attacks in Pakistan.

Earlier this month, protests erupted across the country following US strikes on Iran, with demonstrators clashing with security forces in several cities.

A day after the United States and Israel attacked Iran, killing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, clashes erupted in Pakistan’s southern port city of Karachi and in parts of the north, leaving at least 22 people dead and more than 120 injured nationwide.

At least 12 people were killed in and around the US Consulate in Karachi after a mob breached the compound and attempted to set it on fire.

Khamenei was a central religious and political figure for Shiites worldwide, including in Pakistan.

Pakistan has a record as a mediator

While Pakistan rarely serves as a mediator, its record does include playing a role in some very high-profile talks.

Pakistan’s then-President Gen. Yahya Khan facilitated backchannel contacts that led to US President Richard Nixon’s historic 1972 visit to China. That paved the way for the establishment of diplomatic ties between Washington and Beijing in 1979.


With Top Figures Dead, Who Is Now Running Iran?

A woman holds a poster depicting Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei during an anti-US and anti-Israeli rally, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 26, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
A woman holds a poster depicting Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei during an anti-US and anti-Israeli rally, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 26, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
TT

With Top Figures Dead, Who Is Now Running Iran?

A woman holds a poster depicting Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei during an anti-US and anti-Israeli rally, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 26, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
A woman holds a poster depicting Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei during an anti-US and anti-Israeli rally, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 26, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters

Iran's veteran ‌supreme leader and a host of other top figures and Revolutionary Guards commanders have been killed in US-Israeli strikes, but the ruling system has maintained its ability to strategize and operate in the war that began on February 28.

Born from a 1979 revolution, the Iranian regime built a complex power structure with layered institutions buttressed by a shared commitment to the survival of the theocratic system rather than relying on a small number of individuals.

Here is a guide to who now wields power and influence in a depleted but resilient hierarchy:

IS THE SUPREME LEADER REALLY IN CHARGE?

Iran's veteran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in one of the first strikes of the war. In office since 1989 he enjoyed unquestioning obedience throughout the system and the last say on all major issues.

Under Iran's official ideology of velayat-e faqih, or “rule of the Islamic jurist”, the supreme leader is a learned cleric wielding temporal power on behalf of Shiite Islam's 12th imam, who disappeared in the ninth century.

The leader's office, known as the bayt, has a large staff that shadows other parts of Iran's government, allowing the leader to intervene directly across the bureaucracy.

The new leader, Khamenei's son Mojtaba, has inherited the role and its extensive formal powers, but he lacks the automatic authority enjoyed by his father.

The choice of the Revolutionary Guards, he may also be beholden to the hardline military corps.

He was wounded in ‌the strikes, and has ‌been referred to on state TV as a "janbaz", or "wounded veteran" of the current conflict.

More than three weeks after ‌his appointment ⁠he has not been ⁠seen in any photograph or video clip by Iranians and has only issued two written statements, raising questions over his condition.

HOW CENTRAL IS THE REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS CORPS?

The Guards have been growing in influence for decades, but in the midst of a war and after the killing of Ali Khamenei and installation of Mojtaba Khamenei, they have assumed an even more central role in strategic decision-making.

Long prepared to withstand decapitation of their leadership, the Guards have a "mosaic" organizational structure with a line of replacements already named for each commander, and every unit able to operate independently according to set plans.

Many top-ranking Guards commanders were killed early on - following a long list of senior commanders killed in strikes last year - but they have been replaced with other experienced men who have so far proven able to manage a complex war effort.

That resilience reflects the command depth of a corps that took the ⁠lead in the devastating 1980-88 war with Iraq and has spearheaded Iran's close involvement with groups fighting in a host ‌of other conflicts around the Middle East for decades.

WHAT ROLE DOES THE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP PLAY?

Iran's political system ‌merges clerical rule with an elected president and parliament, and they all have a significant role in running the country along with the Guards.

The killing of the late Khamenei's ‌main adviser Ali Larijani was a real blow to the ruling authorities given his extensive experience, his ability to operate between Iran's different power centers and his skills ‌negotiating with the outside world.

Other capable, experienced political figures remain but the more prominent ones likely to step into the shoes of Larijani and other assassinated individuals may be more hardline than those who have been killed.

The death of Revolutionary Guards naval head Alireza Tangsiri, an experienced commander in place since 2018, was another significant blow. Tangsiri had reportedly played a significant part in Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

WHO ARE SOME OF THE BIG NAMES LEFT?

Revolutionary Guards head Ahmad Vahidi: The corps' latest commander was appointed after his two immediate predecessors were ‌killed. Influential in the Guards for years, he fought in the Iran-Iraq war, ran the Qods Force, served as defense minister and helped crush internal dissent.

Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force chief Esmail Qaani: A secretive figure, he has ⁠managed Iran's ties with proxies and allies across ⁠the region since taking over the unit in 2020 when its veteran leader Qassem Soleimani was killed by a US drone strike ordered by US President Donald Trump.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf: A former Revolutionary Guards commander, Tehran mayor and failed presidential candidate, Qalibaf may be the biggest political heavyweight still alive. He has been increasingly vocal over recent weeks, setting out Iran's stance as the war has developed and was said by an Israeli official and a source familiar with the matter to have been negotiating with the US over recent days.

Judiciary Head Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei: A former intelligence head sanctioned for his role in the deadly repression of mass protests in 2009, Mohseni-Ejei is widely seen as a hardliner.

President Masoud Pezeshkian: While Iran's presidency is far less important than it once was, Pezeshkian is the most senior directly elected figure in Iran, giving him an important voice. The limits of his influence were starkly illustrated earlier this month when he incurred the Guards' ire by apologizing to Gulf states for Iranian attacks on their territory and he had to partially retract his comments.

Former Supreme National Security chief Saeed Jalili: An injured veteran of the Iran-Iraq war and one of the most hardline figures in Iranian politics, he was the losing 2024 presidential candidate and uncompromising former nuclear negotiator.

Guardian Council member Alireza Arafi: The senior cleric is a leading member of the Guardian Council, the body that chooses which candidates to exclude from elections, and was so well trusted that he was chosen to join the three-man interim council running Iran after Khamenei's death.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi: The veteran diplomat has conducted high-stakes negotiations with Iran's Western foes for years, as well as with global powers Russia and China, which have a better relationship with Tehran, and with Iran's Arab neighbors and rivals.