Recent military exchanges involving Iran, the United States, and their respective allies have highlighted the complexities of reaching and maintaining a ceasefire, with analysts pointing to Iran’s multifaceted governance system as a key factor in negotiations. Hostilities resumed this week following the breakdown of a temporary halt to a conflict that began on Feb. 28, 2026, raising questions about the enforcement of any future agreements.
The conflict, centered around key regional waterways like the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea, saw a pause following a June 17 memorandum of understanding that initiated a 60-day negotiation period. However, fighting resumed after reported attacks on shipping vessels. The U.S. conducted strikes for 13 consecutive nights before a pause on July 24. This week, hostilities restarted with strikes reported on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. On Friday, Iran’s army announced it had launched attacks on U.S. military assets in Kuwait and Bahrain.
In a separate incident this week, the U.S. military reported that it intercepted all missiles from an Iranian attack targeting U.S. forces in Jordan. The events occurred as Iran-aligned militias in Iraq were blamed for attacks on Saudi oil facilities and Houthi forces in Yemen for strikes on pipeline infrastructure.
Discussions surrounding a durable ceasefire involve navigating Iran’s distinct centers of authority. The country’s governance includes the Supreme Leader, the civilian government led by the president, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
According to Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East North Africa Program at Chatham House, the IRGC is “the dominant force on war and national security.” Vakil told CNBC that the IRGC operates “missiles, drones, intelligence networks and regional armed partnerships, and during active conflict its commanders can exercise considerable autonomy.”
Ultimate authority over national security rests with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, Vakil noted that while the Supreme Leader has the final say, “he does not personally direct every tactical operation.” The IRGC, a military institution that operates parallel to the conventional army, answers directly to the Supreme Leader. It oversees Iran’s missile programs, foreign operations, and relationships with allied armed groups in the region.
The civilian government, led by President Masoud Pezeshkian, manages diplomacy and economic policy. “The civilian government still matters, and the president can shape diplomacy, economic policy and the work of the Supreme National Security Council, but he does not command the armed forces,” Vakil added.
The different priorities of these institutions could influence negotiations. Analysts suggest that while the civilian government may prioritize sanctions relief to address economic pressures, elements within the security apparatus might view military pressure as a form of leverage.
The diplomatic situation remains fluid. On Monday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmail Baghaei, stated that Iran currently has “no negotiations with the United States.”
Experts observing the conflict have offered their assessments. Alex Vatanka, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told CNBC, “A ceasefire is not a switch that can simply be flipped. Iran wants to translate battlefield realities into political gains before locking itself into a new status quo.”
Amos Hochstein, a former senior advisor to President Joe Biden and a managing partner at TWG Global, commented to CNBC that he believes, “Iran has no intention of returning to the status quo before the war.”
