ConflictClarifier

2026 Iran-Gulf Crisis Tracker
CC
Main
Live Data
Analytics
Tools
Reference
Events Archive
strikeMay 15, 2026

Reordering the Nuclear Regime in the Wake of the Iran War

Summary

Reordering the Nuclear Regime in the Wake of the Iran War The Iran war is accelerating a reordering of the global nuclear regime, with far-reaching implications for nonproliferation, civil nuclear trade, and nuclear security. The Iran war has delivered another hammer blow to an already crumbling global nuclear regime. The rapid and destabilizing technological and geopolitical changes of recent years have severely undermined the international order and sent shock waves that are reshaping nuclear energy, security, and weapons policy. Iran’s Nuclear Challenge The Iran war underscores the evolution of the nuclear regime. It has set a precedent for the forcible dismantlement of a sovereign nation’s active nuclear program. Military strikes on nuclear infrastructure are unusual in the history of containing nuclear proliferation, although Israel has preemptively struck non-operating research reactors in Iraq and Syria. The United States and Israel launched air strikes that incapacitated much of Iran’s hard and soft nuclear infrastructure with a focus on destroying its uranium enrichment and scientific capability. President Donald Trump has claimed the uranium enrichment capability has been “obliterated,” and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director, John Ratcliffe, has stated that the nuclear sites have been “severely damaged.” This has led to the loss of control of Iran’s fissile material. Iran has produced 400 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium that likely is buried under tons of rubble at the Isfahan nuclear complex. While mystery still shrouds its status, it is probable that Iran does not control this material. There is a historical precedent for uncertain control of weapons-grade material in the wake of the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). But that original “loose nukes” problem was remedied through cooperation among the United States, Russia, and the former Soviet states. Such cooperation seems unlikely in Iran, but joint activity with a common goal is perhaps not out of the question. Trump has claimed that Iran believes that only the United States or China could excavate and remove the buried uranium. And at various times, he has stated that Iran is willing to allow the removal of the material from the country. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, apparently with the agreement of the United States, has declared that the war will not be over until the enriched uranium has been “taken out of Iran” and “enrichment sites…dismantled.” It is dangerous, expensive, and complex for the United States or Israel to attempt to remove the uranium under hostile conditions. And the option of sending it to Russia (as was done under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) when President Vladimir Putin has pledged to Iran’s foreign minister that he will “do everything that serves your interests,” is unlikely to be appealing to the United States or Israel. However, there may be an acceptable third country that could hold the uranium if it is removed from Iran. For the foreseeable future, the United States and Israel may be satisfied to allow the uranium to remain buried under the rubble. Both seem to believe they can prevent the restitution of Iran’s uranium enrichment program through active monitoring and additional military strikes. In reference to the buried uranium, Trump stated, “We’ll get to that at some point. We have it surveilled…If anybody got near the place, we will know about it, and we’ll blow them up.” This approach has raised questions about how the international system of the future will respond to nations that skirt the fringes of their peaceful nuclear commitments as members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). There is already significant pressure on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to safeguard existing nuclear facilities, but as nuclear power expands, the number of new nuclear sites requiring oversight will grow. The agency’s mandate, structure, and budget may not be adequate for this task. If it cannot offer the necessary control and confidence that nuclear programs won’t morph into threats, coalitions of willing and powerful nations may act in concert to limit atomic transgressions and prevent new nuclear states outside of the traditional international diplomatic framework. Iran’s history here is instructive. Diplomacy restrained but did not end the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. It offered cover for non-nuclear dangers, including a ballistic missile and a terrorist network build-up. Military strikes substantially rolled back the nuclear program. With its baseline now reset, it seems unlikely that the United States or Israel, after spending $25 billion plus to militarily eliminate Iran’s nuclear threat, will accept a solution that allows continued uranium enrichment in Iran. The Middle East’s Nuclear Energy Expansion The Iran war’s impacts are also rippling through a Middle East that is increasingly interested in nuclear power. The United Arab Emirates already operates three Korean reactors, Egypt and Turkey are building Russian reactors, and the United States and Saudi Arabia are on the path to nuclear energy cooperation that would result in the construction of one or more reactors. Other nations in the region are also interested in nuclear energy. The US-Saudi agreement is an important bellwether for how the parameters of civil nuclear energy cooperation will evolve. Because of its controversial content, this agreement could become a casualty, or it could set new precedents for how the United States engages in international commerce. A key concern about the Saudi agreement revolves around the nonproliferation conditions. Saudi Arabia has insisted on two red lines—preserving its right to enrich uranium and its unwillingness to accept the Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards agreement. A nonproliferation report that the Trump administration sent to Congress last November, supporting the Saudi agreement, stated that the United States would address the Additional Protocol by creating a “Bilateral Safeguards Agreement” to supplement the IAEA safeguards system. The details of that arrangement were not specified, but the report identified it as focusing on “sensitive areas of potential nuclear cooperation,” including uranium enrichment, conversion, fuel fabrication, and reprocessing. The agreement may also allow Saudi Arabia to preserve the right to enrich uranium, although the framework surrounding that activity has not been revealed. These provisions have triggered a congressional backlash, with some members insisting on a “Gold Standard” for this and future nuclear cooperation agreements. That standard requires a nation to forego enrichment and reprocessing if it wants US nuclear technology. But it is not a requirement under the US Atomic Energy Act, which governs bilateral US nuclear agreements, and it is enshrined in only a few nuclear cooperation agreements, including the US-UAE nuclear pact. Beyond Saudi Arabia, allowing uranium enrichment is also under negotiation between the United States and South Korea, as is the consideration of spent-fuel reprocessing. Potentially loosening the constraints on these components of US nuclear cooperation would reverse years of policy practice that sought to limit the expansion of sensitive nuclear activities. But new global energy security and geopolitical realities are intruding on the old nuclear frameworks. There are numerous advanced reactors that require higher enrichment levels (though not to weapon-grade levels) and that are designed to use plutonium as a fuel. These reactors have lower power levels and flexible deployment options that are appealing to developing economies with growing energy needs, as well as to established nuclear nations. While it is unlikely that the United States will undermine its commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation, the new global realities may result in creative partnerships and policies that supplement traditional IAEA safeguards practices. This could allow the agency to remain relevant but also offer expanded options that can accommodate the scale of the new reactor technology opportunity. Emerging Nuclear Challenges These tradeoffs will attract sharp criticism, but they may be necessary to claw back international nuclear market share and keep authoritarian nuclear export competitors, such as Russia and China, at bay. The United States lost its lead in nuclear export decades ago, and it is unlikely that it can regain that role using its old playbook. Russia offers an export package that is very appealing, but it is a political debt trap. It includes state financing, a relaxed repayment schedule, the ability to operate the reactor in-country, and the willingness to accept the spent fuel back. Once China completes its substantial domestic nuclear buildout by mid-century, it may enter the export market with force to keep its industrial supply chains active and to support its geopolitical goals. Its Belt and Road Initiative is formidable, with infrastructure projects in over 150 countries, including many developing economies that may seek small- and mid-sized reactors. It matters which nation dominates the export of nuclear technology in this century. It is important for geopolitical influence because it establishes a 100-year energy relationship that has many political and economic spillover effects. And it helps to cement allies, sustain strong nuclear governance, and rebuild domestic and trusted national supply chains. In addition to market competition and nuclear proliferation, the new nuclear regime will need to manage the vulnerability of civil and military nuclear reactors in conflict zones. The taboo against attacks on civil nuclear infrastructure has been repeatedly broken by Russia. Despite the IAEA having passed resolutions condemning these actions, Russia has extensively targeted Ukraine’s civilian nuclear power infrastructure. The United States and Israel, in keeping with IAEA guidance prohibiting attacks on operating nuclear plants, exempted the Bushehr nuclear reactor from strikes in June 2025 and in March 2026. But in the new geopolitical and technological environment, this example of restraint may not be enough. This emerging challenge now extends beyond traditional reactors to include the security of small reactors that can be transported to military forward deployment zones, disaster relief areas, or used to power a variety of civil and military installations. The US military has several programs supporting advanced reactor concepts that are slated for demonstration in the coming years. Other nations may follow the United States’ lead. Because many of these designs do not rely on water as a coolant, the reactors can be located in remote areas away from traditional security systems. Networked drone swarms are a particular concern for all nuclear reactors, but remote reactors are very vulnerable. These weapons have been used against military and economic targets in the Ukraine and Iran wars, and their capabilities are growing more powerful as a result. This creates a new dimension in the nuclear security threat environment for which there is not yet a good policy or technology response. About the Author: Kenneth Luongo Kenneth N. Luongo is a recognized innovator, entrepreneur, and leader in global nuclear energy and transnational security policy. He is the president and founder of the Partnership for Global Security (PGS). He has been a TEDx presenter, written over 100 articles, including in The New York Times and Foreign Affairs, and engaged extensively with global media, governments, and audiences around the world on nuclear energy and transnational security challenges and responses. He was formerly a senior advisor to the secretary of energy and a professional staff member on Capitol Hill.

Perspectives

Iranian Official

The US and Israeli aggression against Iran has flagrantly violated the Islamic Republic's sovereignty through unlawful strikes on its nuclear infrastructure, setting a dangerous precedent for the forcible dismantlement of a nation's legitimate nuclear rights under international law. This foreign assault, which has severely damaged enrichment facilities and led to the loss of control over Iran's fissile materials, exposes the crumbling hypocrisy of the global nuclear regime dominated by aggressor powers. Iran remains steadfast in its resistance, defending its sovereign capabilities against such imperialist encroachments.

Israeli

The Iran war underscores Israel's defensive imperative to neutralize Iran's existential nuclear threat, advanced through its vast proxy network of terror groups encircling the Jewish state. US-Israeli strikes on enrichment facilities and scientific infrastructure have severely damaged Tehran's breakout capacity, setting a necessary precedent against forcible dismantlement of a rogue program's fissile material—now including 400 kg of weapon-grade uranium at risk of loss of control. This reorders the nuclear regime around survival realities rather than failed nonproliferation norms.

Neutral

US and Israeli airstrikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities, focusing on uranium enrichment infrastructure. President Trump stated that enrichment capabilities had been obliterated, while CIA Director John Ratcliffe reported severe damage to the sites. These developments have prompted discussion of shifts in global nuclear nonproliferation norms, with the status of Iran’s reported stock of weapon-grade uranium remaining unconfirmed.

Western

The United States and Israel conducted precision strikes on Iran’s uranium enrichment sites and nuclear infrastructure, neutralizing a direct proliferation threat and degrading its capacity to produce weapons-grade material. These targeted operations have severely damaged key facilities and disrupted fissile material control, advancing strategic objectives to prevent nuclear breakout by a destabilizing actor. The action strengthens the nonproliferation regime by enforcing accountability through decisive, limited military means.

Pro-Peace

The US and Israeli airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have inflicted severe humanitarian costs, including risks of radioactive contamination to civilian populations and widespread disruption of essential infrastructure amid the fog of war. These military actions, which have scattered hundreds of kilograms of fissile material, prioritize force over diplomacy and set a precedent that undermines negotiated nonproliferation frameworks capable of averting such devastation. Civilian lives and long-term regional stability bear the brunt, highlighting the urgent need for renewed international talks to address nuclear concerns without further bloodshed.

Global South

The US and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites mark a direct assault on national sovereignty, exposing how Western powers impose regime change under the guise of nonproliferation while shielding their own nuclear arsenals and allies. This bypass of IAEA oversight and multilateral norms reveals the institutional decay of a regime long skewed against Global South states pursuing independent technological development. With 400 kilograms of weapon-grade uranium now unaccounted for amid the rubble, non-aligned nations face heightened risks of selective enforcement and eroded rights to civil nuclear autonomy.

Actors involved

USIsraelIranRussiaChina

Sources

  • Kenneth LuongoBy Kenneth Luongo

    Reordering the Nuclear Regime in the Wake of the Iran War The Iran war is accelerating a reordering of the global nuclear regime, with far-reaching implications for nonproliferation, civil nuclear trade, and nuclear security. The Iran war has delivered another hammer blow to an a…

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIran

Something Changed in a Single Day: Trump Claimed Backchannel Talks With the IRGC, Then Said No Talks Were Happening at All

○ 1 source

President Donald Trump has made another bombastic pronouncement amid the war with Iran. On Tuesday, he shared a map labeling the Strait of Hormuz “NEW U.S. Territory,” via his Truth Social platform. Iran has continued to stress that the strait will not be fully reopened until Washington meets its slew of demands, including ending its blockade on Iranian shipping and scrapping oil sanctions.

Ship Hit in Strait Just hours before Trump’s latest post, a vessel exiting the Strait of Hormuz was struck by an unidentified projectile off the coast of Oman. According to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations, the ship’s engine room was hit, resulting in a “crew casualty.

” Officials did not immediately identify the vessel or its cargo. The Omani Coast Guard said it was assisting the remaining crew as authorities investigated the incident. Iran’s Stranglehold on the Strait Since the United States and Israel launched attacks on the Islamic Republic on February 28, Iran has tightly restricted shipping through the waterway.

Prior to the war, around one-fifth of globally traded oil passed through Hormuz. Iranian parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf said Tuesday that Tehran would maintain its restrictions until Washington fulfilled what Iran considers its commitments under the interim U.

S.-Iran agreement struck in June. Those demands include lifting the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports, releasing frozen Iranian assets, removing sanctions on Iranian oil and gas exports, and ending U.S. military threats and operations. “Until the United States fulfills its commitments under the agreement … the Strait of Hormuz will not reopen,” Qalibaf said.

Blockade Vs. Territory Asked in the Oval Office on Monday about his earlier suggestion that Hormuz could become American territory, the president said he liked the idea. “We control it with the blockade, and I like the idea of declaring it a territory,” Trump told reporters, adding: “We have total control over the strait now.

” Washington’s blockade is hitting Iranian shipping hard. U.S. Central Command said Monday that American forces had redirected 64 commercial vessels, disabled three ships, and boarded another two as part of the renewed blockade. That does not mean Washington has eliminated Iran’s ability to disrupt other shipping.

Tuesday’s unexplained attack came after a string of strikes on vessels attempting to navigate the area. Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi also rejected Trump’s territorial claim on Tuesday, describing it as a “delusion.” Tehran has repeatedly maintained that it, rather than Washington, will determine when normal passage through the strait resumes.

Iran and Oman Near Deal Complicating matters further are separate negotiations between Iran and Oman, the two countries sitting on opposite sides of the strait. Iran said Monday that the two governments were finalizing details of an agreement concerning shipping routes through Hormuz.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said an “understanding has been reached regarding the map of the transit route.” Trump responded by threatening Oman, a longstanding U.S. partner, telling Fox News that Washington would “bomb the shit out of them” if Muscat “gets in the way.

” The diplomatic clock has already run down. The 60-day negotiating period established by the June memorandum between Washington and Tehran expired on Monday without a broader agreement being reached. Trump has said the United States is not seeking an extension.

Tehran Likely to Double Down Columnist Melanie Phillips slammed President Trump’s plans for a ceasefire last month, complaining that it had given Tehran the upper hand and showed that “everyone can now see America is not prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to defend itself.

” Trump has claimed Iran has essentially lost this war and that the blockade is massively damaging its economy. However, he has also instructed his team to pursue a “low-key” approach to talks. On July 7, Trump said the agreement was “over”, while Iran’s Foreign Ministry said it was “suspended” the following week.

“They should put up the white flag of surrender,” Trump told Fox News on Monday, claiming that backchannel talks with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were ongoing. The IRGC has denied these claims. On Tuesday, Trump dramatically changed his tune, stating that no talks with Iran were ongoing, and that no discussions were scheduled.

About the Author: Georgia Gilholy Georgia Gilholy is a journalist based in the United Kingdom who has been published in Newsweek, The Times of Israel, and the Spectator. Gilholy writes about international politics, culture, and education.

Location: Tehran
Georgia Gilholy
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranProxy

Iran War Day 172: ‘No Talks’ Scheduled with Tehran, Trump Says

○ 1 source

Iran War Day 172: ‘No Talks’ Scheduled with Tehran, Trump Says In a post on Truth Social Tuesday President Donald Trump said that “there are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Trump added that the U.

S. naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz “remains in full force and effect” and that the waterway “is open and operating.” In a separate post, Trump published an image labelling the strait as “NEW U.S. Territory.” Only six commodity ships transited the Strait of Hormuz on Monday, according to Kpler data cited by Reuters.

Iran’s Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said Tuesday, Until the commitments made by the United States in the memorandum of understanding, including the lifting of the blockade, the release of frozen assets, the lifting of oil sanctions, the end of threats and military operations on all fronts, and other conditions to which America agreed in the memorandum, are implemented, the strait will not be opened.

The deadline for that memorandum of understanding—signed by Trump and Iran’s president in June—expired on Monday. The two nations had agreed to negotiate a final peace deal over a 60-day period, but the framework agreement quickly fell apart, and the deadline seemingly wasn’t extended, despite mixed reporting.

Subscribe Today Get daily emails in your inbox Ghalibaf will lead a “high-level parliamentary delegation” to Iraq on Wednesday, Iran’s Fars news agency reported. The visit comes as pro-Iran militia groups face a September 30 deadline set by the Iraqi government to disarm.

Syria condemned reported Israeli strikes against Abu Duhur airbase on Tuesday, while the U.S. expressed concern over the incident. U.S. Ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Syria and Iraq Tom Barrack wrote on X that “we are deeply concerned that the confirmed Israeli airstrikes on Abu al-Duhur Airbase constitute an unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability.

” The price of Brent Crude oil was over $91 per barrel on Tuesday morning. AAA recorded the national average price of regular gas at $4.07.

Location: Tehran
Harrison Berger
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIran

Trump says no talks planned with Iran, Tehran says Strait of Hormuz still shut

○ 1 source

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday no talks were taking place with Iran and none were scheduled, and he insisted that the Strait of Hormuz was open, contradicting an earlier Iranian assertion that the critical waterway remained shut to shipping.

The receding prospects of a deal to end the nearly six-month conflict drove up oil prices again on Tuesday, while stock markets sagged and borrowing costs for major economies including the U.S. hit multi-decade highs, amid concerns about the long-term inflationary and fiscal impact of the crisis.

A temporary ceasefire agreement expired on Monday and a senior Iranian official told Reuters that his country was moving to a “fully offensive” military posture due to the diplomatic stalemate, though there were no reports of fresh strikes by either side on Tuesday.

“There are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Tuesday. “The Naval Blockade remains in full force and effect. The Hormuz Strait is open and operating. All water mines have been removed or detonated,” he added.

On Monday, Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and special envoy, had sounded an optimistic note, saying talks with Iran were still under way and were “probably more robust” than they had ever been. Despite Trump's typically ebullient remarks about the situation in the Gulf, preliminary shipping data on Tuesday showed ship crossings via the Strait of Hormuz were still in single digits on Monday.

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations said it received a report on Tuesday that a vessel was struck by an unknown projectile while transiting outbound in the Strait of Hormuz, causing engine room damage and a crew casualty. The remaining crew were being assisted by the Omani Coast Guard, according to the report.

Top Iranian negotiator Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said in comments published by state media that the strait would remain shut until the U.S. met the conditions of an interim deal signed with Iran in June. These conditions include the U.S. lifting its blockade of Iranian ports, lifting oil sanctions, releasing Tehran's frozen assets, and ending threats and military operations on all fronts, Qalibaf told parliament.

A memorandum of understanding signed on June 17 had set a 60-day time frame for a broader deal on Iran's nuclear programme and U.S. sanctions. That period elapsed on Monday and Trump said he had no plans to extend it. The agreement, which declared the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts,” had quickly unravelled over a dispute about control of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas flowed before the war.

Both Trump and Tehran have frequently switched between threats and more emollient rhetoric as they seek a way out of the crisis, which erupted when the U.S. and Israel launched strikes against Iran on February 28. Iran remains open to dialogue with the U.

S. but does not confuse negotiations with surrender, Mohammad Mokhber, an adviser to Iran's supreme leader, said on Tuesday, according to the semi-official Fars news agency. Mokhber said military pressure and sanctions would not break Iran's resolve and that the country would defend its security, dignity and allies while not seeking war.

Even as Iran projects resilience in the war, its leaders are worried that a threat of more economic punishment could increase hardships, reignite unrest and further erode the Islamic Republic’s legitimacy, according to three Iranian officials. Thousands of people have been killed in the conflict, mainly in Iran and Lebanon.

Iran has bombed U.S. military bases and infrastructure in countries including Oman, Jordan, Kuwait, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Benchmark Brent crude oil futures have surged during the conflict, hitting a peak of $126 a barrel, roughly 75% above pre-war levels.

Brent crude futures settled up 20 cents on Tuesday at just over $91 a barrel. For Americans who will vote in November congressional elections, gasoline prices have risen above $4 per gallon, up from less than $3 before the war, according to the automotive group AAA.

Location: Tehran
Parisa Hafezi; Katharine Jackson
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN

Iran’s gutted ranks leave loyalists filling critical posts — with one glaring problem

○ 1 source

Iran is rebuilding the upper ranks of its military and security establishment after months of wartime losses by turning largely to familiar veterans — figures whose careers in some cases stretch back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Iran-Iraq War and previous domestic crackdowns.

The appointments follow the deaths of several senior Iranian commanders in U.S.-Israeli strikes since the war began Feb. 28, The National reported Aug. 11. For Washington, the stakes go beyond who fills the vacancies. The reshuffle puts veteran hardliners atop institutions that shape Iran’s military operations, national-security policy and internal security at a time of renewed confrontation with the United States.

The appointments do not prove that Tehran has run out of younger commanders or that loyalty was the sole criterion, but the reliance on figures whose careers stretch back decades is raising a broader question for U.S. policymakers: whether wartime losses have left Iran increasingly dependent on a smaller circle of trusted ideologues — potentially narrowing the room for compromise even as Washington tries to pressure Tehran back toward a deal.

IRAN’S REVOLUTIONARY GUARD SIDELINES PRESIDENT AS MILITARY GRIP EXPANDS Former American prisoner Morad Tahbaz, who was detained in Iran in 2018 and freed in a U.S.-Iran prisoner exchange in September 2023, told Fox News Digital that he views the latest appointments as evidence of Tehran's continued dependence on longtime loyalists.

"They keep rotating the same old people, most of whom are fairly inept but are loyal to the Khamenei father and son," Tahbaz told Fox News Digital. The reshuffle spans Iran's conventional military, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, its naval arm, the Basij paramilitary force and the country's highest national-security council.

Iran's state-run IRNA reported Aug. 10 that Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei appointed Ali Abdollahi chief of staff of the Armed Forces, Kioumars Heydari his deputy, Ahmad Vahidi commander of the IRGC, Mostafa Izadi deputy IRGC commander, Ali Ozmaei commander of the IRGC Navy and Hossein Taeb head of the Basij.

The previous day, former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei, 71, was named secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and Khamenei's representative on the powerful body. Reuters reported Aug. 10 that the SNSC coordinates Iran's security and foreign policy and that Rezaei replaced Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, who had been appointed secretary in late March following the death of his predecessor, Ali Larijani.

The appointments do not establish that Iran has run out of younger or less familiar commanders. But the reliance on longtime military and security figures has fueled assessments that wartime losses have narrowed the regime's pool of officials it regards as sufficiently experienced and politically trustworthy.

Erfan Fard wrote for the Middle East Forum on Aug. 15 that Khamenei was not promoting a new generation but turning to veterans of the revolution, the Iran-Iraq War, intelligence operations and domestic repression, arguing that an architecture based on "institutional memory, loyalty, and coercive power" was taking shape.

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies argued in an Aug. 12 policy brief that the reshuffle looked "less like renewal than a game of musical chairs among regime veterans." The appointments also formalized the position of Ahmad Vahidi, a veteran hardliner who had already emerged near the center of wartime decision-making.

Vahidi was a major player in shaping Tehran's wartime policy and had risen through the IRGC's early intelligence and external-operations apparatus before later serving as defense and interior minister. As interior minister, Vahidi oversaw police units involved in the crackdown on the 2022 protests.

IRNA confirmed Aug. 10 that Khamenei promoted Vahidi to major general and formally appointed him commander-in-chief of the IRGC. WHO IS AHMAD VAHIDI? IRAN’S NEW IRGC CHIEF TIED TO GLOBAL ATTACKS AND ‘DEATH TO AMERICA’ IDEOLOGY Hossein Taeb: The intelligence veteran returns to the Basij to build a ‘20-million-strong Basij force.

’ One of the most closely watched appointments is Hossein Taeb, the cleric and veteran security official tapped to lead the Basij, the IRGC's volunteer paramilitary force that has repeatedly been used against domestic dissent. The National reported that the Basij has been used to suppress internal dissent, while The Times reported Aug.

12 that the force is embedded in neighborhoods, universities, workplaces, factories, ministries and mosques and has played a central role in suppressing successive uprisings. For Tahbaz, Taeb's return is personal. Tahbaz was detained in 2018, while Taeb was leading the IRGC Intelligence Organization.

"Ta’eb is extremely close to Mojtaba Khamenei but was very unceremoniously fired from his former position as head of the IRGC Intelligence Organization," Tahbaz told Fox News Digital. "He was personally responsible for my and my colleagues' arrests and detentions.

He lives and breathes conspiracy theories." The Times reported Aug. 12 that Taeb and Mojtaba Khamenei's relationship dates back more than four decades and that both served in the Habib Battalion during the Iran-Iraq War. The newspaper also reported that IRGC intelligence arrested environmentalists and dual nationals during Taeb's tenure.

Taeb previously commanded the Basij before moving into IRGC intelligence. The Times reported that months after the disputed 2009 election, the Guards' intelligence division was elevated into an independent organization with Taeb as its first chief. Taeb's earlier leadership of the Basij also drew U.

S. sanctions. In a Sept. 29, 2010 Treasury Department fact sheet, the U.S. government said that while Taeb commanded the Basij during the June 2009 election, forces under his command participated in "beatings, murder, and arbitrary arrests and detentions of peaceful protestors.

" According to IRNA, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf congratulated Taeb on his appointment as head of the Basij Organization, saying his tenure could mark a new chapter for the volunteer force. Ghalibaf said the Basij now needs a more comprehensive and forward-looking approach and argued that Taeb’s appointment by the supreme leader could help advance what he described as one of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini’s longstanding goals: building a 20-million-strong Basij force.

UN WATCHDOG SLAMS POTENTIAL ELECTION OF IRAN TO PANEL WITH HUMAN RIGHTS SWAY: 'LUNATICS RUNNING THE ASYLUM' Mohsen Rezaei: Back at the center after four decades Few appointments better illustrate the return of Iran's old guard than Mohsen Rezaei, who was named secretary of the Supreme National Security Council.

Reuters reported Aug. 10 that Rezaei joined the IRGC shortly after the 1979 revolution, became its commander in 1981 at age 27 and led the force for 16 years, including through most of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War. He later served as secretary of Iran's Expediency Discernment Council for more than two decades and as vice president for economic affairs from 2021 to 2023 under President Ebrahim Raisi.

Now, at 71, he is secretary of the SNSC and Khamenei's representative on the body. Beni Sabti, an Iran expert at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies, argued that bringing back longtime figures such as Rezaei reflects weakness rather than renewal.

"This is, again, another evidence that they don't have anyone else," Sabti told Fox News Digital. "So they have to bring him out again from the desk and put him somewhere. These are the guys that they have." Rezaei and Vahidi were also among six people for whom INTERPOL authorized Red Notices requested by Argentina in 2007 in connection with the investigation into the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.

INTERPOL said in November 2007 that its General Assembly upheld the publication of notices for six individuals, including Ahmad Vahidi and Mohsen Rezaei, after Iran challenged Argentina's requests. Sabti argued that Rezaei's re-emergence is particularly telling because Tehran's decision-making circle has become less ideologically diverse.

"Today, there is only one opinion, and this is the main problem," Sabti said. "This is why you think that there is unity and the system is stronger. No, it's not stronger. Actually, it's weaker also because of that." TRADE VESSEL STRUCK BY PROJECTILE IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ AMID US-IRAN TALKS Ali Abdollahi: A wartime commander takes the top military job Ali Abdollahi was elevated to chief of staff of Iran's Armed Forces, putting him at the top of the country's military command structure.

IRNA confirmed the appointment Aug. 10. Abdollahi had previously commanded the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, Iran's joint operational command responsible for coordinating its armed forces in wartime, according to Iran International on Aug. 10.

His appointment also comes amid an effort to integrate the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters more closely with the Armed Forces General Staff. Le Monde reported Aug. 11 that Abdollahi's task includes completing that integration in an effort to further centralize command and coordination.

Fard argued in his Aug. 15 Middle East Forum analysis that Abdollahi's elevation exemplifies Tehran's reliance on longstanding revolutionary-security figures rather than a generational break. FREED AMERICAN REVEALS BRUTAL IRAN PRISON ORDEAL, WARNS HOSTAGES FACE GREATER DANGER Kioumars Heydari: The regular army moves closer to the center Former Army Ground Forces commander Kioumars Heydari was appointed deputy chief of staff of the Armed Forces, bringing a senior officer from Iran's conventional military into the new command structure.

The National reported that Heydari formerly commanded the Army Ground Forces and has held senior positions in Iran's regular army, known as the Artesh. IRNA independently confirmed his appointment. His inclusion also demonstrates that the reshuffle is not limited to the IRGC.

Fard argued in the Middle East Forum that Heydari's previous public rhetoric surrounding protest suppression indicates that Tehran has increasingly integrated the regular army into its domestic-security posture. Mostafa Izadi: Another veteran rises inside the IRGC Mostafa Izadi was appointed Vahidi's deputy, putting another longtime commander near the top of the IRGC hierarchy.

IRNA confirmed Izadi's appointment Aug. 10, while The National described him Aug. 11 as a veteran commander who has held a number of senior positions in Iran's military and security establishment. Iran International reported that Izadi previously commanded the Cyber and New Threats Headquarters within the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters.

IRAN HARDLINER BEHIND US DEAL WARNS TEHRAN WON’T HONOR AGREEMENT IF TRUMP FAILS TO DELIVER Ali Ozmaei: A new commander at one of Iran's most sensitive fronts Rear Adm. Ali Ozmaei was appointed commander of the IRGC Navy, putting him in charge of a force central to Iran's military posture in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.

The National reported Aug. 11 that Ozmaei replaced Alireza Tangsiri, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike in March, and that the IRGC Navy is responsible for Iran's military operations in the Gulf and around the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian state media also highlighted Ozmaei's longstanding maritime experience.

IRNA reported Aug. 11 that Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf praised Ozmaei's years in maritime defense and his familiarity with the current conflict and the Strait of Hormuz. The appointment came one day before Rezaei said the Strait of Hormuz would remain closed unless the United States changed its behavior and accepted Iran's conditions.

Reuters reported that Rezaei said Washington would have to end the war and unfreeze Iranian funds overseas, with other conditions relayed through mediators. Taken together, the seven personnel changes show Tehran moving to fill and reshuffle critical military and security posts after significant wartime losses.

What remains an assessment rather than an established fact is whether the identities of those chosen reveal a deeper shortage of trusted successors. Sabti said the return of veteran figures reflected what he sees as a shrinking bench of trusted officials and a less diverse decision-making circle.

Tahbaz offered a less academic version of that assessment. CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP "They keep rotating the same old people," he said.

Location: Tehran
Efrat Lachter