How Iran's Regime Changed...for the Worse

“Absolutely not. In fact, what we have seen is a hardening of Iran's leadership. The more extreme elements of the Revolutionary Guards and hardliners in the political system are now much more firmly in control than they were before the war. There has been a change in the regime and it's been for the worse.”

“Some analysts say that had there not been a war, the selection of Mushtaba Khamenei would have been a lot less likely. But because his father had been killed, because he was injured, because there was war, it meant that there was more momentum behind him, that choosing him sent a message of continuity and defiance from the political leadership.”

“Iran's new national security chief is someone called Mohammed Bagher Zulkhadra. He's a former Revolutionary Guard commander and has a very violent background. Before the Revolution, he was basically an assassin who was personally involved in the assassination of policemen as well as of an American engineer. He was considered so extreme even by his own peers who thought he was too radical even for them.”

“What we're seeing is that the void is being filled by leaders who in most cases are more radical than the people who have replaced. And by more radical, we mean that they are staunchly anti-American and have no tolerance for domestic dissent. And many of them are kind of guided by this apocalyptic military ideology.”

“Iran is sending the message that they think they've won, right? That the war has actually has been in their favor, despite these kind of devastating losses to Iran's military capabilities and infrastructure. The war has also showed that they have cards to play, that they were able to basically hold the world economy hostage. And I think the fact they found this new leverage in the Strait of Hormuz has further added to this sense of confidence.”