"The Coup Takes Place Within A Year Of The End Of The War."

• 9.04.2026, 13:48

Iran may be in for a change.

After the truce between the U.S. and Iran, oil prices are plummeting and the mutual strikes have stopped. The parties have different interpretations of the compromise reached. On why Trump might need this truce and how it will affect the authorities in Iran itself, journalists pointmedia.io spoke with political scientist Abbas Galliamov, who lives in Israel.

- Many commentators are rushing to rejoice at Iran's "victory." How would you characterize this agreement?

- Of course, there is no victory to speak of. I see this truce as a tactical device with the help of which Trump, first of all, is trying to ease the pressure on himself in terms of oil prices, European and American public opinion. And the other component, no less important, maybe even more important, has to do with Iranian domestic politics. There is a political crisis, certainly, but it has not yet led to the collapse of the system.

- Why hasn't that happened?

- They have mobilized. They fell into a state of agitation, a village brawl, when they fight without thinking about anything, just waving their arms. To expect them to behave in this situation - you have to demobilize him. It's like in boxing. A good boxer demobilizes his opponent. That is, you have to stimulate him to mobilize quickly, demobilize. You outline an attack, he has not yet had time to mobilize, you immediately win it back, he demobilizes again, at that moment you mobilize him again. Eventually, he gets disorganized and loses his sense of psychological control, and then he gets physically exhausted. Well, as a matter of fact, that's how a good boxer wins a fight. And in this sense, they have been mobilized, and you can iron them for a long time, they will still be in this state. Let's demobilize them. They have all the prerequisites for an internal crisis. The new rakhbar (supreme leader) - no one has seen him and it is unclear whether he is capable or not. The IRGC top brass is acting on his behalf. Pezeshkian, the president, Ayatollah Arafi (one of the most influential members of the clergy), expressed discontent. It was reported in the opposition media, and it was not refuted - and if it wasn't true, of course it would have been refuted. And they appealed to the IRGC leadership - where is the Rahbar? Show us at least him! And Arafi said that if he is not capable, then the power should go back to this triumvirate of ours. Pezeshkian says, bring back executive power. And the IRGC says no.

But now the situation has changed. Before, you didn't show us the Rahbar because they are shooting, security issue, his life is priceless. Now there is a truce, they are not shooting, show us! We can lower the security level already. What can the IRGC object to? Objective prerequisites for the growth of the contradiction have now appeared. Under the new conditions, under demobilization, under conditions of no shooting.

The opportunity has arisen to bring the economy back on the agenda. Pezeshkian tried to say during the shooting that one more month and the economy will just collapse. But who will hear him during the shooting?

When the guns speak, the muses are silent. But now we can talk about the economy. Your own IRGC soldiers aren't getting their paychecks anymore. Because the bank has already collapsed, in fact, the bank that was making payments is lying on its side.

- And what can this contradiction lead to?

- If the moderates now manage to form an influential enough coalition that will raise the issue of a new rakhbar and drag the power back, return it to the civilian politicians who are supposed to govern the country, we will be able to do what was impossible during the war. In this situation, there is a chance that the crisis phenomena that were already there but could not materialize in the conditions of war aggravation, when everyone mobilized, rallied around the flag, will manifest themselves. In the new conditions of demobilization all this will come out.

Political science has long known that the most dangerous time from the point of view of a coup is not during the hostilities - but after. A coup doesn't happen during rallying. And a coup happens within a year of the end of a war. Now there is an opportunity to move in that direction. They have already started to conflict among themselves about who will negotiate. At first it was announced that the Ghalibaf. But the IRGC-affiliated media immediately rushed to deny it. Proving that no, not Ghalibaf. Apparently, he seems too pragmatic for the IRGC.

- So we can say that dual power is forming in the country?

- Not exactly dual power. Because the moderates have no real power now. The IRGC has taken all of it. But now there are prerequisites to create this dual power. To take some of the power away from the IRGC. And to return it either to the interim council or to the president. But in any case to civilian politicians.

- But there is also the issue of the Strait of Hormuz. If the IRGC insist, as they have been demanding, that there be a fee for ships to pass through. Would there be a big financial and political gain for the IRGC?"

- It would certainly be a success. But I'm not sure it would be a game changer. You have to know how to manage the money. They will just steal it. And they have a dysfunctional system. After a certain point, when the collapse has crossed a certain line, money can't save the system. Just like the best medicine that can cure cancer at the first stage will not help you when the fourth stage is reached. So, yes, it will be a success for the IRGC. But to say it's an absolute victory is an exaggeration.

- Plus, we don't know how many people will be willing to pay for it. How will Trump behave in this situation? I mean, Trump just might get so angry at them that he can use any excuse to start bombing them again.

- Progressive commentators insist that Trump lost.

- It's possible to interpret it that way. But it's just as possible that this is a tactical break. A change of strategy that has to do with a reluctance to split foreheads. As the Chinese say - why climb a mountain when there's a gorge? Here, if we have found a more effective way to achieve our goals, why not take advantage of it?