Iran's war with Israel is only paused, Revolutionary Guards spymaster says

Mohammad-Hossein Saffar-Harandi, a hardline member of Iran’s Expediency Council, said on state television this week that Israel’s attacks on Iran in a 12-day war in June was part of a deliberate, long-planned “overthrow” operation.

“(Some people) in Israel contacted certain officials within Russia’s Foreign Ministry two to three days before the attack,” he asserted, informing Moscow about the operation and urging them to abandon their cooperation with Tehran.

The Islamic Republic would be toppled in a few days, the Russians were told, according to Saffar-Harandi. He did not say how he obtained the information, nor whether Moscow had informed Tehran or taken any preventive steps.

“If his claim is true, did Russia inform Iran? Or was Russia suffering from a miscalculation (like Israel), believing that Iran was finished?” asked Esfandiar Zolghadr, lawyer and journalist, in a post on X.

Moscow muted

Russia’s response to the war was limited to diplomatic statements, offering no political or military support for Tehran. Iranian analysts see this as a reflection of Moscow’s focus on the Ukraine war and its desire to avoid jeopardizing ties with Israel and the West.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters last week that Moscow was “seriously concerned” about Israeli and American attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities—but stopped short of backing Iran, instead urging negotiations with the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA.

Critics in Iran argue this cautious stance fits a broader pattern.

“From Russia’s unfulfilled promises to deliver defense systems like the S-400 and Su-35 fighter jets, to repeated delays in military cooperation, all suggest that this partnership is not based on mutual trust, but rather on opportunistic, short-term interests,” the reformist Shargh daily said in an August 5 commentary.

Israel first?

Russia’s response has not gone unnoticed in Iran’s military and political circles.

Brigadier-General Yadollah Javani, political deputy of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, acknowledged public confusion over the silence of both Russia and China, pointing to the limits of military pacts that don’t entail mutual defense.

Nematollah Izadi, Iran’s former ambassador to Russia, told the Jamaran news website in late July that if Russia had to choose between Iran and Israel, “it would definitely choose Israel.”

He also pointed to Moscow’s strategic logic: continued Iran-West tensions help Russia maintain regional leverage. A thaw with the West, he warned, could shift Tehran’s alignment.

During the war, President Vladimir Putin said Israel has two million Russian speakers and is “practically a Russian-speaking country.”

The comment was seen as a signal of priorities in Tehran.

“Putin’s statements indicated that ethnic and demographic ties with Israel take precedence for him over regional commitments with Iran,” the commentary in Shargh read.

“This behavior cannot be explained merely within the framework of diplomatic caution; rather, it should be seen as the logical extension of a policy rooted in transactionalism.”

“Iran’s air defense was damaged early in the 12-day war, but since then Iran has rebuilt and modernized its systems. Israel now realizes that Iran’s air defense in a future war would be multiple times stronger,” Tasnim News wrote in an editorial.

One of the most comprehensive official takes from Iran's security apparatus which was badly bludgeoned in the June conflict, the article doubled down on an official narrative that Tehran had triumphed and pledged greater future accomplishments.

Another Israeli attack is highly unlikely, it added, warning that concerns in Iran of renewed hostility in Iran was unhelpful speculation.

“Iran’s missile arsenal remains intact, and some of its most destructive missiles haven’t even been used yet. Any new war would mean greater destruction in Israeli-occupied territories,” the article said.

'Regime change failed'

Israel launched a surprise military campaign on June 13 targeting military and nuclear sites, assassinating senior Iranian commanders and killing hundreds of civilians. In response, Iranian missile strikes killed 29 Israeli civilians.

According to an Iranian government spokesperson, 1,062 Iranians were killed during the conflict, including 786 military personnel and 276 civilians.

The United States capped off the conflict with attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities at Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow with long-range bombers and submarine-launched missiles on June 22. Washington brokered a ceasefire on June 24.

Tasnim also warned that some media outlets and social media users continue to raise the alarm about another imminent Israeli attack. However, it argued that Israel’s core objective “regime change in Iran” had failed.

“In the recent war, Israel bet heavily on political and social collapse in Iran, expecting the public to turn against the Islamic Republic. But what actually happened was the complete opposite of their expectations,” the article said.

In response to the attacks on its nuclear facilities, Iran suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), conditioning any future engagement on new terms.

Iran’s foreign minister said on Wednesday that the UN nuclear watchdog must clarify how it intends to inspect nuclear sites bombed by Israel and the United States.

Israel not positioned for a second attack

The article contended that Israel’s surprise attack was the result of years of intelligence preparation, and that replicating such an operation would require years more planning.

“After decades of intelligence gathering and planning, Israel attempted to catch Iran off guard, assassinating commanders, disabling defense systems and aiming for a swift decapitation strike,” the report said.

“It did kill several high-ranking military officials and nuclear scientists, but failed to achieve its main goal: the collapse of Iran’s political and social structure and its defense systems,” Tasnim added.

Among those killed during the war were several senior IRGC commanders, including Armed Forces Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri, IRGC Commander Hossein Salami, IRGC Aerospace Force Commander Amir Ali Hajizadeh and IRGC Deputy for Operations Mehdi Rabbani.

“Israel gambled everything on this surprise attack but lost. Rebuilding its intelligence network will now take years, meaning Israel is not logically positioned to mount another assault,” the report said.

An Iranian analyst said in July that Israel had hacked Iran’s entire air defense system during the war and that more than 100 Iranian missile launchers exploded upon activation.

“Israel has already lost a war it spent decades preparing for. With exposed defense systems, internal political chaos, and Iran growing stronger and more united, a second act of aggression would not only fail, but would bring even more devastating consequences,” Tasnim added.

“They are seeking to disarm the resistance in Lebanon, but they will take that wish to the grave,” said Iraj Masjedi, deputy coordinator of the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force, according to Iranian media.

“Resistance forces remain fully prepared and equipped, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is completely ready for any scenario,” he added.

Masjedi's remarks followed Beirut’s announcement Tuesday that the Lebanese army would be tasked with collecting weapons from groups operating outside the state’s command.

Lebanon's cabinet instructed the army to develop a plan by the end of the year aimed at creating a state monopoly on weapons—an implicit challenge to Hezbollah, which has resisted disarmament since last year’s war with Israel.

Hezbollah decried the move as a "grave sin" and vowed to ignore it.

The Lebanese government has long been under international pressure to assert monopoly over arms, particularly from Western states who view Iran-backed Hezbollah’s military structure as a parallel force within the state.

Israel, Armed Forces General Staff spokesman Abolfazl Shekarchi said on Thursday, aimed to undermine the Iran-backed network of armed groups in the region.

“The Zionist regime is attempting to alter regional equations, but the resistance front stands firm,” Shekarchi said, naming Hezbollah, Hamas, Yemen’s Houthis, Iraq’s Hashd al-Shaabi and other groups as active components of what he called a growing axis.

Behind the tailored suits and diplomatic polish lies the same system preparing for confrontation, not compromise.

The SNSC, one of the Islamic Republic’s most powerful institutions, is ultimately controlled by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. All senior appointments fall under his direct authority.

Larijani, who previously served as SNSC secretary from 2005 to 2007 and was parliament speaker for over a decade, is one of the regime’s most enduring insiders. A longtime adviser to Khamenei, he has often served as a bridge between rival factions.

With his neatly trimmed beard, sharp gaze, and preference for suits over uniforms, Larijani offers a stark contrast to his predecessor, Rear Admiral Ali Akbar Ahmadian of the IRGC Navy, who often appeared in fatigues and had a distinctly harder edge.

But the change is stylistic, not strategic. Tehran’s broader posture remains intact.

Image over substance

The reshuffle comes as Iran faces mounting pressure over its nuclear program and prepares for the possibility of renewed military conflict with Israel or the United States.

Even journalists aligned with the reformist camp have voiced skepticism over Larijani’s return, calling it “too little, too late.” That skepticism is echoed by Nour News, affiliated with former SNSC chief Ali Shamkhani, who issued a thinly veiled warning on Wednesday:

“National security bodies complement the decision-making process, not replace it. If management and structural changes at a national security body are paired with unrealistic expectations, it will lead to the institution losing its operational credibility.”

Contained rivalries

Larijani and Shamkhani represent rival power centers within the Islamic Republic, each vying for influence over national security and foreign policy.

They may trade blows in public—or, in Iranian political parlance, compete for a bigger “share of the revolution’s spoils.” But when faced with internal unrest or foreign threats, such rivalries are quickly subordinated to regime survival.

Their behavior is captured by a Persian proverb: “We might tear each other limb from limb, but we are brothers. Therefore, we will always bury the bones.”

The Islamic Republic’s first supreme leader Ruhollah Khomeini put it more bluntly: “Preserving the regime is everyone’s highest religious duty—even more important than the life of the (Promised Savior).”

A new war council

Two days before Larijani’s appointment, the SNSC invoked Article 176 of Iran’s constitution to establish a National Defense Council.

Echoing the Supreme Defense Council of the 1980s, the new body is tasked with streamlining security decision-making in wartime.

It will be chaired by the president—or an SNSC member appointed by him—and will include the heads of Iran’s three branches of power, the intelligence minister, the chief of the General Staff, commanders of the IRGC and Artesh, two Supreme Leader representatives, and the head of the Khatam al-Anbia Central Headquarters.

The formation of the new body is a sign that Tehran sees confrontation as imminent.

Larijani’s return should be viewed in that context: not the return of a moderate to power, but the placement of a loyal, presentable veteran into a structure recalibrating for crisis.

As another Persian proverb puts it: “When the adversary rains arrows down on you, take shelter. Rush from one column to another, and buy yourself time—until chance provides you with an opening to fight or flee.”

“The government of Nawaf Salam has committed a grave sin by making a decision that strips Lebanon of the weapons of the Resistance against the Israeli enemy,” Hezbollah said in a statement.

Lebanon's cabinet on Tuesday tasked the national army with establishing a state monopoly on weapons and confiscating the arms of any other groups. Though Hezbollah was not explicitly mentioned, it was the clear focus of the move.

A punishing war with Israel late last year left long-time Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah dead, scores of leaders maimed by booby traps and much of the group's missile cache destroyed.

The conflict destroyed large parts of Beirut’s southern suburbs and southern Lebanon, killing and displacing thousands of people. Israel suffered only minimal casualties and damage.

'Ready to talk'

Once Iran's most fearsome ally in the region, Hezbollah lost a key lifeline to Tehran with the ouster of the Assad dynasty by Sunni Islamist rebels in neighboring Syria and now faces an uncertain future under its ageing clerical leader Naim Qassem.

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam mandated that the plan to collect weapons from non-state actors be completed by year's end. Hezbollah vowed to spurn the initiative.

“We will treat this decision as though it does not exist,” Hezbollah added. “We are ready to discuss a national security strategy, but not under the sound of aggression.”

Israel routinely launches drone and air strikes inside Lebanon against targets it deems a security threat while it maintains a limited presence on the country's soil.

Hezbollah has vowed never to disarm until Israel fully withdraws from what it deems Lebanese territory.

'Surrender'

The group further criticized the United States special envoy Tom Barrack, saying the Lebanese government move heeded his “diktats".

“What the government has decided is part of a surrender strategy and a clear abandonment of the fundamentals of Lebanon’s sovereignty,” Hezbollah said.

Founded in 1982 by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hezbollah is blamed for deadly bomb attacks on US and French military personnel based in Lebanon during the country's civil war.

Its guerrilla campaign ultimately ejected an Israeli occupation in the country's South but ultimately its arms crumpled in the face of its arch-foe's attacks last year.

Hezbollah is designated as a terrorist group by the United States, United Kingdom and Germany, while receiving extensive military and financial support from Iran.

Hardline voices in Tehran have slammed the Lebanese initiative.

“The wish to disarm Hezbollah will go to your grave,” security journalist Hossein Saremi posted on X.