The conflict began with coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes that resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, according to multiple sources. In the same initial attack, a girls' school near an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps base in southern Iran was struck, killing 168 people including approximately 110 children, Iran reported. The U.S. stated it was investigating the school strike incident, while Israel said it was not aware of any military operations in the area. Expert video analysis by BBC Verify later showed a U.S. Tomahawk missile hit a military base near the school.
Iran retaliated with missile and drone attacks on Israel and U.S. allies in the Gulf, according to multiple reports. Israeli authorities said 15 civilians had been killed by Iranian missile fire as of March 19. Human Rights Activists in Iran reported 3,220 people killed in Iran as of March 20, including 1,165 military personnel and 1,398 civilians, though the exact total number of casualties remains unclear due to conflicting figures. The death toll includes at least 87 people killed when a U.S. submarine sank an Iranian warship in the Indian Ocean near Sri Lanka on March 4.
The controversial school strike has become a focal point of international scrutiny. While the U.S. maintains it is investigating the incident, evidence suggests American weaponry was involved in the attack that devastated the civilian area. This has raised questions about targeting protocols and civilian protection in the escalating conflict.
Diplomatic efforts have faltered amid military escalation. The U.S. and Iran agreed on April 7-8 to a two-week ceasefire that included Israel, according to multiple sources. However, negotiations in Pakistan subsequently failed, leading the U.S. to initiate a naval blockade on Iranian ports effective April 13. Iran's negotiating position included demands for lifting sanctions, preserving control over the Strait of Hormuz, and continuing uranium enrichment. Whether a ceasefire is currently in effect remains uncertain given these contradictory developments.
There will be no negotiations with the United States.
Leadership succession in Iran has become confused following Khamenei's death. Mojtaba Khamenei was named as Ali Khamenei's successor on March 8, according to multiple sources. However, the Assembly of Experts is simultaneously working to select a replacement for Ali Khamenei, creating uncertainty about who is the legitimate and recognized successor. According to U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Mojtaba Khamenei was injured and likely disfigured, a claim denied by Iran.
Power dynamics within Iran's government have shifted dramatically. Ahmad Vahidi was appointed commander of the IRGC after previous commanders were killed in the war, according to multiple sources. Vahidi has been linked to the Iran-Contra affair and has sanctions from the U.S. and EU for suppressing protests. The IRGC has resisted President Masoud Pezeshkian's appointments and decisions, shrinking his authority significantly. President Pezeshkian accused IRGC commanders of acting unilaterally and driving escalation, warning of economic collapse.
Military developments have intensified on multiple fronts. Iran has received MiG-29 Su-35 fighter jets and Mil Mi-28 attack helicopters from Russia, according to multiple reports. Conflicting claims surround air engagements, with the U.S. claiming jets were shot down by friendly fire while Iran claims to have shot down U.S. jets. A U.S. strike hit the B1 bridge linking Tehran to Karaj, killing 8 and wounding 95, according to Iran. President Donald Trump threatened to attack bridges and electric power plants in Iran, violating international law according to critics.
The conflict has targeted critical infrastructure and strategic locations. The U.S. and Israel targeted Iran's nuclear program sites, including Kharg Island and South Pars, according to multiple sources. The Strait of Hormuz was closed due to hostilities, disrupting global oil supply, though the extent and duration of the closure remains contested. This strategic chokepoint has become a flashpoint in the broader conflict.
President Masoud Pezeshkian accused IRGC commanders of acting unilaterally and driving escalation, warning of economic collapse.
According to a new analysis from the U.S.-based think tank Institute for the Study of War, power has temporarily concentrated in the leadership of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The think tank specifically points out IRGC chief General Ahmad Vahidi and his inner circle, stating they have gained decisive influence over both Iran's military actions and the country's negotiation line toward the U.S. within about 48 hours. This assessment suggests the true extent of IRGC influence over Iran's government and decision-making, particularly regarding military actions and diplomacy, may be greater than formal structures indicate.
Evidence of IRGC control appears in contradictory statements about the Strait of Hormuz. On April 17, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the strait was open for commercial shipping, according to major media reports. The next day, the Revolutionary Guard's navy issued a contrary decision and announced that no ships, regardless of nationality, are allowed to pass. At the same time, several merchant ships are reported to have been attacked or forced to turn around. These contradictions have raised questions about who actually makes decisions in the country.
The IRGC has reportedly interfered in diplomatic processes. ISW assesses that the Revolutionary Guard thus not only controls military operations but has also interfered in Iran's diplomacy, which according to the think tank is unusual. ISW points out that Ahmad Vahidi and people close to him have also had direct influence over Iran's negotiations with the U.S., a responsibility that normally lies with civilian politicians. During recent talks in Islamabad, the military leadership is reported to have tried to place a security representative in the Iranian delegation to monitor the negotiations, according to major media. When Iran's negotiators reportedly showed some flexibility, it is said to have led to strong reactions within the Revolutionary Guard. According to ISW, this contributed to the talks being broken off and the delegation being called home, indicating that Iran's negotiators lacked full mandate to make decisive decisions.
These developments have created fundamental questions about Iran's decision-making structure. The think tank concludes that the politicians the U.S. has negotiated with may have lacked real influence, and that the actual power instead lay with the Revolutionary Guard's military leadership. ISW emphasizes that this does not necessarily imply a formal takeover of power. Statements from Iran's foreign ministry have been quickly contradicted by military actions, including regarding shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, according to major media reports. This highlights uncertainty about whether Iran has a clear, formal successor to the Supreme Leader, impacting perceptions of political stability and decision-making authority.
Legal and ideological dimensions complicate the conflict further. Iran's model of velayat-e faqih is undergoing ideological collapse with Mojtaba Khamenei's appointment sidelining traditional clergy, according to a regional source. The U.S.-Israeli attacks cannot be legally justified under international law, according to expert Susan M. Akram. These factors suggest the conflict has implications beyond immediate military outcomes.
Formal structures of war management exist alongside these power dynamics. Iran's war is being run by the Supreme National Security Council chaired by Ali Larijani, with a Provisional Leadership Council convened, according to multiple sources. Ali Larijani stated there will be no negotiations with the United States. However, this formal structure appears to operate alongside significant IRGC influence, creating a complex command environment. President Donald Trump suggested Iran may be seeking a ceasefire, but analysts say real power lies with IRGC hardliners like Ahmad Vahidi. The specific conditions and outcomes of negotiations between Iran and the U.S., including details on demands and flexibility shown, remain unclear as diplomatic channels remain strained.