IRGC is the system, the system is IRGC! At what cost will the United States lose?

-

 Abbas Goya — March 16, 2026

We now know that contrary to the mistaken assessment of the United States and Israel, the Islamic Republic did not collapse following Khamenei’s death. That assessment viewed the Islamic Republic as a collection of rival factions held together solely by the “glue” of Khamenei. Accordingly, his removal was expected to create an un-fillable power vacuum. The prevailing assumption was that, after his sudden death, competing factions would enter into a violent conflict for power. The United States, by backing a “moderate” faction, would then tip the balance in its favor; the Revolutionary Guards would submit to a “clerical leader”; and ultimately, the U.S. and Israel would coexist comfortably with a tamed Islamic Republic.

It must be acknowledged that this assessment was not limited to the governments of the United States and Israel. Sections of both the right and left opposition to the Islamic Republic—broadly speaking, bourgeois forces—shared a similar understanding of the regime’s power structure and Khamenei’s role. One need only look at the discourse of pro republicans, monarchists, the MEK, and the Worker-Communist Party of Iran.

The flaw in this assessment became evident within the very first hours of the U.S.–Israeli attack. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) immediately and effectively filled the power vacuum. Khamenei’s death demonstrated that the backbone of the Islamic Republic is not the Supreme Leader as an individual, but the IRGC. The conferral of leadership status upon the “second Khamenei,” while he lay unconscious in a hospital bed, revealed above all the subordination of the “leader” to the Guards—not the other way around. In other words, the IRGC is the system, and the system is the IRGC.

Even if such scenarios did not occur to Netanyahu, Trump, and their civilian advisors—which seems unlikely—U.S. military commanders could not have ignored the risks of regional retaliation by the Islamic Republic. The 2019 attack on Saudi Aramco facilities, as well as the repeated threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, were clear indicators of Iran’s retaliatory capacity. It is therefore highly improbable that these scenarios were absent from U.S. military calculations. The question remains: why did the United States and Israel, despite these considerations and without sufficient preparedness for their consequences, allow themselves to fall into the current predicament?

Beyond the personal factor of Trump, what truly surprised many was the misreading of the real structure of power within the Islamic Republic. The IRGC is not merely a military force; through its extensive ownership in light and heavy industries, its key role in the distribution of goods, and its deep influence over the oil and petrochemical sectors, it has effectively become a de facto capitalist class. It is important to stress that the IRGC does not simply represent this class—it constitutes it. Given such weight and position, why would it submit to any other authority within the state?

The predicament now facing the United States and Israel could have grave consequences for the people of Iran. The war currently unfolding is no longer merely about Iran’s nuclear capabilities; it has effectively become a struggle over regional authority. Moreover, if the United States and Israel fail to achieve their objective—namely, containing the Islamic Republic—the repercussions will extend far beyond the Middle East and may reshape the global balance of power to America’s detriment.

What matters most, however, are a few key points. First, the Islamic Republic—or more precisely, the IRGC—views this war as a war of survival and will not refrain from any act of brutality in pursuit of that goal. Second, what are the red lines of the United States and Israel in this war? Are they prepared to accept the risk of defeat without resorting to more destructive means—without deploying napalm, cluster, barrel, or even nuclear bombs against the people of Iran? Or could the scope of violence escalate to far more devastating levels?

***

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Post-bloody ThuFriday: Obstacles and solutions

-
Abbas Goya - February 2, 2026 Undoubtedly, every protester who took part in the January uprising and lived through Bloody ThuFriday (Thursday–Friday, January 8-9) is grappling with the same question: What are the obstacles, and what are the solutions ? There is no doubt that the brutal massacre (of tens) of thousands of protesters marked a turning point in the struggle of the working masses to overthrow the Islamic Republic. Yet despite deploying an unprecedented level of violence, the regime failed to achieve its central objective: it was unable to re-establish a level of terror comparable to that of the 1980s. The first clear sign of this failure was the reopening of the Internet in Iran. A torrent of testimonies, images, and revelations flooded the world. People spoke out without fear, and funerals became mass political gatherings. The genocidal violence of Bloody ThuFriday did not paralyze the masses in the way repression did in the 1980s. Instead, it produced defiant spirit remini...
More »

The latest Defeated

-
 Abbas Goya Note: What follows is an excerpt from a discussion among socialist activists regarding the January uprising. If we analyze the wage earners who rose up in the January uprising solely through a narrow, interest-based lens within the workers' socialist framework, their presumed long-term objective would be the establishment of a socialist state through the political expropriation of capitalism. Yet when we examine the actual composition of the population, the slogans raised, and the immediate unfolding of events, this claim appears excessively imaginative and far removed from reality. And indeed, it is. What bridges the gap between imagination and reality is not spontaneity but the subjective political factor: political activists, both as individuals and as organized forces. Politics is their terrain — and it is not the exclusive domain of socialists. It is no secret that Western ruling classes, through coercion, and manipulation, attempt to install their preferred altern...
More »

Blackshirts monarchists & their raison d'être

-
Image
Abbas Goya Mussolini, who had previously been a journalist, founded the first fascist government in 1922. His electoral campaign was based on organizing the “Blackshirts” to repress, arrest, and massacre Italy’s communists. Hostility toward communism, in the aftermath of the 1917 Russian Revolution, was the primary reason for the very existence of fascism. Reza Pahlavi and conscious monarchists know very well that in order to gain acceptance by the U.S. rulers—especially under its current president, Trump—they must demonstrate that they possess the necessary and sufficient capacity for hostility toward leftists, socialists, and communists. From the perspective of the US, the main reason for the transfer of power from the Shah to Khomeini was the Islamists’ high capacity to suppress and eradicate communists. Khomeini made this commitment to Carter and carried it out. For this reason, Reza Pahlavi and Pahlavi loyalists are compelled to show that they are no less than Khomeini and the Isl...
More »