Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
Iran Conflict 2026
16MAY

IRGC fires 70th wave, commanders falling

4 min read
12:41UTC

Four senior figures killed in a single week have not slowed the IRGC's attack tempo or its commercial management of the Hormuz toll system — the organisation runs on institutional machinery, not individual leaders.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

The IRGC runs on pre-delegated doctrine, not individual commanders — decapitation is not degrading operational tempo.

The IRGC announced its 70th wave of Operation True Promise 4 on Saturday — four waves in four days since the 66th wave reported on Tuesday . Seventy waves in approximately 23 days of war yields an average of three per day. Each wave deploys combinations of Khorramshahr-4, Qadr multi-warhead, Kheibar Shekan, and Zolfaqar ballistic missiles alongside drones, targeting Israeli territory, US bases, and Gulf state infrastructure simultaneously. Iran has NOW fired more than 400 ballistic missiles at Israel since 28 February, with Israeli air defences intercepting approximately 92%.

The attack tempo has not faltered despite the loss of four senior IRGC-affiliated figures in a single week: Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and Basij commander Gholamreza Soleimani were killed together in Tehran on 16 March . Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib was killed the following day . IRGC spokesman Brig. Gen. Ali Mohammad Naeini was killed on 19 March — minutes after publicly insisting Iran was still manufacturing missiles, contradicting US claims of 90% capacity destruction . The IRGC simultaneously manages the strait of Hormuz toll system, processing roughly 89 to 90 vessels over the first two weeks of March under a regime that requires cargo manifests, crew nationalities, and payments of up to $2 million per transit 1.

The IRGC's resilience reflects a command architecture built for exactly this scenario. The organisation was restructured after the January 2020 killing of Qasem Soleimani, distributing operational authority across regional commands and functional directorates precisely to avoid single-point-of-failure vulnerabilities. The corps controls its own intelligence, its own missile forces, its own naval arm, and — through the Khatam al-Anbiya construction headquarters — a parallel economic infrastructure worth tens of billions of dollars. It does not require a functioning Supreme Leader to operate daily; Jerusalem Post sources described the current power arrangement as one in which "the Revolutionary Guards are controlling him, not the other way around" 2, referring to Mojtaba Khamenei.

The US-Israeli campaign has now struck more than 8,000 targets and killed three members of The Supreme Leader's inner circle. The operational logic assumes that leadership elimination degrades an adversary's capacity to sustain operations and eventually forces a negotiated settlement. The IRGC's 70th wave is the counter-evidence: the organisation operates on institutional momentum, pre-delegated authority, and dispersed command nodes. The question this poses for Washington and Tel Aviv is whether the decapitation strategy has a threshold at which cumulative losses produce organisational paralysis — or whether the IRGC, like the Viet Cong's provincial structure or the Taliban's shura councils, is an institution whose distributed design means it absorbs leadership losses without proportional operational degradation.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Despite losing four top generals in a single week, Iran's Revolutionary Guards are still launching daily missile attacks and running a complex toll system on the world's most important oil shipping lane. This is not luck — it is how the IRGC was engineered. After the Iran-Iraq war, it distributed authority so that no single commander's death could halt operations. The organisation effectively functions on standing orders, operating continuously without requiring direction from the top.

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

The combination of sustained missile waves and Hormuz toll administration under leadership attrition indicates the IRGC has effectively separated tactical execution from strategic command. Mid-level commanders are executing standing orders without apex authorisation. This means decapitation targeting is producing symbolic rather than operational effects — and may be consuming limited precision-strike capacity while simultaneously strengthening the domestic narrative that the IRGC is indispensable to Iranian national survival.

Root Causes

The IRGC's resilience reflects its 45-year development as a parallel state — controlling construction firms, import monopolies, financial networks and media alongside military functions. This economic and institutional breadth means military decapitation does not touch the organisation's substrate. The IRGC is not a conventional military hierarchy vulnerable to leadership attrition; it is a state-within-a-state with distributed authority and pre-delegated operational chains that run independently of any supreme commander.

Escalation

The four-wave-per-day cadence — 66 to 70 waves in four days — is consistent with prior tempo, indicating no measurable operational degradation from leadership losses. The IRGC's simultaneous management of Hormuz toll collection and daily missile operations demonstrates sufficient middle-management depth to run complex parallel activities, a level of institutional capacity that decapitation strikes have not visibly degraded.

What could happen next?
  • Meaning

    Decapitation strategy is not degrading IRGC operational tempo; symbolic leadership kills are not producing measurable strategic effects on the organisation's output.

    Immediate · Assessed
  • Risk

    US and Israeli planners may continue consuming precision-strike capacity on senior IRGC figures while operational output — missile waves, toll collection — remains unchanged.

    Short term · Suggested
  • Consequence

    If the IRGC institutionalises Hormuz toll collection as a revenue mechanism, it acquires a long-term economic incentive to maintain selective closure regardless of any political settlement.

    Medium term · Suggested
  • Precedent

    The IRGC model — state-within-state with pre-delegated authority and commercial substrate — demonstrates a decapitation-resistant architecture that adversarial non-state and hybrid actors will study and replicate.

    Long term · Suggested
First Reported In

Update #45 · Ultimatum expires; Iran tolls Hormuz at $2m

Al Jazeera· 23 Mar 2026
Read original
Causes and effects
This Event
IRGC fires 70th wave, commanders falling
The IRGC's ability to sustain daily multi-front operations while simultaneously running a complex maritime toll system — despite the rapid-fire elimination of four senior figures — demonstrates an institutional command structure that does not depend on centralised leadership. This has direct implications for the US-Israeli decapitation strategy and for how long Iran can maintain offensive operations.
Different Perspectives
India (BRICS meeting host, grey-market beneficiary)
India (BRICS meeting host, grey-market beneficiary)
New Delhi hosted the BRICS foreign ministers' meeting on 14 May that Araghchi attended under the Minab168 designation, giving India a front-row seat to Iran's diplomatic positioning. India's state refiners have been absorbing discounted Iranian crude through grey-market routing since April; Brent at $109.30 means every barrel sourced outside the formal market generates a structural saving.
Hengaw / Kurdish human rights monitors
Hengaw / Kurdish human rights monitors
Hengaw's daily reports from Iran's Kurdish provinces remain the sole independent cross-check on Iran's judicial activity during the conflict. Two executions across Qom and Karaj Central prisons on 15 May and five Kurdish detentions on 15-16 May indicate the wartime judicial pipeline is operating independently of military tempo.
Pakistan (mediator and bilateral partner)
Pakistan (mediator and bilateral partner)
Islamabad spent its diplomatic capital as the US-Iran MOU carrier to secure LNG passage for two Qatari vessels through a bilateral Pakistan-Iran agreement, spending its mediation credit for direct economic gain. China's public endorsement of Pakistan's mediatory role on 13 May is the structural reward.
China and BRICS bloc
China and BRICS bloc
Beijing endorsed Pakistan's mediatory role on 13 May, one day after the BRICS foreign ministers' meeting in New Delhi. Chinese state banks are processing PGSA yuan toll payments; China has not commented on its vessels' continued Hormuz passage, but benefits structurally from a non-dollar toll system it did not design.
Iraq (bilateral passage partner)
Iraq (bilateral passage partner)
Baghdad negotiated a 2-million-barrel VLCC transit without paying PGSA yuan tolls, offering political alignment in lieu of cash. Iraq's position inside Iran's adjacent bloc makes it the natural first bilateral partner and a template for how Tehran structures passage deals with states that cannot afford Western coalition membership.
Bahrain and Qatar (Gulf signatories)
Bahrain and Qatar (Gulf signatories)
Both signed the Western coalition paper while hosting US Fifth Fleet and CENTCOM's Al Udeid base, respectively. Qatar occupies the sharpest contradiction: it is on coalition paper while simultaneously receiving LNG passage through the bilateral Iran-Pakistan track, a position Doha has tacitly accepted from both sides.