Now that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been sworn in as the president of Iran for a second term following controversial election results and bloody street protests, which polarized the people and the ruling establishment, one would expect a period of calm and reconciliation to kick in. Not exactly! The June elections have exposed the establishment’s soft underbelly to local opposition and foreign opponents.

Until the elections Iran appeared imperious; holding winning cards in Iraq, Lebanon, the Gulf and its critical nuclear energy program. Internally, the conservative institution of Wilayat Al Faqih (the authority of the jurist) appeared paramount. The alliance between supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad was unbreakable.

The so-called reformers, including former President Mohammad Khatami, opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi and Chairman of the Assembly of Experts Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani make a colorful mix. They do not agree on all issues and it would be presumptuous to think that a united opposition front exists in Iran today.

What the elections revealed though is that a power struggle was ongoing within the ruling clerical establishment between hard-liners and moderates. But such struggle is not new to the country.

Khatami’s election in 1997, having won 70 percent of the votes, was a watershed in the republic’s history. He was relatively unknown, a scholar who ran on a platform of reform and liberalization. Before him Rafsanjani had served two terms as president and was hoping to win a third before being defeated in the second round by Ahmadinejad in 2005.

But what makes this post-election phase delicate is the fact that for the first time in the country’s history the power of the supreme leader is being challenged from within. Last week a letter was sent to Rafsanjani as head of the Assembly of Experts challenging Khamenei’s fitness to rule as the top spiritual and religious leader. The assembly has the authority to name and remove holders of this highest position in the Iranian hierarchy.

Not that Rafsanjani will accommodate the opposition’s request, but the fact that Khamenei’s authority is being challenged in this “constitutional” manner means that the rift within the ruling establishment is serious and deep. It points to a growing and vociferous objection to the policies of both the government and the supreme leader.

IRAN’S growing influence in regional politics is a proven fact. President Ahmadinejad’s head-on approach has so far scored him big points in Iraq and in the contentious issue of the country’s nuclear program. But the government’s domestic record has been dismal, marked by economic stagnation, rising unemployment and international isolation. The Iranian people, over half of which are youth, are looking for opportunity and a chance to become involved in charting their own future.

The reformists within the establishment have divergent views on many issues, but they all agree that Iran needs to adopt a new course in international relations, one that opens up to the West and establishes new rules of diplomatic engagement. The younger Iranians like that approach: They want to be accepted by others and they want their country’s social, economic and political realties to change to the better.

Since the Iranian revolution in 1979 the country has been going through a roller-coaster ride; a costly war of attrition with Iraq in 1980s, a longstanding confrontation with the US and a growing suspicion of its intentions by its Gulf neighbors. Iran has failed to gain acceptance as a normal state and while this is not entirely its fault, the presidency of Ahmadinejad has not helped improve relations with the outside world.

Iran is still an international target and the conservative elements within believe that America and Israel are conspiring to abort the revolution and destroy its achievements. But a more moderate flank also believes that Iran can preserve such achievements without projecting itself as a rogue state.

Not everyone agrees with the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad perception of a perpetual battle with America. And not all subscribe to notions that Iran must keep itself involved in regional conflicts in Lebanon, Iraq and elsewhere.

This internal struggle is now more visible than ever before. Internally it will continue to evolve simply because more Iranians want things to change in their country.

But externally, America and other players are looking for ways to manipulate this struggle to serve their own goals. Ironically any association with America will only help the cause of the conservatives and derail the quest of the reformists.

President Ahmadinejad will soon realize that his second term in office will be nothing like the first one. He remains popular, a man of the people, and he will find ways to bolster his authority. But his alliance with the supreme leader will rein him in.

It would be wrong to believe that Iran is on the verge of a cataclysmic change. The establishment’s response to street protests is indicative of the tenacity of the conservative elements. They are still in charge and will be for some time.

— Osama Al Sharif is a veteran journalist and commentator based in Jordan.