The analyses and opinion articles about the results of the presidential elections in Iran, where President Hassan Rouhani won a second term, have suggested that this victory reveals a deep struggle between the Revolution and the State in Iran.

There are two important points about the results of the Iranian elections; the turnout on the one hand, and indications of this turnout on the other hand. The interpretation of this turnout is subject to multiple views.

There is a struggle between the hardliners and the less radical clerics (reformists) in Iran. This can explain the high turnout of voters in the last elections, which amounted to about 60% according to official statistics.

To state that there is a conflict between the Revolution and the State needs a deep analysis. The Iranian State, which has emerged since the revolution of Khomeini in 1979, is dependent and loyal to the mullahs, and there is no other parallel State in Iran. It is futile to say that the pre-Revolution Iranian State or the State of ShahenShah is somehow trying to prove its existence.

They say a conflict is there between the State and the Revolution, and I say "What State?" After four decades, the Iranian Revolution is deeply rooted in all governmental institutions, which makes the issue of its conflict with the State seem strange.

Iran's revolutionary ideology is different from that of former communist States, and it is difficult to find common ground between Iran and other historical revolutionary models.

Rouhani is a cleric of the degree of Hojjat al-Islam, he is loyal to the Iranian regime and Revolution. The disagreement between the man and the leaders of the Revolutionary Guard is tactical rather than strategic. The published statements and criticisms reflect the divergence of plans to achieve Iran's revolutionary goals.

The political difference in Iran is an opportunity for the mullahs to implement the role-playing strategy in dealing with the countries of the world.

The Revolutionary Guard sometimes serves the mullahs when its extremist leaders launch statements against other countries - often to convey certain messages and threaten these countries. Politicians often emerge to express softer positions than what has been expressed by the leaders of the Revolutionary Guard.

This performance has been played many times over the past years. We often find that President Rouhani speaks of an alleged good relationship with the GCC countries, the need to achieve regional security and stability and non-interference in the affairs of other countries, while this is preceded by statements claiming the ownership of entire States. We also find some mullahs who are proud to occupy four Arab capitals, without any official Iranian statements that correct these political excesses and declare there is an Iranian State and not a Revolution. There are groups and factions that hold the same ideological stance, while they vary according to their interests, characters and functions.

The political game in Iran is at the hands of the Supreme Leader, who represents the supreme authority in the hierarchy of the Iranian theocratic regime. The Leader sometimes unleashes the voice of militancy and at other times gives the opportunity to moderates. The difference here is determined according to the interest of the revolutionary system and its future, not the interests of this or that group.

Rouhani's victory is a message aimed at easing regional and international pressure on the Iranian regime. If the Leader did not want Rouhani in a second term, he would not hesitate to rig this election as he did with Ahmadinejad. Any other statements are just regime propaganda about the democracy in Iran.

The Leader has given the green light to the nuclear agreement with the West. He later criticized this agreement, giving the impression to some that it was against his will. The leader was trying to convince the West of his position to press for further gains and full implementation of the terms of this agreement. Observers of Iranian affairs are fully aware that President Rouhani did not sign this agreement against the Leader's will.

We must understand the relations within the Iranian regime in order to understand what is going on behind the scenes and what is issued by the mullahs on various occasions.

Since 1979, Iran has not reached the stage of State and is still captive of the idea of the Revolution. The research and discussions on the two concepts have disappeared for years. After things have been stabilized in favour of the Revolution, there are no signs of entering the phase of State rule.