Death in Iran

Iran has had two Supreme Leaders since the inception of the current theocracy in 1979: the Ayatollahs Khomeini and Khamenei, the latter of which is 85 and ailing. But on May 19th, a helicopter crash – a bad weather accident – took the lives of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian. Khamenei announced five days of national mourning and appointed Mohammad Mokhber, first vice president, as the new interim head of the executive branch. Under Iranian law, elections would be called within the next 50 days. Ali Bagheri-Kani, who has close family ties with Khamenei, previously led Iran’s delegation in nuclear talks with the West, has been appointed acting foreign minister. If anyone can tell you with clarity what will happen next, they have information even our highest intelligence agencies don’t know.

Ordinarily, this would have been a most unfortunate tragedy that could be quickly righted by the anticipated successor laws in Iran. But this was not an ordinary event. While no one expects a radical and short-term change in Iranian policy, and the United States has repeated that it has not altered its position on Iran and its regional surrogates (like Hamas, the Houthis, Hezbollah, etc.). But this is huge, unanticipated “change of the most important succession plan.” At 63, Raisi was set to govern Iran for the next two decades… as the probable Ayatollah successor as Supreme Leader to Khamenei. This is clearly the most powerful position in Iran, eclipsing all other authority in the land. Both men are pictured above.

Raisi’s credentials made him out as the hardest of the hardliners. He fought back as women attempted (protested) to shed their headscarves and opposed any notion of social modernization. His efforts kept Iran’s surrogates well-supplied with weapons, and with Khamenei’s blessing, he ordered the direct Iranian strike on Israel.

But as the May 20th Wall Street Journal notes, “[This] leadership transition amid the current turmoil in the Mideast is an additional challenge for Iran to navigate… Last week, senior U.S. and Iranian officials held talks in Oman about regional tensions and Iran’s nuclear program, according to people familiar with the meetings. It came after Iran directly attacked Israel for the first time, launching some 300 missiles and drones at the country. Most were intercepted by a U.S. and Israeli coalition in the region.” Talks, but how meaningful?

There’s another power base in this mix that few understand could use the current instability to seize power: the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), effectively Iran’s ideological militia. After all religious extremism with concomitant surrogate military action in many nations have produced horrible sanctions, shortages of food and other basics, and a general decline in the quality of life for most Iranians, would the Iranian people support such a radical regime change?

The IRGC is “a multi-service primary branch of the Iranian Armed Forces. It was officially established by Ruhollah Khomeini as a military branch in May 1979, in the aftermath of the Iranian Revolution. Whereas the Iranian Army protects the country's sovereignty in a traditional capacity, the IRGC's constitutional mandate is to ensure the integrity of the Islamic Republic. Most interpretations of this mandate assert that it entrusts the IRGC with preventing foreign interference in Iran, thwarting coups by the traditional military, and crushing ‘deviant movements’ that harm the ideological legacy of the Islamic Revolution.” Wikipedia.

Could the IRGC accomplish what the United States has tried and failed to do in 45 years of massive efforts: effect a regime change in Iran? And would that regime change, if implemented, create a more open and liberal Iran or a continuation of the hellish Putin-supporting regional disruptor? We know where Iran’s surrogates stand on this issue.

“Pro-Iranian militias were quick to weigh in on the deaths, with Iran’s most powerful regional proxy, Hezbollah, praising Raisi in religious terms, calling him ‘a big brother, a strong supporter and a staunch defender of our issues and the nation’s issues.’… Hamas, which has received money and weapons from Iran, praised Raisi and the other officials for their support, which included Iranian praise of the terrorist group’s attack on Israel in October, which Israel said claimed nearly 1,200 lives… ‘We express our shared feelings of sadness and pain with the brotherly Iranian people, and our complete solidarity with the Islamic Republic of Iran, in this painful and gravely afflicted incident, which claimed the lives of a group of the best Iranian leaders,’ the group said.

“Israel didn’t comment on the deaths. Iran had blamed Israel for the 2019 killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, widely regarded as the father of Iran’s nuclear-weapons program. Israel neither confirmed nor denied the allegation.

“The U.S., the EU, NATO and France’s Foreign Ministry all sent condolences to the victims of the crash and their families. During a nuclear conference, Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, held a moment of silence for what he called the ‘tragic news.’

“‘The United States expresses its official condolences for the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian, and other members of their delegation,’ State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said in a statement. ‘As Iran selects a new president, we reaffirm our support for the Iranian people and their struggle for human rights and fundamental freedoms.’” WSJ. But what would the Shiite leadership do if the Revolutionary Guards did not support a continuation of Iran’s existing religious leadership? What if the new Supreme Leader were designated by the Guard? Khamenei’s son is touted as a possible, but then the theocracy that lambasted the hereditary monarchy it replaced would devolving into hypocrisy on steroids.

The cloud of backroom familial and religious politics in Iran is opaque, to put it mildly. It is an extreme inner circle that is hard for outsiders to penetrate no matter how practiced and sophisticated. But this transition could be used to benefit both Iran and its people. It would allow even the United States to open new diplomatic door to a recalcitrant enemy that has defied our every moved to purge that leadership from the planet. An excuse? An opportunity? Or an extension of the darkness that has defined a bloody 45 years?

I’m Peter Dekom, but adept diplomats just might produce a mutually beneficial détente… or dig in for the next explosive and extended battle.