Jon B. Alterman
When Iranians took to the streets to celebrate the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on February 28, it was tempting to think that the hardest part of the current confrontation with Iran was over. Iran has been a wicked policy problem for the United States, its Middle Eastern allies, and the international community for decades, and Khamenei was more than merely the face of the problem. He was a bitter voice of opposition, a hard-liner who persistently undermined moderates, and in control of all of the most threatening elements of Iranian power: its nuclear program, its paramilitary forces, its proxy network, and the intelligence services that both terrorized Iranians and carried out acts of terror around the world.
The United States and Israel were able to use exquisite intelligence and powerful munitions not only to kill Khamenei at the outset of the war, but also to kill many of his most senior advisers. Decapitating the regime seems to offer a tidy way to “solve” a problem that has resisted solution for almost half a century, and it could unfold along several paths. The new leaders who arise could adopt a wholly different posture toward the world. They could be incompetent in implementing Khamenei’s strategy. Or they could decide that self-preservation requires them to be more pliable in the face of U.S. demands. It is not unreasonable to think that any of Khamenei’s successors would be an improvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment