logo
Israel has threatened to kill Iran's supreme leader. Here's what could come next

Israel has threatened to kill Iran's supreme leader. Here's what could come next

CNN4 hours ago

As US President Donald Trump weighs joining Israel's assault on Iran, questions are mounting over whether such an intervention could trigger regime change in Tehran – an outcome that risks splintering the country and sending shockwaves across the region.
Home to long-simmering separatist movements that have vied for power and independence, Iran could face internal fragmentation and chaos if its government falls, experts warn.
After reportedly rejecting an Israeli plan to kill Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Trump stated this week that Iran's Supreme Leader is an 'easy target.'
'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Tuesday. 'He is an easy target but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.'
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not ruled out targeting Khamenei either, saying that the death of the Supreme Leader is 'not going to escalate the conflict, it's going to end the conflict.'
On Thursday, Defense Minister Israel Katz went further, declaring that Khamenei cannot be allowed to 'continue to exist' after an Iranian missile struck a hospital in Israel.
Iran is a nation of more than 90 million people and home one of the world's oldest continuous civilizations. Its borders have remained more or less stable for about 100 years. The Islamic Republic has managed to preserve those frontiers despite a diverse population of ethnic and religious groups, many of whom have sought autonomy at various points.
But the comments from Israeli and US officials have prompted speculation over what Iran might look like if Khamenei is killed – with experts warning that the country could face a range of scenarios, including regime collapse or even civil war.
The 86-year-old cleric has ruled Iran for more than 35 years as its highest authority, rising to power a decade after the 1979 Islamic Revolution overthrew a US-backed monarch.
Over the years, he consolidated power and ruled with an iron grip under strict Islamic law. He crushed wave after wave of protests demanding social freedoms – each with increasing ferocity – and expanded Iran's reach far beyond its borders through a network of proxy militias.
With his fate in question, attention is turning to who might succeed him, and how that uncertainty could unleash greater unrest.
The Supreme Leader is elected by the 88-member Assembly of Experts for life and doesn't officially name a successor. It is unclear who might replace Khamenei, but that process may take place as separatist groups who have long resented the Islamic Republic seek to take advantage of what they may see as an opportunity.
Israel has already killed several of Iran's key military figures, and experts say that the regime is now at its weakest.
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute in Washington, DC, said that regime change would require Israel or the United States having a figure in mind to replace Khamenei and send troops to the country.
The figure Israel is likely to favor is Reza Pahlavi, the US-based son of the deposed Iranian monarch who was ousted in 1979. Pahlavi has voiced support for Israel's actions, drawing praise from some in the Iranian diaspora and accusations of betrayal from many others.
'Soon in Tehran,' Israeli Minister of Diaspora Affairs Amichai Chikli posted on X on Friday, along with a picture of himself shaking hands with a smiling Pahlavi. Pahlavi told BBC News on Sunday that Israel's conflict with Iran was an opportunity to bring down the Iranian regime.
If the Supreme Leader is killed and the Guardian Council delays naming a successor, the risk of instability could grow, experts say.
A possible outcome of Khamenei's potential killing is total regime collapse, Parsi said.
'Regime collapse is just to collapse the state, and let the chaos that ensues fester,' Parsi told CNN.
Several scenarios could ensue if the Iranian regime falls, none of which is expected to be to the liking of the US or neighboring states, experts said.
Hamed Mousavi, associate professor of International Relations at the University of Tehran, warned that military intervention 'rarely leads to democratization.'
'Look at the experience of Iraq and Afghanistan… Both countries were unstable for many years,' Mousavi told CNN, adding that Iran is 'even more complicated' than those nations.
One outcome could be that other elements in the Iranian military assume power. They are unlikely to seek diplomatic routes with Israel or the US, but could take a more hawkish approach that sees possession of a nuclear bomb as the only deterrent to more attacks, Parsi said.
Military factions that could take over are 'not going to be the type of regime that the US may have had in mind,' Parsi said.
Another possible scenario is descent into chaos, as Iran's multiple ethnic groups vie for power.
Iran has a diverse population, including Persians, Azeris, Arabs, Baloch and Kurds. Under Khamenei's decades-long rule, the Islamic Republic largely managed to contain civil and ethnic unrest, despite the mistreatment faced by some groups.
Minorities faced discrimination in 'their access to education, employment, adequate housing and political office,' according to Amnesty International last year. 'Continued underinvestment in regions populated by ethnic minorities exacerbated poverty and marginalization,' it said.
Azeris make up around 16% of Iran's overall population, according to Minority Rights Group. The Shiite group is the largest and most well-integrated minority in the Islamic Republic but has nonetheless faced inequity.
Arabs constitute up to 4 million people, and they have also been subjected to marginalization over the years.
A group of tribes speaking the Balochi language, the Baloch people make up nearly 5 million of Iran's population. The predominantly Sunni group extends into neighboring Pakistan and Afghanistan, raising the possibility of separatist conflict spilling over the borders.
The 'Army of Justice' organization, a Baloch Sunni militant group, has shown support for Israel's strikes on Iran, saying in a statement: 'It is clear that the current attack is not on Iran, but on the Velayat-e-Faqih (ruling) regime , it is God's will that the ground has been prepared for us, the people of Iran, to make the best use of this vacuum.'
Kurds make up some 10% of Iran's population and are mostly settled along the borders with Iraq and Turkey. They have been subject to 'deep-rooted discrimination,' Amnesty said.
The Kurdistan Freedom Party, a nationalist and separatist militant group in Iran, published a statement backing Israel's strikes, saying it supports 'the process of destroying Iran's military and security capabilities.'
A Kurdish rebellion in Iran would also be a major concern for neighboring Iraq and Turkey, both of which have large Kurdish minorities that have sought independence.
Another exiled group that has garnered support from US conservatives is the Mujahadin-e Khalq (MeK), a shadowy dissident group that was once a US-designated terrorist organization but today counts prominent anti-Iran politicians as key allies. Iran accuses it of terrorism, saying it carried out a series of attacks in the 1980s. The MeK denies those charges.
It is one of the best-organized opposition groups confronting the Islamic Republic, but it has little support among Iranians, largely due to its violent past and for having supported Iraqi President Saddam Hussein during his almost decade-long war with Iran.
If Iran's regime falls, 'there would be support for ethnic separatist groups by the Israelis, and perhaps the US,' Parsi said. This would lead to a situation where remnants of the state are going to be consumed with fighting separatists.
Fatemeh Haghighatjoo, executive director of the Nonviolent Initiative for Democracy and a former Iranian lawmaker who opposes the current regime, expressed fears that Iran may descend into civil conflict if the current rule falls.
'I would like to get rid of this regime. I am the opposition,' she told CNN's Becky Anderson. 'My main concern is… I see the signs (of) civil war.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘It was a bloodbath': Cruz, Carlson feud offers preview of 2028
‘It was a bloodbath': Cruz, Carlson feud offers preview of 2028

Politico

time5 minutes ago

  • Politico

‘It was a bloodbath': Cruz, Carlson feud offers preview of 2028

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and conservative media personality Tucker Carlson doubled down on their feud over U.S. involvement in the escalating war between Israel and Iran, with each releasing their own podcasts on Friday following up on the fiery debate earlier this week. The ongoing war of words between the two high-profile conservative thought leaders — both of whom have left the door open to a possible 2028 presidential run — could offer a glimpse at what the first Republican presidential primary of the post-Donald Trump era might look like. 'It was a bloodbath,' Cruz said of his appearance on Carlson's podcast on an episode of 'Verdict with Ted Cruz,' the show he hosts. 'The two of us, frankly, beat the living daylights out of each other for two hours straight.' Carlson and Cruz's contentious conversation — in which both men repeatedly shouted at each other and traded personal insults — revealed fissures on the right between pro-Israel Republicans urging the White House to launch an attack on Iran and conservative isolationists who hope the president will uphold his commitment to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. On Friday, both insisted on their respective podcasts that the other was leading the U.S. down the wrong path. Carlson said Cruz's ominous warnings of Iran's nuclear capabilities were part of an effort to 'justify American involvement in regime change.' '[Carlson] has gotten to a place of hardcore isolationism that I think is really dangerous,' Cruz said on his podcast. Cruz and Carlson's disagreement over the U.S.' policy over the escalating conflict in the Middle East will play out in the coming days. Trump told reporters in New Jersey on Friday he's taking 'a period of time' to decide whether to strike Iran, and that the self-imposed two-week timeframe to launch a strike the White House announced on Thursday would be the 'maximum.' But the two men may also find themselves in competing lanes of the 2028 Republican presidential primary, where the intraparty debate between war hawks and isolationists could be a fault line for Republican primary voters. Carlson said he would consider running for president in 2028 in an episode of his podcast last year, while conceding in the same breath, 'I don't think I'd be very good at it.' 'I would do whatever I could to help,' he told fellow conservative podcast host Patrick Bet-David. 'I want to be helpful.' Cruz, who ran for president against Trump in a bitterly-contested 2016 primary that was punctuated with personal attacks, has not closed the door on a 2028 presidential run. When asked about the possibility of running in 2028 by POLITICO in April, Cruz said he's focused on delivering legislative victories for Republicans — even as he uses his new post heading the Senate Commerce Committee to put his stamp on the direction of the party. Perhaps further forecasting another dynamic of the 2028 primary, Trump refused to show a preference for Carlson or Cruz's position, instead offering praise to both men when asked about the interview. 'Tucker is a nice guy. He called and apologized the other day, because he thought he said things that were a little bit too strong, and I appreciated that,' Trump told reporters on Thursday. 'And Ted Cruz is a nice guy. He's been with me for a long time.'

Trump says Harvard agreement on international students may be announced within a week
Trump says Harvard agreement on international students may be announced within a week

Fox News

time8 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Trump says Harvard agreement on international students may be announced within a week

President Donald Trump on Friday said a deal with Harvard University, related to its policies surrounding international students, may be announced within a week. "Many people have been asking what is going on with Harvard University and their largescale improprieties that we have been addressing, looking for a solution," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "We have been working closely with Harvard, and it is very possible that a Deal will be announced over the next week or so." The president noted the university "acted extremely appropriately" during negotiations, applauding leadership's apparent commitment to do "what is right." "If a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be "mindbogglingly" HISTORIC, and very good for our Country," Trump wrote. The announcement came as Federal Judge Allison Burroughs on Friday issued a preliminary injunction, allowing Harvard University to continue hosting international students, despite a Trump executive order. It is a major legal victory for the Ivy League school, which has been fighting a variety of restrictions imposed by the administration. The temporary court order stays in effect until the case is fully decided on the merits. Harvard University sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), challenging the revocation of Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP). Without the program, current and future international students would be barred from attending the university. Harvard alleged the revocation was the culmination of a retaliatory campaign by the Trump administration on academic freedom at Harvard. Attorneys argued the policy is an infringement of the university's Due Process and First Amendment rights, in particular Harvard's constitutional right to be free of retaliatory action for protected speech, as well as violating the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The order states the revocation cannot be used to negatively affect visa applications, deny entry to the U.S., or be used as a reason to claim a visa holder has lost their non-immigrant status. Harvard University did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Iran rulers' playing for time is one big reason Trump shouldn't give them any
Iran rulers' playing for time is one big reason Trump shouldn't give them any

New York Post

time8 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Iran rulers' playing for time is one big reason Trump shouldn't give them any

Hmm: Hours after the world learned that President Donald Trump would take 'up to two weeks' to decide whether to send in US warplanes to drop bunker-busters on Fordow, Tehran's last main nuclear site, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi vomited up some fresh bluster. That makes it obvious the regime intends to just string this out for as long as possible, hoping that Europe and/or Congress will somehow get Trump to tell Israel to stop its campaign. Which means the president needs to pay even more heed to the risks of holding off on a decisive intervention. That includes not just the possible loss of public support that's built over the last week, but the chance that some unforeseen development will raise the stakes beyond a straightforward strike on a single nuke site. To be clear, Trump can still hope for a negotiated end to Iran's nuclear program, but Araqchi's ploy reeks of the same bogus game that Hamas has been playing ever since the end of the Gaza ceasefire the prez imposed as he was taking office. A game the Iranian was plainly pushing as he met Friday in Geneva with a passel of European diplos trying to 'de-escalate' the conflict. Meanwhile, some in Congress are maneuvering to tie Trump's hands, insisting he shouldn't act without votes in the House and Sente explicitly authorizing any strikes — a precedent that would likely permanently limit not just this president, but all future holders of the Oval Office. For what it's worth, Trump plainly isn't holding off only because the ayatollah might see reason: He's also considering the full impact of a US strike, and seeing what else may develop. For example: Maybe Israel can take out Fordow without our help, whether with repeated waves of smaller bombs or (conceivably) the most ambitious commando raid ever. He's reportedly also worried about Iran descending into total chaos, as Libya did after President Barack Obama arrogantly decided he could show the world how 'regime change' should be done. Yet that raises another angle that argues against Trump taking his time: Israel's ongoing total humiliation of the Islamic Republic's rulers (and its killing of many of them) could trigger a Libya-style 'regime collapse' even without a Fordow takeout. So a fast elimination of all Tehran's nuclear assets, allowing Israel to stand down, is arguably the best hope for the region to stabilize. Khamenei and his advisers care only about protecting their own power, so they'll use every hour Trump gives them searching for some way out of the trap they put themselves in by ignoring Trump's last deadline. Trump has to look at the bigger picture, including the risks (seen and unseen) of letting Tehran keep playing games.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store