Australia and the World Past and Present

One key question has been who will replace Ayatollah Ali Khamenei?

It has been reported that his son, Mojtaba, will be the next Supreme Leader. It has also been reported that he has been wounded, perhaps critically. At this time, the exact nature of his injuries are not fully known.

The tricky thing about regime change is that it is inherently unpredictable. You can remove a leader, but you can’t guarantee what will happen afterwards. Will the leader replaced by someone with the same worldview? Will they be replaced by someone worse? Will the successor be even more vehemently opposed to America and Israel?

According to many reports, Mojtaba is said to be even more hardline than his father. So, if the American aim was to effect regime change and install a more sympathetic leader, at this point in time it seems to have failed.

Putting your hand up to become a leader in Iran would be a scary proposition.

Look at what happened to the last Ayatollah.

A new leader immediately becomes a target.

Let’s consider more fully the difficulties of regime change. Take some recent real-world examples.

On 11 September 2001, the US suffered attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

By the following month, US forces were in Afghanistan, pursuing Al-Qaeda.

US forces pulled out of Afghanistan on 30 August 2021 and that same month, the Taliban were back in power in Kabul.

The US also went into Iraq in 2003, on the pretext of removing weapons of mass destruction and to remove Saddam Hussein.

There was regime change in Iraq. The fall of Saddam Hussein led to a power vacuum in Iraq. This led to the emergence Islamic State, a particularly brutal outfit.

Arguably, there was more instability and brutality after Saddam than when he was in power.

And look at Libya. The situation there was a little different because it was linked to the Arab Spring. Unlike Egypt and Tunisia, where the regimes were toppled by people power from within, Gaddafi cracked down on his people and was not immediately removed.

In the Libyan case, there was limited international Intervention. The United Nations authorised a no-fly zone and NATO conducted airstrikes against Gaddafi’s forces, supporting rebels and targeting military assets.

By August 2011, rebels had taken control of key cities, including Gaddafi’s stronghold in Sirte. On 20 October 2011, Gaddafi was captured and killed by rebel fighters and his rule was at an end.

Gaddafi’s removal led to political fragmentation and ongoing instability in Libya, as rival militias and governments competed for power.

Back to Iran. The Iranian regime has deep tentacles. It has been building capacity over 4 decades. And it has prepared itself for conflict with Israel and the United States.

It is often the case that when one layer of leaders is removed, other people step up to take their place.

Individuals come and go. Another issue are the values and ideas that circulate and sustain the regime. Regimes have a way of reproducing subordinates in the same mould as current leaders.

Still, many repressive regimes appear very strong right up until the moment they crumble. Pressure slowly builds to a breaking point and then there is one more event that pushes the whole system over the edge.

At the present time, the Iranian regime is still in place.

Time will tell whether there will be regime change, status quo ante bellum or whether an even more hardline regime will emerge.