War with Iran

On Saturday, the US and Israel mounted full-scale military strikes on Iran. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and dozens of his top military leaders were killed; a meeting of top staff may have been the catalyst for the timing of the strikes.

The response has been all over the map. Democrats focused on the lack of Congressional approval and the absence of a plan. Many people from every party called up Trump’s 2024 campaign language of avoiding costly new wars while the American people have other concerns. There was some evidence that Iran was exerting itself to try to agree to American conditions before the strikes began.

I’ll confess to having a range of reactions myself.

The Khamanei regime brutally killed tens of thousands of its own citizens in the last several months in response to widspread protests. I wrote recently that I hoped that America did everything in its power to topple the regime, which has been the source of myriad terrible actions for decades, including plotting the killing of dissidents that lived in America, one of whom I interviewed.

The protests in Iran were fueled by inflation and impoverishment; the currency lost 80% of its value this year alone and water rationing and power outages are the norm. The regime also savagely oppresses girls and women. Internationally, Iran sponsored terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

“There’s no world in which we’re better off with Khamanei in it,” is the way analyst Ian Bremmer put it. I agree. Iran’s nuclear aspirations are a thing of the past. That is also great news for the world.

“Take over your government,” Trump is now urging the people of Iran. “It will be yours to take.” This is going to be very difficult. The people of Iran are essentially unarmed. Tens of thousands of protesters, some of whom would have been potential leaders, have already been killed. There remains a well-developed underground network of Iranians who despise the current government and have been fueling the resistance; this network has managed to maintain communication even while evading constant surveillance. But the remaining leaders of the Islamic Republic will have their own survival at stake and are experienced now at suppressing internal efforts to oust them.

There is also Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Shah who was removed back in 1979. Reza doesn’t have a ton of relationships within Iran given that he hasn’t been there for decades, but he will be the face of the dissidents abroad who are desperate to move on from the Islamic Republic.

Still, one Iranian who is celebrating Khamanei’s death said, “We have felt entirely alone. Now we know that we are not.”

This military action has been an enormous gamble, and some of the costs are already real. Hundreds of innocent civilians and at least 3 U.S. soldiers have died in the conflict. Iran’s retaliation has included attacks in the region on completely unaffiliated actors in addition to U.S. and Israeli bases.

The major questions lie ahead: How long will the strikes continue? Does the conflict spread? Who will become the new leader of the Islamic Republic, and what stance will they take? What is the follow through? Early signs are that new Iranian leadership has already reached out to Trump and wants to negotiate a cessation of conflict even while signaling escalation in the region. The likely scenario is that Khamanei gets replaced by someone within the Islamic Republic senior ranks who is younger and of similar bent. One Iranian compared the current regime to a hydra; if you cut off one head another like it will appear.

Whether the strikes result in something more positive remains to be seen. But an evil dictator who led the killing and starvation of his own people and sponsored terrorist organizations is dead. The Iranian people have at least some chance for a better way of life, one that didn’t exist before. Some hope is better than none.