According to the announcer on Iranian state television who broke down while breaking the news, the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was many things.
Those included “leader and Imam of the Muslims… on the path of upholding the exaltation of the sacred sanctuary of the Islamic Republic of Iran”, who had “drank the sweet, pure draught of martyrdom and joined the Supreme Heavenly Kingdom”.
To Donald Trump he was simply, “one of the most evil people in history”. Either way, it is fair to say the former supreme leader will not be universally mourned, including in Iran itself.
More than ever, it is difficult to know for sure what is happening in Iran. But there are many reports of jubilation at his passing, and the reaction of the Iranian diaspora has been, if anything, still more euphoric.
For the four decades of his rule, Khamenei presided over the murder and torture of his own people, the dehumanisation of women, state-sponsored terrorism abroad, hostage-taking, developing weapons of mass destruction, and he actively supported Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression in Ukraine, notably with deadly drone technology. His assassination was contrary to international law, but this theocratic monster should be nobody’s pin-up boy for human rights.
With the death by bombing of other senior members of the Iranian leadership, the regime has been at least partially decapitated. Few could have imagined this even a few years ago, when Iran, its militant affiliates and superpower allies, China and Russia, seemed a fearsome axis of autocracy. American and Israeli assaults last summer disposed of that notion comprehensively.
Iran faced this fresh onslaught with its stocks of munitions depleted, its defences disabled, its partners among Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels weakened, Russia preoccupied and China passive. To Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Trump, both increasingly unpopular at home, Iran was a sitting duck.
An optimistic reading of events says what happens next will mirror President Trump’s playbook in Venezuela. The existing dictator will eventually be replaced by someone (or some group) more amenable to American and Israeli demands. The nuclear weapons programme, such as it is, will be renounced, and Iran will agree to limit the range of its ballistic missiles, presumably well short of Israeli territory.
That would, however, leave the apparatus and repressive methods of the Islamic Republic intact. It would not necessarily make the Iranian people more free, as Mr Trump suggests. As in Venezuela, it is quite possible that Washington will quietly drop such talk if some ayatollah or general emerges that Mr Trump thinks he can make a deal with. Mr Trump has never had any intention of repeating the errors made by George W Bush by putting US troops on the ground.
The more gloomy, indeed catastrophic, future is one where Iran does follow the examples of Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Syria after Western intervention – and collapses. It would not be a surprise if order in Iran were to break down, and fighting broke out between armed rival factions and ethnic minority groups who seek independence or separation from Iran.
Overlaid by the historic Shia-Sunni schism, Iran’s neighbours, such as Saudi Arabia, as well as America, Israel and Russia could be drawn into backing their own sponsored forces in order to gain influence or control over the “new Iran”. Such a situation, evolving into a multi-faceted civil war, would turn what is still a regional superpower and major oil supplier into a failed state.
The end result could conceivably be even worse for the security of Israel and the United States than what was, until recently, a cruel and malign but stable regime. It would be an especially tragic outcome given that the talks with the US in Oman were making good progress.
One outcome that does not look imminent is that Iran is transformed into a plural, secular, liberal democracy with rights and freedoms for all. No clear alternative leader has emerged in the way that the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini did during the revolution of 1978-79, when the then Shah fell. In a strange reversal of historic roles, the Shah’s son, the exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi, presently living in America, has volunteered to become a constitutional monarch in a democratic Iran. He may lack the necessary support for his neat idea of a bloodless counter-revolution to unfold.
The inconvenient truth is that the Islamic Republic still commands loyalty in sections of the Iranian population. It has firm control over internal security, and may prove as ruthless as ever. President Trump says that he is coming to the aid of the Iranian people, but they have heard that before – in recent weeks – and thousands of protesters died when their January demonstrations were brutally put down. Indeed, the US carried on negotiating with “evil” tyrants in Tehran, ordering the killings.
The sufferings of the Iranian people will continue and intensify, but for how long and with what outcome is entirely unclear. If Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu do know what is supposed to happen next, they’re not telling. That rather suggests there is no plan for what happens in Iran “the day after” – except more of the “bad things” the American president threatened.
