RSS
Does America Have a Plan Once Iran’s Supreme Leader Dies?
Since 1989, the unwavering grip of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has cast a long shadow over the Middle East, surviving the terms of six US presidents.
This period has been characterized by a strategic game of political chess, with Iran often playing a destabilizing role in the region. US presidents, CIA directors, and the broader US intelligence community have kept a diligent watch over Iran’s maneuvers. The 1979 revolution, which fundamentally transformed the societal and political landscape of Iran, marked the beginning of an era that the White House has monitored with acute vigilance, particularly the actions and evil intentions of Tehran’s mullah regime.
In the ever-shifting sands of US politics, marked by bipartisan candidates and fluctuating party influences, the question of which party will lead the nation next remains open. Amidst this uncertainty, Iran’s strategic posture and internal dynamics consistently emerge as points of contention and discussion among both Democrats and Republicans. Democratic presidents such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden have sought engagement strategies with Tehran’s clerical leadership, aiming to temper Iran’s regional ambitions through diplomacy and dialogue. However, these efforts have often been met with limited success, mired by complex geopolitical realities and Iran’s intricate internal politics.
In contrast, Republican presidents have typically favored a more hard-line approach, symbolizing a show of strength and resolve. Yet, despite their tougher stance, the idea of directly instigating regime change in Iran has remained a complex issue, often sidestepped in Washington D.C.’s political discussions. This hesitance reflects the complexities and potential repercussions of altering Iran’s power structure, a task fraught with unpredictable outcomes.
Throughout this era, spanning over three decades, all six US presidents have closely observed the significant nationwide anti-regime protests in Iran, indicative of widespread public dissent against Khamenei’s authoritarian rule. This sustained observation underscores the geopolitical significance of Iran in US foreign policy. Meanwhile, the American democratic process has seen six presidents come and go, each elected through the people’s mandate — a stark contrast to the narrative in Iran, where Khamenei has wielded power under the guise of divine right, unchallenged and unyielding.
The impending post-Khamenei era in Iran teeters on the brink of uncertainty. The absence of a clear and widely accepted successor poses a significant challenge. The proposition of installing Mojtaba Khamenei, Khamenei’s son, or Ebrahim Raisi is seen by many as an outright affront to the Iranian public, reminiscent of dynastic successions in Islamic history. Such a move could precipitate the further unraveling of Iranian society, already seething with deep-rooted animosity towards the Mullah regime.
Since the Islamic Marxist revolt in 1979, Iran has undergone a transformation marked by increasing corruption and societal decay. The once revered notion of religion has been co-opted as a tool for amassing wealth and consolidating power. This period has been punctuated by heinous crimes committed in the name of preserving power. The Islamic caliphate’s history is a testament to the continuous struggle for power and dominance, often marred by violence and internal purges.
The current Shia mullah’s regime in Iran reflects aspects of the historical Islamic caliphates, spanning a 1,400-year legacy, with Khomeini’s movement marking the beginning of a new era of authoritarianism. The destructive ideology of Khomeinism, with its roots in savagery and criminality, ascended to power through manipulation rather than democratic means. Since 1979, Iran has been governed by a regime where the Supreme Leader interferes in all state affairs, placing himself above the law. The concept of Wilayat al-Faqih, central to this governance model, lacks any genuine legal or moral foundation.
Iran today stands precariously at the brink of social unrest and potential upheaval. The government’s response to dissent has been characterized by brutal suppression, relying on religious authority and force to maintain control. The regime’s legitimacy is increasingly questioned, with social media playing a pivotal role in exposing its fragilities.
As we contemplate the future, the question of whether the Islamic Republic will collapse during Khamenei’s lifetime looms large. The current level of suppression, coupled with disorganized opposition and remnants of the 1979 revolt, makes such an outcome uncertain. None of them are serious for the White House. Yet, upon Khamenei’s death, the Iranian populace might become uncontrollable, driven by pent-up frustration, and a lack of respect for the regime. Is there any plan in Washington?
During Khamenei’s eventual funeral ceremonies, the government is likely to engage in extensive propaganda and displays of power, focusing on introducing the third caliph. However, the fear of a public uprising looms large. Iran’s internal situation is catastrophic, resembling a nation plundered and awaiting an imminent economic tsunami. The government flounders, devoid of competence and direction.
This critical period may represent a turning point in Iran’s contemporary history. Yet, the Iranian opposition, fragmented and lacking a unified vision, is ill-prepared to offer a viable alternative. Despite this, figures like Prince Reza Pahlavi hold significant sway, particularly among younger generations, owing to the enduring credibility of the Pahlavi name in Iran’s modern history. However, there appears to be no inclination from the White House to engage with him.
In closing, Iran stands at a crossroads, with its people holding the key to any substantial change. The unfolding narrative of succession and the potential downfall of the Mullahs’ Republic pose profound questions about Iran’s future and its impact on global politics. The coming months may shed more light on the potential paths Iran may take, in a landscape rife with uncertainty and anticipation. It is likely that briefings in the White House will be extensively focused on developments in Iran.
Erfan Fard is a counter-terrorism analyst and Middle East Studies researcher based in Washington, DC. He is in Middle Eastern regional security affairs with a particular focus on Iran, counter terrorism, IRGC, MOIS and ethnic conflicts in MENA. He graduated in International Security Studies (London M. University, UK), and in International Relations (CSU-LA). Erfan is a Jewish Kurd of Iran, and he is fluent in Persian, Kurdish, Arabic and English. / Follow him from this twitter account @EQFARD / The newly published book of Erfan Fard is: “The Black Shabbat” (Israel, the target of terrorist), which has been published in the USA. www.erfanfard.com
The post Does America Have a Plan Once Iran’s Supreme Leader Dies? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Eyes Bringing Azerbaijan, Central Asian Nations into Abraham Accords, Sources Say
US President Donald Trump points a finger as he delivers remarks in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC, US, July 31, 2025. Photo: Kent Nishimura via Reuters Connect
President Donald Trump’s administration is actively discussing with Azerbaijan the possibility of bringing that nation and some Central Asian allies into the Abraham Accords, hoping to deepen their existing ties with Israel, according to five sources with knowledge of the matter.
As part of the Abraham Accords, inked in 2020 and 2021 during Trump’s first term in office, four Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic relations with Israel after US mediation.
Azerbaijan and every country in Central Asia, by contrast, already have longstanding relations with Israel, meaning that an expansion of the accords to include them would largely be symbolic, focusing on strengthening ties in areas like trade and military cooperation, said the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations.
Such an expansion would reflect Trump’s openness to pacts that are less ambitious than his administration’s goal to convince regional heavyweight Saudi Arabia to restore ties with Israel while war rages in Gaza.
The kingdom has repeatedly said it would not recognize Israel without steps towards Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state.
Another key sticking point is Azerbaijan’s conflict with its neighbor Armenia, since the Trump administration considers a peace deal between the two Caucasus nations as a precondition to join the Abraham Accords, three sources said.
While Trump officials have publicly floated several potential entrants into the accords, the talks centered on Azerbaijan are among the most structured and serious, the sources said. Two of the sources argued a deal could be reached within months or even weeks.
Trump’s special envoy for peace missions, Steve Witkoff, traveled to Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, in March to meet with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. Aryeh Lightstone, a key Witkoff aide, met Aliyev later in the spring in part to discuss the Abraham Accords, three of the sources said.
As part of the discussions, Azerbaijani officials have contacted officials in Central Asian nations, including in nearby Kazakhstan, to gauge their interest in a broader Abraham Accords expansion, those sources said. It was not clear which other countries in Central Asia – which includes Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan – were contacted.
The State Department, asked for comment, did not discuss specific countries, but said expanding the accords has been one of the key objectives of Trump. “We are working to get more countries to join,” said a US official.
The Azerbaijani government declined to comment.
The White House, the Israeli foreign ministry and the Kazakhstani embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment.
Any new accords would not modify the previous Abraham Accords deals signed by Israel.
OBSTACLES REMAIN
The original Abraham Accords – inked between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan – were centered on restoration of ties. The second round of expansion appears to be morphing into a broader mechanism designed to expand US and Israeli soft power.
Wedged between Russia to the north and Iran to the south, Azerbaijan occupies a critical link in trade flows between Central Asia and the West. The Caucasus and Central Asia are also rich in natural resources, including oil and gas, prompting various major powers to compete for influence in the region.
Expanding the accords to nations that already have diplomatic relations with Israel may also be a means of delivering symbolic wins to a president who is known to talk up even relatively small victories.
Two sources described the discussions involving Central Asia as embryonic – but the discussions with Azerbaijan as relatively advanced.
But challenges remain and there is no guarantee a deal will be reached, particularly with slow progress in talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The two countries, which both won independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, have been at loggerheads since the late 1980s when Nagorno-Karabakh – an Azerbaijani region that had a mostly ethnic-Armenian population – broke away from Azerbaijan with support from Armenia.
In 2023, Azerbaijan retook Karabakh, prompting about 100,000 ethnic Armenians to flee to Armenia. Both sides have since said they want to sign a treaty on a formal end to the conflict.
Primarily Christian Armenia and the US have close ties, and the Trump administration is wary of taking action that could upset authorities in Yerevan.
Still, US officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump himself, have argued that a peace deal between those two nations is near.
“Armenia and Azerbaijan, we worked magic there,” Trump told reporters earlier in July. “And it’s pretty close.”
RSS
Trump Reaffirms Support for Morocco’s Sovereignty Over Western Sahara
A Polisario fighter sits on a rock at a forward base, on the outskirts of Tifariti, Western Sahara, Sept. 9, 2016. Photo: Reuters / Zohra Bensemra / File.
US President Donald Trump has reaffirmed support for Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara, saying a Moroccan autonomy plan for the territory was the sole solution to the disputed region, state news agency MAP said on Saturday.
The long-frozen conflict pits Morocco, which considers the territory as its own, against the Algeria-backed Polisario Front, which seeks an independent state there.
Trump at the end of his first term in office recognized the Moroccan claims to Western Sahara, which has phosphate reserves and rich fishing grounds, as part of a deal under which Morocco agreed to normalize its relations with Israel.
His secretary of state, Marco Rubio, made clear in April that support for Morocco on the issue remained US policy, but these were Trump’s first quoted remarks on the dispute during his second term.
“I also reiterate that the United States recognizes Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara and supports Morocco’s serious, credible and realistic autonomy proposal as the only basis for a just and lasting solution to the dispute,” MAP quoted Trump as saying in a message to Morocco’s King Mohammed VI.
“Together we are advancing shared priorities for peace and security in the region, including by building on the Abraham Accords, combating terrorism and expanding commercial cooperation,” Trump said.
As part of the Abraham Accords signed during Trump’s first term, four Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic relations with Israel after US mediation.
In June this year, Britain became the third permanent member of the U.N. Security Council to back an autonomy plan under Moroccan sovereignty for the territory after the U.S. and France.
Algeria, which has recognized the self-declared Sahrawi Republic, has refused to take part in roundtables convened by the U.N. envoy to Western Sahara and insists on holding a referendum with independence as an option.
RSS
Israel Says Its Missions in UAE Remain Open Despite Reported Security Threats
President Isaac Herzog meets on Dec. 5, 2022, with UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Abu Dhabi. Photo: GPO/Amos Ben Gershom
i24 News – Israel’s Foreign Ministry said on Friday that its missions to the United Arab Emirates are open on Friday and representatives continue to operate at the embassy in Abu Dhabi and the consulate in Dubai in cooperation with local authorities.
This includes, the statement underlined, ensuring the protection of Israeli diplomats.
On Thursday, reports appeared in Israeli media that Israel was evacuating most of its diplomatic staff in the UAE after the National Security Council heightened its travel warning for Israelis staying in the Gulf country for fear of an Iranian or Iran-sponsored attacks.
“We are emphasizing this travel warning given our understanding that terrorist organizations (the Iranians, Hamas, Hezbollah and Global Jihad) are increasing their efforts to harm Israel,” the NSC said in a statement.
After signing the Abraham Accords with Israel in 2020, the UAE has been among the closest regional allies of the Jewish state.
Israel is concerned about its citizens and diplomats being targeted in retaliatory attacks following its 12-day war against Iran last month.
Earlier this year, the UAE sentenced three citizens of Uzbekistan to death for last year’s murder of Israeli-Moldovan rabbi Zvi Cohen.