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.