Ali Khamenei
Political assassinations may yield a temporary effect, but they often lead to long-term disasters. Palestinian journalist Daoud Kuttab shares his thoughts in a column for ‘Al Jazeera’.:
The common tactic in war is to attempt to eliminate the enemy's leadership figures. While such a strategy may prove successful in certain circumstances, it historically leads to serious consequences in the Middle East.
The assassination of a key enemy can trigger a rapid surge in popularity among supporters, especially in times of conflict. U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are likely enjoying the moment following the alleged "success" in eliminating Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
However, it is worth noting that removing an 86-year-old leader, who was already planning for his succession due to health issues, is not a true achievement considering the power of the U.S. and Israel. Furthermore, his elimination does not guarantee that the subsequent leadership will be more loyal to the interests of these countries.
Assassinations of political leaders do not contribute to achieving peace in the Middle East. On the contrary, they can lead to the rise of more radical successors or create chaos that only intensifies violence.
History shows that when Israel and the U.S. resorted to "decapitation" in their operations, the consequences were devastating. For example, in Iraq, after the capture of Saddam Hussein and his execution, the regime that openly opposed Israel fell, but this opened the door for the influence of pro-Iranian forces.
Two decades later, Iraq became a battleground for Iranian strategy, allowing Tehran to create a network of non-state actors threatening the interests of the U.S. and Israel.
After the U.S. invasion, a security vacuum emerged that facilitated the rise of various factions, including ISIS, leading to thousands of casualties and a massive flow of refugees to Europe — to the allies of the U.S. and Israel.
It is also worth mentioning Hamas. Since the early 2000s, Israel has repeatedly attempted to eliminate its leaders. The assassination of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in 2004 and his successor Abdel Aziz Rantisi did not lead to stabilization. Ultimately, Yahya Sinwar, appointed as the new head of Hamas, became the initiator of the attack on October 7, 2023.
The situation with Hezbollah is similar. After the elimination of Abbas al-Musawi, its leader Hassan Nasrallah was able to successfully strengthen the organization as a powerful force. Although two and a half years of wars and leadership elimination may have weakened both groups, the idea of resistance to occupation remained untouched. The current lull may only be temporary before a new conflict.
As for Iran, it is unlikely that Khamenei's successor will be inclined to negotiate. Previously, Iran under Khamenei showed a willingness to make significant concessions regarding its nuclear program; however, his successor may not have such political space.
If Israel and the U.S. continue their campaign and truly lead to the fall of the Iranian regime, the consequences could be unpredictable. Given the experiences of Iraq and Libya, the emergence of a security vacuum in Iran could have devastating effects for U.S. allies in the region and Europe.
This raises the question: what exactly do Israel and the U.S. hope to achieve from the "decapitation" strategy in Iran?
For Netanyahu, the assassination of Khamenei could be a significant political achievement. In the context of key elections that could be decisive for his career and lead to imprisonment on corruption charges, a short-term surge in popularity seems a justified risk. Israeli leaders rarely consider long-term consequences, and society largely supports military actions.
For Trump, the benefits are more nebulous. He can boast about the elimination of a sick elderly leader from a distant country to voters weary of wars. Amid a growing cost-of-living crisis in the U.S., he is using billions of taxpayer dollars for military actions against a country that does not pose an immediate threat, which more Americans are calling "Israel's war."
Trump also risks appearing as a weak president drawn into an expensive war for the political survival of another leader.
At this point, it is clear that the U.S. president does not intend to deploy ground troops. However, at some point, he will have to stop the bombings and withdraw troops, leaving behind a catastrophe, the burden of which will fall on U.S. allies. This will negatively impact regional alliances and raise questions domestically.
This could become yet another military adventure for the U.S. in the Middle East, costing taxpayers billions of dollars, soldiers' lives, and loss of international influence, without yielding tangible results. Hopefully, Washington will ultimately learn the lesson: assassination strategies and "decapitation" do not work.
The opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Al Jazeera's editorial board.
Daoud Kuttab is an award-winning Palestinian journalist and the author of the book State of Palestine NOW, available on Amazon in multiple languages.
