About 12 hours after dozens of bombs largely destroyed Ali Khamenei’s compound, Iranian state television confirmed the 86-year-old supreme leader’s death. The complex, Beit-e Rahbari in central Tehran, was among the first targets hit by US and Israeli strikes on February 28. Khamenei, who had often spoken of a martyr’s death, reportedly stayed at the compound with family despite the high risk.
Videos of people celebrating the leader’s death have circulated online and been verified, though internet services in Iran have been largely shut down since the attacks, making it unclear how widely such footage is seen inside the country. At the same time, state television has shown scenes of nationwide mourning for Khamenei; officials declared a 40-day mourning period and a week of official holidays.
Iranian state media reported that several senior military figures were killed at a Defense Council meeting alongside Khamenei, including Mohammad Pakpour, head of the Revolutionary Guards; Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh; and Abdolrahim Mousavi, chief of staff of the armed forces. Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, told state TV a provisional leadership council would be formed soon to manage the transition. He also said Iran did not seek war with neighbors but would continue strikes on US bases in the region.
The Revolutionary Guard issued a statement vowing retaliation and pledged to follow Khamenei’s path. Its press release promised “the largest military operations in the history of the Iranian armed forces” against Israel and US bases in the region.
Experts say the assassination is unlikely to change the short-term course of the conflict. Farzan Sabet, who studies sanctions and security at the Geneva Graduate Institute, noted Iran had been preparing for escalation for weeks and that its decentralized military and security structures can keep operating from preexisting plans even without direct orders from central leadership. That decentralization helps maintain Iran’s ability to act despite leadership losses.
Iran appears intent on pursuing the strategy it announced before the conflict: broad regional confrontation. It has already struck US bases in the region, including in Qatar and Bahrain, attacked oil infrastructure in eastern Saudi Arabia, and hit densely populated areas such as Dubai. Arman Mahmoudian, a Middle East lecturer at the University of South Florida, said Tehran cannot realistically achieve military superiority over the US or Israel but can try to escalate until the superior side opts to end the conflict. The aim, he said, is to maximize the costs of war by destabilizing the region.
Potential elements of that approach include disrupting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and activating allied militias such as Iraq’s Hashd al-Shaabi or Yemen’s Houthis, according to Sara Kermanian, an international relations researcher at the University of Sussex. The Revolutionary Guard has threatened to disrupt Hormuz shipping and to widen its offensive.
Despite the asymmetry in military power, Iran retains strategic resilience. As a non-democratic regime fighting for survival, the government faces less immediate domestic political pressure over human and financial losses and has shown willingness to accept high costs to remain in power, Kermanian said. If Iran weathers the conflict without internal splits, she argued, that would constitute a strategic success; by contrast, prolonged war could increase domestic and international pressure on the US.
Former US President Donald Trump warned Iran against further escalation on Truth Social, saying that if Iran strikes harder than before, the US would hit back with unprecedented force.
Whether further escalation will force negotiations between the US and influential factions within Iran’s reconfigured leadership remains uncertain. The immediate future will hinge on how far each side is prepared to push and what costs they are willing to bear.
This article has been translated from German.