In the shadow of Tehran’s power dynamics, the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh at the end of July – widely believed to have been carried out by Israel – has unsettled a fragile balance. The timing of this escalation in the long-standing conflict between Iran and Israel is particularly challenging for newly appointed President Masoud Pezeshkian, who is still acclimating to his role as this geopolitical crisis unfolds.
For Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the murder of the leader of the Palestinian group surpasses mere provocation; it presents an existential challenge. The explosion that killed Haniyeh is perceived by Iran to have been caused by a missile fired from its borders, constituting a violation of the country’s sovereignty. This has incensed Tehran and placed Khamenei’s 2003 fatwa (a ruling based on Islamic law) prohibiting the manufacture, use, and storage of nuclear weapons under increased scrutiny.
Discussions about whether Khamenei’s fatwa aligns with Iran’s strategic priorities had already begun before Haniyeh’s assassination, according to a senior Iranian official who spoke to Al Jazeera on the condition of anonymity. Khamenei has guided Iran through global shifts since the end of the Cold War, including the rise of U.S. unipolarity, and conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, as well as the challenging history surrounding Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers.
At 85 years old, Khamenei is tasked with ensuring the Islamic Republic’s future, a critical juncture that requires more than maneuvering in the “gray zone” – the space between war and peace that Iran has traditionally used to apply pressure on its adversaries. The implications of these developments could reshape the strategic landscape in the Middle East, especially at a time when negotiators are struggling to reach a ceasefire agreement to end Israel’s brutal conflict with Gaza.
Three weeks after the assassination, Iran has yet to indicate what response it will take. When asked whether Iran would hold back its responses against the Israeli regime to allow ceasefire negotiations to proceed, Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, told Al Jazeera: “The timing… of Iran’s response will be carefully orchestrated to ensure that it occurs at a moment of maximum surprise.”
The assassination has sparked intense debate within Iran, with sources indicating that some are advocating for restraint as the most prudent course of action. They fear that a retaliatory attack could draw Iran into a prolonged and costly confrontation with Israel, weakening Tehran and its regional allies. The opposition’s hope – across the entire Iranian political spectrum – was that restraint could now serve as leverage in future negotiations with the U.S., potentially opening a new chapter in U.S.-Iran relations and providing a more potent response to Israeli provocations.
However, Khamenei did not concur. While addressing officials on August 14, he stated that Iran must not be intimidated by the psychological warfare employed by their enemies. Citing the Quran, he added that “non-tactical retreats, whether military, political, media-related, or economic, will incur divine wrath.” Although there has been no indication as to what action he will take, this is a decision that could significantly reshape the strategic landscape of the Middle East.
The nuclear issue further complicates the situation. Until now, Iran’s nuclear policy has focused on its right to possess peaceful nuclear technology, Khamenei’s fatwa on the subject, and the desire to exist in a nuclear-free zone. These circumstances have led Iran to reassess its strategy in response to what it perceives as threats from Israel, according to the anonymous official.
The ultimate test for Khamenei now looms in a world witnessing Tehran face its most critical decision in decades. The choices ahead resemble bitter cups he must drink from – each bearing significant risk and uncertain outcomes. The stakes have never been higher.