Iranian leader’s brutal gamble in showdown with Trump

In his latest appearance, Khamenei duly condemned the demonstrators as a “bunch of people bent on destruction” who were supposedly causing havoc simply to “please the president of the US and make him happy”. He added: “Whoever you are, if you are the hirelings of foreign countries and have worked for them, the nation rejects you.”

That was the signal for the regime’s militias to do their worst. One indicator of Khamenei’s intentions is that state television has made no effort to minimise the scale of the bloodshed.

On the contrary, one reporter even appeared at a morgue, surrounded by corpses in body bags, and noted how the “majority of them are ordinary people”.

This was the regime’s propaganda of the deed, designed to spread terror and convince Iranians of the price of dissent.

Loading

But it also amounts to a gamble. When Khamenei faced even bigger mass protests in 2009, triggered by a rigged presidential election, the American president of the day was reluctant even to comment on what was happening, let alone intervene with force. Barack Obama would later regret his reticence as the regime crushed that challenge with its customary brutality.

Today, by contrast, Trump is not just talking about the unrest in Iran; he has claimed that if the regime kills protesters, then the US is “locked and loaded” to strike with all its might. Now the moment of decision is coming.

People on the streets of Tehran and many other cities have surely been killed in large numbers.

And Khamenei is rolling the dice on Trump’s threat being exposed as an empty bluff. Remarkably, he is taking this risk despite having misjudged Trump twice before.

Last year, Trump gave Iran 60 days to settle the confrontation over its nuclear program, a deadline that Khamenei believed to be fake and meaningless. Yet, on day 61, Israel began bombing.

Khamenei then convinced himself that the US would not join this campaign, whereupon Trump sent B2 stealth bombers to attack Iran’s nuclear installations at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan.

Having misread Trump twice in less than a year, you might think that Khamenei would be more cautious this time. But apparently not. After all, few ayatollahs are noted for flexible thinking, particularly when they are 86 years old.

In fairness, Khamenei will also be gambling that even if his regime’s brutality does provoke America to intervene, the Islamic Republic will survive anyway.

The recent bloodshed proves two vital propositions. Khamenei is determined to ride out this unrest, just as he has always done in the past.

And the regime’s violent enforcers remain prepared to obey his orders and kill their own people, perhaps genuinely believing that the protesters in the streets are nothing but the “hirelings of foreign countries”.

For as long as both of those factors remain true, the regime’s survival is more likely than not.

Loading

Could an American military strike change either? Any US operation might paralyse the command and communications of the Revolutionary Guard, degrading its ability to suppress the unrest, even if its will remains. Perhaps Khamenei himself might be a target.

But until and unless Trump intervenes, all this must be speculative.

For now, Khamenei’s obdurate determination and the regime’s proven willingness to use overwhelming force have strengthened the Islamic Republic’s chances of survival. His gamble could pay off.