Geo-Strategy #7: Who Killed Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi?

When you do history or analyze current events, you will always encounter three major problems. The first is that there's very little information you can work with; truth is very limited. The second problem is that the information you have may not be true; there's also misinformation. The third problem is that there's always going to be an official narrative that the media and the government publish. It may not be true, but it's the one that people accept.

We know that the Iranian President, Ebrahim Raisi, died. We will have to use Game Theory analysis to figure out how he died and who might have killed him. The problem is we are working with very limited information that the Iranian government chooses to disclose to the public.

The Official Narrative: A Tragic Accident

What do we know as a fact? On May 19th, the Iranian president was in Azerbaijan for a dam opening ceremony. He got into his helicopter and was flying back into the country when an accident caused the helicopter to crash, killing all nine people on board. This included:

• The President
• The Foreign Minister
• Three crew members
• The governor of a province
• A local religious leader
• The bodyguard of the president
• The head of the president's security detail

We have reason to believe that the most probable reason is an accident. The narrative is that it was bad weather—there was fog, the pilot couldn't see, and he crashed into a mountain. The evidence for this is that, one, this happens a lot. For example, in 2020, the famous basketball player Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter crash along with his daughter.

The second piece of evidence is that the helicopter they were flying in is very old. It was an American helicopter that they started to use in the '70s. After the revolution, America refused to cooperate with Iran, so they could never properly maintain the helicopter. Maybe it was just a malfunction. These are two compelling reasons why most people believe this was an accident, and this is probably the cause that will go down in history.

But Game Theory analysis requires us to explore other possibilities.

Possibility #2: A Foreign Adversary

The second possibility is a foreign adversary, meaning that either the United States, Israel, or even possibly Azerbaijan was responsible. The problem with this theory, though, is one of opportunity and motive.

It's very hard for a foreign government to plan an assassination of an Iranian leader in Iran. The opportunity isn't there. Maybe Israel and America wanted him dead, but how could they pull it off? It's very hard to do such a thing.

The second problem is motive. What reason would Israel or the United States have for killing the president now? In the past, the United States and Israel have killed Iranians. For example, in January 2020, President Donald Trump ordered the assassination of General Soleimani in Baghdad. But there was a motive: Soleimani was responsible for Iranian foreign policy in the Middle East and therefore a direct threat to American interests.

Israel has staged assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists in Iran, but again, the motive is that Israel is afraid that Iran will develop a nuclear weapon, and the easiest way to stop that is to kill the scientists. On April 1st of this year, Israel also staged an airstrike against the Iranian Embassy in Damascus, killing two Iranian generals. The motive, as Israel stated, was that these generals were working with Hamas to threaten Israel.

The motive is very clear in those cases. The problem here is it's very unclear what the motive is for killing the Iranian president. In fact, there's a lot of risk in that. It could be a foreign adversary, but there are other possibilities.

Possibility #3: An Internal Enemy

The third possibility is an internal enemy, meaning that certain individuals, factions, or groups in Iran wanted the president dead. With this idea, the opportunity problem doesn't exist because these enemies would have the resources to track down and kill the president.

For example, when the president was flying home, there were three helicopters. It was only his helicopter that crashed; the two other helicopters were fine. We don't know who was in the other two helicopters, but we can guess that they were probably a military escort there to protect the president. At the same time, if they wanted to kill the president, they could.

So, was it the military? The opportunity was there, but then the question is motive. Why would they do that?

The Succession Crisis and the IRGC

The answer is that everyone agreed that Ebrahim Raisi would most likely become the Supreme Leader of Iran when the current Ayatollah, Ayatollah Khamenei, died. Raisi was 63, and Khamenei is 85, so we can expect that within the next five years, Khamenei will die, and Raisi, who many see as Khamenei's protégé, would become the Ayatollah.

The Iranian political system is an Islamic Republic, which means the ultimate authority is God and the Quran, and it's the Ayatollah who represents them. He is the ultimate authority and has ultimate veto power. The president is like the CEO of the country. The person with the real power is the Ayatollah, and if Raisi became the Ayatollah, we could expect major policy shifts.

So, who would benefit from Raisi's death and stopping him from becoming the next Ayatollah? People say that there are two top contenders to be the next Ayatollah. The first and most likely contender was Raisi. The second contender is actually Khamenei's son, Mojtaba Khamenei.

With Raisi gone, Mojtaba Khamenei is most likely to be the next Ayatollah. This presents a problem for Iran because it's an Islamic Republic, supposedly under the rule of God, and one thing that most Iranians oppose is the idea of hereditary leadership—a father passing on leadership to his son. Remember that in 1979, the Iranians had a revolution to overthrow the king, and everyone was in favor of overthrowing the king. If Mojtaba Khamenei did become Ayatollah, this would create a political legitimacy crisis in Iran.

So, Mojtaba Khamenei benefits, but who would benefit from having him as Ayatollah? The answer is a group in Iran called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

What's interesting about them is that they are separate from the army. Where did these guys come from, and why are they separate from the military? It goes back to 1979. There was a popular uprising against the Shah of Iran, the king, and the government brought back Ayatollah Khomeini from exile to run the country. Khomeini at that time was afraid of the army because the army had sworn allegiance to the king. To deal with this problem, Khomeini established another armed group called the Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Their job is very different from the military's. The military has an obligation to protect the nation, but the Revolutionary Guard Corps has a responsibility to protect the revolution—the Islamic Republic. This ultimately means that they are Khomeini's private army; they only obey him.

The other thing about the revolution is that not only were they trying to bring an Islamic Republic to Iran, but they were trying to export the revolution across the Middle East. The Revolutionary Guard Corps had two main functions:

1. Protect the Ayatollah and ensure the revolution succeeds in Iran.
2. Export the revolution to the Middle East to spread Islamic revolution to Syria, Iraq, and beyond.

This is why the Middle East was so disturbed and angered by the revolution. Because so many countries considered Iran to be a threat, they encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade the country in 1980. This started the Iran-Iraq War. It was not just the Americans who supported this war; the Soviets also supported Saddam Hussein, as did Middle East countries like Saudi Arabia. It was a brutal war, and a lot of Iranians died, but ultimately, the Revolutionary Guard Corps was able to protect the revolution from foreign invaders. Because of that, they became the most dominant military group in Iran and had almost unlimited access to funds, not only to protect the revolution in Iran but also to export it overseas.

With so much power, they eventually became corrupt. Today, people believe that they control about 10% to 50% of the entire Iranian economy. Because you have such a monopoly of power, the economy stagnated over time. Western sanctions played a major role—Iran couldn't really sell its oil overseas—but the real problem was the fact that you had this monopoly of power, the Revolutionary Guard Corps, controlling the entire economy.

This led to protests.

• In 1999, 50,000 students protested the lack of democracy in Iran. What they were really protesting, of course, was the corruption of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, but you couldn't say that. They were crushed.
• In 2009-2010, there was the Green Movement. People wanted a new government that promised reform, but in the election, their reform candidate lost. People suspected that the Revolutionary Guard Corps cheated, so there were violent protests. Again, the Revolutionary Guard suppressed them. At that point, people lost faith in democracy, and afterwards, every other president was a puppet of the regime.
• The most recent protest was in 2023. A young woman named Mahsa Amini was arrested by the police for failing to wear a head covering in public, and she died in custody. People suspect that she was beaten by the police, and this caused massive protests across the country.

For the past 20 years, there have been continuous protests in Iran about the government and the economy, but mainly about the fact that the IRGC has monopolized the economy to its own benefit, which has caused the economy to stagnate and for people to become poorer. Because the protests are so widespread, the Revolutionary Guard Corps has ironically become more powerful because they are seen as the most loyal to the current regime. Their loyalty is not contested.

This means that if there's a change in leadership—if the Ayatollah dies and a new Ayatollah comes into power—the new Ayatollah will likely reduce the power of the Revolutionary Guard. He needs to establish his own power base. The IRGC is most loyal to the current leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, but if a new Ayatollah comes to power, he will bring his people into power, and that means reducing the power of the Revolutionary Guard Corps. This would be a direct threat to them.

But if the current leader's son, Mojtaba Khamenei, were to become the new Ayatollah, then things would stay the same, and the Revolutionary Guard would continue to control the economy. This presents a reason why the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would want to kill the current president and ensure that the Ayatollah's son becomes the next leader: they want to maintain their monopoly of power over the country.

Why Would the IRGC Support Mojtaba Khamenei?

In 1989, the first Ayatollah, Khomeini, died, and Ayatollah Khamenei succeeded him. The moment he became the new Ayatollah, he focused on cultivating his personal relationship with the Revolutionary Guard Corps. He knows about 2,000 of them and made a point of meeting everyone and memorizing their names; he even knows the names of their children. The current Ayatollah Khamenei has a great personal relationship with the IRGC. They are his private army.

The reason the Revolutionary Guard would transfer loyalty to Mojtaba is that Mojtaba himself is an extremely unpopular figure. If he were popular or a clever politician, he would most likely become the next Ayatollah on his own. But because he's very unpopular, there's a lot of resistance to him. If he becomes the next Ayatollah, it would only be because the Revolutionary Guard put him there, which means he must be loyal and obedient to their policies.

The Ideology of the Revolutionary Guard

These individuals are corrupt, but they're ultimately religious fanatics that want to export the revolution across the Middle East.

In 1979, the Shah left Iran because there were so many protests against him. He realized it was very hard for him to stay in power despite the brutality of the army and the police. He went to America, and many Iranians were outraged by this for two reasons. First, they wanted the Shah to stand trial for all his human rights crimes. Second, they were afraid that the Shah had gone to America to win support for an invasion of the country to put him back in power, which happened in 1953.

To counter this threat, in November of 1979, 300 to 500 college students stormed the US Embassy, took it over, and held 53 Americans as hostages. They demanded the Shah be returned to Iran to stand trial. This was an invasion of American territory and went against international law, but there was so much public support for the students that the authorities didn't do anything. Ayatollah Khomeini also supported the students.

When the students invaded the embassy, the first thing diplomats must do is destroy all the files and secrets. All embassies come with shredders, machines that cut paper into hundreds of different strips. This is the fastest, most effective way to destroy documents. There were tens of thousands of pages. Over months, the students slowly and methodically pieced the documents back together, one by one.

What these documents revealed to the students and to the public in Iran is that the real center of power in Iran was not the palace where the Shah lived, but the US Embassy. It was the US Embassy that was directing policy in Iran, that was responsible for the brutality of the regime, and that in 1953 staged a coup d'état against the democratically elected government of Iran and installed the police state of the Shah.

These students, when they read these documents, were really angry. You can imagine that because they pieced together these documents, they're fanatics. These students have gone on to become the top military leaders of the country. I'll just give you three names:

• Hossein Dehghan, who was the Minister of Defense from 2013 to 2017.
• Mohammad Ali Jafari, who from 2007 to 2019 was head of the Revolutionary Guard Corps.
• Mohammad Bagheri, who is still the Chief of Staff of the Iranian Army.

The Revolutionary Guards are staffed by individuals who hate America and see America as the "Great Satan." They want to go to war with America to avenge the wrongs and evils that America did to Iran.

When Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980, Iran didn't really have an army. The Revolutionary Guard Corps had arrested, exiled, or executed the officers of the military because they were not seen as loyal to the revolution. Saddam Hussein had airplanes, tanks, and lots of soldiers, and everyone thought the war would end very quickly. But then, the Revolutionary Guard Corps organized a new army called the Basij. This was a volunteer army of poor, religious people from the villages. Ayatollah Khomeini said to them, "We don't have weapons, but we have God on our side. The Iraqis have armor, but we have divine power."

They gave each of these volunteers, who were about 16, 17, 18 years old, a rifle and a key to put over their necks. The idea was that this key was their entry into heaven because when you die in war, you are granted automatic entry. These guys, organized into groups of 22, would run ahead across Iraqi minefields. Tanks and helicopters would strike at them, and they would keep on running. Of course, they would die because they didn't have any armor. But the Iraqis spent so much ammunition and bombs on them that eventually, the Iraqi army became exhausted and withdrew.

This shows you that the main power in Iran, why it is such a powerful military, is that its Revolutionary Guard Corps is run by fanatics with a passion for revolution, and they're supported by the Basij, these poor, illiterate, religious volunteers. There are tens of millions of them for Iran to draw on.

After the Iran-Iraq War, the IRGC recognized that if an enemy attacks Iran, people are going to die, so they want to take the fight to them. That's why for the past 30 years, the IRGC has been supporting conflict in the Middle East. They started something called the Axis of Resistance, which includes:

• Hamas in the Gaza Strip
• Hezbollah in Lebanon
• The Houthis in Yemen
• The Assad regime in Syria
• Shia militias in Iraq

All the money that the IRGC makes in Iran is then sent to this Axis of Resistance to create conflict against Saudi Arabia, the United States, and Israel.

You can imagine that there are a lot of people in Iran who are thinking, "Why are we doing this? What if we withdrew from the Middle East and just focused on our own economy? Then Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United States would have no reason to attack us." There are people thinking that maybe the problem isn't Israel or the United States; maybe the problem is these guys because they're fanatics creating all these problems in the Middle East, which is crippling our economy. If we stop these conflicts and just focus on our own economic development, then maybe our people will be better off.

There are politicians in Iran who are extremely skeptical of the Revolutionary Guard's policy. In January 2020, when General Soleimani was assassinated by the Americans, the Iranian response wasn't that big of a deal. The Iranians didn't really respond. The Revolutionary Guard, because their leader was killed, demanded vengeance and wanted to go to war. We can suspect that it was politicians like Raisi who said, "No, guys, let's be patient. Going to war against Israel and the United States right now is suicidal." They were urging caution and restraint, and the Revolutionary Guard Corps didn't like that.

Then, on April 1st of this year, Israel struck the Iranian Embassy, which made matters worse. Again, at that time, I'm sure the Revolutionary Guard was saying, "Let's just go to war." And again, I'm sure Raisi and his team said to them, "Guys, we cannot beat the United States and Israel in a war. Let's be strategic about this. Let's be patient. Our time will come."

I'm sure that because they're fanatics, they thought, "These politicians are cowards. They're weak, they're soft, they're not believers. Let's get rid of them." Then what happened on May 19th was an opportunity arose where there was fog, and they were like, "Well, here's an opportunity." And so they caused an accident.

What Changes Now That Raisi Is Dead?

If it was an accident, then in theory, nothing changes because ultimately, it's Ayatollah Khamenei who is responsible for policy. But if it was a planned assassination by the IRGC, then everything changes. This means the political class goes away, and the military class takes over and dictates policy.

First, there's going to be an election in late June to replace the president. It's most likely that the current vice president, Mohammad Mokhber, will become the new president. This is important because Raisi did not come from the Revolutionary Guard Corps; he came from the judiciary, a different power base. But Mohammad Mokhber comes from the IRGC, so he would advance their interests.

If that's the case, then we'll see the country's leadership preparing its people for total war. We will see the rhetoric become more extreme, preparing its people for an eventual American invasion. There will be a much harsher crackdown on political dissent.

Second, the IRGC cannot defeat America face-to-face. The only thing they can do to defeat America and Israel is to lure them into the country, and they do that by provoking them. There are different things they can do:

1. Accelerate the nuclear program. What America and Israel have said is they see Iran possessing a nuclear weapon as an existential threat to the safety of Israel. This is a no-go. If Iran accelerates the program, this is a direct provocation.
2. Encourage the proxies. Right now, Israel is very concerned about Hezbollah in the north. Hamas has already attacked them; Hezbollah could also attack Israel. If Hezbollah attacks Israel, then Israel can only interpret this as Iran encouraging them. This would be seen as an escalation, and they would be much more determined to eventually attack Iran. You also have Shia militias in Iraq who could attack US military bases and the Houthis in Yemen who can attack Saudi Arabian oil fields. You're encouraging your proxies to make things worse in the Middle East, in which case the United States can only conclude that they need to destroy the head of the snake, which is Iran.
3. Attack shipping lanes. Iran could start to attack shipping lanes, making shipping much more difficult.
4. Terrorism. Iran, through its proxies, could launch terror attacks against America and its allies.

There are many things that Iran can do to provoke a war. If I'm right—and again, I don't know—then we should expect that in late June, Mohammad Mokhber wins the election, and his rhetoric becomes much more extremist: "We need to take the fight to America. We need to avenge Soleimani." We can also expect that the situation in the Middle East becomes much more extreme. We should see an escalation: the acceleration of the nuclear program, proxies becoming much more violent, shipping being disturbed, and a terror campaign throughout the world.

Just because these things might happen does not mean that Raisi was killed by the IRGC. But if the IRGC did kill Raisi, then we should see these things happening.

How Would Iran Fight a War?

They can only fight the war in one way: to lure the Americans into attacking Iran. It is suicide to attack America in the open. America has air superiority, satellites that can see everything you do, and special forces. What Iran needs to do is trick America into invading Iran, and then America would lose for sure. If they provoke America enough, then America will eventually get angry enough to send an invasion force against Iran.

This is all speculation. I have no actual information or evidence. I'm just saying Raisi died, and it was probably an accident. But if it was not an accident, then who would most benefit from his death? The answer is the Revolutionary Guard Corps because they see him as a direct threat to their authority. At the same time, any new leader would see these guys as a problem because they have too much power, they are creating too much tension overseas, and they're too fanatical. It's most likely that they would want to elevate Mojtaba Khamenei because he is not popular and would have to be loyal to the Revolutionary Guard Corps or need their help to maintain power.

What's important to remember is that the United States might lose a war with Iran, but I have never said that Iran will win the war. This war will be brutal for Iran. Tens of millions of people will die for no reason, and that's why politicians like Raisi and others are saying, "Let's not go to war."