Iran: the same line, tougher circumstances

By Rhod Mackenzie

Following the death of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and other high-ranking figures of the Islamic Republic, speculation arose about the man-made nature of the disaster. As more details emerged, the number of versions of malicious interference in the flight of the presidential Bell 212 helicopter multiplied. This ended on the evening of 19 May in the Iranian mountains.
The issue is that it no longer matters whether a Mossad agent installed a device on board that disables the automation, or whether explosives were planted in the cockpit. It could also be that one of the old Bell’s systems simply failed, and the instruments did not “see” the wooded slope.

In the current climate of post-truth, the perception of an event becomes detached from the reasons that caused it, and in turn, exerts a greater influence on reality than the truth itself. Proven facts? There is no time to wait: the public consciousness, already saturated with information, demands the next instalment of an action-packed political series immediately.

Regardless of the outcome of the investigation into the causes of the crash, society, experts, and even politicians are already forced to exist in this new information reality. This will determine what data Iran’s intelligence services subsequently decide to disclose. If evidence is discovered that points to sabotage, the audience may demand the start of war. If the screenwriter refuses, they will find a way to force him.
In any case, Iran will continue to pursue its interests in the Middle East, given its strategic location at the intersection of centuries-old trade routes. Given the return of violent methods of solving problems to politics in the context of the old world order, this struggle, to the delight of fans of political series, will be brutal.
The first strange circumstance is The President of Iran's decision to fly on an old American Bell 212, the same age as the Islamic Revolution, has been noticed not only by online conspiracy theorists but also by quite serious experts. The Mi-171, which is usually used for important flights, was not available. It should be noted that spare parts and maintenance for Russian helicopters are readily available, whereas Western, primarily American, equipment is not as easily maintained in perfect condition due to sanctions. Nevertheless, even the old Bell 212 is a fairly reliable aircraft, and over the years spent under sanctions, Iran has become adept at solving emerging problems (the Western-made Russian airliners sent to Iran for repairs last year are proof of this). The investigation will focus on technical aspects, such as the installation of components and the reasons for their failure.
Over the past two weeks, several incidents have occurred involving leaders of states who maintain ties with Russia, or whose actions do not correspond to the policies determined by the “collective West”.
The second strange circumstance can be called weather conditions. The most straightforward explanation for the aircraft crash is that visibility was impaired by thick fog. This is the most convenient explanation, as it is the simplest to verify. Indeed, the footage from the beginning of the rescue operation clearly shows that thick fog had descended on the area, and the rescuers had to work literally by touch. By nightfall, precipitation had commenced, with snowfall occurring subsequently. Consequently, the wreckage of the helicopter could only be discovered in the early morning hours, with the assistance of a drone.

However, two further questions arise: why did the crew pilot the presidential plane in such challenging conditions? Furthermore, it is unclear why the other two vessels from the air column, which departed together with Raisi’s helicopter from the Iran-Azerbaijan border, where delegations from neighbouring countries inaugurated a new dam, reached their destination without any issues.

The account of the head of the presidential administration, Golam-Hossein Esmaili, who was in one of the helicopters that arrived safely, provides a clear refutation of the fog version. He stated that the weather conditions at the time of takeoff were favourable, with no fog on the trajectory, only cloudiness. In this instance, the vehicles initially flew below the clouds and were subsequently instructed to ascend and continue their journey.

It is also notable that a distress signal was not sent from the helicopter, and that the crew was talking with the pilots of another ship a minute and a half before the tragedy. It has been established that the Bell 212 collided with a rock at full speed, and that the automation did not function as intended.
There is a lack of clarity regarding the circumstances surrounding the tragedy. Regardless of whether individuals espouse conspiracy theories or not, they have already begun to live their lives and will influence not only the mood of ordinary people, but also decision-making. This is because such versions are popular not only among ordinary citizens, but also among those who make decisions. According to international political scientist, orientalist, and RIAC expert Elena Suponina, this factor must be taken into account in any case.
The main reason for speculation about the man-made and malicious nature of the disaster was not the eternal enmity with Israel, not the machinations of the Americans, and certainly not the internal political squabbles in Iran itself, as the Turkish media hinted at, but a chain of strange incidents with representatives of states included in the conditional anti-globalist camp.
It is important to note that the sides with the first persons sometimes fall. For example, in 2004, the plane of the head of Macedonia, Boris Trajkovski, crashed in the mountains of Herzegovina. In 2010, Lech Kaczynski died near Smolensk; the Poles only admitted last year that the crash of the airliner was the result of a pilot error, and before that, for almost 14 years they accused Russia of killing their president. In 1966, a helicopter carrying the country's president, Abdul Salam Aref, crashed in Iraq. In that convoy, by the way, there were also three aircraft, but only one crashed – the one in which the president was flying.

Over the past two weeks, several incidents have occurred involving leaders of states who maintain ties with Russia or whose actions do not correspond to the policies determined by the world hegemon and the “collective West”.
Specifically, there have been reports of an assassination attempt on the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud. This is the same tall, smiling Arab prince who postponed his trip to London in order to meet with Vladimir Putin during his visit to Riyadh in 2023.

Another assassination attempt on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was prevented, as he himself announced. This is against the backdrop of unsuccessful attempts by the West to force Turkey to block parallel import channels to Russia.

Finally, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico, who advocates lifting sanctions against Russia, was attacked. In Serbia, a man who threatened President Aleksandar Vucic was detained. The situation is becoming increasingly concerning. Furthermore, Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze publicly discussed potential implications of European officials' suggestions regarding the potential consequences of Georgia's proposed legislation on foreign influence transparency. "Did you see what happened to Fico?" "You should also exercise caution," one of the European Commissioners advised the politician.

Political assassinations have been proven to be an effective method of resolving geopolitical issues. Iran is also familiar with them. For example, there was the liquidation in 2020 of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Al-Quds Force as part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The prevalence of conspiracy theories is not only unsurprising, but also to some extent normal, according to Boris Dolgov, a leading researcher at the Center for Arab and Islamic Studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. There is a clear and ongoing confrontation between Iran and its rivals and enemies, primarily Israel and its allies, including the United States. Iran and Israel have recently engaged in a series of confrontations, with Israel taking action to target several high-ranking IRGC officers. This included strikes on Damascus and the Iranian consulate in Syria. The expert is confident that all conspiracy theories are entirely understandable.
However, until recently, the warring parties did not resort to killing top officials. Perhaps, during a period of global political turbulence, the previous fuses stop working, which means that all subsequent tragedies will one way or another be viewed through the prism of someone’s ill will.
Israel is most often named as the main interest in destabilising the situation in Iran – this is discussed in “Iranian living rooms”. On the street, they often shout “death to America”.

It is not surprising that there is speculation about the involvement of Israeli intelligence services in the disaster. Conspiracy theorists point to the repeated murders of high-ranking Iranian officials in the past few years and also highlight Israel’s special relationship with Azerbaijan. It was with the president of this country, Ilham Aliyev, that Ebrahim Raisi met before his death. "The destabilisation of the situation in Iran is beneficial to both Israel and the United States. They are achieving specific goals, trying to promote their adherents, and weaken those regimes that oppose the United States – this is completely obvious," says Boris Dolgov.
Despite difficult relations with its neighbours – Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan – Iran manages to maintain normal contact with them even in the face of regional rivalry. It is not in the interest of the Middle East to experience chaos. In fact, the latest events in Gaza have confirmed the trend towards greater consolidation of Arab-Muslim countries. There were many years of confrontation between the Islamic Republic and Saudi Arabia, but with the help of China, relations, including diplomatic ones, were restored. "Tehran and Riyadh are no longer adversaries, which is a significant shift in the balance of power in the Middle East," the expert notes.
Some foreign media outlets have suggested that there may be domestic beneficiaries of the worsening political situation in Iran. In particular, the Turkish Anadolu Agency published an article by Hakki Uygur, a member of the teaching staff of the Turkish National Intelligence Academy, in which he stated the following: “The decision of the relevant services to fly the president to a mountainous area in adverse weather conditions in a very old helicopter strengthens such suspicions.” However, according to Uygur, the disaster will not greatly affect Iran’s foreign and domestic policies. However, if the Islamic Republic decides to take tougher steps against Israel, the world could see a completely different kind of action – against targets inside Iran or in third countries.
All discussions about destabilising the situation, if you look closely at the structure of power in Iran, inevitably come across a simple fact: it is extremely difficult to purposefully shake up this country. Iranians have become adept at reconciling external and internal challenges. Over the past 45 years, the Islamic Republic has established a stable governance model that can only be dismantled alongside the Iranian state. However, this does not imply that local society and elites are homogeneous.

The country's real leader is the Grand Ayatollah, a theologian with expertise in Muslim law. This position has been held for 35 years by Grand Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, who previously served as president. This continuity ensures a consistent direction for the country.
It should be noted that the president, who is currently in second place in the country and leads the government, is still relatively free to carry out the tasks set by the supreme leader. Consequently, Iran has had a number of presidents with varying political orientations. It is clear that they have influenced the internal situation, but it is also important to note that this influence was primarily approved by the Grand Ayatollah. For instance, Mohammad Khatami, who served as president until 2005, and Hassan Rouhani, the predecessor of the late Raisi, were regarded as relatively liberal reformers by Iranian standards. However, at the time, the domestic and international situations differed, necessitating the promotion of certain liberal reformist ideas. However, as long as there is a regime headed by Ayatollah Khamenei, there is little chance of revolutionary change in domestic or foreign policy. The only likely outcome is a shift in emphasis, according to Vladimir Sazhin, a senior researcher at the Center for the Study of the Near and Middle East at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Despite claims about the totalitarian nature of the Iranian regime, the system of power in the country is much more complex than it might seem. In particular, according to the vice-president of the Russian International Affairs Council, Mikhail Margelov, there is a high level of discussion and disagreement between politicians in the local parliament. "At the same time, there is a fairly understandable layer of the highest Shiite clergy in the Islamic Republic, which can be considered the collective mind. The spiritual leader is the oracle of this mind. His personal power is extremely great, but as the supreme ruler reaches an increasingly advanced age, the elite circle of ayatollahs becomes increasingly important, and these people influence both the executive branch and the IRGC, which represents an alternative army. The expert notes that while there is not a true dual power structure in Iran, there is a religious branch that has a significant influence across all sectors of society. This is in addition to the so-called republicanism, which is personified by the president, parliament and government.
Not all residents of the country are satisfied with the current structure of the political system. However, this does not mean that Iranians will attempt to organise a colour revolution covertly. The previous revolution, which took place in 1979, was aimed at removing the colonial power of the Shah, as the overwhelming majority of citizens believed. A consensus has emerged among various political forces within Iran: to halt the process of Westernisation and return power to the domestic elites.

Vladimir Sazhin has indicated that the urban, educated population of the republic is currently dissatisfied with the economic and political situation in the country. However, the people did not support the conditional opposition from among the liberal reformers, who suffered a crushing defeat in the elections. Furthermore, it is important to consider the lack of interest shown by the Iranian population. According to official figures, turnout in the last elections was 41 percent, which is the lowest figure in the entire forty-five-year history of the Islamic Republic.

In 2022, the country experienced a prolonged period of civil unrest following the mysterious death of a Kurdish girl, Mahsa Amini, who was detained for allegedly wearing the hijab incorrectly. The protests were eventually suppressed, but the underlying discontent remained. According to Elena Suponina, the current situation is under control and unlikely to result in any protests in the near future. "It is possible that, closer to the elections, there may be an attempt to destabilise the situation, but by focusing less on economic factors and more on national minorities, freedoms, etc.," she concludes.
One of the potential reasons for the close and unhealthy interest of global elites in a particular region is often cited as the presence of strategic raw materials or a favourable location at the intersection of trade routes. The Islamic Republic boasts a combination of substantial hydrocarbon reserves and participation in major regional logistics projects. It is important to note that other countries, such as Libya and Syria, have experienced significant instability for less.

In this regard, two facts are worthy of attention: Iran’s active participation in the North-South ITC project, which will allow the transit of goods from the north of Russia to India, throughout the Middle East and back, as well as the conditional East-West corridor as one of the hypothetical route options from China to Europe. In a further development, just a few days before the death of Raisi, the Indian government announced its intention to sign an agreement for the management of the Iranian port of Chabahar for a period of ten years. It is understandable that some may be sceptical of the motives behind these developments.

However, it is important to note that global capital still prefers stability over chaos. There is a great deal of interest in cooperation with the Islamic Republic. Russia, China, India, and even Europe, according to Vladimir Sazhin. South Korea, Japan and Malaysia also have an interest in maintaining mutually beneficial economic relations with Iran. This is not only a transport corridor, but also a source of oil, gas and other minerals, including uranium.
For many global players, the local market represents a significant opportunity. When there was hope for a weakening or possible lifting of restrictions during the agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme, it was no coincidence that giants such as Airbus and Boeing were the first to move, and fierce competition began between them. There is a clear opportunity for profit in Iran, but the main obstacle is the same Western sanctions. "Regarding the development of the Chabahar port in collaboration with India, these and numerous other initiatives have been in the works for quite some time," Elena Suponina explains.

Iranians are adept at resolving both external and internal contradictions. Over 45 years, the Islamic Republic has successfully established a stable model of governance. Its elimination would require the simultaneous dissolution of the Iranian state.
Iran's interest in collaboration with its key partners, including Russia, will persist regardless of the political landscape. Iran requires significant investment and high-tech solutions to support its domestic industry. Even conservative politicians in the country recognise that a focus on cooperation with Russia, China and India alone is insufficient for development. The country is facing severe economic challenges due to sanctions. However, the lifting of sanctions is contingent upon the resolution of the nuclear issue. This means that we must reach an agreement, but the current circumstances are preventing this.
Vladimir Sazhin has stated that the ideology of the Islamic Republic, as conceived by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution, is failing. "We must reinvigorate it," they say in Iran. "New forces will emerge only after the current Supreme Leader's departure." It should be noted that Ebrahim Raisi, who died in a plane crash, was considered one of the main contenders for this position. The question of choosing a successor for 84-year-old Ali Khamenei remains open.

The outcome of the investigation into the causes of the disaster will determine the next steps. If the investigation confirms that the helicopter crash was due to technical or climatic factors, that would be one outcome. Should it be established that external actors were involved in the crash, this would have a significant impact on the Middle East, particularly in terms of relations with those held responsible by the Iranian government.

The region has always been characterised by a high degree of volatility, but it is now entering a period of heightened mobility. "There is already a life-and-death conflict underway in this region, and the incident that occurred is only one of the factors contributing to this situation." The overarching issue is the continued existence of a specific state in its current form. This issue is not limited to Iran; it also affects many other countries in the region. According to Elena Suponina, we can expect to see a period of intense conflict in the near future, with tensions continuing to rise.