Iran’s Khamenei Presents War Scenarios


In an unusual step that comes on the heels of Iran’s threats and warnings to the US and Israel over the consequences of a possible strike on its nuclear facilities, the official website of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei published an analysis written by Dr. Amir Mohebian, a senior political commentator.

The article details three possible war scenarios Iran could be faced with if Israel or the US proceed with a strike:

1. An all out war of attrition that would combine aerial and ground forces attack.

2. Limited war as a preparatory action for political proceedings. This would include hitting Iran’s control centers for the purpose of disrupting the stability of the Islamic regime. The best case scenario here would be that war leads to the regime’s fall; the worst case would see Iran surrendering at the negotiating table.

3. A war on specific targets with the aim of destroying the regime’s assault capabilities, especially against the “Zionist regime.”

The Iranian commentator goes on to assess the possibility of likelihood of each scenario. He believes the feasibility of the first option is due, among other things to the fact that “the western countries’ capabilities to carry out such a complex operation are very limited and nearly nonexistent.”

Mohebian also mentioned the upcoming US presidential elections and the fact that the west doesn’t have sufficient intelligence on Iran. In light of these problems Mohebian believes that the chances of an all out war against Iran are close to nothing.

He goes on to point out the main problems of the second and third scenarios: The Iranian regime is prepared for an attack on its centers of power, the Iranian response to such an attack could be unexpected, the attack could turn the regime to an even more extreme path and encourage it to set the Middle East on fire, which would endanger the western world.

Mohebian claims that even the third and most likely scenario has a relatively small likelihood of happening. He notes that the scenario’s execution would be complicated. It would be impossible to attack all of the country’s nuclear facilities due to its size; a limited war could develop into a regional war.

For example, an attack on Bushehr could lead to harsh ecological consequences for the region. Attacking only certain nuclear sites would not lead to a complete shutdown of Iran’s technological nuclear capabilities.

Meanwhile, it would seem that Israel is also preparing for every possible scenario. Yedioth Ahronoth on Friday revealed that “a friendly country” has in the past few weeks secretly sent Israel anti-aircraft Patriot missile batteries that also serve as a missile defense system.

The new battery arrived at the Ashdod Port, the first Patriot missile battery to arrive in Israel in eight years. Nevertheless, the IDF claims there is no connection between the current shipment and recent talk of the possibility of a strike against Iran’s nuclear sites.

(Source: Ynet)


  1. If both sides are aware that a war will bring devasting consequences, even if less than mutually assured destruction, we have little to worry about. While in some circles (not Iranian ones by the way) there are “suicide bombers”, those are almost always individuals who are socially marginal who choose to by in combat rather to avoid disgrace (e.g. a women whose choices were to go out in glory by blowing up a enemy pizza place, or die in a “honor killing” for doing something we can’t discuss on YWN). You never see them risking anything important in a “suicide attack” meaning its unlikely they risk retaliation.