Who Really Rules Iran?

The Finnish Broadcasting company Yle has closely followed the funeral of Iran’s dictator, Ali Khamenei. At the same time, it has reported that the new Ayatollah, Mojtaba Khamenei, did not appear at the funeral and has not been seen in public even once.

Messages purportedly issued by Khamenei have, however, been read out in Iran before. In addition, the United States and Israel are said to possess intelligence suggesting that Mojtaba is still alive.

That may, of course, be true—or it may not. What is clear, however, is that a head of state hiding like a rat cannot truly be the one exercising power—not even in Iran. If he remains in hiding, someone else must be wielding authority in his place: someone who does not want their own name mentioned publicly and instead issues orders in Mojtaba’s name.

If, on the other hand, Mojtaba has in fact died, it would be entirely understandable that the real holder of power would not want their own name splashed across the headlines. It would instead be far more advantageous for them to claim that Mojtaba is alive and governing the country from a secret bunker, much like Adolf Hitler was said to be doing in 1945.

* * *

I readily admit that what I have written above contains elements of a conspiracy theory. Time will tell whether Mojtaba returns as Iran’s visible religious leader and head of state once peace finally returns.

For my part, to borrow the late ski jumper Matti Nykänen’s famous expression, I would put the odds at no better than “fifty-sixty.”

Before that, it remains to be seen whether Donald Trump can ultimately disengage from Iran without being seen as having suffered a humiliating defeat.

At the moment, however, it appears that Iran has no intention of giving up either its enriched uranium or its Islamist system of government. Even restoring freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz seems unlikely.

* * *

Since I began with a conspiracy theory, it is perhaps only fitting to end with a dose of hindsight.

Trump and the United States would not be in their current predicament if the U.S. military had continued its extraordinarily successful offensive against Iran in the summer of 2025.

Trump, however, chose not to let it do so. Instead, he halted the offensive, giving Iran time to recover and learn from the experience—which it did. The result was a significant improvement in Iran’s military capabilities and the stalemate now taking shape, in which the Americans can hope, at best, to restore the situation that existed before the offensive began—and perhaps not even that.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s War Without Strategy: Why Iran May Come Out Stronger
Escalating Threats—and a Touch of Irony
Finnish Ex-Military Chief: U.S. Likely Halted Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Program

The Complete Demilitarization of Gaza: What Would It Mean for the Palestinians?

Israel has set the complete demilitarization of Gaza as a condition for initiating the second phase of the ceasefire. In other words, the disarmament of Palestinian militants.

The demand is understandable, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it also becomes a prerequisite for any potential peace agreement. After all, Gaza has served for decades as a launch pad for rockets fired at Israel and as the staging ground for the October 7 terrorist attack.

From the Palestinian perspective, agreeing to this demand—and adhering to it—would clearly demonstrate a willingness to achieve lasting peace. Moreover, it would signal that the population in the area desires a fundamental shift in its relationship with Israel.

Additionally, disarmament could indicate that Palestinians have recognized that the methods of terrorist groups like Hamas lead not to a prosperous future but only to suffering. If this is the case, it would mean removing perhaps the greatest obstacle to their own better future.

However, it remains to be seen what Hamas will do in this situation. Will they prioritize the well-being of Palestinians and decide to abandon armed resistance, or will they continue a war against a stronger opponent—one that brings only misery to the people while ensuring lavish profits for their leaders?

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Criminals in the Holy Land, El Salvador, and Ukraine
Questions to the Winners of the Gaza War
The Responsibility for Their People's Future Now Lies with Palestinian Leaders

The Responsibility for Their People's Future Now Lies with Palestinian Leaders

Fresh reports indicate that Israel and Hamas have agreed on a draft deal for a Gaza ceasefire and the release of hostages. The proposed agreement would be implemented in three stages, starting with the gradual release of 33 hostages over six weeks. Among them are five female Israeli soldiers, each of whom would be exchanged for 50 Palestinian prisoners.

In return, Israel would release hundreds of Palestinian women and children in detention, along with 30 security prisoners serving life sentences. During this period, Israeli forces would withdraw from population centers over 42 days, allowing Palestinians to begin returning to their homes in northern Gaza. Additionally, humanitarian aid to the region would increase significantly.

The term "ceasefire" refers to the temporary suspension of war or other armed conflict. It does not, therefore, signify peace, nor does it imply the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

Achieving peace would require mutual trust. However, at this moment, such trust appears to be lacking among both Jewish and Palestinian communities.

The key lies with the latter; the Arabs of the Holy Land must abstain from terrorism and warfare against Israel. This means no rockets launched from Gaza or the West Bank into Israel, and ideally no deranged terrorists attacking Jewish targets.

At the same time, it is crucial for Israel to act decisively, particularly in the West Bank, to prevent the construction of new settlements and to avoid other aggressive actions against Palestinians. Furthermore, the current and future governments of Israel must work in ways that foster Palestinian trust in their own future.

If these efforts succeed, it might be possible for Israel’s Jewish population to accept the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, as envisioned in 1993. However, if these efforts fail, the conflict will revert to square one, likely leading to renewed hostilities in the Holy Land sooner or later.

Personally, I believe that in this particular situation, the responsibility for the future of the Palestinian people lies primarily with their leaders. If they are capable and grounded in realism, the future of the Palestinian people can be excellent. However, if they repeat the inability of their predecessors to acknowledge facts and act accordingly, the ordeal of the people they lead will continue far into the future.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Two out of three Palestinians support October 7 attack
Palestinian responsibility
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!

During the Eurovision song spectacle, the incompetence of EU officials was revealed

During the Eurovision spectacle, the confrontation between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip has escalated to a new phase. This means that the terrorists' last stronghold is becoming the target of an Israeli attack, and therefore the army of the Jewish state has ordered civilians to evacuate from the eastern Ramallah area.

There seem to be three reasons for this. Firstly, to prevent civilian casualties, and secondly, to prevent them from being used as human shields by terrorists. Thirdly, reducing the population may facilitate the discovery of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

All of this is happening despite the disapproval of Israel's evacuation orders by Charles Michel, the Belgian chairman of the European Council. So, would he, as a high-ranking EU official sometimes referred to as the EU president, think it better if Palestinian terrorists were given the opportunity to use human shields, thereby increasing the number of civilian casualties in the Gaza conflict? Or should the hostages captured by Hamas be left in their hands?

According to Michel, "all efforts must continue to achieve a sustainable ceasefire agreement. The EU is committed to a just and comprehensive peace based on a two-state solution."

This repeats the mantra that only complicates the situation in the Holy Land, as not all Palestinians accept a two-state solution, nor will Israelis sit idly by in the face of continued rocket attacks and other acts of terror. Therefore, to solve the Palestinian problem, creative thinking is needed instead of incessantly advocating for a two-state solution, as I provided an example last Christmas.

It would also be good if the President of the European Council had heard of Finland´s former President Juho Kusti Paasikivi and understood that acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom.

In the short term, this would mean following the example of US President Joe Biden. That is, understanding that a ceasefire would begin tomorrow if Hamas released the hostages. According to Biden: "Israel said it's up to Hamas, if they wanted to do it, we could end it tomorrow. And the ceasefire would begin tomorrow".

This (too) raised the question of how the European Union chooses its high-ranking officials. Apparently, not based on logical reasoning or strong understanding.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Christmas gift to the Holy Land
Palestinian responsibility
Palestinians: acknowledging facts is the beginning of wisdom!