Iran To Sue Turkish Broker Over $263M Electricity Debt

This time, spurred by revolutionary slogans and the demands of his supporters, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei shifted his strategy and accepted the risk of direct confrontation, launching missile attacks on Israeli territory.

A week ago, during Eid al-Fitr prayers, Khamenei declared that "Israel must be punished and will be punished". Similarly, commanders of the infamous Islamic Revolutionary Guards had vowed a "decisive and regrettable response" to Israel’s attacks on Iran’s purported consulate in Syria.

While on the surface the promise of revenge appears to be a strategic mistake, it raises the question as to why the state would pursue such a course of action – despite the international, political, and economic consequences.

The religious approach appears rigid and uncompromising, not open to diverse methods or interpretations. It emphasizes demonstrating resilience, with resistance seen as crucial to victory. In this view, persisting with a "fighting" strategy, even if mistaken, signifies a steadfastness in belief and faith.

The policymaking process in the Islamic Republic, however, does not follow the pattern of rational choice or the model of a prudent actor.

Rationality in foreign policy is a model in which the government acts coherently, and policymaking and decisions are based on clear goals and national interests, defined priorities, sufficient information, and understanding of options to achieve those goals, provided that the likelihood of success and the benefits and costs of each chosen policy are examined and evaluated in advance.

Role of Cognitive Maps in the Decision-Making of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran

One characteristic of policymaking in the Islamic Republic is the existence of hierarchical and non-systematic decision-making procedures.

The hierarchical decision-making pattern in the Islamic Republic indicates that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or governments do not have a decisive role in foreign policy policymaking.

Former President Hassan Rouhani and former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif frequently criticized the marginalization of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from foreign policy decision-making and expressed concerns about the military's dominance over diplomacy.

In response to these criticisms, Khamenei asserted in a speech on April 30, 2021, that "foreign policy is determined in high-level forums around the world, not in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs participates in setting policies but is not the decision-maker; it is the executor."

Khamenei even considers the Supreme National Security Council – a key body responsible for overseeing national security affairs – to have a consultative role rather than a policymaking role. 

Therefore, the primary determinant of foreign policy decisions is Ali Khamenei, as the only leader of the Islamic Republic.

In such decision-making structures, understanding the mindset of the Supreme Leader is key to comprehending the policies and decision-making model of the Islamic Republic system.

In his book "Perception and Misperception in International Politics," Robert Jervis argues that understanding the cognitive map of the decision-maker can provide insights into their mistakes.

Thus, this means the creation of a diagram of the relationships that the decision-maker perceives to exist between phenomena. By understanding the causal relationships they have in mind, and analyzing their decisions based on these perceptions, we can assess how closely this perceptual understanding aligns with external reality. Additionally, it allows us to determine whether the effects and impacts anticipated by the decision-maker have actually occurred.

But before that, the elements influencing the cognitive perception of the decision-maker must be understood.

Here, our aim is to illustrate the factors influencing Ali Khamenei's cognitive perception regarding the issue of hostility towards Israel.

These factors constitute the backdrop of the cognitive map of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic:

Islamic Revolution Slogans: The destruction and elimination of Israel are merely slogans and not the primary goal of the Islamic Republic. The existence of Israel serves to justify the Revolutionary Guards' extraterritorial operations. Enmity with Israel is necessary for the Islamic Republic to establish a sphere of influence in regional politics and gain credibility with the international community. However, this enmity is often used as a cliché and serves the propaganda of the system.

Unchanging religious beliefs: It is a collection of ingrained patterns in the mind of Ayatollah Khamenei that remain unchanged. Khamenei's interpretations of Quranic and religious matters are subjective and personal. For instance, he asserts that hijab is a religious obligation and unveiling is religiously prohibited, a stance that reflects solely his personal interpretation. In the context of the Israel issue, the "End-time view" serves as a smokescreen, hindering our ability to objectively understand the issues and equations from a rational and logical perspective.

The Eschatological Perspective: The narratives surrounding the end times, particularly concerning the appearance of the Twelfth Imam among Shiites, adopt a geostrategic approach, pinpointing the emergence in Syria and Lebanon. Traditionally, Shiites were expected to await the reappearance passively, but in the new Mahdism, it is argued that they should actively pave the way for the Imam's return. From an eschatological perspective, one of the actions required for the reappearance is the weakening of Israel and Zionist ideology. Equipping fighters against Israel is considered a religious and unequivocal duty for all Muslims worldwide.

Pressure from allied groups and internal systemic pressures are deemed influential factors in Khamenei's cognitive perception. In this regard, hardliners, pressure groups, seminaries, the Revolutionary Guards, and proxy groups all wield significant influence in shaping Khamenei's perception and decision-making process.

International imperatives should also be considered among the factors influencing Khamenei's cognitive perception. Currently, one of the reasons that have made revenge and emotional reactions costly and challenging for Khamenei is these international imperatives.

If we prioritize Khamenei's cognitive map, the people’s interests and the economic welfare of Iranians would be relegated to the bottom row. The interests of the people and public satisfaction exert the least influence on Khamenei's decisions.

All the factors mentioned form the foundation of Khamenei's cognitive perception. However, it's important to note that Khamenei's decisions may not always stem from rational and collective reasoning.

Therefore, despite the significance of international imperatives, the influence of hardliners and Islamic Revolutionary Guards commanders, and the demands of proxy groups for direct engagement with Israel, the system could potentially be led into a significant gamble.

Khamenei in a State of Absolute Inaction

It seems that Khamenei's pieces on the regional chessboard have entered a state of inaction. Under the influence of his supporters' demands, he made a strategic mistake by emphasizing revenge. Khamenei has accepted the risk of attack to leave a historical legacy and proudly show the supporters of the Islamic Republic that the sky of Israel was showered with missiles. Even if Israel does not suffer serious damage, they are proud to have been sincere in their promise to punish Israel.

Another question arises: Why did the Islamic Republic feel compelled to attack Israel?

Commander Salami, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards, announced after the attack, "We have decided to create a new strategy, and that is from now on, if Israel attacks our interests and personalities anywhere, we will counterattack from the origin, the Islamic Republic of Iran".

Could the reason for this change in strategy be the reluctance of proxy groups during Israel’s attack on the purported Iranian consulate, as these groups had no interest in supporting or incurring costs for the Islamic Republic?

The Islamic Republic military officials spoke about small drones being involved, that they claimed were launched from within Iran, not even mentioning the "Zionist entity", Iran's term for Israel.

The strike in the central city of Esfahan (Isfahan) appears to have caused no significant damage and the muted way the story was told in both nations pointed to a determination, at least for now, not to further escalate their conflict.

In an interview with state TV, a person introduced as a resident of Esfahan described the explosions in the early hours of the morning as "nothing more than firecrackers".

The Israeli military and foreign ministries declined comment and there were no immediate public statements from senior politicians apart from hardline security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, who sent out the one-word message "Feeble!" on social media platform X.

In fact, some commentators believe Israel will not launch a large-scale attack against Iran, trying to avoid escalation. It can continue its undeclared piecemeal sabotage and other attacks, a method many believe has been used frequently since mid-2020.

Israel has a long tradition of maintaining ambiguity over issues like nuclear weapons and intelligence operations and the silence appeared to be part of its messaging.

Israeli media cited reports from the New York Times and the Washington Post, which quoted unnamed Israeli officials as confirming Israel was behind the attack, but did not report official confirmation of their own.

Writing for Israel's biggest newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, before the attack took place, a columnist said an official had said Israel planned a "pinpoint operation".

He quoted a Bible story in which the future King David crept up on a sleeping enemy and cut a piece of cloth from his clothing as proof that he could have struck a deadly blow but chose not to.

"I think it is ultimately a cautionary message that Israel can respond and can get through to Iran if it wants, but it does not want to widen the scope of this conflict right now," said Hasan Alhasan, a senior Fellow for Middle East Policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Iran's thoughts were spelt out most clearly by a senior Iranian official who told Reuters that Tehran did not plan a response now.

Iranian media appeared to play down the significance of the strike. In official statements, there was almost no mention that Israel - or as it usually says the "Zionist entity" - was behind it. State television carried analysts and other pundits who all appeared to be dismissive about the scale.

"There has been a remarkable fabrication to exaggerate the extent of the incident" the semi-official ISNA news agency said.

The apparent attack was the latest in a round of actions set off by the killing of seven Iranian officers in a strike on an embassy compound in Damascus that has drawn fears of a wider regional conflict spilling over from the war in Gaza.

Although Israel has never acknowledged that it was behind the strike on April 1, Iran launched a wave of hundreds of drones and missiles in response that was successfully warded off by the air defenses of Israel and its allies.

Iran's reaction also appeared to signal that it did not want the exchange to go further.

"That seems to indicate that Iran is seeking to step down off the ledge, minimize the impact of the attack, and perhaps walk back down the escalation ladder from here," said Jonathan Lord, head of the Middle East security program at the Center for a New American Security, a US think tank.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi chose not to cut short his trip to the central province of Semnan, indicating that the country was not on high alert. In Israel, the Homefront Command issued no new instructions to the population.

Opinion polls in Israel have appeared to show no overwhelming desire for retaliation, with one poll on Thursday showing 48% in favor of responding even if it meant expanding the conflict with 52% preferring not responding.

"We're good, you can look around, we're happy here, not from the attack but I think the situation in the Middle East is complicated, but Israel will always win and everybody has to know that," said Pavlo Tzuk, a resident of central Israel.

"So, enjoy your day and hope people in Iran will understand we are not seeking for war, but we are seeking for peace, and we want to be here safe, so, understand that," he said.

(With reporting by Reuters)

"Aida was transferred from the morality police detention center to Evin prison on Thursday morning, and from Evin to Shahr-e Rey women's prison," Nasrin Shakarami, Aida's mother, wrote on her personal Instagram account on Friday.

Over the weekend, Nasrin Shakarami revealed on social media that Aida had been detained for failing to wear the mandatory hijab.

Earlier this week, Iran's police initiated a renewed crackdown on unveiled women, using violence against detainees and those trying to intervene to prevent arrests.

Aida’s sister, 16-year-old Nika Shakarami, was abducted by security forces off Tehran’s Keshavarz Boulevard, while she was protesting against the regime amid the nationwide 2022 Women, Life, Freedom protests.

Nika’s body, reportedly subjected to torture, abuse, and beatings by security forces, was handed over to her family over a week after her disappearance.

Fearful of her gravesite becoming a location of protests, government agents secretly seized her body from her hometown of Khorramabad in Lorestan and buried her in one of the province’s villages instead.

At least 500 civilians, including children and teenagers, were killed when regime forces cracked down on the months-long protests following the killing of Mahsa Jina Amini by the so-called "morality police" in Tehran.

In remarks to the semi-official ILNA news outlet, Meshkini, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, emphasized that Iran is equipped with "the most advanced military equipment and precision missiles."

Early Friday morning, explosions were reported near the airport and an army base in Isfahan province, located in the central part of the country. The attack prompted Iran's air defense systems to be activated at several sites, according to state media.

While US officials have confirmed the attack, Israel has not yet acknowledged any involvement in the airstrike.

Iranian state media, controlled by the regime, is downplaying the strike. An official stated that the country’s air defenses intercepted three drones and denied any impacts from missiles.

Iranian media also reported that their nuclear sites remained secure and showed calm scenes in areas where explosions were reportedly heard.

This latest military action follows Iran attacks on Israel, where it launched hundreds of drone and missile strikes over the weekend. Tehran says it was retaliating for a widely believed Israeli attack on Iran’s purported consulate in Syria, which killed several high-ranking Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) officials.

Before the Friday attack on Iran, Esmail Kowsari, another parliamentarian on the national security commission, spoke about potential actions against Israeli nuclear facilities.

"If necessary, it will definitely be done," Kowsari told Jamaran news.

He emphasized that Iran does not seek conflict with any regional country, but that it will be considered if they act “maliciously”.

According to an exclusive report by the Guardian on Thursday, the investigators are looking into whether one of the suspects has connections to Albania.

The investigators interviewed by The Guardian believe that the assailants were recruited and flown to the UK specifically to execute the assault.

Iran International presenter Pouria Zeraati was stabbed outside his home in Wimbledon, in south London, late in March and sustained leg injuries.

Shortly after the attack, London Metropolitan Police announced that considering previous threats against journalists in Persian-language media outlets, the incident is being handled by specialized officers from the Met's counter-terrorism division. Earlier in the month, London Metropolitan police said the three suspects fled the UK after the attack, triggering an international manhunt.

Guardian further reported that Western sources believe that those likely responsible for the attack, presumed to be acting in the interests of the Iranian regime, utilized connections and insights into criminal networks to recruit the assailants.

Senior British counter-terrorism officials, as per The Guardian's report, believe that employing "criminal proxies provides Tehran with plausible deniability" as those recruited are unlikely to be on terror watchlists which would prevent them from entering the UK.

Last year, federal indictments revealed that three individuals linked to an Eastern European mafia group were charged by the United States for plotting to assassinate Iranian-American journalist and activist Masih Alinejad at the request of the Iranian regime.

The US Justice Department announced that the Eastern European mafia group charged "has ties to Iran and is violent, engaging in murders, kidnappings, assaults, and extortions".