Leak Reveals Controversial Scenario in Khamenei's Alleged Will on Leadership Transition

Recent leaks emerging from within Iran's conservative faction, conveyed by hardline cleric Mohammad Mahdi Mirbagheri, have unveiled an alleged will attributed to former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The leak, published by the Nabd Zagros platform featuring Mirbagheri, does not focus on naming the next leader but reveals details of a will reportedly written by Khamenei to organize the moments following his death. The plan attempts to replicate one of the most sensitive scenes in the Islamic Republic's history.

According to the leak, Khamenei recommended that the announcement of the new Supreme Leader should precede his funeral ceremony, allowing him to appear before Iranians and the world as the new leader of the Islamic Republic. This mirrors the events after Ruhollah Khomeini's death in 1989, when Ali Khamenei was chosen as Supreme Leader before the burial, sending a message aimed at affirming the continuity of the regime and preventing any impression of a power vacuum at the top.

Emerging Complications

However, the scenario outlined in the will, as per the circulated narrative, faces a new complication.

The uncertainty surrounding the fate of Mojtaba Khamenei, who has been out of public view since the targeting of the Supreme Leader's residence during Israeli strikes, and opposition platforms' claims about his death, threatens to disrupt the scene that Khamenei intended as his final political message.

The will's purpose, according to the leak, was not for Mojtaba to attend the funeral but for him to appear publicly after being pledged allegiance to as the new Supreme Leader before the burial. This was meant to confirm the transfer of authority as had occurred after Khomeini's death. The absence of this public appearance would undermine the foundational message of the will.

The accompanying interpretation of the leak suggests that security institutions might resort to a narrative claiming Mojtaba attended the funeral disguised for security reasons. Yet, proponents of this view argue that such a narrative does not alter the core issue, which concerns Mojtaba's public emergence as the new Supreme Leader rather than his presence among mourners out of sight.

From this perspective, the leakers describe a "legitimacy and ethical dilemma." The will was drafted as a guarantee for the regime's continuity, but failure to implement it as Khamenei intended, or modifying it under evolving circumstances, could, according to this reading, mark the beginning of an internal crisis within the Supreme Leader's circle rather than symbolizing stability for the subsequent phase.

The leakers believe the regime faces two difficult options: either accept a new reality that grants Mohammad Mahdi Mirbagheri a central role in the post-Khamenei era, or create an alternative scenario to compensate for Mojtaba Khamenei's absence. The latter option could open the door to a profound internal crisis threatening the regime's cohesion.

Political Shock and Internal Reordering

This situation aligns with the views of Iranian journalist Hossein Razagh, who told Eram News that the Islamic Republic has entered a new phase of "political shock therapy."

Razagh contends that the regime's challenges have surpassed external issues and shifted toward reorganizing power centers within the authority in preparation for the post-Khamenei period.

He adds that the Islamic Republic has historically reshaped its internal structure during major turning points by sidelining some centers of influence and creating new balances.

While the "economic shock" transferred the cost of reforms to society, Razagh explains that the "political shock" shifts this cost inside the regime itself, where competing factions face the necessity of redistributing influence and roles.

Razagh clarifies that any significant transformation—whether in relations with the United States or the regime's internal structure—requires figures willing to bear the political cost while maintaining the appearance of regime cohesion.

From this standpoint, the rise of figures within the traditional establishment, such as Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, is interpreted as the emergence of individuals capable of managing difficult transitions without undermining the Islamic Republic's fundamental structure.

According to Razagh, reading the leaked will in this context indicates that the issue extends beyond the identity of the next Supreme Leader to how the power transition moment will be managed. Success in this scenario would reproduce the image associated with the leadership transition in 1989, whereas failure would open the door to a more complex phase within the Supreme Leader's circle amid increasing questions about the decision-making centers that will lead the Iranian regime after Ali Khamenei.

In this setting, the will, designed to confirm the regime's continuity, faces a distinctly different test. The ambiguity surrounding Mojtaba Khamenei's fate and the conflicting leaks that followed have turned Khamenei's final intended message, according to the circulated narrative, into a focal point in the upcoming struggle. This struggle intersects the future of the Supreme Leader's household with the redrawing of power balances within the Islamic Republic.