Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, often deflects responsibility on difficult decisions, issuing vague statements that allows him to avoid blame if and when things go wrong.
Following Israel's air strike on Iran, many asked if the leadership in Tehran will respond, and if so how?
In the initial hours after Israel’s Saturday attack, supporters of the Islamic establishment attempted to downplay it, presenting it as if there was no need for retaliation. Silence from IRGC commanders and officials only reinforced the perception that no response was planned.
However, Khamenei’s statements on Sunday introduced doubt among supporters. He refrained from clearly stating whether the Islamic Republic would respond, instead passing the decision to the Supreme National Security Council and the government.
This move suggests Khamenei wants to avoid the responsibility of decision-making on this matter, so that any outcome can be attributed to other institutions.
If the Supreme National Security Council decides on a military response, leading to a conflict with Israel and possibly the US, Khamenei can claim it wasn’t his decision. Alternatively, if no response is chosen, he can tell hardliners that he was prepared for conflict, but other officials opposed it.
Despite his usual direct involvement in state matters, this time—though the constitution grants him responsibility for war and peace, Khamenei is acting cautiously, keeping options open for both scenarios. However, the public, familiar with this behavior over the years, recognizes his attempt to avoid accountability.
This is not the first time Khamenei has taken this approach. During the anti-government protests of November 2019, when a fuel price hike sparked widespread unrest, he distanced himself, claiming he had no role in the decision, which he attributed to other leaders.
A similar pattern occurred in 2018, when Donald Trump announced plans to exit the JCPOA. Khamenei stated he had always opposed the agreement as it stood, suggesting officials had disregarded his advice. Yet it’s well-known that the JCPOA would not have been possible without his approval; Hassan Rouhani and Mohammad Javad Zarif negotiated with US officials under his directive, and all stages of the negotiation were reported to him. Former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi even revealed that before Rouhani's administration, Khamenei had tasked him with initiating secret talks with the US in Oman.
These examples illustrate Khamenei’s tendency to deflect responsibility during critical moments, delegating difficult decisions to others. Now, confronted with Israel’s recent attacks on Iran’s missile, drone, and air defense facilities—and with the potential for US involvement if reciprocal strikes persist—he is once again refraining from taking a clear stance.
What’s more, he has delegated decision-making to the Supreme National Security Council, all of whose members are his appointees. Thus, the ultimate decision on whether to attack Israel still rests with Khamenei, though he seeks to sidestep direct accountability for potential consequences.
Meanwhile, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of the Islamic Consultative Assembly or parliament and one of Khamenei’s close appointees, has stated that Tehran must respond to Israel. This indicates that if a decision to attack is made, it will likely come from Khamenei and IRGC leaders, and other top insiders, including Ghalibaf.
In this situation, the role of institutions like the government will likely be limited to providing funding and carrying out orders.
This presents a significant challenge, as with an empty treasury, the Islamic Republic faces serious obstacles in funding a potential conflict.