The death of senior Iranian official Ali Larijani in an Israeli airstrike has deepened uncertainty within Iran’s leadership, removing a key strategist at a pivotal moment for the country. Larijani, who served as secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, played a central role in shaping decisions on defence, diplomacy and national security. Though not a military commander, he was widely regarded as one of the Islamic Republic’s most influential policymakers, particularly in managing tensions with the United States and Israel. Get today's headlines by email His death follows the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in late February, compounding a growing leadership crisis. In recent weeks, multiple senior officials and commanders have been killed, suggesting a sustained effort to weaken Iran’s governing structure during wartime. Leadership vacuum amid ongoing conflictState media confirmed Larijani’s death as Israel intensified strikes targeting key figures. His loss leaves a significant gap in decision-making at a time when Iran faces overlapping internal and external pressures. Despite his reputation as a hardliner, Larijani was often described domestically as a pragmatic figure, combining ideological commitment with a measured, technocratic approach. He was involved in diplomatic efforts, including engagement linked to Iran’s long-term co-operation agreement with China, while maintaining scepticism toward Western powers. Three major crises left unresolvedAt the time of his death, Larijani was overseeing several critical challenges. Chief among them was the ongoing war, where he had advocated for a prolonged conflict and potential expansion across the region, including threats to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. He was also managing a wave of domestic unrest that had escalated from economic discontent into broader anti-government protests. Authorities responded with a crackdown that reportedly resulted in thousands of deaths. In addition, Larijani was involved in navigating Iran’s nuclear programme and stalled indirect negotiations with Washington, both of which have been disrupted by recent hostilities. Shift towards military influenceHis removal raises questions about how these crises will now be handled. Analysts suggest power could shift further toward the armed forces, particularly as the government struggles to maintain continuity. Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has indicated that military units may be granted broader authority to act if senior leadership is incapacitated. This could lead to faster decision-making but potentially with less central coordination. Meanwhile, signs of uncertainty over succession persist. Public appearances by the new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, have been limited, and official announcements have been delayed, fuelling speculation over internal stability. Risk of further escalationIn the immediate aftermath, Iran’s military leadership has signalled a strong response. Army chief Amir Hatami warned of “decisive” retaliation, raising the prospect of further escalation in the conflict. While Iran has demonstrated resilience, including through disruptions to global energy markets, continued strikes and leadership losses could undermine its ability to respond effectively over time. The death of Larijani is therefore seen as more than the loss of a single official. It highlights mounting pressure on Iran’s leadership and increases the risk of instability, both in the conduct of the war and within the country itself. Join the discussion? Already a member? Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026
View full article
