Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
Iran Conflict 2026
1JUN

Mojtaba's first named directives via IRIB

3 min read
08:32UTC

Iran's state broadcaster attributed military directives to Mojtaba Khamenei by name on 14 May, the first time since the war began that operational orders have been credited to a Supreme Leader who has not been seen alive in public since 28 February.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Iran's war paper is now signed by a Supreme Leader unseen in public since 28 February.

Iran's state broadcaster IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) reported on Thursday that Mojtaba Khamenei has issued "new and decisive directives" for military operations 1. The attribution is the first time since 28 February that Iran's media apparatus has formally named the country's post-March leadership as the source of active operational guidance, rather than political commentary. No confirming broadcast, recorded address, or authenticated communication accompanied the document. Mojtaba's 17-day absence had been reported by 30 March and has now extended through 77 days of war .

Mojtaba was appointed by the Assembly of Experts in an emergency online session on 7 March after Israeli strikes killed his father Ali Khamenei on 28 February. Thursday's directives describe military operations rather than political guidance, the form successor leaders typically reserve for periods of consolidated authority. The Islamic Republic's institutional design separates religious authority from operational command: the IRGC reports to The Supreme Leader directly, while the regular army Artesh reports through the General Staff. A directive "for military operations" attributed to the office of The Supreme Leader sits across both reporting lines.

Article 109 of Iran's constitution requires The Supreme Leader to hold marja theological credentials. Mojtaba does not. Eight Assembly of Experts members boycotted the 7 March vote citing IRGC pressure. Thursday's directives bypass that gap rather than resolve it. An invisible Supreme Leader cannot be deposed, contradicted, or interrogated, which means the 56-year-old IRGC pick is structurally insulated by his own opacity. Mohammad Mokhber, Mojtaba's senior adviser and acting head of government, had been carrying the public operational voice on Hormuz doctrine through the prior week without requiring a Supreme Leader appearance.

The pattern mirrors, from the Iranian side, the gap on the American side: instruments are issued on both sides, but the issuing authority on each side cannot be verified by the other. Washington produces speeches without paper. Tehran now produces paper without a visible signatory.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Iran is run by a Supreme Leader, a religious figure with ultimate authority over the military, judiciary, and government. Iran's constitution says this person must be a senior Islamic scholar of the highest rank. When the previous Supreme Leader was killed in February 2026, his son Mojtaba Khamenei was given the role despite not having those qualifications. On 14 May, Iran's state television reported that Mojtaba had issued military orders. But Mojtaba has not appeared on camera or in public for 77 days. Nobody has confirmed the order came from him directly. IRIB published the directives as a document only, with no video, recorded voice, or live broadcast from Mojtaba accompanying it. When a country's leader has not been seen for nearly three months, and decisions attributed to him come only as unverified documents, it raises real questions about who is actually making the decisions.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Iran's constitutional requirement under Article 109 that the Supreme Leader hold marja (senior clerical) status created an insurmountable gap for Mojtaba, whose clerical credentials do not meet the standard. The Assembly of Experts' emergency appointment on 7 March bypassed this requirement under wartime emergency powers, but at least eight members boycotted the vote citing IRGC pressure.

The IRGC's role as institutional kingmaker reflects 47 years of expansion: the corps now controls significant portions of the Iranian economy, the Revolutionary Courts, and the intelligence apparatus. An IRGC-backed Supreme Leader without independent clerical authority consolidates the corps' power but creates a self-reinforcing dependency: Mojtaba needs IRGC institutional support to govern; the IRGC needs an attributable Supreme Leader to legitimise its operations externally.

What could happen next?
  • The 77-day public absence, combined with attributed directives issued through state broadcaster without authentication, makes it impossible for external parties to confirm whether Mojtaba is alive, incapacitated, or willingly absent; negotiations requiring authorised Iranian sign-off face a counterparty verification problem.

    Immediate · 0.75
  • Risk

    If the IRGC is issuing directives in Mojtaba's name without his participation, any ceasefire or nuclear agreement attributed to Supreme Leader authority would lack constitutional legitimacy and could be repudiated after the fact.

    Short term · 0.62
  • Consequence

    The IRIB attribution mechanism normalises document-only command attribution in Iranian state media, providing the IRGC with an institutional tool to claim Supreme Leader authorisation for future operations without requiring Mojtaba's visible participation.

    Medium term · 0.7
First Reported In

Update #98 · Three pledges, no paper, twelve sanctions

Iran International (citing IRIB)· 15 May 2026
Read original
Causes and effects
This Event
Mojtaba's first named directives via IRIB
Iran is now running war paper signed by a man no adversary or ally has visually confirmed alive in 77 days. The constitutional gap that produced his appointment remains unaddressed.
Different Perspectives
Human rights monitors (Hengaw, Amnesty International, Iran HRM)
Human rights monitors (Hengaw, Amnesty International, Iran HRM)
Monitors documented a second death sentence for Zahra Tabari, 68, reported cemetery record deletions at Behesht-e Zahra, and a poll showing 81.5% of medical residents want to emigrate, against a background of 200+ confirmed executions since February. Iran's security courts operate at uninterrupted wartime tempo regardless of the diplomatic track.
Pakistan (mediator)
Pakistan (mediator)
Islamabad carried Trump's revised MOU demanding HEU destruction to Iranian negotiators, formally inheriting the role of sole active mediator after Oman's forced withdrawal. Pakistan lacks Oman's banking infrastructure for frozen-asset routing and carries its own regional stakes, making it a less structurally neutral broker.
Kuwait
Kuwait
Kuwait intercepted Iranian missiles and drones for a second time in days on 1 June, with air-raid sirens sounding nationwide, after invoking Article 51 self-defence on 28 May following the Ali Al Salem ballistic-missile strike. The repeated interceptions test whether Kuwait's domestic politics can sustain hosting US forces as a de facto co-belligerent.
China (PRC)
China (PRC)
Beijing sent scholars to Shangri-La rather than its defence minister and addressed Taiwan without mentioning Iran, maintaining bilateral energy corridor protection with Tehran while refusing diplomatic exposure at multilateral forums. Trump barred China as an HEU custodian on 27 May, removing Beijing from the deal architecture while China continues supplying DPI hardware that caps Iran's internet.
Lloyd's of London / war-risk underwriters
Lloyd's of London / war-risk underwriters
Lloyd's held its Hormuz war-risk designation at $10-14 million per voyage while Brent recovered to $93.91, maintaining the structural divergence from futures pricing that has persisted since late May. Underwriters require a UN Security Council resolution or government certification letter, not diplomatic optimism.
Gulf Cooperation Council states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar)
Gulf Cooperation Council states (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar)
Five Gulf states wrote to the IMO on 21 May rejecting Iran's PGSA transit authority over international waters; Saudi Arabia and the UAE have not confirmed participation in the European Hormuz mission. The GCC is navigating between US security guarantees and exposure to Iranian fire, with no Gulf state formally co-belligerent except Kuwait.