The Strategy Behind Israel’s Killing of Two More Iranian Leaders

SPEAKER_1 (0:01)

Instagram teen accounts default teens into automatic protections for who can contact them and the content they can see. Explore teen accounts and all of our ongoing work to protect teens online at instagram.com/teenaccounts.

Alex Ossola (0:18)

In the latest on Iran, a top US official resigns over the war while Israel continues its strategy of taking out top enemy leadership with the killing of Iranian security chief Ali Larijani.

Anat Peled (0:30)

While this is a strategic military achievement, it's just not clear that it's going to move the needle in terms of regime change.

Alex Ossola (0:37)

Plus the Senate kicks off debate on a contentious voter ID bill pushed by President Trump. And finance bros say hands off my Bloomberg terminal, even when AI claims to do the same thing for less. It's Tuesday, March 17th. I'm Alex Ossola for the Wall Street Journal. This is the PM Edition of What's News, the top headlines and business stories that move the world today.

The top US counterterrorism official said today that he had resigned over his concerns about the war with Iran. Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, posted a screenshot of his resignation letter, adding that he could not support the war and that, quote, Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation. He also said that the US had started the war because of pressure from Israel. It's the first significant departure from the Trump administration due to the conflict. When asked about it by reporters in the Oval Office today, President Trump said that Kent's assessment was wrong.

SPEAKER_5 (1:35)

When I read his statement, I realized that it's a good thing that he's out because he said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat. Every country realized what a threat Iran was. The question is whether or not they wanted to do something about it.

Alex Ossola (1:50)

Meanwhile, in Iran, the country's rulers have unleashed a new crackdown against domestic dissent. In an effort to hold back the risk of an uprising, security forces are using fear to keep a tight grip on the streets. Armed men ride around on motorcycles brandishing their weapons to intimidate people and have set up checkpoints where they routinely stop and search cars. At least 500 people have been arrested since the start of the war. And on the topic of the country's leadership, on this morning show we mentioned that Israel announced today that it has killed Iranian security chief Ali Larijani. Israel also said that in a separate strike it killed Gollum Reza Soleimani, head of the country's repressive Basij militia. Those two deaths are the biggest hit to the country's leadership since supreme leader Ali Khamenei at the beginning of the war. It's also the latest example of Israel's strategy of killing the leaders of enemy organizations in an effort to weaken them. WSJ reporter Anat Peled joins me now from Tel Aviv. Anat, who was Larijani? What was his reputation as a leader?

Anat Peled (2:51)

Yeah, so Larijani was the secretary of the supreme national security council, and he had a very prominent role in the regime. He oversaw the violent crackdown of anti-government protests in January that left thousands dead. Interestingly, he also had a reputation, diplomats talked about this, of being also a bit pragmatic, more moderate compared to, you know, other people in the regime and someone that could talk to the West.

Alex Ossola (3:18)

So, just thinking about Israel's strategy here, how does taking out the leadership advance Israel's war goals?

Anat Peled (3:24)

Yeah, so Israel has gone about this strategy in several other arenas. We've seen this in Gaza with Hamas. We've seen this in Lebanon with the Hezbollah militant group. Those are both proxies or allies of Iran. While this is a strategic military achievement, in the long term, the problem is these groups are still standing. Hezbollah is shooting at Israel still. It joined the war with Iran. Iran's leadership planned for a war in which many would be killed and had prearranged replacements ready to step in. Analysts do tell us that it could increase the paranoia of leaders who know they are walking around with a target on their back because Israel said they will continue to go after leadership, political and military leadership. It could also maybe complicate communications as people become more nervous to communicate. It could have results of degrading the regime and making decision making harder.

It's just not clear that it's going to move the needle in terms of regime change. And it actually has the risk of someone even more radical or more hardline could step in.

Alex Ossola (4:25)

And how does this align with the US's war goals as we understand them?