Has a new era begun in Iran? With the new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, son of former supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, taking over the reins of Islamic rule, will there be change in the country or will the same fundamentalist policies be imposed on the people of Iran?
The Middle East is undergoing a period of deep uncertainty – energy markets are in turmoil, the Gulf monarchies are on edge, and India is walking a tightrope of geography and national interest.
Iran’s new supreme leader
Point blank conversation between HT Shishir Gupta and ht Ayesha Verma The event begins with a significant development in Tehran: the elevation of Mojtaba Khamenei, son of slain supreme leader Ali Khamenei, as Iran’s new supreme leader. His rise, backed by the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), signals continuity rather than change – a dynastic and even hard-line consolidation of power, not a reformist beginning, as had been hoped by thousands in Iran… and even more around the world.
According to Shishir Gupta, this establishment is not an isolated incident but the political backdrop to an already volatile war. With Mojtaba closely associated with the IRGC, Tehran’s message is clear: the regime does not intend to compromise under pressure, but to fight.
Gupta describes a “big picture of chaos” spanning from the Middle East to the global economy. Oil prices have risen to around $117 a barrel, with Qatari estimates indicating a surprise rise to $150.
A war with no end?
On the battlefield, Gupta presents the confrontation as a tough, pitched battle with no easy off-ramps. The United States and Israel have increased bombardment targeting Tehran’s infrastructure, oil depots and other strategic sites in an effort to degrade Iran’s war-fighting capability. Remember, the war was waged just 48 hours after Washington and Tehran held the third round of nuclear talks, which begs the question – were the talks just for show and had preparations for war already begun?
Yet Iran continues to launch missiles and drones at Gulf states in what it sees as collusion with Washington, effectively punishing the Sunni Arab world for taking the United States’ side. Through proxies such as Hezbollah, the Houthis and Kata’ib Hezbollah, Tehran is expanding the scope of the conflict and ensuring that its costs are felt well beyond its borders.
The final ultimatum: surrender or die
Gupta compared the fight to a heavyweight boxing match, where both fighters refuse to lose. On one side is President Donald Trump, who is intent on forcing Iran to surrender or be destroyed; On the other hand, Mojtaba Khamenei and the IRGC are equally adamant that they will not surrender.
Read this also Who is Mojtaba Khamenei? Iran announces new supreme leader amid war with US, Israel
In such a scenario, each side can still declare its own version of “victory”. Iran can claim success only by ensuring that the regime survives; The US can claim success by arguing that it has “shattered” Iran’s military and economic infrastructure. Gupta emphasizes that the real question is not battlefield losses, but whether Washington is able to achieve the holy grail of complete victory: regime change in Tehran.
Lens on the Strait of Hormuz
strait of hormuzThe route through which about 20% of the world’s oil passes has become another major pressure point. Gupta says that the movement of ships there has slowed down considerably because Iran has targeted ships, fired drones and disrupted maritime traffic. irgc Claimed they would fire on any ships passing through the strait – a threat issued just days after Trump said he would protect those same ships.
Read this also New video suggests US Tomahawk missile may have been behind Iran school attack that killed 165
This, then, turns the conflict into a three-way competition: the US-Israel alliance, Iran, and the Gulf states absorb the collateral damage, even as they try to avoid overt alignment in war. While the world awaits assurances on energy and food security, the region is still stuck in what Gupta calls “complete anarchy,” and a turning point is expected soon.
IRGC: Tehran’s real power
In political theater, Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian recently issued a carefully modified apology to Gulf states for the attacks, including an explicit warning that attacks would resume if they continued to support the US. Yet Gupta is clear: the statement has “no significance.”
Instead, the IRGC immediately cut that soft line and signaled its intention to expand the war so that “the world is really feeling the heat.” For Gupta, this underscores an important reality – in today’s Iran, the IRGC is the real regime, not even Mojtaba Khamenei. As long as the IRGC remains intact, firing missiles, launching drones and harassing shipping, the character of the war is unlikely to change.
He argues that the decisive point will not be the fate of the militias or proxies, but rather the survival of the core governance structure established in the IRGC. Both Tehran and Washington can spin a victory narrative, but without the collapse of that central pillar, any talk of a decisive US-Israeli victory will remain premature.
For now, Iran’s continued ability to attack ships, target Gulf infrastructure, and project power suggests a regime that is “still alive and active” and not on the brink of implosion.
What is India’s role?
Turning to India, Gupta says clearly: New Delhi neither provoked this war, nor escalated it, and has no realistic way of intervening diplomatically or militarily. He suggests that the call for India to intervene is more about domestic “vote bank politics” than strategic logic, with some parties trying to unify the Shia constituency.
He said recent Shia protests in cities such as Srinagar, Lucknow and Hyderabad had been largely peaceful, despite global narratives suggesting that India was “burning”. India’s actual stance is much more restrained and rooted in its own security and economic compulsions, while emphasizing dialogue and diplomacy for a more peaceful Middle East.
Read this also India supports dialogue, diplomacy to end US-Iran war: Jaishankar
Yet even in crisis, Gupta sees opportunity for India. First, building and leveraging nearby trans-shipment hubs – such as a new port in Kerala – to create shorter, more secure supply lines for food and essential goods to the Gulf states. This could help safeguard regional food security and also give India a stronger logistical role in the Arabian Sea.
Another opportunity is for introspection on defense preparedness. Iran, despite decades of sanctions, continues to fire missiles and drones with increasing accuracy, indicating indigenous capability in missile motors, fuel, explosives and targeting systems. Gupta argues that the Indian defense establishment, including the DRDO, should study how an acknowledged state has managed to build and maintain such a strong arsenal.
drowning of dena
On the controversy over the sinking of the Iranian ship Bina near Sri Lanka, Gupta rejected criticism that India failed to protect it. He noted that the ship was away from Galle and not within the immediate operational area of India; Expecting New Delhi to secure it would be as unfair as demanding the security of a ship in the Suez Canal.
For them, the priority is clear: India should focus on better maritime security in its neighbourhood, support friendly Gulf countries and protect its large diaspora in the region. Moreover, it cannot be expected to take on responsibilities that China and Russia – both closer to Iran and historically more supportive of its regime – have themselves refused to take on.
Read this also ‘Think it was humanitarian’: Jaishankar on India allowing Iranian ship to dock in Kochi
Ultimately, Gupta presents India as a “geographical prisoner”: surrounded by a hostile Pakistan to the west, a strategic rival in China to the north and east, and a deep dependence on imported oil and gas from a troubled Middle East. These constraints mean India must prioritize its energy security, diversify suppliers and avoid engaging in wars that have neither started nor can realistically end.
He concluded that India will do what suits its best strategic interests – standing with friendly Gulf partners, securing sea lanes and food supplies, protecting its diaspora and staying out of the direct line of fire between the US, Israel and Iran.
