As the war triggered by U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iran enters its first week, AJP examines how the conflict began and evolved, the emerging power vacuum in Tehran and its implications for Iran and the Gulf states, and the broader impact on global energy routes, financial markets and the international order.
SEOUL, March 06 (AJP) - Exactly who is in control in Tehran remains unclear after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed during the opening hours of the United States’ Operation Epic Fury and Israel’s concurrent Operation Roaring Lion.
The conflict ignited on February 28 after U.S. President Donald Trump authorized a massive joint air campaign alongside Israel. Ali Khamenei was killed during the opening salvos of the bombardment.
What he removed was more than a leader figurehead, according to Lee Hee-soo, a prominent expert on Islamic culture and Professor Emeritus at Hanyang University. "Khamenei held the status of a spiritual leader for approximately 300 million Shia Muslims worldwide," and the loss was a "spiritual blow" that the West may have underestimated.
The uncertainty deepened after U.S. President Donald Trump said Washington should have a say in selecting Iran’s next leader, warning that figures he considers unacceptable could "just end up dead."
The sudden removal of Iran’s supreme leader and several senior military officials has left the Islamic Republic navigating a rare leadership vacuum while confronting the most intense military assault on its territory in decades.
An interim leadership council composed of President Masoud Pezeshkian, judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Eje’i and senior cleric Ayatollah Alireza Arafi is temporarily overseeing the state. Meanwhile, Iran’s powerful Assembly of Experts is expected to begin the process of selecting the country’s next supreme leader.
Mojtaba Khamenei, the slain leader’s son, is widely viewed as a potential successor, though the succession process—traditionally handled within Iran’s clerical establishment—now faces unprecedented external pressure.
Lee called the potential rise of Mojtaba Khamenei as the "final card" for a regime. "In a state of war, the population often unites under a banner of patriotism," he added noting that Iran’s 1,200-year history since the time of Alexander the Great has been a "history of resistance."
Decentralized retaliation and power
Despite heavy damage to Iran’s military infrastructure, retaliation has continued across multiple fronts. Israeli officials say successive waves of U.S.–Israeli strikes have destroyed roughly 80 percent of Iran’s air defense systems and more than half of its missile launch infrastructure. Yet missile and drone attacks from Iranian forces and allied groups continue to target Israel as well as U.S. installations across the Gulf.
Iran’s ability to sustain attacks reflects a contingency strategy developed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) known as the "Mosaic Defense Doctrine." Under the doctrine, Iran’s military was divided into 31 autonomous regional commands capable of operating independently if central leadership were eliminated. Professor Lee notes that the IRGC is not merely a military wing but a central power pillar controlling approximately 40 percent of the Iranian economy.
"The Revolutionary Guard holds political, economic, and information power. This makes a simple regime change extremely difficult," Lee observed.
Regional IRGC units appear to be acting with pre-authorized authority to launch missiles and deploy drone swarms. While Iran's high-tech capabilities are degraded, it reportedly maintains a production capacity of over 400 drones per day, including the Shahed drones currently utilized in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Drawing parallels to the eight-year Iran-Iraq War, Lee warned that asymmetric warfare lacks a clear "end game" and could settle into a permanent state of chaos.
Moreover, the weakening of centralized leadership has also activated Iran’s broader regional proxy network, the Axis of Resistance. Hezbollah forces in Lebanon have intensified attacks against northern Israel, triggering heavy Israeli strikes in Beirut. In addition to targeting Israel and U.S. bases, Iranian drones struck neighboring Azerbaijan—marking the first expansion of the conflict into the Caucasus.
The Hormuz dilemma and the Beijing channel
One of the most immediate global consequences of the conflict has been the disruption of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. The narrow corridor carries roughly one-fifth of global oil shipments and remains the world’s most critical energy chokepoint. Naval units associated with the IRGC and allied Houthi forces have effectively created a de facto blockade. Professor Lee warned that the risks remain extreme: "The blockade is Iran's life-line and their most potent asymmetric weapon."
Based on current tracking data from maritime intelligence firms like Vortexa and Kpler as of Friday, the maritime paralysis has reached critical levels. Roughly 300 oil tankers and 280 dry bulk carriers are currently trapped inside the Persian Gulf. Outside the passage, at least 150 tankers carrying crude and LNG have dropped anchor in the Gulf of Oman.
Approximately 3,200 vessels—representing 4 percent of total worldwide shipping tonnage—are currently idle.
China can surface a mediating actor in the conflict, Lee said as Beijing purchases approximately 80 percent of Iran’s oil.
The upcoming summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing on March 31 therefore can service as the true "inflection point," he said,
Gulf security under pressure
Iran’s retaliation has also sent shockwaves across the Gulf monarchies. Missile and drone attacks during the opening days targeted multiple countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Oman. Several strikes damaged civilian infrastructure, including airports, shaking the region’s image as a safe global business hub.
The United Arab Emirates bore the brunt of early attacks, threatening its reputation as a stable financial center. Oman, traditionally known for its neutral diplomacy and role as a mediator, was also targeted. The attacks are forcing Gulf states to reassess their national security strategies. For decades, Gulf governments assumed that hosting U.S. military bases would guarantee protection, but some are now questioning whether the security benefits still outweigh the risks.
A region entering a new strategic era
Whether Iran ultimately survives the conflict intact or emerges deeply weakened, the Gulf that emerges from the war will likely be very different. Iran’s attacks on Gulf states have eroded the neutrality and mediation roles those countries once played.
At the same time, the leadership vacuum in Tehran and the rise of decentralized proxy warfare are transforming the structure of regional conflict.
The war that began as a targeted U.S.–Israeli military campaign is now evolving into a fragmented regional confrontation stretching from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean and the Caucasus. The conflict has now expanded to involve 14 countries. The death toll continues to rise, with officials reporting at least 1,230 fatalities in Iran and more than 120 in Lebanon.
As the conflict enters its second week, the central question facing the region is no longer simply how Iran will respond to the strikes. It is whether the Middle East’s fragile balance of power—already under strain—can survive the collapse of centralized authority in Tehran.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.