On Tuesday, Israeli forces struck the Iranian Supreme Council as they gathered to choose a successor to the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a senior Israeli official told Fox News.
Specific targets included the Presidential Office and the building housing the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), a key body advising the Supreme Leader on national security and foreign policy.
Other elements of the leadership compound used by top officials for meetings, command/control, and related infrastructure.
The IDF stated that around 100 fighter jets dropped over 250 munitions on the complex, following intelligence collection aimed at degrading Iran’s command and control systems.
STRUCK: The Iranian Regime’s Leadership Compound — the central headquarters have been dismantled
This command headquarters was one of the most heavily secured assets in Iran. The compound that housed the regime’s most senior forum was struck by the IAF overnight using precise… pic.twitter.com/4iW2xd71bC
Fox News’ Trey Yingst reported, “Good morning. I do want to just start with some breaking news here before I show you the scene of one of these cluster munitions impacts just outside of Tel Aviv. But I’m told by a senior Israeli official that the Israelis just struck the Supreme Council gathering where the Iranians were meeting to choose a new Supreme leader.”
“This is a significant development and again speaks to the Israeli intelligence about this war. They just targeted the meeting in Tehran, where what’s left of the leadership was gathering to choose a new Supreme Leader.”
Watch:
The Iranian Supreme Council was counting the votes to appoint the next Supreme Leader when Israel struck the meeting location. pic.twitter.com/jCJMRFm4aw
The Smoothie King corporation, which proudly boasts its DEI training for employees and upper management, found itself at the center of a major controversy yesterday when two of its employees at their Ann Arbor, Michigan, location decided to discriminate against a customer for wearing a hoodie sweatshirt displaying the name of the President of the United States.
Smoothie King’s current CEO and Chairman is Wan Kim, who acquired the company in 2012 after serving as its first international franchisee in South Korea in 2003. DEI, at least in the case of the two employees working at the Ann Arbor location, appears to be a one-way street.
Erika and husband smoothie king
In a stunning video recorded by Mrs. Lindemyer, a young woman, who appears to be a manager of the Smoothie King in Ann Arbor, Michigan, can be seen arrogantly attempting to explain away the unlawful actions of another employee working behind the counter with her who refused to provide service to him because his hoodie sweatshirt, that bears the name of President Trump, makes her “uncomfortable.”
The unidentified, intolerant woman working behind the Smoothie King counter appears to believe she has the right to ignore Mr. Lindemyr’s right to free speech, as she not only refuses to serve him but demands he and his wife leave the store.
Watch the scene unfold at the Smoothie King location on Jackson Ave. in Ann Arbor, MI, which was recorded by Erika Lindemyer, the wife of the discrimination victim:
Erika Lindemyer & her husband were refused service by @SmoothieKing (https://t.co/WpKp3vidLg)
employee in Ann Arbor, MI.
Watch her openly discriminate against Mr. Lindemyer because he dared to wear a sweatshirt with the President of the United State’s name on it. pic.twitter.com/NJHjbXR7Yc
The employee who discriminated against the Trump-hoodie-wearing customer was so proud of herself that she posted a video on social media revealing how she and her fellow employee refused service to a Smoothie King customer over their (perceived) political beliefs:
This Ann Arbor, MI @SmoothieKing employee boldly videotaped herself while denying service to a customer for wearing a sweatshirt that bears the name of the President of the United States!
Is she trying to get Smoothie King sued for discrimination?
The Gateway Pundit spoke exclusively with Erika Lindemyer, who had just finished filing a police report and was speaking with a lawyer yesterday. We do not have any details on a potential lawsuit yet, but we hope to learn more later today. In the meantime, the City of Ann Arbor has strict rules against discrimination, including discrimination based on an individual’s “political beliefs” (see below).
Chapter 112 (Non-Discrimination) of the Ann Arbor City Code of Ordinances, specifically Section 9:150 (Intent), explicitly protects against discrimination based on actual or perceived political beliefs in public accommodations like retail businesses.
“It is the intent of the city that no individual be denied equal protection of the laws; nor shall any individual be denied the enjoyment of his or her civil or political rights or be discriminated against because of actual or perceived age, arrest record, color, disability, educational association, ethnicity, familial status, family responsibilities, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, government-issued identification card, height, HIV status, marital status, national origin, political beliefs, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, source of income, veteran status, victim of domestic violence or stalking, or weight.”
The Smoothie King corporate account put out a statement on X yesterday, informing the public that the two employees involved in the discriminatory act have been fired, or “are no longer with the company.”
X post – Smoothie King Statement Part IX-post Smoothie King Statement Part II
The former Smoothie King employee jumped into action and immediately put up a GoFundMe to help fund her intolerant self, now that she is out of a job. GoFundMe allegedly shut down her account shortly after it was opened.
Refused to serve a Trump supporter, She didn’t think this would happen next.
A Smoothie King employee has been fired after refusing to serve a Trump supporter following public backlash.
A GoFundMe was started to raise money for her — but the campaign was shut down.
She will… pic.twitter.com/auF1B7cmgq
The Smoothie King employee has since released a video explaining why she refused service to the Trump-hoodie-wearing man, noting how busy the store was at the time, despite the video taken by Mrs. Lindemyr that doesn’t appear to show another customer in the store.
Smoothie King confirms that Janiyah Mishelle Williams and her coworker have officially been terminated after they refused to serve customers at @SmoothieKing because the husband wore a Trump hoodie.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem is testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee as the partial government shutdown targeting DHS hits week three, and Democrats fight to end deportations.
This comes amid heightened tensions following the deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good, who joined a mob of violent leftists who have been clashing with federal agents repeatedly over the last year. It was only a matter of time until somebody died while attacking ICE agents, as happened with the two.
Good was shot and killed after attempting to run over an agent in her car, and Pretti, who had a history of violent encounters and spitting on ICE agents, engaged with federal agents while armed with a gun.
As Noem entered the hearing room, she was harassed by leftist protesters, saying, “You should resign,” You should be ashamed of yourself,” and “Stand with Immigrants.”
Angel families in attendance then confronted them. “You want to know who we are? We’re families who lost loved ones to illegal alien crime.”
“There’s no such thing as illegal immigrants,” one said, as another screamed, “We are families who have families detained in an inhumane system, oppressing them, violating the basic human rights.” Another said, “No one is illegal on stolen land.”
WATCH:
Reporters also attempted to grill Noem outside of the Committee Hearing room.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem heads to Capitol Hill Tuesday to face lawmakers demanding she resign, be fired or impeached.
Her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee comes as members of both parties criticize her handling of the Trump administration’s immigration operations throughout the country. Some Democrats have called for her to face impeachment.
Her testimony has been in the works for months. Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, had been seeking her appearance to conduct routine oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
But it wasn’t until after the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good during immigration operations in Minneapolis that Noem agreed to testify.
Last month, President Donald Trump dismissed the idea of firing Noem.
Image: Wikimedia Commons (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by Mahmoud Hosseini)
The worldwide consequences of Operation Epic Fury could reach well beyond the Middle East.
Nations such as China, Russia, and North Korea have much at stake. The threat of terrorism may be influenced. Regional relationships could shift. In all these scenarios, it seems that the U.S. and Israel emerge as the winners. Time will tell.
The Gateway Pundit spoke to national security expert and retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Darin Gaub. The former UH-60 Black Hawk pilot and battalion commander is a frequent guest on Fox News and has analyzed the “high risk, high reward” joint military offensive launched by the United States and Israel against Iran on February 28.
“In the past 60 days, both Iran and Venezuela, the top oil suppliers to China, have been knocked out of the game,” he said, adding that the two countries are “crucial for China’s energy demands.” Could the East Asian country be forced to explore other sources?
To that end, Gaub noted that the alliance between China and Russia is “relatively new,” originating after the Soviet Union’s dissolution in 1991.
Considering this, he said, “the key issue here is whether China will pursue a trading alliance with Russia or revert to viewing Russia as an adversary,” he said. In this latter scenario, Eastern Siberia could emerge as an energy source, potentially leading to Chinese military intervention to secure it.
“Regardless of whether it is intentional or unintentional,” he told The Gateway Pundit that “a divide between China and Russia could emerge or at least speed up as a result of Operation Epic Fury.”
As all of this plays out, he said, Russia could also find itself looking for options in amid their four-year war against Ukraine. “Iran has been instrumental for Russia, supplying cheap, expendable drones and other weaponry.” In his opinion, “this is crucial for maintaining operations in Ukraine.”
In the Middle East, the Saudis and Iranians have had a contentious relationship for over four decades. This rivalry is rooted not only in geopolitical issues but also in religious differences, as Saudi Arabia is predominantly Sunni Muslim while Iran is primarily Shia.
According to Gaub, “Saudi Arabia is certainly pleased with the actions taken by the United States in Iran, seeing the collapse of the regime as an opportunity to enhance its influence and assert its dominance in the Middle East and Central Asia.”
The potential effects of Operation Epic Fury on terrorism must also be taken into account, Gaub contended. “Without Iranian backing,” he said, “Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis could become largely ineffective.”
The consequences of the operation could also reach tyrannical regimes around the world, particularly that of North Korea. “Without China, North Korea flounders,” he pointed out.
“If China’s struggling economy faces severe repercussions, North Korea may become increasingly militaristic in an attempt to gain favor from countries globally, or it might implode from its own internal pressures.”
“These potential circumstances only scratch the surface. The possibilities are endless,” Gaub concluded.
President Donald Trump is striking back at critics within the MAGA movement who are lambasting the campaign as a betrayal of his long-standing America First principles.
In a fiery phone call with journalist Rachael Bade of The Inner Circle, Trump brushed aside growing criticism from within parts of the MAGA coalition over his decision to launch a massive joint U.S.–Israel bombing campaign against Iran.
“I think that MAGA is Trump — MAGA’s not the other two,” Trump said, referring directly to Kelly and Carlson.
“MAGA wants to see our country thrive and be safe. And MAGA loves what I’m doing — every aspect of it… This is a detour that we have to take in order to keep our country safe and keep other countries safe, frankly.”
The strikes, which began Saturday, targeted Iran’s missile infrastructure, naval assets, and top regime officials, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The operation comes amid stalled “peace talks” that critics argue Tehran was using as cover to continue advancing its nuclear program.
The offensive has not been without cost. Six U.S. service members have now been confirmed killed. Iranian casualties include regime officials and civilians.
But Trump was unequivocal: preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon outweighs political noise.
“I have to do what’s right, number one — and you can’t have Iran getting a nuclear weapon. That’s predominant to me,” Trump said.
Kelly, who supported Trump in the past election cycle, broke ranks publicly this week, telling her audience, “No one should have to die for a foreign country.” She questioned whether fallen U.S. troops “died for the United States,” adding, “I think they died for Iran or for Israel.”
Trump did not mince words.
“MegYn was opposed to me for years when I ran the first time and nothing stopped me,” he said. “Some people are against — and they always come back. She came all the way back. But now I guess she maybe doesn’t like the idea of this war, but I do because I have to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of the Iranians.”
He added bluntly that Kelly should “study her history book a little bit.”
Carlson, who reportedly visited the White House multiple times in recent weeks to lobby against military action, labeled the Iran strikes “absolutely disgusting and evil” in comments to media outlets.
Tucker argued that the elimination of the Khamenei regime will “reshuffle the deck” in a significant way.
Trump told Bade that Carlson “can say whatever he wants; it has no impact on me.”
For Trump, the calculation is simple: strength deters war, weakness invites it. And in his view, allowing Iran to inch toward nuclear capability would guarantee catastrophe far greater than a short-term military campaign.
Immediately after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s swearing-in at a Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Tuesday, a leftist protester stood up and began screaming at Noem before the crazed woman was removed.
Noem was dragged into the Senate as her agency enters its third week without funding after federal agents shot and killed violent leftist protesters, one of whom attempted to run an agent over with a car, and another who was armed while interfering with ICE operations.
“Kristi Noem, you should be ashamed of yourself,” the woman shouted. “You have disgraced our agency.”
She continued, “FEMA employees should be responding to disasters, not ICE!”
“You should be ashamed of yourself,” she added before repeatedly chanting “Your staff say abolish ICE!”
WATCH:
As The Gateway Pundit reported earlier, Noem was harassed earlier upon entering the committee hearing by leftist protesters, shouting, “You should resign,” You should be ashamed of yourself,” and “Stand with Immigrants.”
Angel families in attendance then confronted the protesters. “You want to know who we are? We’re families who lost loved ones to illegal alien crime.”
“There’s no such thing as illegal immigrants,” one said, as another screamed, “We are families who have families detained in an inhumane system, oppressing them, violating the basic human rights.” Another said, “No one is illegal on stolen land.”
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a paramilitary force that swears allegiance to the ayatollah, may be the key to Iran’s fate. Tasnim News Agency, CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is dead, as are many of the country’s top leaders. However, there is still a leadership structure in place, and the regime has not yet fallen. Predicting what comes next is difficult because multiple factions are in play. Those with the most power and the greatest chance of succeeding are calling for the appointment of a new ayatollah.
The strikes were described as “decapitation strikes” and reportedly killed more than 40 high-ranking officials. Notable casualties include the defense minister, the chief of staff of the armed forces, and the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
While the leadership has been severely depleted, the regime itself has not collapsed. The coercive apparatus, specifically the remaining elements of the IRGC, appears to be maintaining control through checkpoints and a nationwide internet blackout.
Per Article 111 of the Iranian Constitution, an Interim Leadership Council has been formed to manage the state until a permanent successor is chosen. The council includes Masoud Pezeshkian, the president of Iran; Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, the chief justice; and Ayatollah Alireza Arafi, a senior cleric from the Guardian Council appointed to represent the religious establishment. There have been unverified rumors of an attack on Arafi, but his death has not been confirmed.
The existing government, clerics, and military would seek to preserve the Islamic system, while the opposition would attempt to move the country in a different direction. However, opposition factions lack the popular support and power to seize control without external help. President Trump appears to be taking a pragmatic stance in Iran, similar to Venezuela, using U.S. military pressure to tip the scale in favor of the opposition while avoiding entangling the United States in another Iraq or Afghanistan with boots on the ground or attempting to build a new government from scratch under fire.
The primary opposition elements are the MEK, the NCRI, and Reza Pahlavi. The MEK, formally known as the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, also called the Mojahedin-e-Khalq, is one of the oldest and most controversial Iranian opposition groups. Founded in the 1960s by university students, its ideology has been described as a blend of Islamism and Marxism.
The group originally opposed the Shah and played a role in the 1979 Revolution but quickly fell out with Ayatollah Khomeini and was forced into exile. During the Iran-Iraq War, the MEK sided with Saddam Hussein against Iran, a decision that led many Iranians to view the organization as traitors.
Now based primarily in Albania, the group operates politically through the National Council of Resistance of Iran. While it maintains significant lobbying influence in Washington, D.C., many analysts argue it has little popular support inside Iran because of its past actions and what critics describe as a cult-like internal structure.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran, led by Maryam Rajavi, has moved quickly to fill the power vacuum.
On February 28, 2026, the NCRI formally declared the formation of a provisional government, presenting itself as the only organized alternative ready to assume power immediately. Its Ten-Point Plan for what it calls a democratic republic includes the dissolution of the IRGC and the Basij, a non-nuclear Iran, and complete gender equality.
During the 2026 protests, one of the group’s prominent slogans has been, “No to the Shah, No to the Mullahs.” The NCRI is openly anti-monarchy and argues that restoring the Pahlavi family would amount to exchanging one dictatorship for another.
The NCRI operates from two primary international hubs while claiming to expand activity inside Iran. For decades, its main political headquarters has been in Auvers-sur-Oise, France, where Maryam Rajavi and the Secretariat are based. The location functions as a parliament-in-exile, hosting international delegations and coordinating lobbying efforts.
Operationally, much of the group’s manpower is concentrated at Ashraf-3 in Manëz, Albania. After being expelled from Iraq in 2016, thousands of MEK members relocated there. The fortified complex serves as the organization’s logistical hub, media center, and residence for its cadres.
The NCRI also maintains a representative office in Washington, D.C., where it regularly briefs U.S. policymakers and holds press conferences on developments inside Iran.
Following the February 28 declaration, the organization’s structure has reportedly become more decentralized. The NCRI claims its base is increasingly shifting inside Iran through so-called Resistance Units operating in cities such as Tehran, Tabriz, and Shiraz. According to the group, these units have hung banners of Maryam Rajavi and coordinated local strikes in preparation for a potential return.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps remains the pivotal force in this power struggle. As a paramilitary organization that answers directly to the ayatollah, the IRGC has long been viewed as the key to preserving or dismantling the regime. Its actions will likely determine the success or failure of any intervention.
Even as military strikes target IRGC leadership and assets, the Guard is reportedly consolidating control in Tehran by securing vital infrastructure and preventing the interim council from making concessions to the West. Some observers describe the situation as a soft coup in progress.
There have also been reports over the last 72 hours of limited defections. While the core leadership remains hardline, some local commanders in provinces such as Sistan-Baluchistan and Kurdistan have reportedly refused orders to fire on protesters, allowing small liberated zones to emerge. The NCRI is said to be attempting to coordinate with local committees inside Iran to support these areas, although its senior leadership remains in France for security reasons.
Several scenarios are under discussion. One is that the IRGC could formally seize control and swear allegiance to a newly selected ayatollah. Reports indicate the Guard is lobbying the Assembly of Experts to appoint Mojtaba Khamenei, seeking what some describe as “a Khamenei without the clergy,” a figure who would provide religious legitimacy while leaving real power in military hands.
Another risk is fragmentation. Intelligence reports suggest the Quds Force, the IRGC’s external-operations wing, may have activated contingency cells in Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen to target U.S. assets, exporting the crisis abroad to relieve pressure at home.
Although it is an official armed force, the IRGC is distinct from the regular army, known as the Artesh. The Artesh is a traditional national military institution and is generally viewed as more professional and more respected by the public.
The Artesh remains a wild card. During the 2026 protests, it has largely stayed in its barracks. If the IRGC were to attempt a full military coup to install Mojtaba, armed confrontation between the IRGC and the Artesh could trigger a civil war and potentially collapse the country.
Beyond the military, the mullahs command tremendous influence. Given that the ayatollah was already 90 years old, a succession plan was likely in place.
One possible successor is his second son, Mojtaba Khamenei, 56, who has long been viewed as a behind-the-scenes power broker and gatekeeper to his father. Often referred to by supporters as “Ayatollah Mojtaba,” his religious credentials remain debated among senior clerics. He is believed to have exercised significant influence over the IRGC and the Basij militia and has been associated with some of the regime’s harshest crackdowns, including the suppression of the 2009 Green Movement and later protests.
Mojtaba’s candidacy presents an ideological dilemma. The 1979 Revolution sought to end hereditary monarchy under the Shah, and elevating the former leader’s son could be seen as contradicting that principle. Unlike many clerical contenders, Mojtaba is a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War and has cultivated a soldier-cleric image. That persona reportedly makes him popular with elements of the military elite while generating concern among segments of the public.
Another potential contender is Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran. Living in exile since the 1979 Revolution, primarily in the United States, he has positioned himself as a leading opposition figure.
Unlike his father, who ruled as an absolute monarch, Pahlavi says he supports a secular parliamentary democracy. He has stated that he does not necessarily seek to return as king but would serve as a transitional figure to facilitate a national referendum allowing Iranians to choose their form of government.
In 2025 and 2026, as tensions escalated, Pahlavi advanced a governance proposal known as the Iran Prosperity Project and adopted a pro-Western, pro-Israel stance, advocating what he calls a Cyrus Accord to restore ties between Iran and Israel. He remains one of the most recognizable faces of the opposition. During protests inside Iran, demonstrators have chanted, “Reza Shah, bless your soul,” reflecting nostalgia for the Pahlavi era or rejection of clerical rule.
WATCH: How We Predicted the Time, Place, and Day of the Strikes on Iran
There has been significant debate on both the Republican and Democrat sides about whether the joint U.S.–Israel operation targeting Iran’s military infrastructure was a necessary act of deterrence.
Some conservatives argue the operation risks escalation and could pull the United States into another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict. Some Democrats claim the strikes were reckless or unauthorized.
I disagree with both objections. Based on the strategic reality of Iran’s military posture and the regime’s long-standing conduct, I support the strikes.
Iran is not a normal regional actor. The Islamic Republic has spent decades building a proxy network designed specifically to target American forces and U.S. allies.
Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, Shiite militias in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen are armed, trained, and financed by Tehran.
Thousands of American service members have been killed by Iranian-supplied weapons. Allowing that infrastructure to expand without consequence invites further aggression.
The nuclear issue cannot be separated from the military strikes. Iran has repeatedly pushed enrichment limits, restricted inspections, and advanced its ballistic missile capabilities. Even for those who support diplomatic engagement in theory, diplomacy requires leverage.
Over the past decade, sanctions relief and negotiated pauses have not permanently halted Iran’s strategic ambitions.
A regime that openly calls for the destruction of the Western world while expanding missile range cannot be treated as a contained threat.
Senior Iranian officials have repeatedly referred to the United States as the “Great Satan” and called for the end of Western influence, framing hostility toward America as a core ideological principle.
I am America First. I support American interests before those of any foreign nation. I would only support military action when it directly serves the security and national interests of the United States.
When a regime openly chants “Death to America,” declares that the United States should be eliminated, and defines hostility toward America as central to its ideology, those statements cannot be dismissed as empty rhetoric.
Repeated threats must eventually be taken seriously.
Some argue Congress should have acted first. Constitutionally, Congress declares war. Historically, presidents of both parties have authorized targeted military operations without formal declarations when immediate threats were identified.
The commander in chief is entrusted with national security decisions precisely because intelligence assessments and operational timelines do not always allow for extended legislative debate.
This is not an expansion of authority unique to one administration; rather, it reflects longstanding executive power in limited strikes.
There is also the argument that the American public does not want another conflict. That concern is understandable. After two decades of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, skepticism is rational.
However, strategic deterrence and full-scale occupation are not the same. Targeted strikes designed to dismantle specific capabilities differ fundamentally from regime-change nation-building campaigns.
If regime change ultimately occurs, Iran’s future government should be decided by the Iranian people—not imposed by the United States. Regime change becomes destabilizing when America installs leadership from the outside.
The administration has argued, including in cases such as Venezuela, that its role is not to engineer political outcomes but to support populations demanding change from within.
As a conservative who prioritizes American national security, I view the strikes through a structural lens.
The question is not whether conflict is undesirable. Conflict is always undesirable. The relevant question is whether failing to act would have strengthened a hostile regime’s ability to threaten U.S. forces, destabilize regional allies, and potentially acquire nuclear weapons.
If the answer is yes, restraint becomes riskier than action.
Iran’s leadership has consistently framed the United States as an adversary and has acted accordingly.
When a regime spends decades preparing for confrontation, policymakers cannot assume deterrence will sustain itself. Deterrence requires credibility. Credibility requires action when red lines are crossed.
Reasonable people can debate scope, oversight, and next steps.
Those debates are healthy in a constitutional republic. But dismissing the strikes as reckless ignores the strategic context that produced them.
I support the strikes not because I favor war, but because I favor preventing a far more dangerous balance of power in the Middle East. Allowing Iran to expand its military capabilities without a decisive response would not have reduced the risk of conflict. It would have postponed it under worse conditions.
In matters of national security, delay is sometimes the most dangerous choice.
The Patriot Perspective has recently switched its main platform from Rumble to YouTube, and we would greatly appreciate it if our old subscribers would subscribe to us there. [HERE]
Chinese leader Xi Jinping and the late Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei. Images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
On February 28, 2026, Supreme Leader Khamenei was killed in a joint U.S.-Israeli airstrike in Tehran, with CIA intelligence reportedly used to locate senior leaders. A three-person leadership council, including President Pezeshkian, the judiciary chief, and a senior cleric, has been formed to hold power until a successor is named. Iranian retaliatory strikes continue to hit U.S. assets across the Gulf region.
The regime, however, is not eliminated. As the Council on Foreign Relations noted, taking out Khamenei is not the same as regime change. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps remains intact and has vowed revenge. Analysts warn that without Khamenei’s doctrine of “strategic patience,” field commanders freed from clerical restraint may respond with greater ferocity.
China’s response has been rhetorically sharp but strategically restrained. U.N. Ambassador Fu Cong called it “shocking” that the strikes occurred during active diplomatic negotiations. Foreign Minister Wang Yi condemned the “blatant killing of a sovereign leader,” warning that the Middle East risks being “pushed into a dangerous abyss.” The Global Times amplified the message, cautioning that normalization of targeted killings would destabilize the global security order, a signal that Beijing views such precedents through the lens of its own leadership security.
Despite the rhetoric, Beijing has avoided meaningful backing of Tehran. China’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. and Israel to “immediately stop military actions” and return to dialogue while calling for respect for Iran’s sovereignty. Direct military involvement would risk U.S. retaliation and entangle China in a conflict that does not serve its core interests. Dr. Yun Sun of the Stimson Center noted that Beijing has little incentive to jeopardize its broader relationship with Washington, particularly with President Trump scheduled to visit China from March 31 to April 2, the first U.S. presidential trip to Beijing in nine years.
China’s restraint reflects both hierarchy and self-interest. Although Beijing and Tehran maintain what is formally labeled a “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership,” the designation carries no mutual defense obligations and falls far short of an alliance. Iran is not an “all-weather” partner like Pakistan, nor does it hold the strategic weight of Russia in China’s diplomatic calculus. Beijing views the relationship primarily as strategic opportunism, a means of securing discounted energy and complicating U.S. influence, rather than a commitment worth risking direct military confrontation.
China’s economic exposure to Iran is significant but limited in strategic depth. In 2025, Beijing purchased more than 80 percent of Tehran’s shipped oil, accounting for roughly 13.5 percent of China’s seaborne crude imports. A weakened Iran may become more dependent on China, but the relationship remains asymmetrical. Investment pledges have frequently fallen short of headline figures, military cooperation is constrained, and Beijing has shown no willingness to convert economic ties into defense guarantees.
China’s broader Middle East interests further constrain it. Beijing has cultivated deep economic relationships with Gulf Cooperation Council states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, historic rivals of Tehran. Direct military backing of Iran would jeopardize those partnerships and undermine China’s self-styled role as a regional mediator and “builder of peace,” a posture that depends on perceived neutrality.
Financial risk also limits Beijing’s options. China’s economy remains deeply integrated with the Western financial system. While it is willing to bypass certain sanctions to purchase Iranian oil, direct military involvement or transfer of high-end offensive weaponry would likely trigger severe U.S. secondary sanctions. Chinese leadership is unlikely to jeopardize more than $600 billion in annual trade with the United States, and even larger trade volumes with the European Union, to defend a regime it may view as strategically weakened.
Instead of open intervention, Beijing has opted for calibrated “shadow support.” Rather than deploying troops, China provides dual-use technologies such as the BeiDou-3 navigation system, cyber defense tools to replace Western software, and components usable in missile and drone production. This approach allows Beijing to enhance Iran’s strategic resilience and complicate U.S. objectives without crossing the red line into direct war.
On the diplomatic front, China is positioning itself as the defender of sovereignty norms while portraying the United States as a destabilizing hegemon, particularly in the Global South. Washington now faces accusations of illegal intervention, and Beijing will use that narrative to advance its alternative international order framework.
There is also a broader strategic dimension. A prolonged U.S. military engagement in Iran, with ongoing strikes, retaliatory attacks across the Gulf, and no ground campaign, consumes American military and political bandwidth. Chinese planners will assess whether Middle East commitments constrain Washington’s ability to respond to a Taiwan contingency. At the same time, Beijing will look for openings to fill diplomatic and economic vacuums in Iran, potentially engaging new factions to prevent alignment with the West.
The most consequential long-term implication may be precedent. The demonstrated willingness to kill a sitting head of state will be studied carefully in Beijing. Chinese leadership will treat this as a relevant threat model in any future Taiwan scenario, likely hardening security protocols and leadership protection infrastructure accordingly.
The September assassination of conservative Christian icon Charlie Kirk probably unleashed more spiritual energy than any event in recent memory.
To our horror, some of that energy felt diabolical.
For instance, according to The Spokesman-Review of Spokane, Washington, Chase and Sarah Gibson, the husband-and-wife owners of Grooveberries Frozen Yogurt in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho — just across the state line from Spokane — have received death threats on account of their decision to put Kirk’s image on their frozen yogurt cups.
“It just makes me more sad to see so many people hurting enough to say some of those things that they say on social media,” Sarah said. “I just wish that everybody would turn to Christ, because they would lead a lot different of a life, if that was the case.”
Indeed, the Gibsons chose to honor Kirk not for political reasons, but to spread Christianity.
“We want to spread the word (of Christ), because I don’t think people will fully understand what He has done and necessarily be able to feel what I felt by giving my life to Him,” Chase said. “The only way to do that is to get his name out there. You just get very humble, turn more selfless through Jesus Christ. Honestly, you want to help others, and you turn away from yourself. And I’ve truly felt that in the last five years or so since I really did that.”
Giving one’s life to Christ, and thereby turning away from oneself, effectively defines the Christian experience.
That explains, of course, why so many woke leftists reacted to Kirk’s murder with demonic glee.
After all, wokeness has its roots in atheistic Marxism. It tells its adherents, in effect, not to humble but instead to deify themselves.
Do you have an unwanted pregnancy? Reject the divine gift of life, they tell you. Assume God’s role. Sacrifice your unborn child on the altar of career and convenience.
What about your identity? Do you feel confused? If so, again, you may make of God’s creation whatever you wish. Change your gender, even if it requires mutilating yourself.
Kirk gave young people a life-affirming alternative to the narcissism and nihilism of wokeness. He told them to get married and have more kids than they could afford. That is why leftists celebrated his assassination.
Meanwhile, it turns out that many customers also embraced Kirk’s message, for God has blessed the Gibsons, who attend Candlelight Christian Fellowship in Coeur d’Alene, with increased sales.
The couple’s primary concern, however, had nothing to do with business. They wanted to both honor Kirk and spread the Word of God.
In fact, although the idea to feature Kirk on the cups came to Sarah on the day after his assassination, the couple has since expanded their approach.
“My mom and I were just wondering, ‘How can we remember him and honor him in our business,’ which is a bold move, because our business is our livelihood,” Sarah said. “It was as simple as just a sticker with his name and his birth year to death year, just as a memoriam, and then we kind of evolved from there and started putting Bible verses on some of the stickers. We started selling stickers, some hoodies, shirts, stuff like that too, just because we got so many people wanting to participate in keeping his legacy alive.”
In the end, of course, many of us will never forget the woke left’s demonic reaction Kirk’s murder. But we also will not forget the light that spread as so many mourners turned to Jesus.
Therefore, rather than dwell on (or in) the darkness that consumed those woke leftists, we have cause to celebrate Christians such as the Gibsons and their customers, who in their own way remind us that “the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it” (John 1:5).
STRUCK: The Iranian Regime’s Leadership Compound — the central headquarters have been dismantled
EXCLUSIVE: In a phone call w/me just now, 
