Should Trump Have Authorized Khamenei’s Assassination?
National Review
by John FundMarch 2, 2026
AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary
The question of whether former President Donald Trump should have authorized the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, raises critical debates about the ethics, legality, and potential consequences of such an action. While the idea of targeting Khamenei has been floated by some as a means to disrupt or overthrow Iran's regime, experts argue that it would likely escalate tensions, trigger widespread retaliation, and destabilize the region. Drawing parallels to historical examples, such as the U.S. operation that killed Osama Bin Laden during Operation Neptune Spear, highlights the complexities of executing such a mission and its long-term implications.
Proponents of targeting Khamenei often cite the need for decisive action against adversarial regimes, arguing that it could weaken Iran's influence in the Middle East and beyond. However, critics warn that assassinating Khamenei would violate international law, as it constitutes state-sponsored murder and undermines global norms against regime change. Additionally, such an act would likely unify Iran's population behind a nationalist agenda, making it harder for the U.S. to achieve its strategic goals in the region.
The broader context of U.S.-Iran relations is crucial to understanding this issue. Tensions between the two nations have been high since Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal and reimposed sanctions on Iran. Khamenei, as the spiritual and political leader of Iran, plays a central role in shaping its foreign policy and response to American actions. Any attempt to remove him would likely be viewed by Iranians as an existential threat, potentially leading to increased aggression and instability.
From a geopolitical perspective, the U.S. has historically avoided direct involvement in internal affairs of
Verticals
politicsconservative
Originally published on National Review on 3/2/2026