Iranian commentators abroad are deliberating on how the election of the new Assembly of Experts, responsible for selecting the Islamic Republic's next leader, will impact succession in Iran.

This was the focal point of discussion on Monday's edition of the Chashmandaz (Panorama) program on Iran International TV. Host Samira Gharaee engaged Iranian analysts Mehdi Mahdavi Azad, Mohammad Javad Akbarain, and Mehdi Khalaji in a discussion about whether Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has already chosen his successor or if other influential figures will have a say in the matter.

The March 1 elections saw the installment of a new Assembly of Experts (AoE), following extensive pre-election vetting that disqualified hundreds of candidates. Ultimately, there were not even two candidates for each slot when the smallest number of voters went to the polls.

The last time the Assembly decided about succession, was in 1989 when it elected Ali Khamenei as the Islamic Republic's leader. In recent years, a committee of three AoE members have been tasked with "finding" the next leader and "introducing" him to Khamenei. Committee members have said Khamenei's son Mojtaba has been one of those "found" to be fit for succession.

Mahdavi Azad observed that recent developments suggest the composition of the Assembly will have little impact on succession. The absence of influential figures within the Assembly, capable of effecting significant change, suggests that its role may be limited to rubber-stamping decisions made elsewhere.

Akbarain cautioned against accepting government-provided statistics about the Assembly elections at face value, suggesting that they may not accurately reflect the public's sentiment. While the Assembly's composition may align with the government's broader agenda, public skepticism remains regarding both the election turnout and the Assembly's makeup.

Khalaji noted that the Assembly has historically played a minimal role in determining leadership succession. He explained that the reason why totalitarian regimes such as the regime in Tehran hold elections is to control the rotation of the elite in key posts. During the past years, Khamenei has consolidated his power by controlling and weakening various institutions and their members. For instance, the president whoever he might be, poses a threat to the Supreme Leader and must be weakened.

The recent removal of former President Hassan Rouhani as a candidate, and the “defeat” of Expediency Council Chief Sadeq Amoli Larijani in the elections, underscores Khamenei's efforts to consolidate power and eliminate potential threats.

Mahdavi Azad further emphasized that while Khamenei has marginalized key figures within the political establishment, he himself has suffered a decline in influence due to the government's mismanagement of economic and social issues. The weakening of the political system has left no significant figures within the Assembly, signaling a broader deterioration of Iran's governance structure.

When discussing Khamenei's involvement in the election process, Akbarain highlighted the regime's tendency to micromanage all aspects of governance, including the Assembly of Experts elections. He cited a decree by Khamenei emphasizing his supreme authority, even in matters as trivial as the seating arrangements at meetings, or where students should have their summer camp.

Khalaji suggested that decisions regarding succession are made by entities external to the Assembly, with the IRGC playing a significant role in financing Assembly members' election campaigns. He argued that the Assembly merely legitimizes decisions made by external actors, rather than actively shaping leadership succession.

He continued that despite being a totalitarian regime with a leader that micromanages the matters, still the Islamic Republic is an intelligent system of self-preservation, otherwise it cannot survive.

Looking ahead, Khalaji predicted that Khamenei's death will not only mark the transition to a new leader but also signify a broader shift in Iran's governance structure. He suggested that while a cleric may serve as a figurehead, real decision-making power will be consolidated within a network of military and intelligence institutions operating behind the scenes.