Pentagon Says Iran’s New Supreme Leader Was “Wounded and Likely Disfigured” in Opening Strike
War creates strange rumors, but occasionally those rumors arrive from the podium of the Pentagon.
On March 13, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told reporters that U.S. intelligence believes Iran’s newly installed Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was “wounded and likely disfigured” during the February 28 strike that killed his father, longtime Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Hegseth did not present evidence during the briefing, but the remark immediately fueled new speculation about the condition of the man now sitting atop the Islamic Republic.
The strike that ignited the current war reportedly killed several members of Mojtaba Khamenei’s family as well, including his wife, mother, sister, and brother-in-law. The younger Khamenei survived.
In the chaotic days that followed, Iran’s Assembly of Experts convened emergency sessions to determine succession. The body met repeatedly from March 3 through March 8 and formally announced Mojtaba Khamenei as the new supreme leader on March 9, placing him at the center of a regime suddenly fighting for survival.
What has followed is an unusual silence.
On March 12, Iranian state television aired what it said was Mojtaba Khamenei’s first message as supreme leader. The statement was read by a news anchor rather than delivered by Khamenei himself. There was no video appearance, no audio recording, and no images confirming his condition.
That absence quickly became part of the story.
Israeli officials speaking to Axios have said Mojtaba Khamenei was inside the compound struck during the opening attack. Additional reporting citing intelligence sources indicates he suffered injuries, including a fractured foot, bruising around one eye, and facial lacerations. None of those details has been independently confirmed.
Iran has not denied that the new leader was hurt. Iranian diplomats have acknowledged that Mojtaba Khamenei sustained injuries during the strike but insist they were relatively minor. Tehran maintains that he remains fully capable of governing and directing the country’s response to the war.
The conflicting claims have left analysts with a familiar wartime puzzle: fragments of intelligence, official statements, and a notable lack of visual confirmation.
Adding to the intrigue are unconfirmed reports circulating in regional media that Mojtaba Khamenei may have been quietly transported to Russia for medical treatment. A Kuwaiti outlet has claimed he was flown to Moscow aboard a Russian military aircraft and is recovering at a secure government residence linked to President Vladimir Putin. Those reports remain unverified.
Already have an account? Sign In
Two ways to continue to read this article.
Subscribe
$1.99
every 4 weeks
- Unlimited access to all articles
- Support independent journalism
- Ad-free reading experience
Subscribe Now
Recurring Monthly. Cancel Anytime.
For now, one fact stands out.
In a conflict monitored by satellites, drones, and round-the-clock surveillance, one of the most powerful men in the Middle East has yet to appear publicly since the strike that killed his father.
Until he does, the question hanging over Tehran remains simple.
What exactly happened inside that compound on February 28, and in what condition is Mojtaba Khamenei?
Trump Warns NATO of “Very Bad Future” as Hormuz Crisis Tests the Alliance
War has a way of exposing true alliances. Not the ceremonial kind with summits and smiling photographs, but the real test, the moment when someone asks who is actually willing to show up. War has a way of exposing true alliances. Not the ceremonial kind with summits and smiling photographs, but the real test, the moment when someone asks who is willing to sail into danger when the shooting starts.
That moment arrived this week as President Donald Trump warned NATO members and other oil-dependent nations that failing to help secure the Strait of Hormuz could carry consequences for the alliance itself.
In an interview published Sunday by the Financial Times, Trump said the alliance’s future could be at stake if countries benefiting from Gulf oil refuse to assist.
“If there’s no response or if it’s a negative response, I think it will be very bad for the future of NATO,” Trump said.
The warning comes as the war with Iran has turned the narrow waterway between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula into one of the most dangerous shipping routes on the planet. Roughly 20 percent of the world’s seaborne oil moves through the strait, making it a critical artery for global energy markets.
Since the conflict erupted, commercial shipping through the passage has been heavily disrupted. Insurance rates for tankers entering the Gulf have surged, and crude oil prices have climbed past $100 per barrel, with benchmarks approaching $105 as traders brace for prolonged instability.
Trump’s message is simple: countries that rely on Gulf energy should help protect the route.
That means naval escorts, minesweeping operations, and a multinational effort to keep tankers moving through waters now shadowed by Iranian missiles, naval mines, and armed patrol craft.
So far, the response from many allies has been cautious.
Germany’s foreign minister has expressed skepticism about expanding existing European naval missions into the Strait of Hormuz and signaled Berlin would not take an active role in the war. Britain says it is working with partners on a collective plan to restore freedom of navigation but has emphasized it will not be drawn deeper into the conflict itself.
Other countries are keeping their distance. Australia has said it will not send ships and noted it has not received a formal request from Washington. Several European governments, including France, remain in discussions but have not committed forces.
Meanwhile, the reality in the Gulf is growing more complicated by the day.
Shipping industry groups say roughly 1,000 oil tankers are currently stranded or rerouting as they wait for a safer path through the strait. The U.S. Navy itself has reportedly declined near-daily requests from commercial operators seeking armed escorts, citing the high level of risk.
Iran, for its part, says the waterway remains open to most traffic, claiming vessels from countries such as India and China have been allowed to pass while warning U.S. and allied ships away.
The result is a standoff unfolding across one of the world’s most important trade routes.
Tankers idle offshore. Energy markets twitch. And the alliance that once defined collective security now faces a question far less abstract than it sounds in diplomatic speeches.
When the global oil supply runs through a combat zone, who is willing to sail into it?
Meet the Destroyer Standing Between USS Abraham Lincoln and Iran’s Missiles
When the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) sails into a conflict zone, it usually becomes the headline. Nuclear powered. Around ninety aircraft aboard. More than five thousand sailors and aviators working across its decks.
It looks like the center of gravity.
But in modern naval warfare, the ships surrounding a carrier often determine whether it survives the first moments of an attack. One of those ships is USS Spruance (DDG-111), an Arleigh Burke–class guided-missile destroyer operating with Lincoln’s carrier strike group in the Middle East.
If the shooting starts, ships like Spruance become the first line of defense.
Aircraft carriers are powerful, but they are also large targets. Iran has spent decades building weapons designed to threaten them, including anti-ship missiles, drones, and fast attack craft operating in the confined waters of the Persian Gulf.
Destroyers like Spruance exist to stop those threats before they ever reach the carrier.
The ship carries the Aegis Combat System, one of the most advanced naval air-defense networks in the world. Its AN/SPY-1 radar can track hundreds of airborne targets simultaneously, identifying incoming missiles and aircraft long before they reach the strike group.
Spruance also carries 96 vertical launch missile cells, allowing it to fire a range of defensive weapons, including SM-2 and SM-6 interceptors designed to destroy aircraft and incoming missiles, along with the Evolved Sea Sparrow missile for medium-range air defense.
If a wave of missiles or drones appears on radar, ships like Spruance are often the first to fire.
Destroyers are not only defensive platforms. They can also strike targets far inland.
Arleigh Burke–class ships carry Tomahawk cruise missiles, long-range weapons capable of hitting targets more than a thousand miles away. These missiles have frequently opened American military campaigns by destroying radar stations, command centers, and missile batteries before aircraft ever arrive overhead.
In recent operations tied to the war with Iran, Spruance itself has reportedly launched Tomahawk missiles in support of the broader campaign.
Hunting the Quiet Threat
Missiles and drones are only part of the danger.
Iran fields several classes of diesel-electric submarines designed for the shallow waters of the Persian Gulf. Spruance carries advanced sonar systems, anti-submarine torpedoes, and MH-60R Seahawk helicopters that can search the sea for those threats before they reach attack position.
It is work that rarely attracts attention.
But without ships like USS Spruance, even the most powerful aircraft carrier becomes far more vulnerable.
COMMENTS