Pictured above: Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. Photo courtesy of Wikimedia.
By Sophie Soloway ’23
Global Editor
Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, was killed in an attack in his vehicle on Friday, Nov. 27. After a reported gun attack in northern Iran, hospital workers unsuccessfully attempted to revive the prominent figure.
Fakhrizadeh was the head of Iran’s Research and Innovation Organization and was widely regarded as a national hero for his work with the country’s nuclear program, both before and after the Iranian government officially ended it. According to Senior Fellow at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Karim Sadjadpour, “Fakhrizadeh likely knew more about Iran’s nuclear program than any living human. Losing his leadership, knowledge and institutional memory is undoubtedly a blow to the Islamic Republic.” Protests quickly emerged in Iran, reflecting the significance of the loss for the country.
Officials have not yet pinpointed the individual responsible for the attack. However, on Saturday, Nov. 28, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani accused Israeli leadership of being responsible for the scientist’s death. According to The New York Times, three unnamed American officials have made similar statements.
Having had a critical role in the nation’s development of nuclear technology, Fakhrizadeh has long been a person of interest to the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, as well as to U.S. intelligence agencies. The U.S. and Israel are allies and have historically vehemently opposed Iran’s nuclear program, as Israel specifically views Iran as its largest regional threat. Although Fakhrizadeh denied that the purpose of Iran’s nuclear program was related to building nuclear arms, documents stolen by Israel in early 2018 suggested otherwise.
When Israeli agents stole approximately 50,000 pages and 163 discs of information on Jan. 31, 2018, they concluded that the Iran nuclear program was ongoing and dedicated to developing nuclear weapons. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released this information days before U.S. President Donald Trump pulled out of a nuclear deal with Iran.
As of Friday, Nov. 27, Netanyahu’s administration has not officially responded to Rouhani’s claims that Israel played a role in the murder of Fakhrizadeh.
The assassination might provoke further conflict in the region. Rouhani has pledged to retaliate against those responsible for the murder. Fakhrizadeh’s assassination was also compared to the U.S.’ January airstrike on Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian operations leader. This previous attack is largely considered to have increased tensions between Iran and the U.S. since Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. As the U.S. presidency enters a transitional period, this attack may impact President-elect Joe Biden’s plans to alter relations with Iran.
Carrie Lewis ’23, a Mount Holyoke student interested in international relations, noted that “because of the United State’s military support for Israel and their previous attack on [the] Iranian leader [Soleimani], this might block progress between the relationship between Iran and the United States, especially under Biden.”
Biden has long stated that his administration plans to return to the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran that Trump undid. Given the salient relationship between the U.S. and Israel and both nations’ suspected roles in assassinating high-profile officials, this recent attack is expected to make a nuclear deal with Iran significantly harder to achieve for the president-elect. As protests mourning Fakhrizadeh’s death continue in Iran and more Iranian officials place blame on the U.S.-Israel alliance, concerns regarding the future of these regional relationships mount.
Helen Roane ’23, an international relations major, said, “I think it’s really interesting how Israel really put itself in the middle of an international conflict over Iran’s nuclear program. Because it seems like they are counting on the United States support, which is not guaranteed with a Biden presidency that is looking perhaps for a more diplomatic resolution to such issues. Either way, it remains an impactful action that clearly says that the government of Israel is not afraid of taking actions to stand for what they think protects their national interest.