The IRGC-affiliated media has vehemently rejected a report by the New York Times regarding the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, which claimed he was killed by an explosive device hidden in his room two months before the hit.
"These lies are being propagated while the results of the experts' investigation indicate that Haniyeh was struck by a projectile, in which involvement of the Zionist regime cannot be ruled out,” read a report by Fars news agency.
Citing five Middle Eastern officials, the New York Times report claimed the bomb was hidden in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-run guesthouse in the Neshat compound in northern Tehran, the report states.
The newspaper detailed that the explosion, which occurred around 2am local time, was triggered remotely and caused significant damage. It shook the building, shattered windows, and partially collapsed an exterior wall.
It is not clear who the Middle Eastern officials are, and if they are from countries friendly with Iran, that would have an interest in offering a scenario less damaging to the IRGC or the Iranian regime. Some Iranian journalists and activists shed doubt on the veracity of the report, saying that the Iranian regime does not want to appear totally unable to defend itself against foreign missile or drone attacks. However, the Fars News insistence that a projectile hit the building appears to weaken this argument.
The assassination of Haniyeh, who was in Tehran for the inauguration of President Masoud Pezeshkian, has sparked speculation about the method of his killing.
Earlier, most observers had said that the killing was done by a projectile hitting the specific part of the building where Haniyeh was spending the night.
However, the NYT article says the meticulous planning behind the attack was such that, despite the proximity of Ziyad al-Nakhalah, leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, who was staying next door, his room sustained minimal damage, as claimed by two Iranian officials.
Reports, including those from Iranian state media, suggest he may have been targeted by a drone or a precision-guided missile, with special forces in Tehran directing the strike from nearby windows.
Another theory posited by Iranian media suggests that spyware was installed on his phone, enabling his location to be monitored and ultimately leading to his tracking and assassination.
To date, Iranian officials have not commented on the specific circumstances surrounding the death of the figure who had been the key bridge between Iran and Hamas since 2017.
The report lacks several key explanations, including why Haniyeh, who had stayed at the guesthouse multiple times during his visits to Tehran, was targeted on this occasion without clarifying the specific reasons for the timing of the attack.
The NYT's report contradicts statements by Pezeshkian’s supporters who have insisted that the attack was aimed at his new administration. If the bomb was placed two months ago, at that time Pezeshkian was not even a presidential candidate.
‘Reformist’ journalist and political activist Ahmad Zeidabadi stated on Thursday that the "primary objective" of the attack on Haniyeh was to "destabilize and potentially paralyze the Pezeshkian government from the outset."
Regardless of the method employed, it is evident that even Iranian officials acknowledge a significant failure on Iran's part to protect Haniyeh, reflecting a profound lapse in adequate security.
According to three Iranian officials speaking to the New York Times, such a breach "was a catastrophic failure of intelligence and security for Iran and a tremendous embarrassment for the Guards, which use the compound for retreats, secret meetings, and housing prominent guests like Mr. Haniyeh."
Some officials such as IRGC commander Qasem Soleimani’s deputy and former MP, Mansour Haqiqatpour, have even suggested that a purge within the security forces is necessary.
He condemned the assassination for the impact it will have on Iran's security apparatus, telling Rouydad 24 that the killing "casts a negative light on Iran's security officials". He called for accountability among certain political, military, and security officials, suggesting that "some may need to be dismissed."
The conservative Iranian newspaper Jomhouri-e Eslami also criticized the security forces for failing to eliminate infiltrators within their ranks.
The article condemned the focus on "getting revenge" rather than preventing terror acts and recommended a "comprehensive purge of intelligence and security agencies" to safeguard against such assassinations.
The delegation was wearing white jackets with black clothing, the women all with compulsory hijabs with film and television actor Behrang Alavi posting on Instagram: "Wishing success for the injections team."
Public figures and media outlets have not held back in their criticism.
State TV host Elmira Sharifimoghaddam said on air, "The Iranian team looked as if a team of doctors and nurses had gone to Paris."
The moderate-conservative website, Asr-e Iran, highlighted the consistently poor choice of attire for the delegations as they travel to the Games over the years, controversy around uniforms nothing new for Iran.
"Since the London 2012 Olympics, Rio de Janeiro 2016, Tokyo 2021, and now in Paris, the issue of strange, bizarre, and ugly clothing designs has been a consistent source of embarrassment," they wrote.
"It is astonishing that the Ministry of Sports and the National Olympic Committee have not been able to provide an elegant and dignified outfit for the Iranian team for the Paris Olympics in the past three years."
Adding fuel to the fire, there was no official unveiling ceremony for the uniforms before the team's departure, a shift from tradition likely intended to avoid immediate backlash.
The Ministry of Sports and the National Olympic Committee have faced intense scrutiny, with many questioning the transparency and rationale behind their choices.
Asieh Amini, a social issues analyst, told Iran International that in 2021, 31 billion rials (over $160,000 at the time) were allocated for athletes' clothing, “but this year, we don't even know how much has been spent", she said, as the country faces its worst ever economic crisis.
She added, "These uniforms have no connection to a country with various ethnic groups and their beautiful traditional clothes. How is it possible that, with all our ethnicities, traditions, and high potential, what we show to the world is so tasteless?”
Asr-e Iran's review added, "The Olympics is the most important sporting event for all athletes worldwide. With these ugly outfits, we completely destroy our athletes' morale and confidence from the opening day, and then we expect them to bring home the best medals."
Some have also shared AI-generated photos depicting how the Iran team uniforms might have looked if designed by AI.
Mahsa Javar, a national rowing athlete and brand ambassador for the Iranian sports delegation's clothing, defended the designs in a controversial social media post, calling the critics "uncultured."
Her comments only intensified the backlash, with many advising her to focus on her performance rather than engage in the controversy. However, she later apologized for her comments, stating that the athletes, like others, are not happy with the uniform.
The 2016 Rio Olympics saw a major uproar over the bizarre design and color choices, leading to a complete redesign. The 2020 Tokyo Olympics followed a similar pattern, with athletes wearing turquoise blue attire and white masks, which were widely criticized, none of which bore the colors of Iran's national flag.
Prominent sports website Varzesh-3 vented frustration saying the opportunity on the Olympics' "grand stage" has been missed, once again. "Most other countries use this opportunity to showcase the most beautiful aspects of their culture and civilization. We, however, consistently fail to present a respectable image," she said.
Allegations of cronyism have also surfaced. Mojtaba Pourbakhsh, a former TV host, revealed that the design contract initially awarded to the Majid brand or Merooj Inc. was abruptly handed over to the Hectaton brand, owned by Ali Aajdarkosh.
The Majid brand is owned by the Abdolmajid Saedifar family. They operate under a company named Majid Merooj Iranians, which was established in 2010. The quality of the national football, wrestling, and volleyball team uniforms designed by the company has faced criticism in recent years.
The Hectaton brand is also owned by a company named Pishgaman Danily Aras. This company was established in 2012 and, like Majid Merooj Iranians, is family-operated under the ownership of Ali Ajdarkosh.
Ajdarkosh's close ties with sports officials and athletes, along with his sponsorship of various events, have raised questions about the integrity of the selection process.
According to Pourbakhsh, the National Olympic Committee, whose secretary has been Manaf Hashemi since 2022, initially signed a multi-billion contract with the Majid brand for the design and production of the uniforms. However, the project was later handed over to the Ajdarkosh family.
Another official responsible for selecting the Iranian team's outfits for the Olympics is Mahmoud Khosravi Vafa. Khosravi Vafa has been the President of the National Olympic Committee since September 2022. In 1980 and 1981, he served as a bodyguard for Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, for a short period.
Rouydad 24 reported that the Iranian government's direct intervention and preference for close associates in selecting the clothing designer bypassed usual formalities, leading to the current debacle.
"This time, everything happened behind the scenes," said Majid Nami, a member of the Clothing Union. "The result is a disgraceful representation of our culture and heritage."
“Cronyism and connections are two factors that prevent transparency in the procurement of uniforms for national and Olympic teams. If high-level decision-making and the Iranian government were free from cronyism and connections, there would be no other reason to obscure this process," said Amini in her interview with Iran International.
She also called the industry a "mafia", saying, "When you have this mafia behind all your operations and decisions, it is definitely necessary to be transparent. But to avoid accountability, you are forced to conceal everything and keep it shrouded in ambiguity. And then, when it's all over, they say it's too late to do anything about it,” she said.
“The issue is that this lack of accountability and transparency has become routine in the Islamic Republic. Corruption has essentially become a standard practice among the managers of the Islamic Republic,” she added.
Yet, there are numerous reports that may provide clues for experts to speculate on how the operation was carried out – and whether it involved advanced weaponry or a sophisticated drone strike.
Where and when?
In one of its statements, the IRGC announced that the attack resulting in Haniyeh's death occurred at two in the morning and stated that he was killed by "a projectile from the air" while stationed at one of the "special residences for war veterans in northern Tehran."
Hours later, the Iran-aligned Lebanese network Al-Mayadeen reported that the missile used to attack Haniyeh's residence was launched not from within Iran, but from another country.
Since then, however, Israel’s Channel 12 reported that Iranian officials were coming to the conclusion that the projectile was actually fired from within the country’s borders.
Where did Haniyeh reside in Tehran?
Although the Iranian state’s Fars news agency reported that Haniyeh was staying at a special residence for war veterans in northern Tehran, little is known about the building.
Some unofficial sources inside Iran, have suggested that Haniyeh could have been killed near the Saadabad Palace – a historic royal complex located in the northern part of Iran’s capital. Boasting hundreds of acres, the complex has been used by the Islamic Republic for various official events for many years.
Some reports have also suggested that the Basij al-Zahra camp in the northwest of this complex was Haniyeh’s residence.
During President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's administration, leading up to the Islamic Summit Conference in Tehran in 1991, a building was reportedly constructed at Saadabad Palace to accommodate special guests. This facility might have been used to host distinguished visitors, although specific details about Haniyeh’s residence there are not well-documented.
Was there an explosion?
Some local witnesses reported hearing an explosion in the Saadabad area early Wednesday morning.
State-run media outlet Tejarat Online published a story that suggested that the explosion's sound was "so loud that it triggered all the car alarms and was heard throughout northern Tehran, with smoke and dust from the explosion covering the area."
According to sources connected to Hamas, the building targeted in the attack was also occupied by his bodyguard, Ziad Nakhalah, the leader of Islamic Jihad, along with a Hamas delegation.
So far, however, there have been no reports indicating that these individuals were harmed.
In addition, no reports have emerged about other residents of the building being injured, leaving the door open to assume that despite the precision of any operation to kill Haniyeh, the explosion's power and intensity were likely limited.
Missile vs drone?
Although the IRGC's statement referred to "a projectile from the air," the origin of the projectile remains unclear.
Sky News Arabia reported that based on its Iranian sources, that the building Haniyeh was in, was targeted by a missile fired from a nearby building.
Aerial projectiles can be launched from either fighter jets or military drones. For such strikes, military aircraft would typically utilize the airspace of neighboring countries. While using the airspace of other countries without authorization and conducting operations near border areas is challenging, it is not impossible.
In Israel’s April attack on the 8th Tactical Airbase in Isfahan, American officials confirmed that Israeli aircraft launched three missiles from outside Iran's borders targeting a radar site protecting the Natanz nuclear facility. Iranian officials, however, attributed the incident to enemy drones at this military base.
According to Israeli Channel 14 military correspondent Hallel Bitton Rosen, however, the attack was not carried out by launching a missile, but with another weapon that exploded close to him.
Drawing on Israel’s past operations, the country has a history of conducting drone attacks on Iranian soil.
In February 2023, the Wall Street Journal reported that Israel was responsible for a drone attack on a Defense Ministry workshop complex in Isfahan and an explosion at a munitions center in the city. Iranian officials described the attack as "unsuccessful" and stated that it caused only limited damage.
What are some experts saying?
Israel has not claimed responsibility for the attack, but one Israeli and two US officials told Axios that Israel was behind the strike.
About two hours before Haniyeh’s death, Richard Goldberg, a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, appeared to allude to the attack, saying "The Israeli Air Force is demonstrating its range tonight."
After the news of the killing of the Hamas leader broke, Goldberg, in reference to Israel striking Iran previously, posted on X: "If you can hit a radar next to a nuclear site, you can hit a house in Tehran. Ayatollah is exposed."
Major Andrew Fox, a researcher at the Jackson Institute and a former British paratrooper, told Iran International English that the attack might have been carried out with a missile launched from outside Iran. According to him, the Caspian Sea, given its proximity to Tehran, is a suitable option for this operation.
Fox, drawing on his experience and emphasizing that such missiles are guided with precise laser technology, said: "A soldier on the ground targets the laser pointer exactly at the point where he wants the missile to hit, guiding the missile to the impact point."
The expert also noted that Israel has missiles designed to use the kinetic energy from the speed and weight of the warhead for lethality. This explains why, in some missile attacks, fewer casualties and less noise are observed compared to those with explosive warheads.
Ronen Solomon, an Israeli intelligence and security analyst, highlighted the proximity of Baku and Tel Aviv, as well as Azerbaijan’s common border with Iran. He suggested that the use of Azerbaijani airspace for the attack is highly likely due to the short distance and the presence of Israeli weapons in the region.