Readers may remember the recent assassination of top Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in Absard, Iran. The story is evolving:
Officials from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have divulged new information regarding the Nov. 27 assassination of nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh.
Deputy commander Ali Fadavi said during a Q&A session at Tehran University Dec. 6 that Fakhrizadeh had 11 guards with him at the time of his assassination. He was assassinated in the suburbs of Tehran. Fadavi added that 13 bullets were fired at him from the Nissan and that the only other bullets fired were from the Iranian bodyguards.
Fadavi also claimed that the Nissan was controlled through satellite and used artificial intelligence to zoom in on the target. He said that Fakhrizadeh was shot in the back, hitting his spinal cord. [AL-Monitor]
Do I trust the word of the IRGC? Of course not. They’re a conduit for the spread of Iranian arms and propaganda, or at least so the story goes. But the story they’re telling isn’t raising any red flags in terms of consistency or likelihood – everything I read here seems to be easily in the realm of technology.
And it’s interesting to see the evolution of the story:
Fadavi’s statements conflict with earlier reports from Iranian media, which described multiple shooters and a shootout. These reports also suggested an explosion took place. Ali Shamkhani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, was one of the first individuals to briefly discuss the use of the satellite-controlled attack.
I presume the consumers of this story are primarily the Iranian public, so this leads me to wonder how the Iranian public is affected by a story of a remote control assassination as compared to an account of …multiple shooters and a shootout. Will this stir up the Iranians more than a brazen attack by a group of assassins on-site? Or will it calm the nerves of people fearing those same assassins will be taking out other targets. The psychology of communication has fascinated me for decades, and this may be an example of a communication used purely to manipulate the target audience.
And … the new account may be entirely true. If so, I wonder why the attackers chose this approach rather than using a drone, as has been used previously by the Yemenis for offensive attacks.
