Hail..Headless Hydra: Why Iran is not surrendering even after killing of 15 top leaders, US' $11 billion+ blowout, 16 aircraft losses

In the long list of Iranian leaders’ assasination by Israel and US, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard spokesperson Ali Mohammad Naini was killed in joint US and Israeli strikes today. His death came hours after he issued a defiant warning challenging US naval claims in the Gulf. In the last one year, as many as 15 top Iranian leaders have been killed including the supreme leader Ayotallah Khomeni, army chief, intelligence chief and the spokesperson.

But, despite a series of high-profile assassinations targeting Iran’s top leadership, the Islamic Republic continues to function, retaliate and expand the battlefield, highlighting the resilience of a decentralised war doctrine known as Mosaic Defence.

In contrast to past conflicts like Iraq in 2003, where the removal of leadership led to a rapid collapse, Iran’s system has shown no such breakdown. Even after the reported killings of key figures including top political and military leaders, the state structure has remained operational.

Key Iranian leadership losses

#	Name	Position / Role	Date of Elimination
1	Ayatollah Ali Khamenei	Supreme Leader of Iran	February 28, 2026
2	Ali Shamkhani	Secretary of the Iranian Defense Council	February 28, 2026
3	Major Gen. Mohammad Pakpour	Commander-in-Chief, IRGC	February 28, 2026
4	Major Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi	Chief of the General Staff, Armed Forces	February 28, 2026
5	Brig. Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh	Minister of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics	February 28, 2026
6	Brig. Gen. Mohammad Shirazi	Head of the Military Office of the Supreme Leader	February 28, 2026
7	Brig. Gen. Hossein Jabal Amelian	Chairman of the Organization of Defensive Innovation (SPND)	February 28, 2026
8	Brig. Gen. Reza Mozaffari Nia	Former Chairman of SPND (Nuclear/Missile Technical)	February 28, 2026
9	Brig. Gen. Mohsen Darrebaghi	Deputy for Logistics, General Staff of Armed Forces	February 28, 2026
10	Brig. Gen. Gholamreza Rezaian	Commander of Police Intelligence Organization (FARAJA)	February 28, 2026
11	Brig. Gen. Bahram Hosseini Motlagh	Head of Operations Planning, General Staff	February 28, 2026
12	Mohammad Baseri	Senior Intelligence Ministry Official	February 28, 2026
13	Brig. Gen. Saleh Asadi	Deputy for Intelligence of the Armed Forces General Staff	February 28, 2026
14	Brig. Gen. Akbar Ebrahimzadeh	Deputy Head of the Office of the Commander-in-Chief	February 28, 2026
15	Brig. Gen. Hassan-Ali Tajik	Head of Logistics Department, General Staff	February 28, 2026
16	Ali Mohammad Naini	IRGC Spokesperson and Deputy of Public Relations	March 1, 2026
17	Reza Khazaei	Senior IRGC Quds Force Official (Beirut)	March 3, 2026
18	Majid Hassini	IRGC Financial Officer (Beirut)	March 8, 2026
19	Ali Reza Bi-Azar	Chief of Intelligence, Lebanon Corps (IRGC)	March 8, 2026
20	Ahmad Rasouli	Chief of Intelligence, Palestine Corps (IRGC)	March 8, 2026
21	Brig. Gen. Gholamreza Soleimani	Commander of the Basij Forces	March 17, 2026
22	Ali Larijani	Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council	March 17, 2026
23	Alireza Bayat	Deputy for Internal Security (SNSC)	March 17, 2026
24	Esmaeil Khatib	Minister of Intelligence	March 18, 2026
25	Major Gen. Hossein Salami	Former Commander-in-Chief, IRGC	June 13, 2025
26	Major Gen. Mohammad Bagheri	Former Chief of Staff, Armed Forces	June 13, 2025
27	Major Gen. Gholamali Rashid	Head of Khatam Al-Anbia Central Command	June 13, 2025
28	Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh	Commander of IRGC Aerospace Force	June 13, 2025
29	Brig. Gen. Mehdi Rabbani	Deputy of Operations, General Staff	June 13, 2025
30	Brig. Gen. Gholamreza Mehrabi	Deputy Director for Intelligence, General Staff	June 13, 2025
31	Brig. Gen. Davud Sheikhiyan	Commander, Air Defense Division of IRGC Aerospace	June 13, 2025
32	Masud Shane'i	Chief of Staff to the IRGC Commander-in-Chief	June 13, 2025
33	Fereidoun Abbasi-Davani	Former Head of AEOI (Senior Nuclear Figure)	June 13, 2025
34	Brig. Gen. Esmail Qaani	Commander of the Quds Force	June 13, 2025
35	Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar	Senior Military Advisor and Former Defense Minister	June 13, 2025

Also Read: Trump once claimed 8 planes crashed in India-Pakistan war; Report says US lost 16 aircraft in Iran war in just 3 weeks

System holds despite leadership losses

Iranian officials have maintained that the system is designed to survive beyond individuals. The Supreme National Security Council confirmed the deaths of senior leaders but emphasised continuity, while Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the absence of individuals does not weaken the broader political and military structure.

Following the assassination of Ali Larijani on March 17, his deputy assumed operational control within hours, reflecting a pre-defined succession chain that ensures continuity during wartime.

What is mosaic defence

At the core of this resilience is the Mosaic Defence doctrine, developed in the mid-2000s under IRGC leadership. The strategy restructures Iran’s military into a decentralised network of semi-autonomous units capable of operating independently if central command is disrupted.

Under this model, Iran is divided into 31 provincial commands, each functioning as an independent operational unit. In the event of a breakdown in central leadership or communications, local commanders are authorised to take control, launch strikes and sustain military operations without waiting for instructions.

Also Read: Why 'F35 hit by Iran' is a big deal for world's most-advanced stealth fighter jet that was supposed to be 'unkillable'

Each province maintains its own stockpiles of essential resources such as fuel, food and medical supplies, ensuring continuity even under siege conditions. The system is further reinforced by a network of paramilitary volunteers trained for localised, cell-based warfare.

Why decapitation strikes have limited impact

Israel’s early strategy in the conflict focused on decapitation strikes aimed at dismantling Iran’s leadership. However, the decentralised nature of Mosaic Defence has reduced the effectiveness of such tactics.

Instead of creating a power vacuum, the removal of leaders triggers a succession mechanism. Operations do not stop but shift to other nodes within the system. US officials have indicated that some recent drone attacks in the Strait of Hormuz may have been carried out by regional units acting independently.

This “headless” structure makes it significantly harder to disrupt operations or force a rapid end to the conflict.

Also Read: Friendly fire, no hostile fire and unexplained damage: The curious case of US fighter jet going down during Iran war

Cost of war rises sharply for US

The financial burden of the conflict has also surged. The Pentagon has spent approximately $11.3 billion in the conflict so far, a figure that covers only the first six days of strikes and does not include the cost of military buildup prior to the operation.

Reports indicate that around $5.3 billion was spent in just the first two days of strikes, with a significant portion attributed to the heavy use of high-precision munitions. The scale of spending underscores the intensity of operations and the high cost of sustaining such a campaign.

Low-cost warfare and expanding battlefield

Iran has also leveraged low-cost tactics to sustain pressure. The use of relatively inexpensive drones is forcing adversaries to deploy costly missile defence systems, increasing the financial burden of the conflict.

The strategy extends beyond Iran’s borders through allied groups often referred to as the “Axis of Resistance,” which operate with a degree of autonomy and continue to engage in regional operations.

This layered and decentralised approach complicates intelligence efforts, as adversaries must track multiple independent actors rather than a single command structure.

Lessons from Iraq and shift in war design

Iran’s doctrine draws heavily from lessons observed in US military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unlike Iraq’s centralised system, which collapsed after leadership removal, Iran has deliberately dispersed authority.

The focus has shifted from protecting leadership to ensuring the system survives even if leadership is eliminated. This marks a fundamental change in how modern conflicts can be structured and sustained.

A war without an easy end

The decentralised nature of Mosaic Defence also raises concerns about conflict resolution. With authority spread across multiple nodes, enforcing a ceasefire or coordinated de-escalation becomes more complex.

Even if political leadership seeks to end hostilities, autonomous units may continue operations, making it harder to bring the conflict to a definitive close.

In effect, Iran’s strategy is not centred on achieving a conventional victory but on preventing defeat. The system is designed to endure, adapt and continue functioning under sustained pressure, ensuring that even after leadership losses, the state remains standing