Is regime change in Iran possible?

Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear sites and kills top generals, and Iran retaliates with missile barrages. That is the most recent news from the Middle East as the conflict is escalating and will likely be a long one. It might seem like an uneven fight as Iran has more than 92 million people against Israel with fewer than 10 million. In there case though, it is rather a fight related to technology with Israel using precision bombing and Iran not being able to break the Israeli defense system. The defense shield, or the Iron Dome refers to Israel’s sophisticated and multi-layered missile defense system. This system is designed to protect Israeli citizens and critical infrastructure from a variety of aerial threats, including short-range rockets, medium-range missiles, and long-range ballistic missile

What is the goal with the Israeli attack on Iran? Is it a matter of ending Iran’s nuclear ambitions or is this an attempt for regime change in Iran? Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says it launched operation “Rising Lion”, to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s survival. The U.S. and President Trump have been unusually quiet. It is said that Trump vetoed an Israeli plan to kill Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. At the same time, Trump is firmly behind Israel’s actions.

At this point, the end goal seems to be to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities but would this not be a good opportunity to eliminate the Iranian regime once and for all as they have been a problem since the revolution in 1979. Regime change in Iran might a possibility, but it is not guaranteed and would likely be a complex and lengthy process. While Israeli attacks on Iran, including strikes on military and industrial targets, may be intended to destabilize the regime and potentially trigger its collapse, the Iranian government has shown resilience in the past. It would likely require a larger effort such as a ground invasion with the U.S. involved and that is a highly unlikely scenario. There are internal factors within Iran, such as popular discontent and the potential for internal conflict, that could contribute to regime change. However, the Iranian government has a history of suppressing dissent. The regime has developed highly efficient security systems that have allowed it to survive numerous challenges since 1979, including the Iran-Iraq war and massive sanctions. Several foreign countries have help Iran build a first-class surveillance system in order to control its citizens. Amon these companies are several Chinese companies, such as Tiandy Technologies, Hikvision, and Dahua Technology, have been involved in supplying surveillance technology to Iran, including cameras and AI-enabled software like facial recognition. There are also some European companies, like Bosch (Germany) and Milestone Systems (Denmark), that have supplied surveillance technology to Iran. Maybe the west has been to lenient and passive towards Iran? Now is an opportunity to change that.  

However, it seems that Israel and the U.S. are not interested in regime change. If they were, they would already have taken out Ali Khamenei. Instead, this might be an opportunity for the west to work with local opposition and dissident groups and tighten pressure as sanctions and economic instability could further erode public support for the government. The Iranian regime would then face increasing pressure from within Iran, driven by economic collapse, widespread political disillusionment, and rejection of religious authoritarianism. This has been particularly evident in recent years with protests against the mandatory hijab law, as well as broader anti-government demonstrations. Also, the regime’s legitimacy has been weakened due to its inability to address the needs of its people, coupled with its heavy-handed response to dissent. The significant decline in voter turnout in recent elections reflects this loss of trust.

Israel and the U.S. should be in a good position to disrupt the Iranian political system. Iran’s regional influence is has already diminished significantly as its proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah suffered military defeats and diplomatic isolation. This might be a rare opportunity for regime change, but it would require more U.S. involvement.

It would potentially also require a ground offensive, which will certainly not happen after the Iraqi debacle. How would the neo-conservatives have acted? They would probably have been proactive and aggressive as this could be a golden opportunity to take out the Iranian leadership. The U.S. has grown more cautious after the Iraqi war and history suggests that externally induced regime change does not guarantee positive outcomes. It is also difficult for the west to work with dissidents in Iran. The Iranian opposition, while growing, lacks a clear leader and a cohesive vision for the future, which could limit its ability to effectively challenge the regime.

While a collapse of the current regime is possible due to the internal and external pressures it faces, it is not an inevitable outcome and highly unlikely. The Iranian regime’s resilience, its ability to suppress dissent, and the complexities of external intervention all play a role in determining the likelihood of regime change. It seems that this is an opportunity to transform Iran and Trump seems to be hesitant. He is after all a nationalist with focus on Making America Great Again.