The U.S. and Iran

Trump has on several occasions promised that the U.S. will take action against Iran to stop them from developing nuclear weapon capabilities. Trump has also told protesters that help is on its way, as well as Trump’s zero enrichment red line, but at this point, nothing has happened and the U.S. is still deciding what to do about Iran.

Special Envoy Steve Witkoff recently warned that Iran could be a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material, raising urgent questions about what Trump could do next to address the looming threat. Witkoff told Fox News that the president is curious why Iran has not shifted course despite mounting U.S. pressure in the region. It might be because Iran does not think the U.S. will go through with their threats and that ultimately, Iran will be fine and the regime will stay in power. External pressures are only part of the picture. The Islamic regime faces additional pressures from its own civilians, prompting unrest and state-driven aggression against protesters.

Exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, who has discussed the proposition of Iranian regime change on multiple occasions, has previously expressed faith in Trump’s ability and willingness to help topple the regime. Pahlavi has outlined a series of measures the U.S. could take to weaken the ayatollah, including neutralizing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, cracking down on ghost tankers that secretly transport sanctioned oil and fund the regime, expelling diplomats or holding them accountable for criminal behavior, freezing oligarchs’ assets, supporting protesters with internet access and calling for the unconditional release of all political prisoners in Iran.

Despite the situation in Iran, Trump is clearly hesitant to act. There are several reasons for this. The U.S. is reluctant to take direct, full-scale military action against Iran due to fears of triggering a major regional war, potentially disrupting 20% of global oil supplies, and causing significant, uncontrolled escalation. Key factors include risks of Iranian retaliation, limited strategic upsides, and concerns over a prolonged, costly conflict. U.S. leaders fear a conflict could involve U.S. allies and bases in the region, with Iran prepared to launch retaliatory strikes against the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Jordon to mention a few relatively easy targets. A conflict could shut down the Strait of Hormuz, causing a costly global oil crisis.

There are several potential benefits should the U.S. decide to attack Iran. It would disrupt or degrade Iran’s nuclear and missile programs and make the U.S. and key ally Israel relatively stronger in the region. Some policymakers assert a key goal would be to reduce Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons or advanced missiles, essentially delaying or hampering these capabilities. A show of force by the U.S. and Israel could signal to allies and adversaries that the U.S. is willing to act militarily to defend its interests or counter perceived threats, bolstering confidence among partners like Israel and some Gulf states. Intervention might be viewed by some allied governments as reaffirming U.S. commitment to regional security, potentially deepening defense cooperation and arms sales. This can also create economic activity for the U.S. defense sector.

Should U.S. choose to act against Iran, the ultimate goal is clearly regime change and to create a U.S.-friendly government. Regime change is difficult though as proven in Syria, Libya and Iraq. It would also require a change from within, driven by Iranians themselves through protests, strikes, and societal pressure. If protests grow in size and coordination and if large segments of security forces stop obeying orders, the existing regime could lose its ability to govern. The challenge in Iran is that the government’s security apparatus is deeply entrenched and has repeatedly crushed uprisings. A successful popular revolution requires sustained mass participation and defections from key security institutions. A more likely path would include harsher sanctions, psychological operations to weaken elite loyalty, or targeted weakening of the regime’s repressive forces.

At this point, the U.S. has move powerful aircraft carriers like USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerard Ford into position and Trump is threatening Iran on a daily basis, but nothing has happened. The next week will be key in the development and it is widely seen that Iran will have to meet the U.S. nuclear demands, otherwise the U.S. will act against the Iranian regime and selectively bomb the country. A ground invasion is unlikely, so the question is how many punches the regime can take before ultimately give in to U.S. demands. Trump is talking the tough talk and the pressure is building on the U.S. to act.