By Farhad Rezaei, JNS
Some observers hope that with the Iran weakened, at home and in the region, the United States can help the Iranian people change the regime.
Iran’s rapid move toward acquiring nuclear weapons, its pledge to keep supporting destabilizing proxies in the region and its harsh treatment of the Iranian people have unleashed a torrent of speculation about how best to address these challenges.
Some observers hope that with the Islamic Republic weakened, at home and in the region, the United States can help the Iranian people change the regime. Others argue that the United States should refrain from pursuing regime change in Iran as it is unachievable. Instead, they believe that the United States should focus on changing the regime’s behavior through diplomacy. According to these analysts, diplomacy would not just persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions, it might also lead to a grand bargain in which the regime renounces military support for terrorist groups, like Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis.
This latter argument is troublesome on different levels. First, these observers seem to forget that two decades of diplomacy with the Islamic Republic have failed to persuade it to end its nuclear weapons program. Instead, the regime has deliberately adopted a “talk for talk’s sake” approach to stall and drag out the process until it achieves a nuclear breakout—a threshold it is now on the verge of crossing.
The Islamic Republic has made considerable progress in its nuclear weapons program. It is only days away from having sufficient weapon-grade uranium to build multiple nuclear warheads, and the leaders of the Islamic Republic have begun openly hinting at a shift in Iran’s nuclear doctrine. Iran has accelerated the production and operation of centrifuges to enrich uranium at higher levels, thereby creating the type of fuel used for nuclear bombs. According to the latest assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as of Oct. 26, Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% purity had reached 182.3 kilograms. If this stockpile is further enriched to 90%, it will be enough to make up to five nuclear warheads.
Meanwhile, the regime has restricted the U.N.’s ability to monitor key facilities, limiting both technological and physical inspections. As a result, the IAEA can no longer reliably detect whether Iran is diverting nuclear material, equipment or other resources to undeclared sites, further complicating verification efforts. Intelligence reports also indicate that scientists at civilian research institutes have been conducting limited computer modeling and metallurgy experiments related to nuclear “weaponization,” potentially expediting Iran’s ability to produce nuclear weapons.
More concerning is the notable increase in public statements by regime officials regarding changes to Iran’s nuclear doctrine and its potential withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran poses serious implications for United States security. An immediate, decisive solution is required to address this escalating threat. Military action is not an optimal solution, but Iran’s rapid nuclear advancements suggest that diplomacy alone is unlikely to fully address this threat.
Diplomacy with the regime will never lead to a grand bargain, one in which the regime renounces its military support for terror proxies. Iran’s support for these proxies is not merely tactical, it is central to its revolutionary identity and its strategic opposition to Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States. Abandoning this support would necessitate a fundamental shift from a revolutionary cause to a normal state, a transition achievable only through sustained pressure from the United States and a transformation of the regime’s ideology.
The Islamic Republic views regional instability as essential for maintaining its influence, systematically funding, training and arming groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Houthis and various Shia militias. Despite setbacks following Israel’s military campaign against Iranian-backed proxies after the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Iran remains committed to rebuilding these groups. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has reaffirmed his determination to reconstitute its proxy network and to continue supporting the axis of resistance—in Gaza, Judea and Samaria, Lebanon, Yemen and beyond—against the “malicious actions” of the Zionist regime. Given the deep ideological and strategic embedding of these proxies within Iran’s axis of resistance, expecting a reduction in support through diplomacy alone is overly optimistic.
Finally, the argument that the United States shouldn’t prioritize regime change in Iran because this goal is unachievable largely stems from a misunderstanding of Iran’s current situation. The regime faces multiple crises at home and is on the brink of collapse. Widespread corruption among officials has undermined public trust and government effectiveness, which has brought the regime’s legitimacy down to near zero. High unemployment, social restrictions, limited press freedom, restrictions on civil liberties, water scarcity, pollution and the mismanagement of natural resources have fueled public anger. Factories operate at less than 50% capacity, blackouts routinely disrupt schools and government services, and the currency continues to plummet. Protests over unpaid wages and increasing prices are spreading across all sectors.
On several occasions, the Iranian people have risked their lives to rise up against the regime, but the regime responded with brutal force. Had the Biden administration provided them with the necessary support, the outcome would have been very different. The Trump administration should fix this oversight. Supporting the Iranian people in their effort to change the regime is not only a moral responsibility for the United States, it is a strategic necessity. A democratic Iran would likely renounce nuclear ambitions, cease engaging in aggression and renounce military support for its proxy groups.
Without the Islamic Republic, the Middle East would also fare better. The prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians would increase substantially, and the Houthis would be less able to disrupt global trade through the waters. Furthermore, a new, democratic Iran would not support U.S. adversaries like Russia, China and North Korea.
The ultimate solution to Iran’s problems lies in regime change rather than continued diplomacy with its current leadership. President Donald Trump should act swiftly before the regime rebuilds its proxy network or breaks out with a nuclear weapon.
