Israel’s war with Iran has captured the attention and imagination of the entire world. Since the U.S. has a connection to Israel’s efforts, we want to know everything that could happen, from overviews to incisive details: whether Iran will exhaust its stock of ballistic missiles; whether Israel will continue to attack only the relevant sites, and not the people; whether Iran will continue to target the Israeli people; and how long will the fighting last? But at this moment, the question that looms large in the minds of many people is whether there will be regime change in Iran?

There are several issues that are worth exploring regarding regime change:

1.    Should the U.S. participate in those efforts?

2.    What will happen to Americans if we assist the Iranians?

3.    What makes us think that regime change could be successful?

4.    Isn’t it up to Israel to assist Iranians rather than the U.S?

5.    Should we leave regime change in the hands of the Iranians?

This article primarily examines whether the U.S. should get involved at all or if change should be left to the American people.

Those on the left who despise Trump and a small cohort on the right who are isolationists assume that the U.S. will be instrumental in regime change, with disastrous results. Time Magazine offered a dystopian take:

But Iran is not Syria, Libya, or Iraq. If President Trump joins the war on Iran and commits the United States to removing the Iranian regime, the results will likely be more catastrophic than the 2003 war on Iraq, which killed more than 1.2 million people, displaced more than nine million Iraqis, contributed to the emergence of the Islamic State, and cost the United States about $3 trillion. America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also contributed significantly to the squandering of its unipolar moment and setting off the decline of the American century.

The reality, though, is that President Trump and the American people abhor the thought of putting boots on the ground. It’s highly unlikely, in my opinion, that we will become involved in regime change in any substantial way.

However, paving the way for Iran to change its regime from within is a worthwhile effort—and, significantly, the time is right, given that the IRGC’s leadership has been wiped off the board. The organization’s ability to take control of the government has been greatly diminished. Additionally, IRGC members who were propagandized to assume they were overwhelmingly powerful have watched their country’s weapons and nuclear infrastructure be nearly destroyed, leaving them frustrated and disillusioned with the current governance.

On the ground, Iran has long been plagued by unrest and civil disobedience:

What we are seeing is no longer isolated dissatisfaction—it is the convergence of class-based grievances and political dissent, laying the groundwork for potential revolutionary change.

This latest surge of strikes and protests could mark a pivotal turning point. These movements are not just economic in nature; they are deeply rooted in the structural crises that afflict the Islamic Republic and affect more than 90 percent of the population. While demonstrators may initially chant about inflation, unpaid wages, and poor working conditions, their underlying message is clear: they do not believe the Islamic regime can or will resolve these issues. Beneath these demands lies a growing consensus: the solution is a regime change.

Several crises are contributing to the dissatisfaction and disorder. For some, having the option to return to the mores of a Persian culture, rather than a technocracy, has great appeal. The people no longer trust their leaders. The economy is devastated. Free and fair elections are non-existent. And the suppression of women is primitive and rooted in extremism.

One organization has actively been working for decades to take back the country of Iran: The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). It is prepared to take the lead in creating a new regime under a parliament-in-exile. It was organized in 1981 and is led by Maryam Rajavi:

The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which I lead, offers a viable alternative for achieving freedom and democracy.

Several key components underpin this solution:

• An organized resistance movement with thousands of experienced members.
• Broad social and international support for the NCRI’s platform.
• A clear roadmap for transition to a democratic government.
• Active grassroots resistance cells, which form the foundation of a freedom army.

[snip]

Under the NCRI’s plan, the regime’s collapse would be followed by the formation of a six-month transitional government tasked with organizing free and fair elections for a constituent assembly. This assembly would draft a new constitution for the Republic of Iran.

Key principles of this vision include:

• A democratic system rooted in free elections and the rule of law.
• Full gender equality and the empowerment of women.
• Autonomy for Iran’s ethnic minorities.
• Religious freedom and the separation of religion and state.
• A commitment to regional peace and a nuclear-weapon-free Iran.

This roadmap ensures stability and eliminates the risk of chaos. A free Iran will prioritize democracy, inclusion, and peace.

That all sounds very fine, but there’s a lot to criticize about NCRI because of its close relationship with MEK, an organization founded as a Marxist-Muslim fusion—or the worst of all possible worlds NCRI routinely defends MEK and touts its legitimacy as a powerful force in assisting NCRI to accomplish democratic regime change.

On the American home front, the U.S. government has condemned the current Iranian government and is supporting those who resist it:

A bipartisan group of 151 lawmakers is rallying around a resolution to support the Iranian resistance movement ahead of a hearing with an opposition leader.

The resolution, led by Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., expresses support ‘or the Iranian people and their stated desire for a ‘democratic, secular and non-nuclear’ Iran through regime change.

‘The developments of the past year have left no doubt that the source of terrorism and warmongering in the Middle East region is the theocratic Islamic Republic of Iran,’ the resolution reads.

It calls out the Iranian regime’s oppressive practices, voices support for the opposition and calls on global leaders to continue imposing sanctions.

The Iranians have waited many years to be free of the Islamist oppression and violence. It’s time we support them in any way we can:

Iran stands at a historic crossroads. What may begin as scattered labor strikes and economic protests can rapidly evolve into a broad-based, nationwide uprising. The call for regime change is no longer whispered—it is being chanted in the streets.

The making of a new Iranian revolution may already be underway. The world—and especially the United States—must be ready.

Image created using ChatGPT.