Key Takeaways:
- The US government is unprepared for a potential regime change in Iran, despite the noise surrounding the issue.
- The policy debate on Iran is muddled by overlapping networks of influencers, lobbying groups, and foreign governments.
- The Iranian-American community in Washington is polarized, with some advocating for regime change and others pushing for peaceful negotiation.
- The Arab Gulf states have their own interests in Iranian regime change, which may not align with US goals.
- The Iranian public sphere is highly decentralized and fragmented, making it difficult to predict the outcome of any potential regime change.
- The US government and other external actors may not be equipped to manage the transition to a post-Islamic Republic future.
Introduction to the Iranian Regime Change Debate
The issue of regime change in Iran has been a topic of discussion in Washington for many years, with various groups and individuals advocating for different approaches. However, despite the noise surrounding the issue, most anti-regime activists in the US have given little thought to managing the transition to a post-Islamic Republic future. The policy debate on Iran has been muddled by overlapping networks of Iranian-American influencers, domestic lobbying groups, aspiring political appointees, and several Arab Gulf states. This has left the US government no better prepared for revolution now than it was in 1979.
The Role of Iranian Influencers in Washington
The issue of Iran has always been highly polarized in Washington, where hundreds of government employees claim expertise despite having never been to Iran or having spent any significant time with Iranians. Most are only able to distinguish themselves for career advancement by confidently asserting their policy and political opinions. They are either staunchly anti-regime in the belief that the Islamic Republic is comprised only of hardliners unwilling to make concessions, or they are equally convinced that the only path to moderating Iran’s behavior is through peaceful negotiation. The many Iranian influencers at think tanks and universities who visit Washington to brief the US government and share their insights often have their own agendas and biases, which can further complicate the policy debate.
Reza Pahlavi and the Iranian Opposition
Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah of Iran, has been a prominent figure in the Iranian opposition movement in Washington. He has spent the last 45 years in the suburbs, mingling with politicians and policymakers at unofficial gatherings of former neocons, Iranian dissidents, and pro-Israel activists. However, despite his efforts, he has never formed a government-in-waiting, which was probably wise given the potential for factional disputes. His Iran Prosperity Project, launched in 2025, has made broad policy recommendations, but it remains unclear what kind of transition he is advocating for. Pahlavi checks off every box for the many lobbyists who would advocate for radical change in Washington, but his brand is also marked by a long history of association with corruption, brutality, and overly cozy relations with the US government.
The Interests of the Arab Gulf States
The Arab Gulf states have played their own complex game of engaging Washington on the issue of Iran. Several of them have spent years harping on the threat of conventional warfare in the Gulf to justify sales of advanced American defense systems. At times, their interests have aligned with other pressure groups, resulting in a dramatic amplifying effect. Following the Green Movement protests in 2009, some Arab Gulf partners became involved in supporting Iranian oppositionists and separatist groups more directly. This activity has brought some Arab Gulf officials into close proximity with Israeli counterparts who seek to build regional security alliances that might help isolate Iran and contribute to the demise of the regime.
The Fragmented Iranian Public Sphere
The messy reality on the ground in Iran is far removed from the clean lines of policy debate between various interest groups in DC. The Iranian public today is inundated with information, making mobilization of protesters much easier, but also making their organization much harder. The public sphere is highly decentralized and fragmented, with countless competing narratives once you move beyond a general opposition to government abuses. The only coherent faction that has an existential imperative to seize control and maintain a firm grip over politics is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), affiliated security organizations like the Basij, and their economic beneficiaries.
The Challenges of a Post-Revolutionary Iran
The increasingly complex and convoluted influence operations that have played out in DC over the last two decades have come at a cost. The money, politics, and institutions involved have created a situation in which Washington will be unprepared for real change in Iran. The many pressure groups seeking to influence the policy debate will have done us all a disservice. The Trump administration has signaled its readiness to conduct airstrikes on regime targets, but it is unlikely to take ownership of the chaos that could ensue. Instead, it will likely wait to see what the various opposition factions and their backers can do to rally Iranian public support and restore order.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the debate over Iranian regime change is complex and multifaceted, with various groups and individuals advocating for different approaches. However, despite the noise surrounding the issue, the US government and other external actors may not be equipped to manage the transition to a post-Islamic Republic future. The Iranian public sphere is highly decentralized and fragmented, and the IRGC has a strong incentive to maintain control over the situation. As the situation in Iran continues to evolve, it is essential to consider the potential consequences of regime change and the challenges that will arise in the aftermath. Ultimately, it will be incumbent on the various pressure groups that have lobbied for regime change to pick up the pieces themselves, a job for which most of them are wholly unsuited.