For now, President Donald Trump says he will “wait and see” before striking Iran, adding that “sources” have told him that the Iranian government has stopped killing its own people.
It is always possible that Trump will eventually decide to attack if the Iranian regime continues to kill protestors or execute some of those arrested as their top judicial official pledged. Trump’s decision after nearly three weeks of horrendous bloodshed in Iran and rising tension with the U.S. is unsurprising but unlikely to resolve the fundamental issues convulsing Iran or the nearly five decades of hostility between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic.
Trump bears some responsibility for the dire economic situation that set off the latest and bloodiest popular protests in Iran since the 1978-79 revolution. Trump’s decision in his first term to quit the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by his predecessor and to reimpose draconian sanctions helped put Iran in this predicament. Rampant corruption within the Iranian regime, along with decades of mismanagement of the country’s resources, also contributed significantly to this state of affairs. Iran’s decision to try to revive its nuclear program and to continue to back regional militant actors kept it in U.S. — and Israeli — crosshairs and led to a 12-day war last June in which the U.S. attacked the Iranian homeland for the first time.
What happens now is hard to predict. Will the Islamic Republic offer a new bargain that relinquishes uranium enrichment and promises to scale back its regional interference? The former would be a bitter acknowledgement of loss of sovereignty but practically not too difficult at a time when much of Iran’s nuclear program lies in ruins and its stockpile of enriched uranium is under the rubble of last year’s U.S. and Israeli attacks. To pull back from the so-called “Axis of Resistance” is also conceivable given the damage to its constituent groups by Israel since the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023.
The question of how the regime resolves the chasm between its theocratic, repressive leadership and its own population is much more complicated. Under pressure from society after the last round of protests — the Women, Life, Freedom movement of 2022-2023 — the government has grudgingly stopped trying in a systematic way to police how its women dress. The long hair and bared midriffs so often seen in pictures from Iran on social media are a testament to Iranians’ secular preferences after 47 years of having a fundamentalist interpretation of Shi’ite Islam stuffed down their collective throats.
But Iranians want more — much more. They want to elect their leaders, not obey a “Supreme Leader” chosen by other clerics. They want international recognition and respect instead of visa bans and pariah status. They want an economy that is integrated into the international financial system, not dependent on smuggling and cryptocurrency. Whether the current regime is capable of — and willing — to undertake such dramatic shifts is unlikely.
What is clear is that the U.S. can’t bomb Iran into transforming into a democratic system that meets its citizens’ aspirations. Should President Trump change his mind again — or the protests resume and provoke more mass killing by the regime — the U.S. could always target bases of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or try to take out the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , along with leaders of the security services responsible for this latest killing wave. But the IRGC — which is crucial to continued regime control — has not shown any sign of splintering over the past few weeks, and the removal of Khamenei would almost certainly lead to his replacement by another cleric, likely already chosen.
Iran would retaliate against U.S. bases in the region, angering U.S. Arab allies that have reached a modus vivendi with Iran, despite lingering differences over Iran’s regional proxies and ballistic missile program, in the interest of fostering some stability in a region that has seen very little of that, particularly in the last two years. Indeed, the appeals of those allies to Trump not to strike Iran appear to have helped bring about his latest decision.
Not bombing Iran does not mean abandoning its people. The U.S. should be doing everything possible to continue to amplify dissident Iranian voices, break the Internet logjam, and flood the zone with vetted information. The draconian cuts the Trump administration made to U.S. global media appear particularly short-sighted now and urgent repair is needed — starting with replacing Kari Lake with an experienced journalist who understands this realm. Those fired should be rehired and their budgets restored.
The U.S. should be willing to listen to Iranians in the diaspora but should not pick winners or losers in this fight. The U.S. record of regime change in the Middle East is spotty at best and in Iran, calls up memories of the forced exile of Reza Shah in 1941 and the reinstallation of his son on the throne in 1953 after a CIA-backed coup against a popular prime minister. The exiled former crown prince, Reza Pahlavi, can help mobilize support for change but cannot supplant those who have endured life under the regime and understand how it works at a molecular level. Trump appears to have realized that Pahlavi is not the man of the hour, calling him “very nice” but casting doubt on the Washington suburbanite’s ability to rule a country he has not visited since he was 17.
Iran has plenty of leadership ability within its borders as well as more recent exiles who would be more than willing to help it recover its rightful place on the international stage. In the end, however, this is Iranians’ fight, and the U.S. should not assume it can direct events on the ground. The past 47 years of US-Iran animosity show that both countries have missed multiple opportunities to help Iran — and the wider Middle East — find a more peaceful and prosperous path.
Header image: Popular rally in Tehran. By Masoud Shahrestani, Tasnim News Agency
For Now, the US Holds Off on Attacking Iran
By Barbara Slavin
Middle East & North Africa
For now, President Donald Trump says he will “wait and see” before striking Iran, adding that “sources” have told him that the Iranian government has stopped killing its own people.
It is always possible that Trump will eventually decide to attack if the Iranian regime continues to kill protestors or execute some of those arrested as their top judicial official pledged. Trump’s decision after nearly three weeks of horrendous bloodshed in Iran and rising tension with the U.S. is unsurprising but unlikely to resolve the fundamental issues convulsing Iran or the nearly five decades of hostility between the U.S. and the Islamic Republic.
Trump bears some responsibility for the dire economic situation that set off the latest and bloodiest popular protests in Iran since the 1978-79 revolution. Trump’s decision in his first term to quit the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by his predecessor and to reimpose draconian sanctions helped put Iran in this predicament. Rampant corruption within the Iranian regime, along with decades of mismanagement of the country’s resources, also contributed significantly to this state of affairs. Iran’s decision to try to revive its nuclear program and to continue to back regional militant actors kept it in U.S. — and Israeli — crosshairs and led to a 12-day war last June in which the U.S. attacked the Iranian homeland for the first time.
What happens now is hard to predict. Will the Islamic Republic offer a new bargain that relinquishes uranium enrichment and promises to scale back its regional interference? The former would be a bitter acknowledgement of loss of sovereignty but practically not too difficult at a time when much of Iran’s nuclear program lies in ruins and its stockpile of enriched uranium is under the rubble of last year’s U.S. and Israeli attacks. To pull back from the so-called “Axis of Resistance” is also conceivable given the damage to its constituent groups by Israel since the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023.
The question of how the regime resolves the chasm between its theocratic, repressive leadership and its own population is much more complicated. Under pressure from society after the last round of protests — the Women, Life, Freedom movement of 2022-2023 — the government has grudgingly stopped trying in a systematic way to police how its women dress. The long hair and bared midriffs so often seen in pictures from Iran on social media are a testament to Iranians’ secular preferences after 47 years of having a fundamentalist interpretation of Shi’ite Islam stuffed down their collective throats.
But Iranians want more — much more. They want to elect their leaders, not obey a “Supreme Leader” chosen by other clerics. They want international recognition and respect instead of visa bans and pariah status. They want an economy that is integrated into the international financial system, not dependent on smuggling and cryptocurrency. Whether the current regime is capable of — and willing — to undertake such dramatic shifts is unlikely.
What is clear is that the U.S. can’t bomb Iran into transforming into a democratic system that meets its citizens’ aspirations. Should President Trump change his mind again — or the protests resume and provoke more mass killing by the regime — the U.S. could always target bases of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or try to take out the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , along with leaders of the security services responsible for this latest killing wave. But the IRGC — which is crucial to continued regime control — has not shown any sign of splintering over the past few weeks, and the removal of Khamenei would almost certainly lead to his replacement by another cleric, likely already chosen.
Iran would retaliate against U.S. bases in the region, angering U.S. Arab allies that have reached a modus vivendi with Iran, despite lingering differences over Iran’s regional proxies and ballistic missile program, in the interest of fostering some stability in a region that has seen very little of that, particularly in the last two years. Indeed, the appeals of those allies to Trump not to strike Iran appear to have helped bring about his latest decision.
Not bombing Iran does not mean abandoning its people. The U.S. should be doing everything possible to continue to amplify dissident Iranian voices, break the Internet logjam, and flood the zone with vetted information. The draconian cuts the Trump administration made to U.S. global media appear particularly short-sighted now and urgent repair is needed — starting with replacing Kari Lake with an experienced journalist who understands this realm. Those fired should be rehired and their budgets restored.
The U.S. should be willing to listen to Iranians in the diaspora but should not pick winners or losers in this fight. The U.S. record of regime change in the Middle East is spotty at best and in Iran, calls up memories of the forced exile of Reza Shah in 1941 and the reinstallation of his son on the throne in 1953 after a CIA-backed coup against a popular prime minister. The exiled former crown prince, Reza Pahlavi, can help mobilize support for change but cannot supplant those who have endured life under the regime and understand how it works at a molecular level. Trump appears to have realized that Pahlavi is not the man of the hour, calling him “very nice” but casting doubt on the Washington suburbanite’s ability to rule a country he has not visited since he was 17.
Iran has plenty of leadership ability within its borders as well as more recent exiles who would be more than willing to help it recover its rightful place on the international stage. In the end, however, this is Iranians’ fight, and the U.S. should not assume it can direct events on the ground. The past 47 years of US-Iran animosity show that both countries have missed multiple opportunities to help Iran — and the wider Middle East — find a more peaceful and prosperous path.
Header image: Popular rally in Tehran. By Masoud Shahrestani, Tasnim News Agency
Recent & Related