Israel’s Strategic Strikes Aim for Regime Change in Iran
Attacks Target Key Infrastructure and Leadership
Recent actions by Israel signal a strategy to destabilize Iran’s government. The focus is on diminishing the regime’s influence and potentially fostering internal dissent, a move that could reshape the Middle East’s political landscape.
Israel’s Aims and Objectives
Israel’s surprise assaults on Iran were designed to disrupt its nuclear program, potentially delaying its advancement toward a nuclear weapon. The choice of targets included key figures in Iran’s military and scientific sectors. This suggests a broader objective beyond just dismantling nuclear facilities.
Michael Singh, from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, expressed that the attacks could be aimed at regime change. He stated that the limited civilian casualties might indicate a broader goal.
“One assumes that one of the reasons Israel is doing that is they’re hoping to see regime change.”
—Michael Singh, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, directly appealed to the Iranian people in a video address. The actions against Hezbollah led to a new government in Lebanon and the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria. The world is watching to see if similar changes are possible within Iran’s borders. Recent data shows that over 70% of Iranians express dissatisfaction with the current government, according to a 2024 poll by the University of Tehran (Tehran University, 2024).
Challenges and Uncertainties
Despite the significant damage, the deep-seated animosity towards Israel among Iran’s ruling class and its majority-Shi’ite population raises questions. It’s uncertain whether this would spark enough public support to displace the leadership in Tehran, backed by its loyal security forces.
Jonathan Panikoff, a former US deputy national intelligence officer, noted the potential dangers of destabilizing Iran. If Israel successfully removes Iran’s leadership, the successor might be even more hardline in its pursuit of conflict.
“History tells us it can always be worse.”
—Jonathan Panikoff, Atlantic Council
The military campaign, however, may create the conditions for a deal with the U.S., which could thwart the nuclear program. The international community remains skeptical that Israel can obliterate the nuclear project without American support.
Although weakening Tehran’s nuclear program offers value for Israel, the desire for regime change may explain the targeting of key military figures. This could throw the Iranian security establishment into confusion, according to Sima Shine, a former chief Mossad analyst.
