Analysis & Opinions - The Washington Post
The Trump administration wants regime change in Iran. But regime change usually doesn’t work.
resident Trump is no fan of Iran. As a candidate, he had promised to tear up the Iran Nuclear Agreement. Having been frustrated in his attempts to do that — at least for now — the administration and its backers have been rumbling about changing the regime.
In June, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), declared, “The policy of the United States should be regime change in Iran. I don’t see how anyone can say America can be safe as long as you have in power a theocratic despotism.” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has said more than once that the three most dangerous threats facing the United States are “Iran, Iran, Iran.” Other administration voices on record as favoring regime change include Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, CIA Director Mike Pompeo and Derek Harvey, former National Security Council director for Middle East affairs.
All this has mostly been rhetorical, and has done little to address whom Washington would promote to replace the mullahs. But would a more serious overt or covert effort in Iran bring benefits — such as a friendly Iranian regime — to the United States?
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Downes, Alexander and Lindsey A. O'Rourke.“The Trump administration wants regime change in Iran. But regime change usually doesn’t work..” The Washington Post, July 31, 2017.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
You Can't Always Get What You Want: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Seldom Improves Interstate Relations
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Blog Post
- Views on the Economy and the World
High Oil Prices Can Help the Environment
Journal Article
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
Future Warfare in the Western Pacific: Chinese Antiaccess/Area Denial, U.S. AirSea Battle, and Command of the Commons in East Asia
Journal Article
- Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology
resident Trump is no fan of Iran. As a candidate, he had promised to tear up the Iran Nuclear Agreement. Having been frustrated in his attempts to do that — at least for now — the administration and its backers have been rumbling about changing the regime.
In June, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), declared, “The policy of the United States should be regime change in Iran. I don’t see how anyone can say America can be safe as long as you have in power a theocratic despotism.” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has said more than once that the three most dangerous threats facing the United States are “Iran, Iran, Iran.” Other administration voices on record as favoring regime change include Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, CIA Director Mike Pompeo and Derek Harvey, former National Security Council director for Middle East affairs.
All this has mostly been rhetorical, and has done little to address whom Washington would promote to replace the mullahs. But would a more serious overt or covert effort in Iran bring benefits — such as a friendly Iranian regime — to the United States?
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security
You Can't Always Get What You Want: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Seldom Improves Interstate Relations
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Blog Post - Views on the Economy and the World
High Oil Prices Can Help the Environment
Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security
Future Warfare in the Western Pacific: Chinese Antiaccess/Area Denial, U.S. AirSea Battle, and Command of the Commons in East Asia
Journal Article - Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology