The approaches and objectives of the United States and Israel regarding the Iran issue are different. This is the opinion of Iran expert Tigran Davudyan.
Trump Does Not Consider Full “Regime Change”
According to the Iran expert, Donald Trump is not considering the option of full “regime change” in Iran. In Davudyan’s assessment, the US president does not aim to necessarily radically change the power structure, but rather wants to see leaders emerging from the same system but advocating a milder policy.
He cites Venezuela as an example, noting that there, despite the pressure, power remained in the hands of the same political force. According to him, Trump hopes that possible new leadership in Iran could come from the same system but adopt a more conciliatory foreign policy.
According to Davudyan, names of possible candidates are already being discussed inside Iran. The name of Security Council Secretary Larijani is mentioned, as well as former President Hassan Rouhani, known as a supporter of reformist approaches.
In the Iran expert’s estimation, if such figures come to power, Washington could expect some political softening.
External Forces and Opposition Groups
However, he emphasizes that Israel’s approach differs from the possible calculations of the United States.
According to Davudyan, Israel’s strategic goal is not merely a change of course, but the complete “bringing to its knees” of the Islamic Republic.
The Iran expert notes that in the situation forming around Iran, various opposition and armed groups are also becoming active. According to him, Israel is providing support especially to Kurdish forces, and there is a risk of incursions from Iraqi territory into Iran.
In addition, Davudyan recalls the Mujahedin-e Khalq organization (MEK), which previously engaged in armed struggle and operated from Iraqi territory. In his view, it is theoretically not excluded that such groups could become active again.
The third direction, according to the Iran expert, is connected to the son of the former Shah of Iran, who is considered one of the symbolic figures of the opposition movement. However, as Davudyan emphasizes, these circles are mainly not supporters of armed struggle.