As joint Israeli and United States air strikes on Iran continue, Israel’s broader strategic objective appears increasingly clear: encouraging regime change from within Iran.
Following the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Iranian public directly in a televised message. Speaking in Farsi, he urged citizens to “take to the streets in your millions” and rise up to overthrow what he described as a regime of fear that has burdened their lives for decades.
Netanyahu framed the ongoing military campaign as support for the Iranian people, telling them their sacrifices would not be in vain and that the assistance they had long hoped for had now arrived. The air strikes, carried out jointly by Israel and the United States, have reportedly resulted in hundreds of deaths, including civilians, intensifying international concern over the conflict’s humanitarian impact.
Regime Change or State Collapse?
While Israeli officials have not explicitly declared regime change as their formal war aim, many analysts believe it is central to Israel’s strategy.
Ahron Bregman, a senior teaching fellow at King’s College London’s Department for War Studies, suggested that Israeli leadership sees the fall of Iran’s government as a transformative moment for the Middle East. According to him, there is significant public backing within Israel—even among liberal segments of society—for the belief that removing Iran’s ruling establishment would fundamentally reshape the region for the better. However, Bregman cautions that such expectations may be unrealistic.
Still, questions remain about how committed Israel’s leadership truly is to ensuring a stable transition if the current Iranian government collapses. Iran’s political landscape is highly diverse. Opposition movements range from those seeking restoration of the monarchy to advocates of secular democracy. At the same time, some Iranians have rallied behind the government in response to foreign attacks and the killing of their leader.
Former Israeli government adviser Daniel Levy argues that Israel may not be prioritizing an orderly transition at all. Instead, he suggests some within Israel’s leadership may see broader regime and even state collapse as strategically advantageous. A weakened or fragmented Iran, he notes, would remove a major regional counterbalance to Israeli military freedom of action.
Regional and International Implications
The war’s trajectory, however, may not be entirely in Israel’s control. Much of Israel’s military capability depends on US financial and strategic backing. Yet public support in the United States for direct conflict with Iran appears limited, potentially constraining Washington’s long-term involvement.
Additionally, US allies in the Gulf region—who had previously cautioned against escalation—may grow increasingly uneasy if Iranian retaliation expands to their territories. Diplomatic pressure on Washington could intensify, especially if the conflict destabilizes global energy markets or threatens critical shipping routes.
Analysts also note that US President Donald Trump may have priorities that differ from Israel’s. While the current campaign represents unprecedented military coordination between the two allies, future political calculations in Washington could shift rapidly.
Strong Domestic Support in Israel
Despite Iranian missile strikes targeting Israeli territory, public opinion inside Israel appears largely supportive of the military campaign. Years of political messaging portraying Iran as Israel’s principal existential threat have shaped public sentiment.
From Netanyahu’s longstanding warnings about Iran’s nuclear ambitions to cross-party rhetoric predicting potential Iranian aggression, many Israelis view the current confrontation as a decisive and perhaps inevitable showdown.
Political leaders across the spectrum—including opposition figures such as Yair Golan, Yair Lapid, and Naftali Bennett—have expressed support for the operation. Even critics of Israel’s policies toward Palestinians have largely united behind the government in confronting Iran.
Political pollster Mitchell Barak described the campaign as a source of national pride, emphasizing the significance of conducting the operation alongside the United States. According to him, many Israelis see the war as both a defensive necessity and an opportunity to permanently neutralize what they consider a longstanding threat.
An Uncertain Endgame
While the objective of weakening or transforming Iran’s leadership may be clear to many observers, the ultimate outcome remains uncertain. Whether the conflict results in regime change, prolonged instability, or diplomatic negotiations will depend on a complex interplay of regional resistance, international diplomacy, and domestic political pressures within both Israel and the United States.
For now, as air strikes continue and tensions escalate, the war marks a pivotal moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics—one whose consequences may reshape the region for years to come.
Read More..
France Orders Aircraft Carrier Deployment to the Mediterranean
