In the West, a number of observers and officials—both current and former, across the political spectrum—hesitate to acknowledge that regime change in Iran is not only possible, but increasingly plausible. Some offer valuable insights, but many seem constrained by long-standing assumptions, institutional caution, or personal bias. What they are missing is that the shift may already be underway—however tragically, through the momentum of war.
CIA documents are replete with postmortem analyses of what is now widely regarded as an intelligence failure: the U.S. inability to anticipate the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The failure was not due to a lack of information, but rather to flawed assumptions, cognitive biases, and deep-seated institutional blind spots. The same kind of inertia and disbelief seems to be resurfacing today.
From what I have observed across Iranian media, public discourse, and diaspora conversations, even those focused solely on ending the war without regime change are beginning to concede a sobering truth: if this conflict ends with the Islamic Republic still intact, life for ordinary Iranians will become exponentially worse. Weakened, humiliated, and cornered, the regime would almost certainly retaliate by intensifying its repression at home.
There is also a growing recognition—however painful—that peaceful change may no longer be viable. After decades of civil protest movements and reform efforts, the regime has systematically closed every path to nonviolent transition. Many Iranians now simply want a chance to live a normal life—even if that chance emerges from the chaos of war, which they did not choose but must now endure. They have waited long enough, while regime elites enriched themselves and plundered the country at the people’s expense.
The Iranian people have learned bitter but invaluable lessons from the broken promises Khomeini once made. They are a well-educated, politically conscious nation—capable of correcting past mistakes, if given the opportunity. But that opportunity can only come if this murderous regime is replaced by a system of governance that is transparent, accountable, and committed to peace.
This is a moment of reckoning. To withhold support for a transition now is not neutrality—it is complicity in the survival and resurgence of a brutal regime. No one can claim Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi is perfect or that his roadmap is without flaws. But he remains a widely recognized figure with enough legitimacy and visibility to help guide a transitional period—one that could lay the foundation for a future government that no longer threatens its own people or its neighbors.
Regime change will not be easy—but it is no longer unthinkable. As Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi reportedly said:
“If not now, then when?”