"Trump has billed the war with Iran as a one-time opportunity for Iranians to take back their country. This implies regime change, yet the administration's ambitions have in fact been vague and inconsistent. By offering a grab bag of justifications and intentions, the United States has been squandering an opportunity to declare a goal that is both necessary and achievable: Instead of changing Iran's regime, the U.S. should fatally weaken it."
"Toppling the regime also demands breaking up the forces that suppress Iranians, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the notorious Basij militia. The Pentagon's air campaign aims to weaken these groups by striking their headquarters, command posts, armories, and communication nodes, but it's unclear whether this will be enough to undermine the forces that prop up the regime."
"Tehran is counting on the cost of this war exceeding Trump's willingness to fight it. If Iran's regime survives, it will be even more determined to rebuild and wreak vengeance, at least in the short term. Some argue that the only way to stop Iran from menacing the region and its people is to crush this regime."
Effective statecraft requires clear objectives, yet the Trump administration's approach to Iran has remained vague and inconsistent. Rather than pursuing regime change, a more achievable goal is fatally weakening Iran's regime. Tehran's leaders demonstrate extreme tenacity in survival, as evidenced by their suppression of protests. Weakening the regime requires dismantling the forces that sustain it, particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Basij militia. Current Pentagon air campaigns targeting headquarters and command posts may prove insufficient unless they effectively isolate and disorient these forces through disrupted command and control. Two strategic paths exist for regime weakening, including sustained attacks on weapons stockpiles and production facilities.
Read at The Atlantic
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]