Tone Adapted Article
Internal transition in Iran is the sole path towards a new government.
Iran's freedom: Who's got the juice to change the regime?
By Tim Black, Associate Editor - 23rd June 2025
The Iran-Israel war has reached a new level of intensity, with rumors of 'regime change' swirling around Tehran. Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump took to social media, suggesting that if the current Iranian regime can't "Make Iran Great Again," then regime change could be on the horizon. But is this just political grandstanding, or is it a genuine risk?
Trump's post left a hole wide enough to drive a truck through - the details of who, when, and how the regime would change remain unclear. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tried to clear things up, stating that Trump was merely posing a question, "why shouldn't the Iranian people rise up against this brutal, terrorist regime?" Trump's cabinet, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have all insisted that the U.S. has no intention of engaging in a full-scale war with Iran.
So, what's the deal? If we take Trump's tweet to mean that the U.S. is considering initiating regime change, that would be a reckless and dangerous move. Why? Because the U.S.'s intervention in the Middle East hasn't always gone according to plan. Remember Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), and Libya (2011)? The removal of dictators led to power vacuums, civil war, and the rise of extremist groups. And let's not forget about the devastating, years-long occupations that followed, all of which were meant to be short, limited missions.
Here at "our website," we've always opposed these narcissistic regime-changing interventions that are driven by self-righteousness rather than strategic considerations. We believe that genuine regime change can only come from the people struggling for it. That's why, historically, we've seen societies evolve through their own acts of internal regime change, like the ones we've witnessed in Western democracies as they moved away from monarchy.
In the case of Iran, a forced regime change would take control out of the hands of the Iranian people and place it in the hands of politicians and armies who don't understand the complexities of Iranian culture and society. The result would likely be chaos, fragmentation, and an Islamic insurgency. Iran needs change, but it must come from within.
Despite the challenges faced by the opposition, there are signs that change is on the horizon. From the 2009 Green Movement to the 2019 fuel protests, and more recently to the "Women, Life, Freedom" demonstrations, each wave of anti-regime protest has grown in size and scope. It's no longer just the middle class of Tehran airing grievances against the authoritarian theocrats—now, working-class Iranians are also fed up with the regime's economic mismanagement, aggressive foreign policy, and repressive social policies.
The ultra-reactionary clerics' grip on power may be loosening, but it's up to the Iranian people to decide their own future. It's time for Iranians to step up, seize control of their own nation, and build a better future for themselves and their children.
So, what do you think? Is it time for Iran to change its regime, or should the Iranian people continue to fight for positive change internally? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!
Enrichment Integration
Interestingly, there are signals that the regime change in Iran may not solely depend on external factors. Moderate factions within the Iranian regime are growing in influence, partially due to internal disagreements exacerbated by the ongoing conflict with Israel and the U.S. Some caution, however, that the Iranian opposition remains fractured and lacks a unifying leader, making the prospect of successful regime change difficult. Additionally, Iran's history suggests that external intervention may have limited success, as internal struggles and movements have played a significant role in shaping Iran's political landscape.
- The ongoing Iran-Israel war and Trump's suggestion of regime change have stirred discussions about the role of politics in shaping cultures, particularly in the context of free speech and the potential consequences of war-and-conflicts.
- Amidst calls for regime change, the Iranian people's struggle for internal change represents a critical element in maintaining cultural and societal cohesion, as observed in the historical evolution of Western democracies.
- The enrichment integration of moderate factions within the Iranian regime and the growing signs of resistance among the Iranian opposition underscore the complex interplay between politics, culture, and general news in Iran's future trajectory.
