Muslim World Report

Unraveling Iran: Risks of Regime Change for U.S. and Israel

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Jun 20, 2025 10:55 AM | 7 min read | 1433 words

TL;DR: The potential collapse of the Iranian regime presents significant risks, including civil unrest and regional instability for the U.S. and Israel. Past interventions have often led to unintended consequences, underscoring the need for a careful, diplomatic approach to avoid exacerbating tensions.

The Potential Fallout from Iranian Regime Collapse: Risks for U.S. and Israel

The tumult surrounding the Iranian regime has intensified discussions about the implications of potential regime change—a topic that has long been the subject of intense debate among analysts and policymakers. Recent developments indicate that while some factions, both internally and externally, advocate for a change in leadership, the viability of such upheaval is fraught with uncertainties. The potential collapse of the Iranian regime could destabilize not only Iran but the entire region. Here are some key considerations:

  • Absence of Leadership Alternatives: As Fawaz Gerges of the London School of Economics highlights, the lack of credible leadership alternatives makes scenarios resembling past interventions in Libya or Iraq unrealistic (Gerges, 2012).
  • IRGC’s Role and Control: The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is deeply entrenched within Iranian society, controlling critical military, economic, and political levers.
  • Power Vacuum Risks: Movement toward regime change raises the specter of a power vacuum, which could unleash civil unrest and deepen sectarian divides.

Contextualizing Iranian Political Dynamics

The IRGC’s omnipresence in Iranian governance complicates the idea of a smooth transition, as these loyalists have cultivated a robust network that spans various sectors of Iranian society. Historically, such networks have thrived on the legitimacy provided by a ruling regime; however, in the event of upheaval, this legitimacy may be put to severe tests. The potential collapse of the regime could thus lead to various outcomes:

  • Emergence of new leadership
  • Escalation into a civil conflict

What If Iran Descends into Civil War?

If regime change occurs in Iran, it is not merely a matter of transitioning power; it could ignite a civil war. Historical precedents make it clear that toppling a regime does not guarantee immediate stability. The absence of unifying leadership could lead to:

  • Clashing Factions: Splintered factions vying for dominance among various ethnic and ideological groups.
  • Competing Militias: Potential fragmentation of the IRGC, leading to competing militias and chaos.

The consequences of a civil war would be dire, including:

  • Humanitarian Crisis: Potentially displacing millions and triggering a refugee crisis reminiscent of the Syrian civil war.
  • Political Strains in Europe: Migrants seeking sanctuary could strain political systems and provoke public backlash against open-border policies.

Furthermore, the geopolitical landscape would be further complicated:

  • Exploitation by Neighboring Countries: Nations like Turkey and Pakistan may attempt to exploit the chaos for their own strategic interests.
  • Potential Regional Power Struggles: This situation could exacerbate conflicts and provoke wider wars involving global powers.

Regional Implications

The international landscape complicates the situation further, with U.S. and Israeli interests heavily vested in the outcome. Should the Iranian regime collapse, the immediate aftershocks could include:

  • Explosion of Civil Unrest: Escalation of sectarian conflict and potential humanitarian crises spilling into neighboring countries.
  • Destabilization of Neighboring States: Similar to the refugee crisis instigated by the Syrian civil war (Crawley & Skleparis, 2017).

Historical evidence illustrates how destabilization in one country can ignite conflict in another, evidenced by the interrelated crises in the Middle East (Hendrix & Wong, 2012).

  • Emboldenment of Extremist Groups: A lack of stability in Iran could empower extremist factions.
  • Preemptive Measures by Neighboring States: Countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel may take actions they deem necessary, potentially leading to military escalations.

The Rise of Hardline Successors

In the event of the Iranian regime’s collapse, those vying for power are likely to emerge from the ranks of the IRGC, with many potentially adopting more hardline stances. This scenario could lead to:

  • Entrenchment of Authoritarian Governance: Increased repression against dissenting voices advocating for reform.
  • Escalation of Violence: Hardline responses could paradoxically unify opposition networks, leading to a cycle of violence.

Externally, an increasingly aggressive Iran could embolden adversarial states, increasing the risk of:

  • Military Escalations: Proxy conflicts and heightened tensions across the region.
  • Deeper Fiscal and Military Ties: Regional rivals could deepen their alliances against perceived threats.

Risks of Western Military Intervention

Proposals for military intervention may yield catastrophic outcomes. The historical record in Iraq and Libya serves as a cautionary tale; foreign military actions, often implemented with good intentions, can lead to unintended consequences and protracted conflict (Gholz & Press, 2010). The challenges include:

  • Fierce Resistance: Any intervention would likely meet robust opposition from various Iranian factions.
  • Bolstered Nationalist Sentiments: Resistance could reframe the IRGC as defenders of Iranian sovereignty.

The Iranian landscape is fraught with tensions, and an external military presence could rally disparate factions into an anti-Western coalition, thwarting chances for sustainable reform. Moreover, military interventions risk:

  • Reinforcing Anti-Western Sentiment: This could empower extremist groups and ignite a new arms race among regional rivals.

What If the West Intervenes Militarily?

As the possibility of intervention looms, it becomes crucial to consider its wider implications:

  • Potential Backlash: An intervention could provoke backlash across the Muslim world, reinforcing anti-Western sentiment.
  • Diverse Responses from Regional Countries: Countries may have differing reactions based on their strategic interests and historical conflicts with Iran.

This situation could lead to a new arms race among rivals, with countries like Saudi Arabia and Turkey bolstering their military capabilities in response to perceived Iranian threats.

Strategic Maneuvers: Navigating the Uncertain Landscape

Navigating the potential fallout from the Iranian regime’s collapse necessitates careful strategic planning from all involved parties. For the U.S. and its allies:

  • A nuanced approach that avoids direct military intervention while engaging in diplomatic dialogues with various Iranian factions is critical.
  • Outreach to reformist groups and civil society, supporting grassroots movements, is essential for promoting genuine democratic aspirations (Carothers, 2002).

Simultaneously, the U.S. must reassess ties with Israel, whose direct military assistance to opposition forces could undermine transformative political dialogue in Iran (Thompson, 2016). Encouraging dialogue between Israel and moderate Iranian factions could foster an environment conducive to sustainable reform.

What If the Negotiations Fail?

Despite diplomatic efforts, a failure to achieve meaningful dialogue could lead to dire consequences:

  • Exploitation by Radical Factions: A vacuum could lead hardliners to seize the moment, exacerbating tensions both domestically and internationally.
  • Escalating Violence: Internal dissent might devolve rapidly into violence, causing humanitarian crises.

Public sentiment could shift dramatically toward nationalism, rallying many Iranians around the regime in opposition to external meddling.

  • Preemptive Military Moves by Neighbors: Regional actors might choose to intervene, further destabilizing the area and potentially igniting a broader conflict.

Conclusion and Implications for the Future

This complex web of potential outcomes surrounding the Iranian regime’s fate presents a landscape fraught with challenges and uncertainties. As various actors contemplate their responses, the lessons learned from past interventions underscore the need for caution and strategic thinking.

The implications of a regime collapse—whether it leads to civil war, the ascent of hardline successors, or the prospect of external military intervention—require an understanding of the intricate dynamics at play in Iranian society. As the stakes rise, the international community must prioritize the safety and aspirations of the Iranian people, fostering an environment conducive to genuine democratic change while avoiding the pitfalls of past interventions.

Navigating this precarious situation will demand patience, foresight, and a commitment to the principles of sovereignty and self-determination in the pursuit of peace and stability across the region.

References

  • Albrecht, H., & Ohl, H. (2016). The struggle for legitimacy in Iran: The role of leadership transitions and the IRGC.
  • Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democracy, 13(1), 5-21.
  • Crawley, H., & Skleparis, D. (2017). Refugees, migrants, and the EU: A complex story.
  • Davenport, T., & Armstrong, N. (2004). Conflict in Iran: The role of the IRGC in the political landscape.
  • Erickson Nepstad, S. (2011). The dynamics of protest in authoritarian regimes.
  • Gerges, F. (2012). The new Middle East: Protest and revolution in the Arab world.
  • Gholz, E., & Press, D. (2010). The effects of military intervention: Lessons from Iraq and Libya.
  • Hendrix, C., & Wong, J. (2012). The nexus of conflict and environmental factors in the Middle East.
  • Hetherington, M. J. (1998). The political effects of public panic: The case of the Iranian revolution.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century.
  • Kilcullen, D. (2006). The accidental guerilla: Fighting small wars in the midst of a big one.
  • Menkhaus, K. (2010). The crisis in Somalia: Tragedy in five acts.
  • Smith, J. (2004). The importance of civic engagement in reform processes.
  • Staniland, P. (2015). The uses of insurgency: The IRGC and its strategies.
  • Thompson, H. (2016). Rethinking U.S.-Israel relations amid regional turmoil.
← Prev Next →