Here's what a post-Ayatollah Iran could look like if war with Israel leads to regime's fall
As the Iranian regime reels from sustained Israeli strikes on military and nuclear infrastructure, debate is intensifying over what could come next.
Experts say the end of the Islamic Republic is no longer unthinkable — but warn that what replaces it could either lift the country toward a freer future or plunge it into instability.
Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran and a prominent opposition figure, posted yesterday, "Sources inside Iran say that the regime's command and control structures are collapsing at a rapid pace. Meanwhile, the international community is beginning to realize that the Islamic Republic has no future. Our discussions about a post-Islamic Republic Iran have begun."
"The first thing is revolution is too broad a word," said Behnam Taleblu, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. "The better words are evolution and devolution, meaning if you get something better or something worse. Because this is the Middle East, and fundamentally, things can get worse, not better, when you introduce an exogenous shock."
Taleblu cautioned that both the Iranian opposition and Western governments have failed to prepare for regime collapse because of a long-standing reluctance to engage with the idea of regime change. "By not being able to articulate the necessary political strategy... we are most unprepared," he said.
Beni Sabti, an Iran expert at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies, sees four scenarios emerging from the current moment — one of which, he warns, is far worse than the others.
"The Iranian people are currently leaderless, low-energy, and disillusioned since the women's protests," Sveti told Fox News Digital. "One scenario is collapse from within, similar to the Soviet Union. A brigade commander inside the Revolutionary Guards, supported by a circle of loyalists, could decide to rebel from within the regime."
Sabti said that after Israel eliminated many Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) generals, Iran's regular army may now be better positioned to rise. "It might even align with disillusioned elements of the revolutionary guards," he said. "Because they know the system and its bureaucracy, insiders could quietly organize something from within. There would be casualties, but it could unfold as a relatively quiet historical event."
Taleblu supports the idea that a regime transition could emerge from within, but notes that Iran has spent decades "coup-proofing."
"It has promoted more based on zeal than capability. So it's less likely that you could have a classic military coup d'état emerge," he said. "That doesn't mean it can't happen, but it would take a significant amount of politicking and maneuvering."
The second scenario Sabti outlined is a popular uprising sparked by the release of political prisoners. "There are many political leaders in Iranian prisons," he said. "If some are freed, they could rally the public. They were once part of the regime but tried to shift course and now support relations with the U.S. It would still be a very cold peace with Israel—but not hostile."
Taleblu noted that Iranian society has already undergone a significant shift over the past decade. "Large swaths of the Iranian population—80% is probably a minimum number—hate this regime," he said. "The protests since 2017, especially 'Women, Life, Freedom,' were triggered not just by politics, but by economic, social, even environmental issues."
A third possibility, Sabti said, is the return of exiled leaders. "There's deep romantic nostalgia toward the monarchy," he said. "Maybe in a later phase, if infighting breaks out, people might rally around a symbolic figure—'Come back and be a symbol.' That could strengthen the revolution."
Taleblu acknowledged that figures like Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi could play a role, but not as rulers. "Think of the diaspora as a bridgehead into a new Iran—not the definers of the new Iran," he said. "The people inside Iran should be the ones shaping the next Iran."
The fourth — and worst — scenario, according to Sabti, is that the regime survives. "That's the worst option," he said bluntly.
Taleblu agreed, warning that survival would bring an even more repressive future. "If the Islamic Republic survives, it will survive in a more radical fashion—more military, less clergy," he said. "There's debate: does it become like Turkey or Pakistan, or does it become even more messianic? The older IRGC are corrupt; the younger ones are messianic."
One of the most contentious questions looming over all these scenarios is the future role of Iran's non-Persian communities, including the Ahwazi, Baloch, Azeris, and Kurds. Aref Al-Kaabi, executive president of the State of Ahwaz, told Fox News Digital in a written statement that without trust-building between these communities and the Persian opposition, change will remain elusive.
"In my opinion, regime change in Iran is possible if the following conditions are met: continued Israeli strikes... support for non-Persian components... international will... and bridges of trust between Arabs, Kurds, Baloch, Azeris, and the Persian opposition," Al-Kaabi said. "If these conditions are met, I believe the regime's fall will only be a matter of days."
He said that in recent days, the IRGC launched widespread arrests in Ahwaz to prevent mobilization. "Most of those arrested are Arabs from Abadan, Bushehr, Sheyban, and Shoaibiya," he said.
Al-Kaabi also criticized the Persian opposition abroad. "They view us—Arabs, Kurds, Azeris, Baloch—as separatists and refuse to work with us. That stubbornness is one of the main reasons the regime is still in power."
Taleblu warned against Western attempts to divide the country. "The way to unite the Iranian population is not to talk about balkanization," he said. "That would be an own goal of moral and strategic proportions."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Like George W Bush did in Iraq, if Israel breaks Iran it will end up owning the chaos that could ensue
Israelis are good at tactics, poor at strategic vision, it has been observed. Their campaign against Iran may be a case in point. Short termism is understandable in a region that is so unpredictable. Why make elaborate plans if they are generally undone by unexpected events? It is a mindset that is familiar to anyone who has lived or worked there. And it informs policy-making. The Israeli offensive in Gaza is no exception. The Israeli government has never been clear how it will end or what happens the day after that in what remains of the coastal strip. Pressed privately, even senior advisers will admit they simply do not know. It may seem unfair to call a military operation against Iran that literally took decades of planning short-termist or purely tactical. There was clearly a strategy of astonishing sophistication behind a devastating campaign that has dismantled so much of the enemy's capability. But is there a strategic vision beyond that? That is what worries Israel's allies. It's not as if we've not been here before, time and time again. From Libya to Afghanistan and all points in between we have seen the chaos and carnage that follows governments being changed. Hundreds of thousands have died. Vast swathes of territory remain mired in turmoil or instability. Which is where a famous warning sign to American shoppers in the 80s and 90s comes in. Ahead of the disastrous invasion that would tear Iraq apart, America's defence secretary, Colin Powell, is said to have warned US president George W Bush of the "Pottery Barn rule". The Pottery Barn was an American furnishings store. Signs among its wares told clumsy customers: "You break it, you own it." Bush did not listen to Powell hard enough. His administration would end up breaking Iraq and owning the aftermath in a bloody debacle lasting years. Israel is not invading Iran, but it is bombing it back to the 80s, or even the 70s, because it is calling for the fall of the government that came to power at the end of that decade. Iran's leadership is proving resilient so far but we are just a week in. It is a country of 90 million, already riven with social and political discontent. Its system of government is based on factional competition, in which paranoia, suspicion and intense rivalries are the order of the day. Read more:Putin says 'Ukraine is ours' and threatens nuclear strike After half a century of authoritarian theocratic rule there are no opposition groups ready to replace the ayatollahs. There may be a powerful sense of social cohesion and a patriotic resentment of outside interference, for plenty of good historic reasons. But if that is not enough to keep the country together then chaos could ensue. One of the biggest and most consequential nations in the region could descend into violent instability. That will have been on Israel's watch. If it breaks Iran it will own it even more than America owned the disaster in Iraq. Iran and Israel are, after all, in the same neighbourhood. Has Israel thought through the consequences? What is the strategic vision beyond victory? And if America joins in, as Donald Trump is threatening, is it prepared to share that legacy? At the very least, is his administration asking its allies whether they have a plan for what could come next?
Bloomberg
33 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Iranian Missiles Intercepted Over Tel Aviv
Iranian missiles intercepted over Tel Aviv in the early hours of Saturday, June 21, 2025. (Source: Bloomberg)
CNN
35 minutes ago
- CNN
Smerconish: Where's the Evidence on Iran's Nuclear Weapons? - Smerconish on CNN - Podcast on CNN Audio
Smerconish: Where's the Evidence on Iran's Nuclear Weapons? Smerconish on CNN 45 mins CNN Michael Smerconish dives into the conflicting messages from the Trump administration about Iran's nuclear weapon capabilities. Then, Retired Admiral James Stavridis and New York Times National Security Correspondent David Sanger join Smerconish to weigh on the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. After that, Retired Lt. General David Deptula discusses U.S. military capabilities in case tensions between Israel and Iran becomes a wider regional conflict. Finally, the L.A. Dodgers are taking a stand against the Trump administration's ICE raids. Los Angeles Times Writer Jack Harris sets the record straight about conflicting reports about a stand off between the L.A. Dodgers stadium and DHS officials.
