Latest news with #Artesh
Time Magazine
a day ago
- Politics
- Time Magazine
The Issues With Calling for a Regime Change in Iran
Some have called for a regime change in Iran. Though a change is unlikely to happen by itself, should President Donald Trump push for one, he would be making a grave mistake. It is not the first time that foreign powers have imagined Iran as a crumbling house—one that only needs a gentle push, or a series of airstrikes, before it falls into new hands. This was the fantasy in 1953, when the CIA and the British intelligence overthrew Mohammad Mossadegh, Iran's prime minister who had nationalized the country's oil, and delivered Iran to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi's autocratic rule. And this was also the fantasy in the 1980s, when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran with military and economic support from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Israel, who believed the newly revolutionary Iran would collapse in months. It was the fallacy in 2003, when the George W. Bush Administration imagined the ' axis of evil ' could be undone through further isolation of Iran. Now, the myth of a seamless regime change in Iran has been resurrected. 'As we achieve our objective we are also clearing the path for you to achieve your freedom,' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a video address to the Iranian people. The shape of Israel's effort is clear: sabotage operations, assassinations, and strikes. President Trump's response has varied widely. First, he sought out a renewed nuclear deal with Iran. Later, he demanded its ' unconditional surrender,' posting about the possibility of killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran. He moved American refueling jets closer to Europe and maintained a degree of ambiguity about the U.S. military's commitment to Israel. Since, he has come to support Israel's attacks on Iran. But Iran is not Syria, Libya, or Iraq. If President Trump joins the war on Iran and commits the United States to removing the Iranian regime, the results will likely be more catastrophic than the 2003 war on Iraq, which killed more than 1.2 million people, displaced more than nine million Iraqis, contributed to the emergence of the Islamic State, and cost the United States about $3 trillion. America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also contributed significantly to the squandering of its unipolar moment and setting off the decline of the American century. American analysts often underestimate the strength of the Iranian state, which is structured for survival. The Iranian military has a dual architecture designed to resist coups and invasions: Artesh, the regular armed forces of around 420,000 men across ground, naval, air, and air-defense forces, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), an elite, ideologically driven military with roughly 190,000 personnel across ground, naval, and air branches. Beyond them is the Basij, a vast paramilitary network with hundreds of thousands of members embedded in every corner of Iranian society—in the streets, in neighborhoods, in schools, and mosques. They aren't just loyalists of Ayatollah but woven into a deeper idea of the state and committed to the independence of Iran. Despite Israel's extensive and quite successful campaign of assassinations targeting senior IRGC commanders, the core of this group has not been hollowed out but hardened. A younger generation of more ideologically rigid commanders has emerged. They came of age in a regional military power, see themselves as the stewards of an embattled regional order, and push for more aggressive postures toward the United States and Israel—stances their more pragmatic predecessors, shaped by the war with Iraq, often resisted. This new generation of Iranian military commanders has also been battle-hardened in close-quarter conflict in Syria and understand how wars of state collapse can unfold. If this war morphs into a war of state collapse—and it very well might—then what comes next will likely not be surrender. The Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, which helped organize a patchwork of militias that bled American forces in Iraq for years, is well-positioned to do the same again. These networks—Lebanese, Iraqi, Syrian, Afghan—were built precisely to extend deterrence and sow instability in the event of direct conflict. Israel has deeply weakened Iran's axis of non-state actors in the region, but Tehran retains the ability to foment militias to fight against American and Israeli troops and interests. Bombing campaigns could significantly destroy military and civilian infrastructure in Iran but to replace the Iranian regime, President Trump has to be prepared to fight not just a standing army but a system with decades of experience in asymmetric warfare. Yesterday, Trump posted on social media that the U.S. will not kill Iran's Supreme Leader 'at least not for now.' But Iran is not governed by a single man or clique that can be decapitated. The Iranian state is a competitive authoritarian system with institutions that have evolved over a century. Even amid crises, the system generates new leaders, factions, and power centers. Even the deaths of some influential figures would not bring the system down—it would renew it. And Iran remembers: the invasions, the coups, the chemical attacks, and the long war of attrition it fought in the 1980s when the West bet on Saddam Hussain. At that time, the Islamic Republic was relatively young, with comparatively miniscule military resources, almost no idea of governance, and no battlefield experience. Saddam owned the skies. He wielded nerve gas. He had Western and Soviet support. Still, Iran did not fall. The war with Iraq scarred Iran, however it taught the country that survival does not require parity but endurance. In the decades since, the Iranian state has reorganized itself not for peace, but for siege. Its military doctrine is not built for conquest but for resistance. Iran won't simply absorb aerial bombardment or shrug off sabotage. Moreover, Iran is a civilizational state. The identity binding many Iranians is not limited to a flag or a government but rooted in a deeper historical memory stretching back through empire, invasion, forced partitions, foreign coups, and colonial interludes. To be sure, the Islamic Republic has inflicted great suffering upon the Iranian people and enraged many Iranian protestors, but to mistake that rage for a longing to be 'liberated' by foreign forces is to repeat the catastrophic delusions that defined the Iraq war in 2003. Iran's geography and demography will also affect the course of this conflict. Iran is four and a half times the size of Germany, with 92 million people. There are millions of Iranians who want an end to the Islamic Republic, but there are also millions who would fight any foreign attempt to decide what replaces it. The talk of regime change was no doubt intensified by the success of Israel's extensive intelligence campaign against Iran, leading to assassinations of Iran's military leaders and nuclear scientists, sabotage of defense facilities, and aerial dominance. But these operations, while exposing Iran's weakness and reducing its deterrence, also eviscerated the space for diplomacy and increased the possibility of violence and paranoia within the Iranian state. Some argue that Iran, under pressure and humiliated by foreign penetration, may be more willing to strike a deal and abandon its nuclear ambitions. But many in Iran's security establishment are likely to believe that only nuclear deterrence can ensure regime survival. The lesson they are likely to draw from the past two decades is that surrender does not lead to safety. Saddam gave up his weapons. He was invaded. Gaddafi gave up his nuclear program. He was overthrown. In this view, the path to survival for Iran is not disarmament—it is deterrence. Iran may not yet be racing to build a nuclear bomb, but if the regime comes to believe that collapse is inevitable without it, it may sprint to make sure no one else dares to come for them again. The irony is that the most ardent proponents of regime change in Iran may be accelerating the very nuclear program they claim to fear.
News18
6 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Who Is Amir Hatami, The Man Chosen To Lead Iran's Army After Israeli Strikes Killed Top Generals?
Last Updated: With senior commanders killed in Israeli strikes, Ayatollah Khamenei has turned to seasoned Artesh figure Amir Hatami to stabilise Iran's Army and rebuild command Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on Friday announced a significant reshuffle in the country's military hierarchy, appointing Major General Amir Hatami as the new Chief Commander of Iran's Army. This change comes in the aftermath of Israeli airstrikes that killed key military leaders, including General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri and General Hossein Salami—two of the most powerful men in Iran's security establishment. In the same decree, General Abdolrahim Mousavi was appointed as the Chief of the Armed Forces, replacing Bagheri, while Mohammad Pakpour took over as head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), succeeding Salami. Who Is Amir Hatami? Major General Amir Hatami, 59, previously served as Iran's Defence Minister from 2013 to 2021, under President Hassan Rouhani. He made headlines at the time for being the first defence minister in more than two decades with a background in the Artesh, rather than the IRGC. His tenure marked a rare shift in the balance of power between Iran's conventional military and the Revolutionary Guard. Before his ministerial role, Hatami held several key command positions within the Iranian Army. He is a graduate of the elite Imam Ali Officers' Academy, AJA University of Command and Staff, and Iran's National Defense University—institutions that train the country's top military strategists. Why Hatami's Appointment Matters Khamenei praised Hatami's 'dedication, competence, and experience," calling on him to enhance Iran's combat readiness and strengthen the ideological and spiritual foundations of the military. Rising Tensions With Israel Hatami's promotion comes as Iran grapples with the fallout from Israeli airstrikes on Tehran that killed top commanders of both the regular army and the IRGC. These strikes, described as among the most high-profile attacks on Iranian soil in recent history, have plunged the region deeper into uncertainty. The deaths of Bagheri and Salami, two powerful figures close to Iran's Supreme Leader, appear to have prompted the swift appointments, as Tehran looks to regroup its chain of command during an increasingly volatile moment in West Asia. Who Is Gen Abdolrahim Mousavi? General Abdolrahim Mousavi, who now takes over as the Chief of the Armed Forces, previously served as Commander-in-Chief of Iran's Army. He has been sanctioned by multiple Western countries, including the United States, European Union, United Kingdom, and Australia, for alleged serious human rights violations. According to advocacy group 'United Against Nuclear Iran', the US sanctioned Mousavi in 2023, freezing any assets under its jurisdiction. The EU cited his involvement in crackdowns on anti-government protests as the basis for similar measures. The Bottom Line Hatami's appointment comes at a time when Iran is under pressure to project stability after a dramatic loss of senior commanders. By turning to a seasoned Artesh officer with ministerial experience, Tehran may be signalling a strategic pivot, one that prioritises institutional continuity over ideological assertiveness. Whether this recalibrated leadership can steer Iran through escalating regional hostilities without provoking further escalation remains to be seen. First Published: June 14, 2025, 14:14 IST
Mint
7 days ago
- Politics
- Mint
Iranian Major General Amir Hatami appointed new Army chief amid attacks from Israel: Who is he?
Commander-in-Chief Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei ordered the appointment of Major General Amir Hatami as Chief Commander of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Iran as part of major reshuffle at Iran's military top leadership, Tehran Times reported. This comes following the assassination of General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri, the head of the country's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), by Israel's series of airstrikes in Iran's capital. According to an official decree on Friday, the decision was announced where Khamenei stated Hatami's 'dedication, competence, and experience' as the basis for the appointment. 'With the Army's vast pool of capable and faithful personnel, and the experience gained during the Sacred Defense and beyond, it is expected that under your command, efforts to enhance combat readiness, strengthen spiritual and ideological foundations, improve personnel welfare, and boost cooperation with other branches of the Armed Forces will accelerate,' the decree read. Hatami, 59, succeeded Hossein Dehghan and preceded Mohammad Reza Gharaei Ashtiani. He was Iran's Defense Minister from 2013 to 2021 and has now taken command of the country's regular military forces amid escalating regional tensions. He is the first defense minister with an Artesh background in over two decades, breaking a pattern in place since 1989, when the position had been exclusively held by officers from the Revolutionary Guards. Hatami studied at Imam Ali Officers' Academy, AJA University of Command and Staff, National Defense University. Iran and Israel exchanged missile and airstrikes early Saturday, after Israel carried out its largest air assault to date against its longtime adversary in an effort to halt its nuclear weapons development. In Iran, numerous explosions were heard in the capital Tehran, the semi-official Tasnim news agency report said. Iranian missiles broke through Israel's air defenses on Friday, marking a significant test for the country's defensive systems. Since the war began on October 7, 2023, Israel has faced a barrage of threats, including short-range rockets, medium-range missiles, attack drones, and ballistic missiles launched from Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Iran. The long-range ballistic missiles fired Friday night posed one of the toughest challenges yet. Iranian missiles injured 34 people in Israel, whereas Israel's strikes in Iran led to 78 deaths, leaving 329 others injured.
