As the prospects for negotiations with
Iran over its nuclear program dim, and an anxious American public contemplates
the grim prospect of military action, attention has turned again to the prospect
of changing Iran's regime. But is U.S. regime change in Iran, whether through
sanctions or direct action, really a viable prospect?
Reuel Marc Gerecht and Mark Dubowitz have
argued that the United States should pursue sanctions that lead to regime change.
According to them, through sanctions, "a democratic counterrevolution in Persia
might be reborn. A
democratic Iran might keep the bomb that Khamenei built. But the U.S., Israel,
Europe, and probably most of the Arab world would likely live with it without
that much fear." The attraction of removing the Islamic Republic may be obvious.
Sanctions may slow down Iran's nuclear drive but most likely will not roll back
the program. Military strikes would do damage but are hardly guaranteed to
destroy major facilities such as the recently opened Qom enrichment plant,
buried beneath 300 feet of rock. For many, only a change of the regime would diminish
the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.
COMMENTS (2)
Read More
