Historic chance for change in Iran—but only if strategy follows, experts warn

The US and Israel may have altered the trajectory of the Mideast with military strikes on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure—but without a broader strategy for internal change, the window of opportunity could quickly close, experts told Iran International.

Over the weekend, US forces carried out unprecedented airstrikes targeting Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities. B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles were used in a mission that involved more than 120 aircraft—making it one of the largest US military operations against the Islamic Republic in decades.

“This marks a dramatic and consequential shift in the region’s strategic balance,” said Dr. Eric Mandel, founder of the Middle East Political Information Network (MEPIN), a think tank focused on US foreign policy and national security in the Middle East. But he warned military strikes alone were not a strategy for lon-term success.

Mandel emphasized that lasting success depends on political vision, regional coordination, and tangible support for the Iranian people—including support for dissident networks, and a clear set of US conditions for any future negotiations.

The removal of nuclear capabilities from “the world’s most dangerous regime” makes the world safer, argued Jonathan Harounoff, spokesperson for Israel’s Mission to the United Nations and author of Unveiled: Inside Iran’s #WomanLifeFreedom Revolt.

'Rare opportunity' for change

Harounoff, whose family is of Iranian origin, said the Iranian people “deserve a government that cares more about their social and economic wellbeing and safety than in pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into constructing a dangerous foreign policy, a destructive nuclear program and a web of terror proxies across the Middle East.”

“The door has been opened to make sure Iran cannot continue its pursuit of nuclear weapons,” said former US Ambassador John Craig, who was part of the Carter administration’s mission to assess the Shah’s position just prior to the 1979 revolution. While it’s too early to predict long-term outcomes, Craig said Iran’s leadership is now under enormous pressure to either return to negotiations or risk further escalation.

“Iran is in a very, very bad place. The leadership has very few options,” said Craig.

Craig added that internal discontent is growing—but warned that the international community must consider who can credibly lead a push for regime change from within. “Time for the mullahs to go,” he said. “But who leads the way is the real question.”

Experts agree that Israel’s initial strikes—combined with US firepower—shattered the Islamic Republic’s sense of impunity. But they caution that without a coherent American strategy, this moment could be lost.

Unless the United States now moves with strategic clarity—disrupting Iran’s centers of power and actively supporting the Iranian people—this rare opportunity for meaningful change could slip away, Mandel warned.