The political scientist sees the chances of a regime change after the US air strikes at the weekend at less than five percent. What could happen instead and whether the threat of terrorism is now also increasing in Europe, he says in an interview with CH Media.
March 1, 2026, 8:33 p.mMarch 1, 2026, 8:33 p.m
On Saturday morning, Israel and the USA launched attacks on Iran.Image: Anadolu
Pictures of cheering Iranians in Europe and the USA, as well as those from Iran, are currently doing the rounds. Among other things, they react to the death of the Ayatollah. Can the people of Iran breathe a sigh of relief now?
Peter Neumann: I believe that with the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei the leadership changes, but not necessarily the regime. We are still a long way from democracy in Iran.
How come?
Iran is not a one-man dictatorship like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya, but a revolutionary system that was, in principle, designed precisely for such situations. A successor will be appointed relatively quickly, who will also come from the system. Various names are already circulating. At the moment, a triumvirate is at the helm as an interim solution. This will nominate the successor to the revolutionary leader, who will then continue to lead the regime. The Islamic leadership had been preparing for Khamenei’s death long before the military strikes. He was already 87 years old and quite ill. As sorry as I am for the Iranians who are now hoping for democracy, the death of the Ayatollah does not mean that the road to democracy has become shorter.
So you think the regime can survive the attack?
One hundred percent – for the simple reason that regime change that is only supposed to be brought about through air strikes never actually works. There always needs to be a movement on the ground: a ground invasion with ground troops, like in Iraq, or a rebel group that is already there and fighting and that you can support, or at least a protest movement. We had that in Iran until six weeks ago, but it was brutally suppressed by the regime. There were probably over 30,000 dead. The result is that we currently have no democracy movement in Iran.
Couldn’t that change?
We’ll see that in the next few days. Donald Trump promised the Iranian people help several weeks ago on social media (“Help is on the way”). Unfortunately, as things stand, help comes too late. Now it is difficult to see how the situation can result in a popular uprising and real regime change.
Political scientist Peter Neumann is a security expert and professor at King’s College London.Image: imago
Yet the US and Israel attacked on Saturday morning? Why now?
Because the negotiations on a new nuclear deal that Trump had agreed to led nowhere. It was clear that the Iranians were unwilling to accept even the Americans’ minimal demand: a complete end to the nuclear program, both civilian and military. The situation had developed a certain dynamic of its own. Because of his own announcements, Donald Trump found himself in a situation where he either had to make military strikes or cancel them. The latter option would have made him look like a loser, and of course he wanted to avoid that. In addition, they had intelligence that the leaders of the entire regime would be in one place on Saturday morning. The two factors opened a window of opportunity to eliminate the country’s entire leadership in one fell swoop.
How strong is the support among Trump’s supporters and allies for the attack?
Not particularly large because its base rejects military intervention. They fear that the US president will drag the country into a much larger conflict. The fear is very real. There are plenty of US soldiers in the region. Cynically speaking, the Iranians just need to get lucky a few times and kill a lot of US soldiers. That would put Donald Trump under great pressure domestically. Of course, Iranians also know that there are general elections in the USA this year. With Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz, oil prices will also explode. This means that fuel is also becoming more expensive in the United States, which is not going down well with Trump’s supporters. So there are plenty of tools that Iran has at its disposal to put pressure on Trump. Their already low level of approval could decrease further the longer the conflict lasts.
Iran also responded militarily to the attack. Among other things, attacks on US military bases, on Israel but also on allied states such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Did any of these aspects surprise you?
The attacks on US military bases and Iran did not surprise me. With today’s attacks, Iran is essentially dragging the entire region into the conflict. The regime has targeted civilian targets in the Gulf states, for example hitting a hotel in Dubai. Iran is trying to expand the conflict to increase costs. Not just for the USA, but for all countries in the region. These Gulf states, be it Qatar or Bahrain or the UAE, depend on an open global economy. They need air traffic, oil exports, tourists. If that’s not possible, they’ll run out of air after 10 or 15 days.
Video: Watson/Michael Shepherd
What consequences would that have for the war?
Iran’s hope is that when that happens, these states, which are very influential in Washington, will go to Donald Trump and say, “Please, please have a ceasefire.” That’s the strategy: to increase costs and bring other states into the mix. And then to produce a situation where America makes a ceasefire at the request of other states.
Is that realistic?
I think it’s not entirely unrealistic. Iran is completely inferior militarily. He is much, much weaker than the US and doesn’t have as many cards to play. The hope with these various attacks is that one of the strategies will work and sooner or later Trump will say he wants to end the conflict as quickly as possible.
In a speech shortly after the first attacks on Saturday morning, Donald Trump formulated several goals for “Operation Epic Fury”: the destruction of the nuclear program, the missiles and creating the conditions for regime change. Can he achieve that?
The nuclear program is very realistic. It was largely destroyed in the summer. Since then, according to intelligence information, Iran has failed to enrich uranium. That’s why it was always just an excuse. Things get more complicated with ballistic missiles. The US could actually make some progress and destroy more, which would weaken Iran. As far as regime change is concerned, I would put the chance at less than five percent, for all the reasons I have already mentioned. And obviously Trump himself doesn’t believe in it either. In his statement on Saturday he said that the conditions were being created. The actual regime change is then the job of the Iranian people. So he can declare victory, retire and say he did everything he could.
There is criticism of the US attacks from various quarters. Do you think the military strike was justified?
There is no doubt at all that the war is not in accordance with international law. You don’t have to be an expert in international law to understand this. But you don’t have to be a political expert to understand that Donald Trump doesn’t care about that at all, that it’s completely irrelevant to him. The real tragedy is that these attacks, regardless of whether they now comply with international law or not, would have had a much greater chance of actually leading to regime change 6 weeks ago, when there was a protest movement in Iran, when hundreds of thousands of people were on the streets in all provinces. Now that the medicine comes, the patient, cynically speaking, has already died.
Could Iran bring the war to us? Do you see a risk of terrorist attacks in Europe?
There is a risk of terrorist attacks against American, Israeli targets or Jewish communities. The threat of terrorism has certainly increased with the war. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard has attempted to carry out terrorist attacks in the past – regularly. These networks exist. However, Iran would only go to this level of escalation if its existence was really acutely threatened. That’s not imminent at the moment. However, the effect would be huge. And that’s why it’s right to take precautions and prepare. (aargauerzeitung.ch)