Supporting Israel isn’t enough — the Islamic Republic must go 

On Oct. 1, Iran launched nearly 200 ballistic missiles against Israel in retaliation for an Israeli strike that killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Israeli air defenses, with substantial support from the U.S. Air Force, intercepted most of the missiles. However, a large-scale Israeli response seems inevitable now, raising concerns about a broader conflict.  

Although fears of an all-out war are exaggerated, the looming confrontation between the two states forces the U.S. to confront the consequences of decades of policies that have contributed to this crisis. 

Anti-Zionism and anti-Americanism have long been central to the ideology of the Islamic Republic of Iran, serving as revolutionary principles that legitimize the regime before its base. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei frequently refers to "the enemy" in his speeches, emphasizing these themes repeatedly. 

In the U.S., such rhetoric is often dismissed as political posturing for domestic audiences. There is truth to this interpretation. But decades of such rhetoric have created a demand for action among the regime’s supporters.  

The Islamic Republic, despite not being a democracy, still has its own internal politics and is responsive to its core base to stay in power. The recent missile attack was likely intended to appease this base, with Khamenei hoping that the U.S. would restrain Israeli retaliation, as it had done in previous confrontations, allowing him to save face.

Hostilities are unlikely to end as long as both Israel and the Islamic Republic of Iran remain intact, as the regime in Tehran risks losing its legitimacy if it fails to meet its ideological commitments. 

U.S. policy has consistently underestimated this ideological drive, contributing to the current tensions. For decades, the U.S. has rightly provided military support to Israel while failing to take adequate measures to curb Iran's military ambitions. Under Democratic administrations, U.S. policy has facilitated Iran’s militarization through sanctions relief and the release of frozen assets. 

Achieving peace between Israel and Iran is impossible as long as the Islamic Republic remains in power. The U.S. has historically avoided a policy of regime change in Iran. Democratic administrations’ financial concessions have even extended the regime’s life. 

The U.S. must change course — beginning with a recognition that its concerns about a full-scale regional war are baseless. 

Iran and Israel do not share a common border, making the deployment of ground forces impractical. The logistical challenges of moving large Iranian forces through Iraq and Syria render such scenarios unrealistic, as neither country is eager to invite conflict onto its soil. Moreover, Israel’s air superiority and military capabilities would neutralize any attempt by Iran to mobilize forces at such a distance. Finally, the Islamic Republic doesn’t trust its own population with arms. A young Iranian mockingly summed it up on Twitter: “Now that there’s a war, I have to ask the politicians, will you trust us with guns?”

Simply put, Iran’s only advantage over Israel is its large population, which is a useless card as the table is currently set. 

This will be an air war, where Israel holds significant advantages. Israel’s air defense has already proven its ability to stop Iranian missile attacks, and Iran’s air fleet is aging and poses little threat — 1960s-designed F-14s are its most advanced fighters, and these are largely not operational due to spare parts shortages. Reports suggest that Russia's promised Su-35 fighter jets have yet to be delivered to Iran, further weakening its aerial capabilities.

Israel’s immediate focus will likely be on targeting Iran’s oil facilities and conventional military infrastructure rather than its nuclear facilities; Israel will come back to the nuclear question after the Lebanon campaign is over.

The U.S. should put aside its apprehensions and support Israel’s efforts. To do this, U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria should be placed on high alert with the authority to engage Iran’s proxies, who are more mercenaries than ideological fighters, as is evident from their lack of suicide missions. The U.S. Air Force should continue to provide critical air defense support to Israel, while the U.S. Navy should secure the Eastern Mediterranean to prevent any Iranian submarine attacks. Additionally, the U.S. military should employ its electronic warfare capabilities to disrupt Iran’s communications and undermine its air defenses. 

This campaign is likely to be swift but could have long-term repercussions. Even if the United States remains committed to negotiating a nuclear agreement with Iran, a decisive show of force would strengthen its position in any future talks. Within Iran, such a defeat would undermine the regime’s credibility among its supporters, leading to a potential crisis of legitimacy. 

The U.S. should take this opportunity to adopt a more proactive stance toward regime change in Iran. Renewing and strictly enforcing sanctions will weaken the Islamic Republic’s security forces. A leaked memorandum from 2022 on the state of the security forces read like an assessment of the Tsar’s army in 1916. Restoration of economic pressure could lead to defections or at least reduce the rank and file’s willingness to suppress future protests. 

Moreover, the U.S. should engage both publicly and covertly to challenge the regime’s legitimacy, particularly among Iran’s conservative youth. Highlighting the regime’s failure to fulfill its revolutionary promises could erode its base of support, making its collapse more feasible. 

Simultaneously, the U.S. must strengthen its engagement with both domestic and diaspora opposition groups to empower the Iranian people in their struggle against the regime. The ultimate goal should be for the Iranian people to lead their own revolution, just as Israel addresses its security challenges, with the U.S. playing a supportive role in both instances. 

The U.S. must accept that, due to its own policies, a war between Iran and Israel became inevitable. But this moment also represents the most significant opportunity for the greatest change in the region since 1979. To ensure that this change benefits both regional stability and American interests, the U.S. must fully support Israel's military actions while strategically leveraging the fallout to encourage regime change in Iran. 

Shay Khatiri is vice president of development and senior fellow of the Yorktown Institute.