The president of the United States, , is considering options against Iran, including targeted attacks on security forces and leaders to inspire protesters, multiple sources told , even as Israeli and Arab officials claimed that the air force alone .
Two US sources familiar with the talks said Trump wanted to create the conditions for “regime change” after the crackdown crushed a national protest movement earlier this month, leaving thousands dead.
To this end, it was considering options to attack commanders and institutions that Washington considers responsible for the violence, to give protesters confidence that they could invade government and security buildings, they indicated.
One of the US sources indicated that the options being considered by Trump’s advisers also include a much larger attack with a lasting impact, possibly against those that can hit US allies in or their nuclear enrichment programs. The other US source stated that Trump has not yet made a final decision on the course of action, including whether he will take the military route.
Military deployment and outstretched hand?
Trump’s arrival in the Middle East this week has expanded Trump’s ability to potentially take military action, having repeatedly threatened to intervene over the Iranian crackdown.
Four Arab officials, three Western diplomats and one senior Western source, whose governments were briefed on the talks, expressed concern that, rather than mobilizing people, such attacks could weaken a movement already in shock following the bloodiest crackdown by authorities since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Alex Vatanka, director of the Middle East Institute’s Iran Program, said that without large-scale military defections, the protests in Iran remained “heroic, but outgunned.”
Sources for this article requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. Iran’s Foreign Ministry, the U.S. Department of Defense and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. The Israeli prime minister’s office, , declined to comment.
Trump on Wednesday urged Iran to come to the negotiating table and reach a nuclear weapons deal, warning that any future US attack would be more severe than the June bombing campaign against three nuclear facilities. He described the ships in the region as an “armada” sailing toward Iran.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters that Iran was “preparing for a military confrontation, while also using diplomatic channels.” However, Washington did not show openness to diplomacy, the official added.
Iran, which claims its civil status, was ready for dialogue “based on mutual respect and interests” but would defend itself “like never before” if pressured, the Iranian mission to the United Nations declared in a post on X on Wednesday.
Trump has not publicly detailed what he is seeking in any deal. His administration’s previous negotiating points have included a ban on Iran independently enriching uranium and restrictions on long-range ballistic missiles and Tehran’s network of armed agents in the Middle East.
Iranian citizens walk past an anti-American billboard in Tehran on January 26, 2026.
The limits of air power
A senior Israeli official with direct knowledge of the planning between Israel and the United States told Reuters that Israel does not believe airstrikes alone can topple the Islamic Republic, if that is Washington’s goal.
“If you are going to overthrow the regime, you have to deploy troops on the ground,” he declared, noting that even if the United States removed the Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah, Iran “would have a new leader to replace him.”
Only a combination of external pressure and organized internal opposition could change Iran’s political trajectory, the official said.
The Israeli official said the Iranian leadership had been weakened by the unrest but was maintaining firm control despite the deep economic crisis that sparked the protests.
Multiple U.S. intelligence reports reached a similar conclusion: that the conditions that led to the protests remained in place, weakening the government but without major fractures, according to two people familiar with the matter. The Western source said he believed Trump’s goal appeared to be to push for a change in leadership, rather than “overthrow the regime,” where US intervention replaced the president without a radical change of government.
Khamenei has publicly acknowledged several thousand deaths during the protests. He blamed the riots on the United States, Israel and those he called “seditious.”
The death toll related to the riots has been estimated at 5,937, including 214 security personnel, while official figures put the figure at 3,117. Reuters has not been able to independently verify the figures.
Khamenei maintains control, but is less visible
At 86, Khamenei has retired from day-to-day government, reduced his public appearances and is believed to be residing in safe locations after last year’s Israeli strikes decimated many of Iran’s top military commanders, regional officials said.
Day-to-day management has fallen to figures related to the Islamic Corps (IRGC), including senior advisor Ali Larijani, they noted. The powerful Guard dominates Iran’s security network and much of the economy.
However, Khamenei retains final authority over war, succession and nuclear strategy, meaning political change is very difficult until he leaves power, they noted. The Iranian Foreign Ministry did not respond to questions about Khamenei.
In Washington and Jerusalem, some officials have argued that a transition in Iran could break the nuclear stalemate and eventually open the door to more cooperative ties with the West, according to two Western diplomats.
However, they warned, there is no clear successor to Khamenei. In that vacuum, Arab officials and diplomats believe the IRGC could take control, consolidating a hardline regime, deepening the nuclear stalemate and regional tensions. Any successor seen as emerging under foreign pressure would be rejected and could strengthen, not weaken, the IRGC, the official said.
Across the region, from the Gulf to Turkey, officials say they prefer containment to collapse, not out of sympathy for Tehran but out of fear that unrest within a nation of 90 million people, riven by sectarian and ethnic divisions, could spark instability far beyond Iran’s borders.
A fractured Iran could descend into civil war, as happened after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, two Western diplomats warned, triggering an influx of refugees, fueling Islamist militancy and disrupting oil flows through the , a global energy bottleneck.
The most serious risk, analyst Vatanka warned, is fragmentation in an “early-stage Syria,” with rival units and provinces fighting for territory and resources.
Regional setback
The Gulf countries, historical allies of the United States and home to important American bases, fear being the first targets of Iranian retaliation, which could include allies of Tehran.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman and Egypt have pressured Washington not to attack Iran. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has told Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian that Riyadh will not allow its airspace or territory to be used for military actions against Tehran.
“The United States can pull the trigger but it will not bear the consequences. We will”
“The United States can pull the trigger,” declared one of the Arab sources, “but it will not bear the consequences. We will.”
Mohannad Hajj-Ali of the Carnegie Middle East Center said the U.S. deployments suggest that planning has moved from a single strike to something more sustained, driven by the belief in Washington and Jerusalem that Iran could rebuild its missile capability and eventually weaponize its enriched uranium. The most likely outcome is a “progressive erosion – elite defections, economic paralysis, disputed succession – that wears down the system until it breaks,” analyst Vatanka said.
