- Senior officials in Israel are concerned that a historic opportunity to replace the ayatollah’s regime in Iran may be missed if President Trump does not exploit the current crisis and refrains from striking Iran.
- Reza Pahlavi is viewed as a symbolic figure for alternative leadership. Israel and the United States favor a gradual transition of power while preserving the oil industry, in order to prevent chaos, weapons proliferation, and the strengthening of regional power centers in the event of a collapse of the Iranian regime.
Senior security officials in Jerusalem argue that an unprecedented opportunity exists to replace Iran’s ayatollah regime, and urge President Trump to act decisively to seize this moment.
According to them, Israel missed a rare chance to eliminate the Iranian leadership, headed by Ali Khamenei and his son Mojtaba, who is designated to succeed him, during the 12-day war in June 2025. Israel had the intelligence and operational capability to do so; therefore, this historic opportunity must not be missed again.
Operation “Rising Lion” was a major tactical success, but if the Iranian leadership is not replaced during the current crisis, the strategic existential threat to Israel will continue to loom. Iran is determined to renew its nuclear project and to increase the production of ballistic missiles in order to destroy Israel.
The implication of not replacing the leadership in Iran is that Israel will be forced to engage in repeated rounds of confrontation with Iran every few months in order to delay the rehabilitation of the nuclear project and prevent additional ballistic missile production.
A senior political source estimates that Israel cannot allow this scenario to materialize. Therefore, if President Trump does not replace the current Iranian leadership, Israel will be forced to eliminate Ali Khamenei itself, whom it views as the head of the snake of the Shiite axis.
Ebrahim Jabari, an adviser to the commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, said on January 24, 2026, in response to Trump’s threats against Khamenei, that “it is not surprising that such behavior comes from a criminal like Trump.” However, he stressed that Iran “is not concerned and is not in a state of panic, as the Iranian people stand with love and faith behind the leader of the revolution,” according to his statement.
At the same time, the same source assessed that Israel and the United States have reached an understanding not to strike Iran’s oil industry should the current crisis deteriorate into a broad military confrontation.
The oil and gas industry is the central and strategic source of income for the Iranian regime, constituting the financial backbone of the state, the security apparatus, and the Revolutionary Guards. The regime’s control over the energy sector enables it to concentrate resources, partially circumvent internal economic pressures, and finance the regional activities of its proxies outside Iran’s borders.
Any damage to oil exports or to revenues from them would severely harm any new Iranian leadership, should one emerge, and would pose a major obstacle to the rehabilitation of the Iranian economy, even if Western economic sanctions on Iran are lifted.
Who Could Be Iran’s Next Leadership?
Reza Pahlavi, the son of the Shah of Iran who was overthrown in 1979, said on January 24, 2026, that he seeks to contribute to shaping Iran’s future, but emphasized that he does not aspire to hold a defined governing role.
In an interview conducted in English with the German television channel ARD, Pahlavi said he wishes to return to Iran to help bring about change. He stated: “I am not running for any position, I am not demanding anything in return, but I know how important my role is as an agent of change here.” He stressed that he wishes to serve the people, noting that this is his promise to the citizens of Iran, “and therefore they trust me and have invited me.”
Pahlavi believes that his role as a supporter of the movement enjoys public legitimacy, adding that “millions of people took to the streets across Iran. Millions chanted my name and called, ‘Pahlavi, come back.’”
According to him, his name has also been written on walls. He added: “I do not know how much more evidence is needed to show that I indeed enjoy the support of millions of my people.”
Pahlavi emphasized his intention to return to his country as soon as possible and said, “I am working to see how to get there, but I want to be present, even before the collapse of the regime, if that is possible.”
Political sources in Jerusalem say that Trump currently does not have an official and declared candidate as an “alternative leadership” for Iran, but the central name being examined in contingency plans in Washington is Pahlavi.
Western intelligence sources assess that Trump views him as a symbolic figure who could serve as a focal point for mobilizing international support and for creating a transitional framework, rather than as a de facto ruler.
At the same time, the administration is also examining options for a broad civilian “transitional leadership” composed of exiled opposition figures, former Iranian technocrats, and members of the economic and security establishment who might defect from the current regime, but without an agreed-upon charismatic leader.
The prevailing assessment is that Trump is avoiding publicly pointing to a successor in order not to be perceived as appointing a ruler for Iran and in order to preserve diplomatic flexibility.
Sources in the Republican Party in Washington estimate that Trump does not wish to formally appoint a “successor” to the Iranian regime, but rather to leave the leadership question open in order to maintain political flexibility and to avoid accusations of direct interference in the establishment of a new government in Iran.
However, after Steve Witkoff met with him at Trump’s direction, Pahlavi is viewed in administration circles and in the U.S. intelligence community as the most convenient figure to serve as a symbolic address, both for international purposes and for the creation of a transitional government in the event of a collapse of the current Iranian regime.
According to assessments within the Republican Party, Trump prefers an outcome of controlled change or internal collapse that produces local leadership, rather than a move in which the U.S. is perceived as dictating a ruler for Iran.
Regarding Israel’s position on alternative leadership in Iran, the political leadership in Israel would be very pleased to see Pahlavi as Iran’s next ruler, but at the same time, there is deep skepticism regarding his ability to actually govern Iran on the day after the fall of the regime.
The prevailing security assessment in Jerusalem is that Pahlavi is a cognitive and symbolic asset, but not necessarily a governing solution.
Israeli security officials fear that a scenario of regime collapse without a consolidated leadership could lead to security chaos, the dismantling of security institutions, the risk of weapons proliferation, problems in controlling nuclear facilities, and the strengthening of regional and ethnic power centers.
Therefore, Israel prefers a model of gradual transition, in which senior officers, former regime figures, and technocrats assume key roles, while Pahlavi would serve more as a unifying symbol and less as a de facto ruler.
