Just hours after Israeli fighter jets began striking Iranian nuclear facilities and air defence systems, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, appealed to the Iranian people directly.
“The Islamic regime, which has oppressed you for almost 50 years, threatens to destroy our country, the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said.
Israel’s objective was to remove the nuclear and ballistic missile threat, he said, but added: “As we achieve our objective, we are also clearing the path for you to achieve your freedom.
“The regime does not know what hit them, or what will hit them. It has never been weaker. This is your opportunity to stand up and let your voices be heard,” Netanyahu said.
Three days of strikes between Iran and Israel have left dozens dead in both countries, as both sides warn of further attacks. Israel’s attack targeted senior figures in Iran’s military and scientific establishment, took out much of the country’s air defence system and destroyed the above-ground enrichment plant at Iran’s nuclear site.
The scale of Israel’s attacks, its choice of targets, and its politicians’ own words suggest Israel’s ambition could be to topple the regime itself.
“One assumes that one of the reasons that Israel is doing that is that they’re hoping to see regime change,” said Michael Singh of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a former senior official under President George W Bush.
“It would like to see the people of Iran rise up,” he said, adding that the limited civilian casualties in the initial round of attacks also spoke to a broader aim.
Footage from central Tel Aviv showed fire and smoke rising from a condo tower. Source: AP / Tomer Neuberg
The Israeli embassy in Washington insisted: “The future of Iran can only be determined by the Iranian people.”
“As a democratic country, the State of Israel believes that it is up to the people of a country to shape their national politics, and choose their government,” the embassy told Reuters.
‘Chance of a popular revolt’
Despite the damage inflicted by the unprecedented Israeli attack, decades of enmity toward Israel, it’s unclear whether the Iranian people would follow Netanyahu’s call.
The strikes early on Friday hit not just Iran’s nuclear facilities and missile factories but also key figures in the country’s military chain of command and its nuclear scientists, blows that appear aimed at diminishing Iran’s credibility both at home and among its allies in the region – factors that could destabilise the Iranian leadership, experts said.
But Singh cautioned that no one knows what conditions would be required for an opposition to coalesce in Iran.
Director of Deakin University’s Middle East forum told Shahram Akbarzadeh told SBS News that Iranians who have long been unhappy with the conservative Islamic Republic leadership could rise up.
“There is a chance of popular revolt and discontent in the country in protest to the deteriorating, fast deteriorating state of affairs in Iran, with leaders being killed,” he said.
“People are unhappy about not just the economic decline that’s likely to come, but also the fact that they believe Iran doesn’t need the war with Israel.”
Akbarzadeh said there will be many voices in Iran arguing that it should pursue the development of a nuclear bomb, to act in part as a deterrent to Israel attacking it.
Many of Iran’s 90 million people are unhappy with the country’s weak economy, a lack of freedom of speech, women’s rights, and minority rights.
Unrest in 2022, known as the “Woman Life Freedom” movement took most of Iran, but failed to build a major lasting political opposition in the country.
Jessica Genauer, senior lecturer in international relations at Flinders University, told SBS News that Israel sees an opportunity to further degrade a weakened Iran and potentially precipitate regime change.
Those amongst Israel’s nationalist right wing coalition government see this as Israel’s best chance to escalate into a more direct war with Iran.
“That might go on for some time until they actually see regime change in Iran,” Genauer said.
“If that were to actually take place and if regime change in Iran is actually the end goal of the current Israeli government, then I would say we are looking at escalation of this current phase of direct conflict in the medium to long-term, over coming months.”
Israeli authorities said dozens were injured in Iran’s retaliatory strikes on Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Israel and Iran are essentially at war, and the conflict could continue for some time, experts say. Source: Getty / picture alliance/dpa
Netanyahu has called for a change in Iran’s government, including in September.
The US government has given no indication that it seeks regime change in Tehran.
The White House and Iran’s mission to the United Nations in New York also did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the matter.
Toppling Iran regime could be risky
While setting back Tehran’s nuclear program would have value for Israel, the hope for undermining the regime could explain why Israel went after so many senior military figures, potentially throwing the Iranian security establishment into confusion and chaos, experts say.
“These people were very vital, very knowledgeable, many years in their jobs, and they were a very important component of the stability of the regime, specifically the security stability of the regime,” said Sima Shine, a former chief Mossad analyst and now a researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.
“In the ideal world, Israel would prefer to see a change of regime, no question about that,” she said.
Iranian people look over damage to buildings following Israeli airstrikes in Tehran. Source: Getty / Majid Saeedi
But such a change would come with risk, said Jonathan Panikoff, a former US deputy national intelligence officer for the Middle East who is now at the Atlantic Council.
If Israel succeeds in removing Iran’s leadership, there is no guarantee the successor that emerges would not be even more hardline in pursuit of conflict with Israel.
“For years, many in Israel have insisted that regime change in Iran would prompt a new and better day – that nothing could be worse than the current theocratic regime,” Panikoff said.
“But history tells us it can always be worse.”
