The biggest obstacle to regime change in Iran is not the regime's military strength - it is the absence of any cohesive opposition prepared to take power. That is the assessment of Jonny Gannon, a former CIA operative who spent 26 years running covert operations in the Middle East, including large-scale programs targeting hostile regimes.
In an opinion piece for the Financial Times, Gannon argued that the Iranian diaspora is fractured and unable to present a united political front. He described the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), an exiled group that has long lobbied Washington for support, as having controversial internal practices and little credibility inside Iran, "Hvylya" reports.
Reza Pahlavi, son of Iran's last shah, remains the most recognizable opposition figure abroad. Gannon acknowledged his prominence but drew a sharp distinction: name recognition does not equal power. Pahlavi does not command the loyalty of Iran's security or military institutions - the actors who would control any serious transition, Gannon wrote. Without institutional backing, even the most visible exile leader cannot govern.
Gannon also warned against squandering goodwill among ordinary Iranians who still distinguish between their rulers and the outside world. He pointed to the bombing of a school in Minab as a test case. If the US conducted the strike, Washington should acknowledge the mistake and apologize - a step Gannon called both morally right and strategically wise. Alienating the civilian population would only strengthen the regime's hold.
Scholar Karim Sadjadpour notes that Iran's Revolutionary Guard and military leadership are fighting for regime survival because their own economic interests depend on it. Even after significant battlefield losses, these institutions retain enough cohesion to block any transition they do not control.
"Hvylya" earlier examined how local fractures rather than Iran explain the rise of Middle East militias - a dynamic that complicates any post-regime scenario.