President Trump's call for Iranians to seize power after the February 28 strikes rests on a fundamental miscalculation: airstrikes can destroy infrastructure and eliminate leaders, but they cannot manufacture an organized political opposition. That is the core argument of Ali Vaez, Director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group.
Writing in Foreign Affairs, Vaez directly challenges the logic behind Trump's exhortation to the Iranian people: "When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take," as reported by "Hvylya".
The analyst's verdict is blunt: "The path to a popular uprising that successfully dislodges the regime is far from clear." The Iranian public is unarmed, fragmented, and facing one of the most securitized states in the region. Even a weakened regime retains coercive institutions - the Revolutionary Guards, intelligence services, internal security forces - "that are built precisely for moments like this."
The US bet, as Vaez frames it, is that "airstrikes will finish the job from above while Iranians complete it from below." But that bet "rests on no clear historical model and ignores the resilience of entrenched authoritarian systems under external pressure." Bombs can degrade capabilities. They cannot create what does not exist - a unified movement with leadership, structure, and a plan for governance.
Instead of democracy, Vaez sees darker scenarios as more probable: "more overt control by a Revolutionary Guard that has already become a preeminent political and economic actor," or "prolonged civil strife between those seeking to topple the system's remnants against those clawing to preserve it." Neither outcome delivers the freedom Trump has promised the Iranian people.
Also read: "A Nihilist With Instincts": Applebaum Exposed the Real Reason Trump's Iran Endgame Keeps Changing