Update on Iran

Several observations on Iran.

I think the momentum is now toward regime collapse. They have deadly options as they go down, and it may be a violent week, including against Israel.

But the regime is dying and such a “Samson option” will not save them.

I will not interfere in internal opposition Iran politics and judge who should rule afterwards. Only Iranians should. I can only reflect analytical observations.

But clearly the MEK was caught off guard by events and are struggling to show relevance. They are currently using considerable effort to darken Western views of other oppositionists, especially the Shah. But their claim to be the only effective structure on the ground has proven inflated vastly.

The slogans the MEK says are being said, “no to dictatorship of any kind including Monarchy” might be said somewhere, but I have watched dozens of hours and I have not seen that slogan.

I have seen Javed Shah (Long Live the Shah) all over, and several other slogans.

Clearly the Shah has at least symbolic currency, which reflects a total failure of Western intelligence agencies since assessing that the Shah was universally as hated and rejected as his father was in 1979 seemed to be the only solid thing they all agreed upon in full consensus, and that appears to be flat out wrong.

That said, the real operational leadership that is emerging is within Iran, not outside. The nation needs a symbol, but a symbol must stay above factions and the rough and tumble of ruling.

The U.S. and Israeli statements supporting the Iranian people, combined with the immense damage Israel did to the regime’s command structure and image of omnipotent effective brutality last summer as well as the sobering shock to the regime by Maduro’s seizure by the U.S. so flawlessly a week ago, all have converged to become game changers and given the Iranian people a tailwind and a confidence unseen before.

The threat of force by President Trump strongly reinforced that. It is a game changer on top of a game changer.

But I worry about a U.S. intervention — Not because of the “rally the flag” issue, which I think is total BS. Indeed, it would cause a “rally around the U.S./Trump” phenomenon that puts us in a good position theoretically.

But because it would then put the steering wheel fully in our hands, and we do not have an end game concept for Iran. And we are lousy imperial overlords, nor do our government structures understand Iranian society.

Nor should we even if we could do it effectively. It has to be left to the Iranian people.

But the temptation to fall prey to “we broke it; we must fix it” is too great, and we would be drawn into things it is best we not be drawn into. In contrast, if Israel acted, they would have far more limited aims and are too small to be tempted by grand planning.

So, if an intervention is to be, and I think quite probably it might be and certainly would be if Iran exercised the “Samson option,” it would be best were it to be by our regional ally and not by us.