Trump Hints at Iran Regime Change After Nuclear Site Bombings

President Donald Trump, in a surprising turn of events, hinted at the possibility of regime change in Iran following a series of aerial bombings on three of the country’s nuclear sites. This stance appears to contradict the earlier messaging from his administration, which had emphasized the goal of resuming negotiations and avoiding further escalation.

Trump’s remarks on social media suggested a shift in policy, as he questioned the future of Iran’s ruling theocracy. “It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???” he posted. This statement came after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had clearly stated during a news conference that the mission was not about regime change.

The administration’s primary objective, as articulated by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Rubio warned that any retaliation or acceleration of Iran’s nuclear program would put the regime at risk. However, the situation remains uncertain, with the potential for further conflict or a renewed push for negotiations.

Trump’s administration has made a series of aggressive statements while simultaneously calling for negotiations, creating confusion about the U.S. president’s intentions. Up until Trump’s social media post, the coordinated messaging from his vice president, Pentagon chief, top military adviser, and secretary of state suggested confidence that any fallout would be manageable and that Iran’s lack of military capabilities would force it back to the bargaining table.

Hegseth and Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, detailed “Operation Midnight Hammer” during a joint Pentagon briefing. They reported that the operation involved decoys and deception and met with no Iranian resistance. The goal of destroying nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan was achieved, with initial assessments indicating severe damage and destruction.

Vice President JD Vance expressed confidence that the strikes had substantially delayed Iran’s nuclear weapon development, potentially setting back their program by many years. He also suggested that the U.S. had negotiated aggressively with Iran and that Trump’s decision to strike was based on Iran’s lack of good faith in negotiations. Vance saw the strikes as an opportunity to reset the relationship and negotiations with Iran.

Rubio, on the other hand, stated that there were no planned military operations against Iran unless they attacked U.S. interests. This statement aligns with Trump’s previous threats to other countries, which often did not result in extended conflicts due to his promises to avoid prolonged wars.

Iran and other global powers are reacting to the U.S. strikes with a mix of condemnation and caution. Iran criticized the actions as a violation of its sovereignty and international law, with its foreign minister warning that the U.S. was fully responsible for any retaliatory actions. China and Russia condemned the military action, calling for a return to diplomatic solutions. The United Kingdom, Italy, Canada, Germany, and France have called for a rapid resumption of negotiations, while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer discussed the need for Tehran to resume talks with Trump.

The Pentagon briefing provided details on the timeline and execution of the strikes. Hegseth explained that the timeline was set by Trump’s 60-day schedule for talks with Iran about its nuclear ambitions. The U.S. benefited from Iran’s weakened air defenses, allowing the attacks to be conducted without resistance. The strikes occurred between 6:40 p.m. and 7:05 p.m. in Washington, or roughly 2:10 a.m. on Sunday in Iran.