Nur die Demokratie kann die nukleare Bedrohung des Iran beenden
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/only-regime-change-can-end-iran-nuclear-threat-by-abbas-milani-2025-06
Nur die Demokratie kann die nukleare Bedrohung des Iran beenden
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/only-regime-change-can-end-iran-nuclear-threat-by-abbas-milani-2025-06
10 Kommentare
Regime change is probably the largest goal of Israel’s current attacks. How they plan to do it via bombing, which wasn’t able to provoke regime change all the way back in WWII I have no idea.
In a commentary piece for *Project Syndicate*, Research Fellow [Abbas Milani](https://www.hoover.org/profiles/abbas-milani) argues that a long-term solution to the problem of Iran’s nuclear program and regional aggression depends on the Iranian people changing their form of government and ejecting the current regime from power. Milani writes, “As with the Palestinians, the lives of innocent Iranian citizens must be safeguarded. Iran’s people and their democratic aspirations are the only hope for changing the regime.” Milani emphasizes that “any deal with this brutal, hypocritical regime will be broken as soon as its leaders believe that they have gotten clear of their current predicament,” underscoring the need for a turn toward democratic governance. To do this, Milani calls for supporting “democratic voices within Iran” and their allies across the Iranian diaspora. Iran’s people, Milani writes, “cannot but benefit from the end of a regime mired in the dogmatism of a nonagenarian cabal.”
For more of Milani’s analysis of the conflict, you can watch his recent discussion with host Amna Nawaz on [PBS News Hour](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/dissecting-the-strength-of-irans-regime-and-trumps-wait-and-see-approach-to-the-war).
The hypothesis is likely true.
The question is who pays for it and whose cost benefit analysis says they should be willing to pay for it with blood and money.
Israel, who is clearly the country most threatened, isn’t willing to take over policing and nation building. Why should any other country?
Oh like it did to Afghanistan, the American agenda of talking about democracy is so hypocritical
Every small country on earth is probably going to try and get a bomb now. All they’ve learned the last few decades is being nuke-less makes you vulnerable.
There’s only one world power sponsoring a genocide in the Middle East.
Great.
The US should lead by example!
Israel could do with a regime change
When it became clear that Israel was going to attack soon, General Salami said that they were prepared for anything.
He was dead before breakfast the next day
>More than ten years ago, my colleague Siegfried Hecker and I wrote an [article](https://thebulletin.org/2014/01/a-nuclear-energy-program-that-benefits-the-iranian-people/) suggesting that Iran, beginning with the Shah in the 1970’s, should have followed South Korea and forfeited highly enriched uranium in favor of nuclear technology. Enrichment, we argued, only begets doubts about the peaceful goals of a nuclear program.
Democracies don’t need nuclear weapons? Is that what the author is saying?
Why does the US have them then? Or Israel?
Why aren’t they afraid about doubts that others might have about „the peaceful goals“?