President Donald Trump and administration officials have repeatedly stated that the U.S. has accomplished regime change in Iran. However, foreign policy and military analysts suggest that eliminating key leaders without altering the underlying governmental structures falls short of a traditional definition of regime change.

Leadership Changes Amidst Ongoing Conflict

The conflict between the U.S. and Iran began on February 28th. Since then, the U.S. and Israel have reported the deaths of numerous Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Following Khamenei’s death, Iranian officials announced that his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, had assumed power.

White House Defends 'Regime Change' Claim

When questioned about President Trump’s claim, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded, “I mean, has it not?” She further elaborated, “There has been a change in the regime leadership, which is what the president said, so thank you for confirming he was right.”

Administration officials have described the situation as a complete overhaul, stating, “We've had regime change, if you look already, because the one regime was decimated, destroyed. They're all dead. The next regime is mostly dead. And the third regime, we're dealing with different people than anybody's dealt with before.” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly simply stated, “The regime has changed because the former leaders are dead.”

Expert Analysis: More Than Just Personnel

Military and foreign policy experts largely disagree with this assessment. They emphasize that regime change involves more than just replacing individuals; it requires altering the governing institutions. Mark F. Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, explained, “It’s fair to say that there has been a leadership change in the regime, but the regime is still there because the basic structures, like the constitution, are intact.” He added that true regime change implies a shift away from the current theocratic structure.

Boaz Atzili, a professor at American University, echoed this sentiment, stating that a regime encompasses more than just people. Other key Iranian power centers, such as the Guardian Council and the Council of Experts, remain in place.

Michael O’Hanlon, director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution, noted that while there isn’t a formal definition of “regime change,” the events in Iran don’t meet the “common sense standard of a complete removal of previous leadership and its ideology.”

Concerns About a More Hardline Government

Barbara Slavin, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center, observed that the new leaders appear to be more hardline and militaristic than their predecessors. “The system of government in Iran is fully in place… So, how you can claim this is a new regime, I don’t understand.”

Even John Bolton, a former national security advisor known for his interventionist stance on Iran, suggested the situation is “moving in the direction of possible regime change.” However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio took a more cautious approach, stating the U.S. is “dealing with a 47-year-old regime that still has a lot of people involved in it who aren’t necessarily big fans of diplomacy or peace.”

Ultimately, while the U.S. has eliminated numerous top Iranian officials, the core structure of the Iranian government remains intact, leading experts to conclude that a complete regime change has not yet occurred.