Trump declares MIGA, Make Iran Great Again — these are the leaders he might back to replace the current regime
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
What does Trump's 'MIGA' really mean?
'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!'
Could Trump actually support a new Iranian leader?
Is Reza Pahlavi Trump's most likely pick?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Mobilizing the Iranian diaspora
Gaining G20 support
Encouraging defections within the regime
Building a path toward free elections
What about the radical Restart Movement?
Could Trump support insiders like Ali Larijani?
Can Iran's regime survive if it cannot protect its top commanders?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Is Iran's opposition strong enough to fill a power vacuum?
Is nationalism helping the Islamic regime gain support?
Will Trump's actions push Iran closer to regime change?
'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change?'
How badly has Iran's military suffered, and what comes next?
FAQs:
In a dramatic turn following U.S. airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, President Donald Trump unveiled a bold new slogan—MIGA: Make Iran Great Again. And with it, he hinted at something even more explosive than missiles: regime change in Tehran.Shortly after U.S. forces targeted key Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, Trump took to Truth Social with a message that set off alarm bells in foreign policy circles:This post came just as his own administration, including Vice President J.D. Vance and Defense Secretary Marco Rubio, insisted the strikes were not about toppling the Iranian regime, but about preventing it from going nuclear. Trump's post, however, suggests a broader strategic goal—removing Iran's current leadership and possibly backing a new one.While Trump didn't name names, several prominent Iranian opposition figures and exile groups are already jockeying for the spotlight. Let's take a look at the most likely contenders under the MIGA banner.Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince and son of Iran's last Shah, has long been a figurehead for monarchist and democratic factions abroad. Earlier in 2025, he announced a transitional government in exile and claimed the Islamic Republic was 'on the verge of collapse.'Pahlavi is the most credible and internationally recognized face of the opposition. If Trump is serious about a peaceful, Western-aligned Iran, Pahlavi might be his top choice.Another group that's jumped on the MIGA bandwagon is the Restart Movement, led by controversial Iranian-American figure Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini. Known for conspiracy theories and extremist rhetoric, Restart has been pushing for violent regime change for years.They've even publicly embraced Trump's slogan—but they're far from mainstream and are considered fringe by most analysts. While their support for Trump is loud, it's unlikely they'd ever receive official U.S. backing.There's also speculation around more moderate voices within the Iranian establishment—such as Ali Larijani, a longtime conservative figure and former parliament speaker.But despite his pragmatism, Larijani is still a regime insider. Backing someone like him would mean propping up the same system Trump seems eager to dismantle. That makes this scenario unlikely.In recent days, several top Iranian military and intelligence leaders have been killed in Israeli strikes. Among them were intelligence chief Mohammad Kazemi and deputy Hassan Mohaqiq, alongside key nuclear scientists. This has sparked serious doubts among Iranians.'Despite all claims about missile defense or protecting command centers, the absolute inefficiency of this regime has become apparent to the public,' said Majid Golpour, an exiled Iran expert, in an interview with DW. He questioned how a government that fails to protect its top brass could secure the country from broader threats.Khamenei himself is now rumored to be in hiding, with Israeli and U.S. sources hinting he could be directly targeted next. If the supreme leader is assassinated, it could cause a major shift in the political structure of the Islamic Republic.Experts say the downfall of the regime doesn't automatically lead to a new democratic government. Golpour stresses that regime change depends heavily on a viable political alternative. However, Iran's opposition—both inside and outside the country—remains fragmented.Some factions within the Iranian diaspora support Prince Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah, as a symbolic leader. But he lacks any political organization within Iran itself. Others, like Nobel Peace Prize winner Narges Mohammadi, advocate for civil rights and democratic reform but face harsh crackdowns.Inside Iran, opposition figures have long been silenced—jailed, exiled, or executed. This long suppression has made organizing difficult. As political scientist Shukriya Bradost of the Middle East Institute notes, a 'political vacuum' could emerge if the regime weakens, possibly leading to widespread unrest, strikes, and protests. But without unified leadership, lasting change is uncertain.During the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, nationalist sentiment kept the country united despite hardship. Now, the Islamic regime is again using patriotic rhetoric to gain public backing. But experts suggest this may not work as well today.'Iranians no longer buy into the 'nation of Islam' idea. They see themselves as citizens of Iran, not soldiers of a religious revolution,' said Shahran Tabari, a political journalist, in an interview with DW. She believes many Iranians feel anger and fear about the conflict—one they had no voice in starting.Still, wars often trigger patriotic responses. Whether this conflict will lead to mass resistance or reluctant support for the regime remains to be seen.US President Donald Trump, in a dramatic move, launched airstrikes on three of Iran's nuclear facilities. Shortly after, he hinted at 'regime change' in a social media post:This statement came just hours after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the mission 'was not and has not been about regime change.'The mixed messaging from the Trump administration has created confusion. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on Fox News that the U.S. is 'not at war with Iran,' but with 'Iran's nuclear program.' Vice President JD Vance echoed this on NBC, saying the strikes were meant to stop Iran's nuclear development—not its government.Despite these clarifications, Trump's open taunts and hints suggest deeper motives. His unpredictability adds to the tension, leaving allies unsure and enemies on high alert.Since Israel's initial attack on June 13, Iran has lost a significant portion of its military command. According to Human Rights Activists, a Washington-based group, 950 Iranians have died in the strikes. Iran's retaliatory attacks killed 27 Israelis, but experts say Iran's air defense systems and missile launch sites have been severely damaged.Iran responded with drone and missile attacks, but without the same impact. Analysts say Israel's air campaign effectively crippled Iran's ability to launch a sustained counterattack.With Iran's elite commanders gone and its defenses weakened, the regime is under more pressure than ever. The next move—whether a truce, uprising, or further escalation—could determine whether Iran's leadership survives this war.The question of regime change in Iran has lingered for decades. But this war with Israel has exposed vulnerabilities in Tehran's leadership, military, and political strategy. The killing of top commanders, economic sanctions, growing public frustration, and pressure from the international community all point to a critical juncture.Yet the fall of a regime does not guarantee democracy or peace. As long as Iran's opposition remains divided and unorganized, a clear path forward remains uncertain. What happens next may depend as much on President Trump's decisions as it does on the actions of the Iranian people themselves.Yes, rising tensions and military losses may shake Iran's ruling system.Yes, reports suggest Khamenei could be targeted next amid the ongoing conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
a few seconds ago
- The Hindu
India signs Terms of Reference for trade deal with Russia and others
India and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), comprising Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and the Kyrgyz Republic, on Wednesday (August 20, 2025) signed the Terms of Reference (ToR) to launch negotiations on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the Indian government announced. Also Read | Unjustified, says Russia on U.S. pressure on India for buying Russian crude oil This comes amid pressure from the U.S. — in the form of additional tariffs on imports from India — to reduce its economic ties with Russia. Also Read | Trump imposed tariffs on India to end Russia-Ukraine war, says White House The ToR were signed by Ajay Bhadoo, Additional Secretary in the Department of Commerce in the Government of India and Mikhail Cherekaev, Deputy Director in the Trade Policy Department in the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC). 'Both sides noted the growing trade turnover between India and the EAEU, which stood at $69 billion in 2024, registering a 7% increase over 2023,' the Ministry of Commerce and Industry said in a release. 'With a combined GDP of $6.5 trillion, the proposed FTA is expected to expand market access for Indian exporters, support diversification into new sectors and geographies, enhance competitiveness against non-market economies, and deliver significant benefits to Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs),' it added. The Ministry added that both sides of the agreement reaffirmed their commitment to an 'early conclusion' of the FTA and to 'building a long-term institutional framework for trade cooperation'.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
a few seconds ago
- First Post
Belarus and Iran, both friends of Putin, plan to strengthen military and broader ties
Belarus and Iran, both supporters of Russia's war in Ukraine, plan to deepen bilateral ties, including defence, as agreed by Presidents Alexander Lukashenko and Masoud Pezeshkian in Minsk Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian shake hands during a meeting in Minsk, Belarus, on Wednesday. Reuters Belarus and Iran - two countries that have backed Russia's war in Ukraine - plan to deepen bilateral ties across all areas including defence, their presidents said at talks in Minsk on Wednesday. Belarusian state news agency Belta said presidents Alexander Lukashenko and Masoud Pezeshkian agreed to work on a strategic partnership treaty. 'In conditions of geopolitical turbulence, Minsk and Tehran are undertaking consistent and balanced steps to further develop cooperation, and are working hard to turn each new challenge into a new opportunity,' it quoted Lukashenko as saying. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'We are ready to discuss any issues, we have no closed topics,' Lukashenko said, adding that the two countries could partner across a range of areas including 'military-technical cooperation'. Lukashenko, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, allowed Russia to use Belarusian territory as a launchpad for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and later assented to hosting Russian tactical nuclear missiles. Iran has supplied drones to Russia for use in the war and Pezeshkian signed a strategic cooperation treaty with Putin in January, although it did not include a mutual defence clause. Both Iran and Belarus are under what Pezeshkian described as 'illegal Western sanctions'. Belta quoted him as saying Iran was ready to help Belarus 'neutralise' such measures, noting that it had more than 40 years of experience in this area. Pezeshkian said the two countries needed to build their economic and other ties to a level that matched the high level of trust between them. 'Of course, our common views should be implemented in the economic and cultural spheres, in the development of tourism between our countries, and also, as you noted, in the development of military-technical cooperation,' Belta quoted him as telling Lukashenko. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
a few seconds ago
- First Post
The irony if a Putin-Zelenskyy meet happens in Budapest
The US is considering hosting Ukraine-Russia peace talks in Budapest, a city tied to the broken 1994 security pact, with Trump set to join if the summit happens The White House is considering a potential trilateral summit in Budapest involving the presidents of the United States, Russia, and Ukraine as part of ongoing efforts to negotiate an end to the years-long conflict, according to a Politico report, citing Trump administration official and a source familiar with the matter. The choice of Hungary's capital carries a note of historical irony for Ukraine, as it recalls the 1994 Budapest Memorandum — an agreement in which the US, UK, and Russia pledged to uphold Ukraine's sovereignty in exchange for its nuclear disarmament, a promise shattered by Russia's 2014 invasion. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Russian President Vladimir Putin's 2014 assault on Ukraine proved the agreement meaningless when none of the signatories provided military forces to counter the attacks. The US Secret Service is making preparations for the meeting in Hungary, a Central European country led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a longtime ally of President Donald Trump since his first term in office. When asked about Budapest as the venue for the meeting during Tuesday's White House media briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to confirm specifics about the potential summit location. 'I'm not going to confirm or deny locations,' she said. Although the Secret Service routinely evaluates multiple venues and plans may still shift, Budapest is currently emerging as the leading option for the White House, according to the Politico report, citing two individuals granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations. Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed a preference for Moscow, while French President Emmanuel Macron has lobbied for Geneva. In an effort to secure the talks, Switzerland's foreign minister even offered Putin 'immunity' from an outstanding war crimes warrant if his country, renowned for its neutrality, were selected as host. Still, the summit remains far from certain. After a meeting between European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Monday that a follow-up conversation between Zelenskyy and Putin could take place within weeks. Shortly after, Trump announced on social media that he would join the two leaders for a trilateral summit, touted as the final step in peace talks that gained traction after his meeting with Putin in Alaska last week. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD However, Russian officials now appear to be dragging their feet on any direct engagement between Zelenskyy and Putin, reported Politico. In an interview on state-controlled television on Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow wouldn't rule out talks with Ukraine, but emphasised a cautious, incremental approach: 'step by step, gradually, starting from the expert level and then going through all the necessary stages.' Leavitt reiterated on Tuesday that Putin has agreed to meet with Zelenskyy, and confirmed that the US is coordinating with both Russia and Ukraine to arrange the bilateral meeting. 'The president has spoken to both leaders about this and both leaders have expressed a willingness to sit down with each other,' Leavitt was quoted as saying. Leavitt said the bilateral meeting with Putin and Zelenskyy could be followed by a trilateral one including Trump. Meanwhile, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine will host top military officials from Germany, the UK, France, Finland, and Italy in Washington late Wednesday to begin talks on potential security guarantees and how to implement them, reported Politico, citing a defence official and a person familiar with the evolving plans. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Also on Wednesday, all 32 Nato defence chiefs will hold a virtual meeting led by Nato's top general, Italian Adm. Giuseppe Dragone. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, the new head of US European Command and Nato's Supreme Allied Commander, is expected to join the call. The urgent meetings highlight the scale of coordination required as European allies consider sending a peacekeeping force to Ukraine and ramping up purchases of US-made weapons for Kyiv. With inputs from agencies
