Trump attacks Iran with 'major combat operations' to oust regime - what next?

Key Concepts

• A joint US-Israeli military operation ("Operation Epic Fury" & "Operation Lion's Roar") against Iran ("Operation True Promise 4") has commenced with the stated goal of regime change.
• The operation was likely pre-planned, with previous negotiations with Iran potentially serving as a deceptive tactic ("Mascarovka").
• A major concern is the potential for escalation and the diversion of US military resources, creating opportunities for adversaries like China, specifically regarding Taiwan.
• The success of the operation hinges on a rapid and decisive initial phase to avoid a protracted conflict requiring ground forces and sustained munitions resupply.
• The Iranian response involves ballistic missile attacks against Israel and US assets in the region.

Initial Attack & Strategic Context (February 28th, 2026)

The US and Israel initiated a widespread military operation against Iran, targeting key locations including Tehran, Isvahan, and Iranian oil export terminals (Kag Island). Donald Trump stated the objective is regime change – to “bring down the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Roland Olphant suggests the recent negotiations with Iran were likely a deliberate deception ("Mascarovka") masking a pre-planned military operation, despite Iran offering to never stockpile enriched uranium. The strikes are nationwide and comprehensive, not limited to nuclear sites. Iran has responded with multiple waves of ballistic missiles targeting Israel and US bases in Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and the US Fifth Fleet headquarters, activating emergency protocols and urging citizen evacuation.

Iranian Capabilities & Russian Involvement

Iran’s limited advanced air defense systems are attributed to Russia’s failure to deliver promised equipment, likely due to Russia’s own commitments in the Ukraine war. A previous Israeli strike, "Operation Rising Lion" (June 2025), highlighted the limitations of air defense systems without proper integration. The IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) controls approximately 30% of Iran’s black market economy. A distinction is made between the IRGC (ideologically driven) and the Artesh (the regular Iranian army), with the potential for the latter to defect or be integrated into a new government.

US Military Planning & Potential Strategies

US military planning, as described by Jonathan Hackett, a former US Marine, involves presenting the President with a range of options. A potential regime change strategy involves decapitation strikes against Iranian leadership, followed by attempts to persuade elements of the security forces to defect, and ultimately a call for a revolution from within. A parallel covert action component is suggested, involving providing communication tools (Starlink terminals) to Iranian citizens to facilitate protests. The US has approximately 14 days of munitions available in the region before requiring significant resupply. The goal is to “use the time really smartly in those early days so that the regime isn’t able to stop us from surging more munitions” to avoid deploying ground forces – a scenario described as undesirable.

Geopolitical Risks & China’s Potential Response

A significant strategic worry is the diversion of US military assets, particularly aircraft carriers, from their intended global deployments, creating a power vacuum. Intervention in Iran risks cutting off approximately 80% of China’s oil supply sourced from outside of China. This is presented as a major point of concern for China, given Xi Jinping’s stated ambition to annex Taiwan by 2030. The assessment is that “if I was Xi Jinping, this would be a great opportunity to be looking at taking Taiwan,” acknowledging an increased, though not necessarily imminent, risk of Chinese action against Taiwan due to US preoccupation and potential weakening. The Kasum Solommani assassination (January 2020) is referenced as a previous attempt to destabilize Iran that ultimately failed to achieve regime change.

Podcast Information & Resources

“Battle Lines” is an original production of The Telegraph, created by David Nolles and hosted by Venicia Rainey and Roland Olphant. Listeners are encouraged to follow the podcast on podcast apps and leave reviews, subscribe to The Telegraph newspaper, and sign up for the “Dispatches” newsletter. Additional resources include listening to the related podcast “Ukraine, the latest.” Contact information is [email protected] and via X (handles in show notes). Production credits are given to Peter Chevlin (producer) and Louisa Wells (executive producer).

Conclusion:

The US-Israeli military operation against Iran represents a high-stakes gamble with potentially far-reaching consequences. While the immediate objective is regime change, the operation’s success hinges on a swift and decisive initial phase, avoiding a protracted conflict and managing the significant geopolitical risks, particularly the potential for exploitation by adversaries like China. The situation is fraught with uncertainty and the potential for escalation, demanding careful planning and a clear understanding of the complex regional dynamics.