For decades, opinions on the Middle East conflict have been polarizing. While a fact-based, balanced perspective is increasingly rare, Western citizens are being led down two opposing, yet equally suicidal, paths. Leftists are increasingly inclined toward a policy of appeasement toward ever more radical Islamists, who are themselves portrayed as persecuted victims. Conservatives, on the other hand, are being steered toward a militaristic course, on which they utterly fail to liberate Muslim populations from extremists and oppressive regimes—as George W. Bush promised before the wars in Afghanistan (2002–2021) and Iraq (2003–2011).
Instead, Western militaries have destroyed civilian infrastructure and facilities, resulting in considerable collateral damage. This kind of “liberation” has fueled a surge in support for terrorist organizations and Islamists in general, while simultaneously enhancing their global reputation. Thus, the West Bank Autonomous Authority, which lacks democratic legitimacy, also gained international recognition, even though it pays pensions to terrorists convicted in Israel – a form of "pay for slaying."
Above all, the suffering of Muslim civilians, as presented in the media, brings the Islamists closer to their true goal: the spread of a radical, reform-resistant Islam. To this end, terrorist organizations have established seemingly harmless civilian branches that carry their ideology into Western societies through a process of patient jihad based on propaganda and demographics.
These successes have tempted extremists to develop a strategy of success based on the interplay of terrorism and Western reactions. This was demonstrated most clearly by the massacre planned by Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar on October 7, 2023. The plan worked perfectly, as confirmed by a message to accomplices in Qatar in mid-2024. After the Israeli military had devastated large parts of the Gaza Strip, he wrote: "We have Israel right where we want them." https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2024/06/11/hamas-leader-yahya-sinwar-depicts-palestinian-casualties-as-necessary-sacrifices/
The massacre of October 7 was not only an attack on Israel, but on the very foundations of coexistence between civilized societies, as outlined in the UN Charter. Therefore, the Netanyahu government was not solely responsible for an appropriate and effective response. Two draft resolutions submitted to the UN Security Council in a timely manner, both demanding an immediate ceasefire and the return of all hostages, were irresponsibly blocked by the US delegation under the Biden administration.
This was followed by the Israeli military operation provoked by Sinwar and later praised by him. This operation, while simultaneously failing to achieve its military objective, destroyed approximately 90% of the Gaza Strip, in accordance with Israel's official, but largely unknown, Dahiya military doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahiya_doctrine
Instead of learning from the devastatingly self-destructive American wars from Vietnam to Afghanistan, the destruction based on ignorance of psychological mechanisms was systematized. Now, civilian infrastructure and housing are being 'disproportionately' devastated in those areas from which terrorists are firing. Despite the terrorists being the root cause and thus responsible, media criticism does not focus on this fact and the violations of humanitarian principles committed by them, but on those committed by Israel. The superior destructive force of the Israeli counterattacks makes this easy.
Although the Israeli military announces its operations in advance, a high number of civilian casualties are reported. The damage inflicted on Israel and Western civilization by the Dahiya Doctrine is immeasurable. Antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment have reached unprecedented levels worldwide. In contrast, Islamists like the political wing of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Muslim Brotherhood are thriving. Amidst the wave of sympathy for the Palestinians, the ideological boundaries between Islam, Islamism, and terrorism are dangerously blurred. The trend is toward radicalization and societal polarization.
The Dahiya Doctrine also has repercussions in the Iran-Iraq War. According to AI, the Iranian regime is provoking Israel through Hezbollah attacks launched from southern Lebanon, but the media has focused solely on the spectacular Israeli retaliatory strikes. Thus, this counterproductive Israeli military doctrine also jeopardizes the success of the military intervention in Iran, which Trump announced as a liberation mission.
Understanding this background is essential for a successful end to the Iran war. As protégés and extended arms of the Tehran power circle, Hamas and Hezbollah share the same irresponsible mentality, which leads them to coldly sacrifice their own civilians for radical political goals. These fanatics crave war and seek only the opportunity to shift the blame onto the enemy. The destruction of civilian infrastructure such as bridges and power plants, as announced by Trump, has no deterrent effect whatsoever; rather, it plays into their victimhood strategy.
The political and media headwinds Trump faces in the Iran war are creating increasing pressure towards the aforementioned policy of appeasement towards Islamists. Simply yielding to this pressure would result in a continued expansion of Middle Eastern terrorism.
However, the days leading up to the expiration of the ceasefire offer an opportunity to begin preparing for a swift, largely bloodless liberation of the 70-80% of Iranians who oppose the regime.
In the eyes of the citizens, the autocratic leaders in Tehran have forfeited their legitimacy through decades of supporting terrorism and murdering thousands of demonstrators. But a coup attempt on their own would be extremely bloody due to the entrenched system structures, and its success uncertain. The necessary external support can now be provided by the United States and Israel to bring about the resignation of the uncontrolled power triangle. This triangle consists of the Supreme Leader, the Assembly of Experts, and the Guardian Council.
IMMEDIATE MEASURES FOR A MOST NON-VIOLENT REGIME CHANGE:
1. Removal: The United States, Israel, and allies declare that the Supreme Leader, the Assembly of Experts, and the Guardian Council have lost their legitimacy. Each member is offered a clear, time-limited way out: voluntary house arrest with protected status and free departure for those who publicly renounce violence and resign within a few days. Anyone who refuses and continues to issue orders will be ostracized by an international declaration—without recourse, with assets frozen worldwide and travel bans imposed. This mirrors successful pressure tactics used in past transitions of power and leads to the immediate paralysis of the leadership without attacking civilian areas.
2. Protection through a coordinated “Air Defense Strategy of Freedom”: Any regime security forces (Basi, internal units of the Revolutionary Guard) attempting to massacre demonstrators will be targeted with precise, real-time airstrikes. Conversely, population centers, power grids, and civilian infrastructure will be protected. This strengthens the Iranian people’s right to peaceful assembly and accelerates the achievement of the 3.5% participation threshold, which is known to make nonviolent movements unstoppable. At the same time, Iran is being provided with secure communication tools (satellite internet, encrypted apps, VPNs) and Persian-language broadcasts that unequivocally proclaim: “We stand with the Iranian people against the regime that oppresses you.”
3. Supporting parallel institutions and defectors: The formation of a National Reconciliation Council (including various opposition movements such as women’s rights activists, trade union leaders, reformers, and representatives of civil society) is being promoted and financially supported. This transitional body can call new elections and coordinate peaceful strikes, boycotts, and neighborhood committees—proven methods from the nonviolent phases of the 1979 Iranian uprising and the Velvet Revolutions in Eastern Europe.
4. Reaching Cooperative Individuals: Politicians, army commanders, and mid-level police officers should be given a choice: collaboration and receiving retention of their rank, or personal sanctions and isolation.
5. Selective Sanctions: Secondary sanctions should be maintained and intensified exclusively against regime-controlled entities, elite offshore accounts, and regime oil revenues. Simultaneously, transparent humanitarian channels should be established to bypass regime intermediaries. Diplomatic channels to the theocratic leadership should be closed, and any emerging republican or transitional government that guarantees free elections should be recognized. This weakens the repressive apparatus without harming the overall economy or the Iranian population.
This program is also suitable as an effective tool in negotiations.