Donald Trump has reached a dead end in the Iran war due to missed lessons from historical mistakes. https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/blog/iran-treacherous-trap and https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/blog/iran-war-risks-and-chances
He, like the vast majority of Western politicians, has ignored the mentality and the main strategy of all Islamists – the provocation of Israel and the USA. The subsequent Western military strikes are bringing their civilian populations precisely the suffering that, after worldwide media coverage, garners them waves of sympathy, support, and the spread of their ideology. They want war – but blame the West. The civilian casualties are demonstrably and deliberately accepted by these unscrupulous leaders.
Given this strategy, it was predictable that negotiations with the regime in Tehran would not lead to satisfactory results. This situation leaves two options open:
The first is immediate regime change. This is the wish of most Iranians – see the 9-point plan: https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/blog/nine-point-plan-reestablish-democracy-iran-restoration-sovereignty-iranian-people
The basis of this option is the population's commitment to freedom. This invaluable asset must be carefully preserved and promoted. Therefore, the overriding principle in any liberation process must be to avoid harming civilians and their property. The destruction of infrastructure and housing would be highly counterproductive. The catastrophic results of the wars in Iraq and in the states of the 'Arab Spring' of 2010/2011 have already clearly demonstrated this. Drawing the appropriate lessons is vital for successful action in Iran.
To the immense detriment of Israel and the entire West, the Netanyahu government has failed to learn from these very lessons and, in the Gaza War and the current conflict with Hezbollah, has instead repeated and exacerbated historical errors. The militarily senseless destruction of civilian buildings, in application of the counterproductive Dahiya Doctrine, and the unavoidable collateral casualties are driving global support for the Jewish state to the brink and pushing the victims into the arms of Islamists. An immediate correction of this self-destructive strategy is essential for any lasting solution in the Middle East.
It is not until autumn 2026 that the new elections in Israel are likely to bring an end to the Netanyahu government – probably too late for constructive action in Iran. Because of these uncertainties, concluding an unsatisfactory but time-buying agreement with the Tehran regime, followed by the American withdrawal of the naval fleet from the Gulf region, would be the best option. Three reasons support this. First, even a better agreement with the regime would not guarantee lasting peaceful coexistence in the region, nor would it halt the international spread of Islamism and terrorism.
Second, the time gained could easily be used to further strengthen the already substantial Iranian opposition. This offers a historic opportunity for a long-overdue reversal of the prevailing trend: George W. Bush launched his “War on Terror” in October 2001, a move that was as foolish as it was illegal under international and national law.
Its fundamentally flawed approach, which disregards basic psychological principles, has produced the exact opposite of its stated goals. Islamism, terrorism, and antisemitism have since expanded rapidly. Terrorist organizations such as ISIS have emerged, gained significant support, and found ways to acquire American weapons.
The current situation in Iran offers all the prerequisites to reverse this destructive trend, with its population serving as a role model in the Muslim world. After almost 100 years of stagnant reforms, it can finally help a depoliticized Islam to assert itself, one that stays out of state affairs and grants people the individual freedoms that are essential to life in modern civilization. In the 1920s, it was Mustafa Kemal, Kemal Atatürk, who decisively advanced compatibility between Western civilization and the Islamic world. To the great detriment of both sides, the work begun is now being eroded.
In Iran, the implementation and continuation of this reform program could have started as early as 1979. However, Ayatollah Khomeini, who came to power that year, deprived Iranians of a contemporary, liberal model of society. What was distorted then can be straightened again today using similar methods. These include patience, which can and should be used in the coming months or years to work purposefully toward a largely non-violent liberation from the Islamist dictatorship.
A third argument for a patient, long-term solution is that not only Netanyahu, but also Trump has not yet drawn sufficient lessons from the counterproductive Western military interventions of recent decades: Before the security apparatus of the military and intelligence services can ever again be deployed in large-scale missions, this unreliable state within the state must be purged and brought under effective democratic control. This applies particularly to the counterproductive influence of the MIC, the military-industrial complex, consisting of people who profit from wars, not from peaceful solutions.
A liberation of the Iranians according to the aforementioned 9-point plan can take place at a suitable later date. The following "long-term psychological program" serves to work patiently and purposefully toward its implementation.
THE LONG-TERM PSYCHOLOGICAL PROGRAM
1. The Narrative: The 1979 Sovereignty Fraud
To undermine the theocracy progressively, exhibiting its foundational myth as fraudulent and illegitimate is essential. The regime claims its authority from the 1979 revolution, framing it as a holy, popular uprising. The correct counter-narrative must truthfully reframe 1979 not as a holy event, but as a sophisticated constitutional bait-and-switch.
- The Original Sin: Remind the public and the lower-ranking military that the millions who marched in 1979 were promised a free, pluralistic republic. Khomeini explicitly stated from Paris that clerics would not govern and would return to the seminaries of Qom.
1.2 The Pseudo-Constitutional Coup: It has to be highlighted how the radical clerical elite systematically outmaneuvered the secular and nationalist revolutionaries, rewriting the draft constitution to inject Velayat-e Faqih (the Supreme Leader's absolute veto power).
- The Framing: The movement is not "overthrowing the state"; it is enforcing the original, unfulfilled promise of Iranian sovereignty against an occupying ideological elite. A historical detour is being corrected.
2. The Media Lever: The "BBC Pivot" and Historical Redress
Before and during Khomeini’s 1979 overtake, the BBC Persian service inadvertently acted as his megaphone by broadcasting his speeches and daily schedules verbatim, lending him immense unearned legitimacy.
- The Moral Leverage: A coordinated diplomatic and public relations campaign by Iranian diaspora organizations and Western governments shall pressure the BBC to run deep, historical retrospectives on the 1979 transition. Other public broadcasters like Voice of America and Deutsche Welle can be asked to join.
- The Content Shift: This is not about broadcasting overt counter-propaganda (which lowers credibility). It is about relentless, objective exposure.
3. Avoiding the "Cornered Rat" Trap
To prevent the regime from unifying in a desperate bid for survival, the plan must keep the Golden Bridge open until the very last moment. The architecture of the exit must be visible, credible, and consistently messaged over months and years.
- Depoliticizing the Professional Soldier: The long-term narrative must constantly repeat: The professional military is separate from the ideological elite. The target of accountability is a very small circle of top-tier human rights abusers and corrupt oligarchs.
- The De-Escalation Ladder: Mid-level officers must know that their smooth transition is guaranteed. This must be clear years before the liberation.
- Plannable transition: The same guarantee applies to jobs and pensions within the civil service. This way, the transition will not appear as a frightening, chaotic purge, but rather as an inevitable, professional reorganization in which the lower and middle levels of the state apparatus simply redirect their loyalty back to the nation and its state.