A turning point that no one saw coming
February 28, 2026 will go down in history as one of those days when everything changed. The United States and Israel launched a joint military operation against Iran, with a clear objective: to provoke a regime change. They call it Operation Epic Fury and Lion’s Roar, but it’s really a declaration of war.
Trump and Netanyahu insist that it was necessary to neutralize “imminent threats,” especially the Iranian nuclear program. But this is not like previous crises. It’s something different.
“What we are experiencing now is a deliberate decision by two countries to attack another sovereign state and bring about a ‘regime change'”
Immediate reactions and consequences
Iran responded by attacking Israel and regional bases, although with limited damage for now. The international community reacted with mixed criticism but widespread concern.
Russia condemned the attacks as premeditated aggression. Europe called for de-escalating the conflict before it gets out of control. China demanded an immediate cessation of hostilities.
Legally, this is a serious problem. The attacks clearly violate international law and the UN Charter. Trump did not even consult the US Congress, opening a debate about the limits of presidential power.
The void after the death of the supreme leader
According to Netanyahu and Trump, Ali Khamenei died in the attack. This is not just anything: it is a strategic earthquake that opens more questions than answers.
What kind of transition is Iran facing now? Will it be a succession controlled from within the theocratic system or the beginning of a crisis that will alter decades of balance?
The big question is who will take over. A continuationist aligned with the hard line? Or could someone more pragmatic emerge, willing to dialogue with the West?
Everything will depend on the successor’s relationship with the Revolutionary Guard – the true power behind the throne – and his ability to keep the social bases of the regime cohesive.
Doubts on the political terrain
Decapitating the leadership is one thing. Provoking the effective fall of the regime is quite another. And making that eventual replacement democratic… that would be miraculous.
In Washington, the questions are equally urgent:
- What will Congress do in the face of what amounts to a war without a formal declaration?
- Will Trump’s electoral base support this new military adventure when he promised to avoid wars?
- Is the president willing to deploy troops on the ground?
Recent history – Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya – teaches us that regime changes are rarely achieved with airstrikes alone. Much more is needed: credible alternative actors, favorable internal conditions and sustained presence to avoid power vacuums.
Without these elements, the risk is to open a cycle of instability whose outcome could be worse than what was wanted to change.
We are in unknown territory. The margin for error is minimal, the potential costs are very high, and the uncertainty… well, that’s here to stay.
