Top US senator backs regime change if Washington strikes Iran

US Senate Majority Leader John Thune declared Thursday that any American military strike against Iran should have regime change as its objective, even as diplomatic efforts in Geneva showed signs of progress. Speaking to reporters at the Capitol, Thune said: "In my view, if you're going to do something there, you better well make it about getting new leadership and regime change."

Strikes Not Yet Decided

Thune acknowledged that President Donald Trump has not made a final determination on whether to authorize strikes by US forces currently positioned in the region. "I think they're gaming out what contingencies might look like and what's in our national security interest. And of course, obviously, first and foremost is to prevent them from having a nuclear capability," he added. His hawkish comments come as a massive US military buildup continues in the Persian Gulf, with the administration warning that time for a diplomatic solution is running out.

Progress in Geneva

Thune's remarks coincided with the third round of indirect nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States in Geneva, mediated by Oman. After the talks concluded, Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi reported "significant progress." Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the two countries "moved closer to agreement" on certain issues, adding that seriousness was evident on both sides. The contrasting developments—diplomatic progress in Switzerland and hawkish rhetoric in Washington—underscore the dual-track approach as the clock ticks toward Trump's stated deadline for a deal.

Divergent Paths

The Senate leader's endorsement of regime change reflects hardline sentiment within the US Congress and contrasts with the administration's public emphasis on preventing nuclear weapons capability rather than toppling the Iranian government. While Trump has warned of military action if negotiations fail, his envoys continue engaging with Iranian representatives through Omani mediators. Whether the "significant progress" reported in Geneva can translate into a final agreement before the military option is exercised remains uncertain, with Thune's comments serving as a reminder that powerful voices in Washington prefer confrontation over compromise.