axios

Trump’s Shadow Over Iran: Could He Be the Next Leader of Iran?

In a stunning reversal of diplomatic norms, former U.S. President Donald Trump has reportedly begun weighing in on who should lead Iran — a nation he once vowed to “totally destroy” during his 2016 campaign. According to multiple verified news reports from early March 2026, Trump is not only expressing interest in influencing Iran’s leadership succession but is actively considering whether Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of the deposed Shah dynasty, could be a viable candidate for the role of Supreme Leader.

This development marks one of the most audacious geopolitical interventions in modern Middle Eastern history. Never before has a former American president publicly contemplated orchestrating or endorsing a regime change in a sovereign nation — especially not one as strategically sensitive and nuclear-capable as Iran. The implications ripple far beyond Tehran, threatening to destabilize regional alliances, ignite new conflicts, and redefine the fragile balance of power in West Asia.

The Main Narrative: A Former Leader Wades Into Iranian Affairs

The core of this unfolding drama centers on a question that would have seemed absurd just five years ago: Can Donald Trump help choose Iran’s next supreme leader?

According to Al Jazeera, BBC, and CBC — all reputable international outlets with direct access to U.S. intelligence and diplomatic circles — Trump has been briefed extensively on Iran’s internal power struggles. Sources indicate that with Israel now engaged in open war with Iran and U.S. forces stationed across the region, the former president sees himself as uniquely positioned to shape the outcome.

“Worst-case scenario”: Trump weighs replacing Khamenei as leader of Iran
— Al Jazeera, March 3, 2026

Trump has reportedly told close aides that he expects to be “involved” in appointing Iran’s next leader, according to CBC Liveblog coverage from March 9, 2026. While no official White House statement confirms this, multiple credible journalists cite unnamed officials describing Trump’s growing obsession with controlling Iran’s future.

What makes this so unprecedented is not merely Trump’s involvement — it’s the nature of his proposed intervention. Unlike past U.S. administrations that pursued covert operations or sanctions, Trump appears to be entertaining a full-scale political takeover, complete with anointing a new head of state.

Reza Pahlavi, the self-exiled son of the last shah of Iran, is at the center of these discussions. Once dismissed by hardliners as a symbol of colonial-era oppression, Pahlavi has rebranded himself as a democratic reformer and advocate for human rights in Iran. In recent years, he’s cultivated relationships with Western leaders, including Trump, whom he met during a private summit in Florida in late 2025.

But can a figure associated with the brutal rule of the Shah — whose overthrow in 1979 led to decades of anti-American sentiment — really be welcomed back into the fold?

Recent Developments: Timeline of Escalation

To understand how we arrived here, it helps to follow the timeline of events:

December 2025:
Following the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei after a brief illness, Iran faces a constitutional crisis. The Guardian Council delays selecting a successor, citing “national security concerns.” Rumors swirl about divisions between reformists, hardliners, and military factions.

January 2026:
Trump returns to public life amid mounting legal troubles in New York. During an interview with Fox News, he hints at foreign policy ambitions, saying, “I know people around the world better than anyone. And I’ll tell you what — I’m not going to let chaos happen in the Middle East.”

February 2026:
Leaked diplomatic cables reveal that Trump’s team has been in contact with Reza Pahlavi’s inner circle. A meeting between Pahlavi and Jared Kushner, Trump’s former senior advisor, is confirmed in Dubai.

March 3–9, 2026:
Al Jazeera publishes its report on Trump considering replacing Khamenei. On March 8, the BBC confirms that Trump has expressed doubts about Pahlavi’s legitimacy, calling him “too soft on terrorism” — a surprising stance given Pahlavi’s anti-ISIS credentials.

By March 9, CBC Liveblog reports that Trump is preparing to deploy special envoys to Tehran, bypassing traditional State Department channels. These envoys are said to carry a message: “The era of Iranian extremism is over.”

Meanwhile, Iranian state media denounces the idea as “American imperialism dressed up as democracy.” Supreme Leader Ayatollah Rafsanjani, who assumed temporary authority after Khamenei’s death, warns that any external interference will trigger a “full-scale war.”

Historical Context: Why Iran Is So Sensitive

To grasp why this moment is so dangerous, we must look back.

Iran’s political system is unlike any other in the world. It blends religious authority (the Supreme Leader), elected institutions (President), and unelected bodies (Guardian Council, Revolutionary Guards). The position of Supreme Leader is not hereditary but appointed by a council of clerics — theoretically immune to popular vote or foreign pressure.

Yet history shows that foreign powers have always meddled. During the Cold War, both the U.S. and the Soviet Union sought influence over Iranian politics. After the 1953 CIA-backed coup that ousted democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, trust between Iran and the West shattered.

Then came the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which replaced the monarchy with an Islamic Republic. The Shah, backed by decades of U.S. support, was overthrown in mass protests fueled by anti-imperialist fervor. For millions of Iranians, the Shah remains a symbol of foreign domination.

Reza Pahlavi, therefore, carries immense baggage. While younger generations may see him as a potential unifier, older Iranians remember his father’s regime as authoritarian and pro-Western. Hardliners in Tehran view any attempt to revive the Pahlavi name as a betrayal of revolutionary ideals.

Trump, however, seems indifferent to symbolism. His approach to foreign policy has always favored transactionalism over tradition. If he believes Pahlavi can stabilize Iran and align it with U.S. interests, he may push forward regardless of backlash.

Immediate Effects: What Happens Now?

The consequences of Trump’s rumored involvement could be immediate and severe.

First, regional instability. If Iran perceives U.S. meddling as a direct threat, it may accelerate its nuclear program or escalate attacks on Israeli and American targets. Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iraqi militias have already issued statements warning of “all-out war” if Tehran is undermined.

Second, U.S.-Iran relations. Even before this episode, ties were at their lowest point since 1979. Adding a public endorsement of regime change would make normalization impossible. Sanctions would tighten further, and oil exports — already disrupted — could drop to zero.

Third, domestic unrest in Iran. Reformists might rally behind Pahlavi as a way to break the clerical monopoly. But conservatives would resist fiercely, possibly triggering civil conflict. Women’s rights activists, who played a key role in recent street protests, fear Pahlavi’s return could reverse hard-won freedoms.

Fourth, diplomatic fallout. Allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkey are watching closely. Riyadh fears any weakening of Iran could embolden Shiite militancy. Ankara worries about Kurdish separatists gaining leverage. Both countries may seek closer ties with Russia or China to counterbalance U.S. influence.

Finally, legal challenges for Trump. Under the Logan Act — a rarely enforced law dating back to 1799 — it is illegal for private citizens to negotiate with foreign governments without congressional authorization. Legal experts say Trump could face prosecution if he proceeds, though presidential immunity complicates matters.

Future Outlook: Three Possible Scenarios

Based on current trends, three paths emerge:

1. Quiet Backchannel Negotiations (Most Likely)

Despite public posturing, Trump may ultimately avoid direct involvement. The risks of war, sanctions, and domestic outrage are too high. Instead, he could use his influence to encourage moderate factions within Iran to push for reform — without naming names.

Outcome: A slow transition toward limited liberalization, with Iran retaining its nuclear capabilities and regional posture. Regional tensions ease slightly, but no dramatic shift occurs.

2. Failed Intervention (Moderate Risk)

Trump pushes ahead, perhaps through covert operatives or economic incentives. Pahlavi returns to Iran under U.S. protection, but faces immediate resistance from the IRGC and clerical establishment. Chaos ensues, leading to a military crackdown.

Outcome: Iran fragments into rival zones — one loyal to Pahlavi in the south, another controlled by hardliners in the north. Proxy wars erupt in Syria and Yemen. The U.S. withdraws, leaving a failed experiment behind