A new leadership in Iran may come to the negotiating table and could even become a potential ally of the United States

The escalation of confrontation between the United States, Israel, and Iran in late February–early March 2026 has become one of the most serious crises in the Middle East in recent years and has effectively opened a new phase of the regional conflict.

Military operations unfolded against the backdrop of the effective collapse of diplomatic efforts to resume negotiations surrounding Iran’s nuclear program. Attempts to reach a new agreement between Tehran and Western countries in recent weeks failed to produce a compromise on limiting Iran’s nuclear activities and easing sanctions pressure. As a result, tensions quickly transitioned into a military phase, and the strikes carried out by the United States and Israel signaled a readiness to move from diplomatic pressure to a force-based scenario.

In response, Tehran launched missile and drone attacks against Israeli territory as well as against facilities associated with the American military presence in the region. As a result, the conflict rapidly began to take on a broader regional character, affecting neighboring states and intensifying concerns about further escalation. The scale and intensity of the current strikes significantly exceed previous episodes of covert confrontation between the sides and may have long-term consequences for the entire security architecture of the Middle East.

Amid ongoing hostilities, the risk of further involvement by other regional players is growing, primarily the countries of the Persian Gulf, as well as the intensification of instability in areas where armed groups allied with Iran operate. At the same time, it remains an open question whether the current escalation will weaken the Iranian regime or, on the contrary, become a factor in consolidating power within the country. Under these circumstances, the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran is turning not only into a military confrontation but also into a key geopolitical test for the entire region.

CASPIA presents an exclusive interview with American expert Jason Epstein.

– How do you assess the causes of the current escalation of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran? Were these strikes truly inevitable, or could they have been prevented?

– In essence, these strikes were inevitable. The Iranian regime was determined to acquire nuclear weapons and the intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of delivering them. No negotiations would have stopped Tehran on its path toward its ultimate goal. In addition, Donald Trump is a representative of the baby boomer generation: he not only remembers that the Iranians were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American servicemen during the second Persian Gulf War, but he also clearly remembers the events of earlier years — the Islamic Revolution, the holding of American hostages for 444 days, the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, and the execution of the CIA station chief there as well.

– What were the key objectives of these strikes from the perspective of the strategic interests of the United States and Israel? Were they aimed exclusively at military targets, or did they also pursue political goals (for example, putting pressure on the Iranian leadership)?

– The primary goal, it seems, was the decapitation of the Iranian regime’s leadership — from the Supreme Leader to the top command of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Although President Trump has repeatedly stated that regime change is not an official strategic objective of the United States, he has never said that such a change could not occur organically — from within. And strikes of this kind could very well create the conditions for such a scenario.

– How will the current events affect the likelihood of the conflict spreading further and the risk of a local or global war? What might this escalation mean for negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program and other diplomatic efforts?

– The basic balance has not yet changed, however it is quite possible that one or more Persian Gulf countries may now join the strikes against Iranian targets.

Today’s strikes effectively draw a line under the negotiations. It is possible that a new Iranian leadership will be ready to come to the negotiating table — not only with a genuine desire to reach an agreement but also, potentially, as an ally of the United States and its regional partners, from Azerbaijan to Israel and Saudi Arabia.

– How will the conflict affect Iranian society as a whole? Will it provoke internal pressure on the regime or, on the contrary, strengthen it?

– Inside the country, the regime is hated, and it appears weaker than ever. Although the authorities may hold on for some time, there is practically no doubt that their position is extremely fragile.

– How do you assess the perception of this conflict within American society — is support for military intervention growing, or, on the contrary, is there a desire for de-escalation?

– As with everything else, a large part of American society reduces U.S. actions to the figure of Trump and his political image. The overwhelming majority of his supporters will support the strike — provided that it does not lead to an occupation similar to Iraq. And an equally overwhelming majority of his opponents will oppose it.

Nevertheless, most Americans would be satisfied if the result were a new Iranian government that does not seek to destroy neighboring countries and at least minimally respects basic human rights within its own territory. As in many other matters, a significant portion of Americans perceives any U.S. actions exclusively through the prism of Trump. Therefore, most of his supporters will support the attack if it does not turn into an occupation, while most of his opponents will condemn it. At the same time, people in the United States as a whole would find acceptable an outcome in which a new government appears in Iran that does not seek to destroy other countries and respects at least basic human rights at home.

The basic balance remains unchanged, although the participation of one or several Persian Gulf countries in strikes against Iran is now possible. Fox News reports that the Kingdom will likely respond with military force. Today’s strikes demonstrate that negotiations are over. It is possible that a new Iranian leadership will come to the negotiating table in earnest — and may even become a potential ally of the United States and its regional partners, from Azerbaijan to Israel and Saudi Arabia.