Trump Warns Against Iran Regime Change, Then Hints at It

While en route to a NATO summit, former U.S. President Donald Trump insisted on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, that he does not support regime change in Iran, warning that such a move would breed “chaos and instability.”

“I am not looking for regime change in Iran.

“That would lead to chaos,” Trump told reporters.

He reaffirmed that preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons remains a top priority.

Trump revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin had reached out with an offer of assistance, adding, “Iran is not going to have a nuclear weapon”

Mixed Messages: Public Denial vs. Private Implication

This public stance, however, contrasts with a message Trump posted earlier on Truth Social.

Cracking that “it’s not politically correct to use the term ‘regime change,’” he suggested that if the current Iranian leadership failed to “MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN,” a change might follow.

Trump concluded with: “MIGA!!!” These remarks have deepened confusion over U.S. policy.

Senior officials, including Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have emphasized the administration’s primary goal: halting Iran’s nuclear capabilities, not removing its government.

“We don’t want to achieve regime change.

“We want to achieve the end of the Iranian nuclear programme,” Vance told ABC, as reported by Politico.

Officials Clarify, Trump Complicates

Trump’s Truth Social post has reignited debate in Washington.

While aides suggest the tone was intended to pressure Iran diplomatically, analysts say it injects ambiguity into U.S. policy.

“The comments add uncertainty at home and abroad,” Politico reported.

It cited unnamed U.S. officials who argued the aim is deterrence, “to pressure Iran without seeking to topple its leadership”.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the post a “crossing of a very big red line.”

He also warned that Iran would view this as a diplomatic unravelling—“not the time for diplomacy”

Trump’s Nuclear Assurances and Putin’s Role

Despite confusion over regime change, Trump’s assurance on nuclear non-proliferation was unequivocal.

“Iran is not going to have a nuclear weapon,” he repeated, and noted that Putin had offered help in addressing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions

These remarks reaffirm a central tenet of his foreign policy: prioritizing nuclear constraints over regime restructuring.

Regime Change Debate: Lessons from History

Policy experts caution that seeking regime change in Iran could backfire.

Lessons from interventions in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan show that toppling regimes can spark prolonged instability.

Iran’s government, backed by the Revolutionary Guard and the paramilitary Basij, remains deeply entrenched.

This suggests that external attempts to remove the regime would likely bring chaos, not order

London’s The Guardian warned that a power vacuum in Tehran, mirroring Libya’s collapse, would have unpredictable and potentially disastrous consequences

“Maximum Pressure” vs. Military Action

Earlier this year, Trump unveiled a “maximum pressure” economic strategy, restoring sanctions and aiming to force Iran into a new nuclear deal without direct confrontation.

Despite this, he has not ruled out military options. Administration sources indicate that Trump weighed airstrike plans, specifically targeting Iranian nuclear installations, but was hesitant due to fears of regional upheaval like Libya’s aftermath

Diplomacy or Escalation: Uncertain Path Ahead

The broader message from Trump was clear: the U.S. will resist nuclear developments but is wary of regime change.

However, his dual statements, publicly dismissing regime change, while hinting at its possibility on social media, have created uncertainty about U.S. strategy and intentions.

Western allies have supported his nuclear campaign but remain cautious.

As Europe’s NATO leaders convened in The Hague, French President Emmanuel Macron and Chancellor Olaf Scholz emphasized the risks of instability Tehran might unleash should a regime collapse occur.

Key Takeaways

No regime change: Trump said he opposes it, warning of chaos.

Nuclear non-proliferation remains the primary goal.

Conflicting messaging: Public denial vs. private hints.

Historical caution: Regime changes often backfire.

Strategic uncertainty: Allies await clearer policy direction.

As global leaders press forward, the dual message from Washington, limitations on nuclear capability with no regime overhaul, underscores both a cautious and complex strategy toward Iran.

The world watches closely as policy evolves amid growing stakes.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook