Tag: National Intelligence

  • Intel Says Regime Change in Iran Is ‘Unlikely’

    Intel Says Regime Change in Iran Is ‘Unlikely’

    A classified assessment produced by the National Intelligence Council has concluded that even a large-scale U.S. military assault on Iran would be unlikely to topple the Islamic Republic’s deeply entrenched clerical and military establishment, according to three people familiar with the document’s contents.

    The sobering intelligence analysis, completed roughly one week before the United States and Israel launched their joint military operation on Feb. 28, directly undercuts the Trump administration’s increasingly vocal ambitions to “clean out” Iran’s leadership and install a new ruler acceptable to Washington.

    The report examined succession scenarios under both a narrowly targeted campaign against senior Iranian figures and a broader offensive against leadership compounds and government institutions. In both cases, U.S. spy agencies determined that Iran’s clerical and military apparatus would swiftly follow long-established protocols to ensure continuity of power — even after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the war’s opening day.

    The prospect of Iran’s fragmented opposition groups seizing control of the country was judged “unlikely,” the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the highly sensitive findings. The National Intelligence Council, whose analysts represent the collective judgment of all 18 U.S. intelligence agencies, produced the document as a forward-looking assessment of potential outcomes.

    The CIA referred questions about the report to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which declined to comment. The White House would not confirm whether President Donald Trump was briefed on the assessment before green-lighting the operation, which has rapidly expanded to include submarine warfare in the Indian Ocean and counter-missile operations near NATO member Turkey.

    White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly pushed back sharply, saying in a statement: “President Trump and the administration have clearly outlined their goals with regard to Operation Epic Fury: destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles and production capacity, demolish their navy, end their ability to arm proxies, and prevent them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon. The Iranian regime is being absolutely crushed.”

    Doubts about the Iranian opposition’s ability to take power have surfaced in recent reporting by The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, but the NIC’s specific analysis of both limited and expansive military scenarios — and its conclusion that the regime’s institutions would endure — has not been previously disclosed.

    People demonstrating in support of the government in Tehran on Saturday.(The New York Times)
    People demonstrating in support of the government in Tehran on Saturday. (The New York Times)

    Suzanne Maloney, a veteran Iran scholar and vice president at the Brookings Institution, said the assessment reflects deep institutional knowledge of how power works inside the Islamic Republic. “It sounds like a deeply informed assessment of the Iranian system and the institutions and processes that have been established for many years,” Maloney told The Washington Post.

    The report does not appear to have modeled more extreme scenarios, such as the insertion of U.S. ground troops or the arming of Iranian Kurdish groups to spark a wider rebellion. It also remains unclear whether the “large-scale” campaign analyzed in the document precisely matches the scope of current U.S.-Israeli operations.

    Inside Iran, the succession process anticipated by the NIC is already unfolding under intense pressure from the ongoing bombing campaign. The replacement of the supreme leader is formally the responsibility of the Assembly of Experts, a powerful clerical body, though senior commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and other security figures wield significant influence.

    Intense speculation has centered on whether the assembly will choose Khamenei’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei. The IRGC has been actively promoting his candidacy, but it has encountered resistance from other power centers, including Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, according to a Western security official.

    As the conflict enters its second week, Trump has continued to escalate his rhetoric. In a Truth Social post he demanded Iran’s “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER” and has repeatedly suggested he should play a direct role in selecting Tehran’s next leader. Speaking to journalists, Trump dismissed Mojtaba Khamenei as “incompetent” and a “lightweight,” adding that Washington wants leaders who will not simply rebuild Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. “We want them to have a good leader,” he told NBC News. “We have some people who I think would do a good job.”

    Iran’s Parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, rejected any foreign role in the process. In a post on X, he declared: “The fate of dear Iran, which is more precious than life, will be determined solely by the proud Iranian nation, not by [Jeffrey] Epstein’s gang” — a pointed reference to the late sex offender who was once a social acquaintance of Trump.

    Current and former U.S. officials say there are few visible signs of a mass popular uprising or significant cracks within Iran’s government or security forces. Iranian security services killed thousands of demonstrators during nationwide protests in January driven by economic collapse. Trump has publicly advised the Iranian people to “shelter in place” until the U.S.-Israeli campaign concludes.

    People attend Friday prayer in Tehran. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA/via REUTERS)
    People attend Friday prayer in Tehran. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA/via REUTERS)

    Experts say the NIC’s conclusions severely limit Trump’s leverage to dictate political outcomes. “Bending the knee to Trump would go against everything they stand for,” said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “The upper echelons of the clerical establishment are ideological, and so their modus operandi is to resist American imperialism.”

    Maloney of Brookings echoed that view: “There’s no other force within Iran that can confront the remaining power that the regime has. Even if they’re not able to project that power very effectively against their neighbors, they can certainly dominate inside the country.”

    The intelligence community’s assessment arrives at a moment when the Trump administration has raised the possibility of a prolonged campaign. Senior officials have privately described the operation as one that has “only just begun,” even as public messaging continues to emphasize rapid, decisive gains. The classified report’s warning — that neither short nor extended military action is likely to produce the kind of clean regime change the president has repeatedly telegraphed — adds a layer of internal skepticism to an already volatile conflict.

  • Whistleblower Complaint Against Gabbard Tied to Intercepted Foreign Call

    Whistleblower Complaint Against Gabbard Tied to Intercepted Foreign Call

    A whistleblower complaint against Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is based on a sensitive phone conversation the U.S. intercepted in which individuals linked to a foreign government discussed a person close to President Trump, according to people familiar with the matter.

    The discussion, at least in part, concerned issues related to Iran, some of the people said.

    The full substance of the call, which was intercepted by the National Security Agency, couldn’t be determined.

    The intercepted conversation was a key catalyst for the highly classified whistleblower complaint filed by a U.S. intelligence official last May that accused Gabbard of limiting the sharing of the conversation within the U.S. intelligence community for political purposes, the people said.

    The existence of the complaint was first revealed by The Wall Street Journal this week.

    A spokeswoman for Gabbard didn’t address questions about the substance of the complaint. “Every single action taken by DNI Gabbard was fully within her legal and statutory authority,” the spokeswoman said. The representative has dismissed the allegations against Gabbard as “baseless and politically motivated,” and said that the claims pertaining to Gabbard were deemed by the former acting inspector general to be not credible.

    The conversation in question was difficult to assess, in part because it wasn’t clear whether what was being discussed about the person close to Trump was true, some people familiar with the matter said. Foreign spies and diplomats are known at times to have conversations about others that are deliberately misleading if they believe an adversarial spy agency may be listening in.

    Shortly after the intelligence was collected, Gabbard met with White House chief of staff Susie Wiles to discuss the matter, people familiar with the meeting said. The whistleblower complaint alleges that following that meeting, Gabbard worked to limit the sharing of the intelligence concerning the call, those people said.

    The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The New York Times earlier Saturday reported on contours of the foreign-intelligence conversation that sparked the whistleblower complaint.

    The developments come as tensions between the U.S. and Iran continue to climb. On Tuesday the U.S. shot down an Iranian drone aimed at the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, and a U.S.-flagged ship outran an attempt by armed Iranian gunboats to force it to stop. Senior U.S. and Iranian officials met Friday to discuss Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, and both sides signaled a willingness to keep working toward a diplomatic solution that could head off an American strike.

    The Journal reported on Monday that the complaint against Gabbard was filed with the intelligence community’s inspector general, but had stalled for eight months within Gabbard’s office. Her office hadn’t shared it with Congress until this week, after the Journal’s report.

    In a memo sent to lawmakers and posted online by Gabbard’s office this week, the intelligence community inspector general, Chris Fox, wrote that the whistleblower had alleged that Gabbard had restricted the sharing of a specific, highly classified intelligence report, for political purposes.

    A spokeswoman for Gabbard’s office has dismissed the allegations against Gabbard as “baseless and politically motivated,” and said that the claims pertaining to Gabbard were deemed by the former acting inspector general to be not credible.

    Gabbard’s handling of the complaint has fanned criticism from Democrats on Capitol Hill, who have accused Gabbard of using her job to focus on Trump’s personal priorities rather than national security threats. In a post on X Saturday, Gabbard said that Democrats and the media were working to use the whistleblower complaint to “spread lies and baseless accusations” about her for political gain.