Trump threatens ‘total destruction’ as hard line prevails in Iranian regime

Following the start of Operation “Epic Fury”, the contrails of commercial flights have been replaced by the invisible drone of F-35s and reconnaissance drones.

What was once sovereign territory has become, on the radar screens of Tel Aviv and the Pentagon, a private property board.

Regarding this scenario of vulnerability, the president Donald Trumplaunched harsh threats against the Iranian regime and warned that it is considering “total destruction.”

The threat of “sweep away everything” It translates into operational plans that the Pentagon is already executing: the destruction of the Iranian navy, with 42 ships sunk in three days, the annihilation of its communication systems and attacks on desalination and energy plants.

Trump’s threats

Donald Trump’s threats do not come this time wrapped in the diplomatic ambiguity of his predecessors, but with the forcefulness of a demolition sledgehammer.

From his social networks and the podiums of his rallies, the president has abandoned any pretense of “change in behavior” of the regime to embrace the rhetoric of “surgical annihilation.”

For Trump, Iran is no longer a problem to be managed, but rather a Gordian knot that must be cut in one fell swoop.

“Due to Iran’s misconduct, we are considering, for its total destruction and certain death, areas and groups of people that until now we had not considered as objectives,” he warned on his social network.

What makes this threat qualitatively different is the feeling of inevitability that projects.

“We are not looking for a negotiating table in Geneva, We are looking for the smoke to dissipate and there is nothing left that could threaten us“he recently stated before a group of senior military commanders.

For the president, total destruction is not the last resort, but the main tool to force a surrender which, according to his calculations, would prevent a land occupation but would leave the Iranian theocracy as an empty shell.

The hardline wall

Anyone would expect that, in the face of such a siege, the regime would show signs of crumbling. However, the intramural reality is different.

The hard line of the Iranian regimeled by the commanders of the Revolutionary Guard, has taken advantage of the external attack to close ranks.

The regime has shown a façade of unity and determination, at least on the surface. Clerical and military leaders have reiterated their intention not to give in to intimidation.

For the Iranian hawks, survival is synonymous with victoryand external aggression has served to cement a bunker unity where surrender is not an option discussed in public.

The regime’s resilience, forged through decades of isolation and sanctions, is a key factor in the current geopolitical equation.

The official narrative of state media such as IRNA is from epic endurance.

“The enemy believes that it is bombing infrastructure, but it is only cementing our determination,” say the editorials aligned with the most conservative sector.

Pezeshkian’s dilemma

The president, who came to power with a promise of dialogue and pragmatism, He seems now a tragic and hesitant figure.

In his recent statements, Pezeshkian has attempted an impossible balance: Call for an end to hostilities from the international community while assuring that Iran “will not kneel.”

While he offers a “suspension of attacks on neighbors” if the aggression stops, the Revolutionary Guard launches missiles against US bases in the region.

This hesitation has left the president in a ‘no man’s land’, unauthorized by his military, who continues shooting, and branded as ‘lukewarm’ by the radicals.

Meanwhile, the US president, Donald Trump, interprets his apology as a sign of imminent defeat.

A change of regime is impossible

And classified report of the National Intelligence Councilconcluded that a Regime change in Iran ‘highly unlikely’ in the short and medium term.

This change would not be possible even if there was an external military intervention.

The report, which directly contradicts the aspirations of some sectors in the United States, argues that the internal cohesion of the regime makes any attempted overthrow from the outside extremely difficult.

This evaluation highlights the complexity of the Iranian challenge and the need for a strategy that goes beyond military threats to address security concerns in the region.

The Islamic Republic system was meticulously designed after the 1979 revolution to survive the “decapitation” of their leaders.

For every general or cleric who falls, there is a line of doctrinal and military succession ready to fill the void.

The conflict closes the week with a Iran militarily depleted but politically immovable.

The absolute control that Israel and the United States exercise over the empty skies of the Islamic Republic guarantees the destruction of objectives, but does not resolve the power vacuum that a fall of the regime would leave.

With no viable political alternative on the horizon, Washington’s “sweep it all” strategy faces the reality of a structure designed to survive among the rubble of its own air sovereignty.