President Donald Trump is talking about the so-called "Venezuela model"—under which a figure cooperative with the United States within the existing power structure would temporarily assume power—in connection with the Iran airstrike crisis, but some say that because the two countries' situations are very different, it will be difficult for Iran to stabilize as quickly as Venezuela did.
Trump has compared the Iran air operation with the Venezuela case. On the 3rd (local time), meeting German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House, he said, "Venezuela, where we carried out strikes yet kept the government structure, was remarkable," emphasizing that relations between the two countries improved after former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was arrested. In a New York Times (NYT) interview on the 1st, he also said, "I think what we did in Venezuela was a perfect, truly perfect scenario."
These remarks are interpreted as reflecting a plan to selectively remove only the anti-U.S. supreme leader in Iran, as in Venezuela, keep the existing government system and bureaucracy intact, and then shift to a pro-U.S. government. In Venezuela, Vice President Delcy Rodríguez initially expressed a will to resist the United States, but later turned cooperative with Washington. The United States has since opened the way for Venezuela to export crude oil.
However, CNN pointed out on the 3rd that Iran's theocratic, ideology-based regime is very different in nature from the Venezuelan government that had been built around Maduro. After the Pahlavi monarchy, which had U.S. support, was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution in 1979, a theocratic system took hold in Iran. Under Iran's constitution, the supreme leader wields enormous authority, exercising not only approval and dismissal of the president but also all appointment powers and final decision-making over domestic and foreign policy.
CNN reported, "Unlike Venezuela, Iran's regime began as a theocracy and has effectively transformed into a dictatorship," adding, "Many Iranian officials, diplomats, and security forces hold ideologically very hard-line positions." It continued, "The suppression of dissent carried out in Iran went beyond simple anti-government sentiment and aimed to repress religious differences, modern reforms, and even women's rights."
Johns Hopkins University Professor Vali Nasr explained that while Ali Khamenei is the top power, the regime's authority is highly diffused among military bodies, religious leaders, and various political institutions. He said, "After Israel's attack in June, the supreme leader and the system actually dispersed power even further," adding, "This means that the approach of removing a leader, as in other countries, may no longer be effective."
In fact, while Israel claimed in the first airstrike to have killed 40 senior Iranian military commanders, Iran's system and retaliation plans are still functioning. Iran has even unleashed indiscriminate retaliatory attacks on neighboring countries, bringing more than a dozen nations into the crisis's sphere of impact. And whereas in Venezuela a forward-leaning leader like Rodríguez emerged immediately after the U.S. strikes, in Iran there is virtually no politician willing to work with the Trump administration.
Moreover, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which has buttressed Iran's theocratic regime, wields such powerful influence that a pivot like Venezuela's is unlikely. Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, senior Iran-Iraq analyst at global risk consulting firm Control Risks, said, "There is a possibility that future leaders will be even more hard-line than Khamenei," adding, "In particular, for the IRGC, that possibility is very high during a transitional phase."
Former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director General David Petraeus also said, "Iran does not have a figure like Syria's Ahmed Alshara, who possessed military power and was able to bring down the fragile military of Bashar Assad's regime in Syria in 2024." For a regime change to occur in Iran, a forward-leaning figure with military power is needed, but in reality there is no military force capable of countering the IRGC, which has supported Khamenei's rule.
The Assembly of Experts, composed of 88 senior Iranian clerics, has already elected Khamenei's second son, Mojtaba, as Iran's supreme leader. Mojtaba has maintained close ties with the IRGC, and it is known that the IRGC exerted pressure in the process that led to his selection as supreme leader.
Some experts say Iran's political situation could unfold in the opposite way from what the United States expects. Robert Pape, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago and an international security expert, said history shows that without the deployment of ground forces, it is very unlikely that airstrikes alone will bring about a regime change leading to democracy or meaningful reform. He said, "On the contrary, the experience of airstrikes carries the risk of creating a dynamic of 'society and government versus foreign military attackers.'"