BY MIRABEL ODETA
U.S. President Donald Trump said on March 1 that the joint American and Israeli military operation targeting Iran could continue for as long as five weeks, signaling that the campaign is far from over and suggesting that its impact on Iran’s political leadership may reshape the country’s future. His remarks came as tensions across the Middle East intensified and as speculation mounted over what direction Iran might take following the reported deaths of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior figures in the early phase of the strikes.
The United States and Israel began large-scale military action on Feb. 28 after nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran ended without a breakthrough. According to Trump, the primary objective of the operation is to eliminate what he describes as long-standing security threats posed by Iran’s military capabilities and to permanently block the regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He has repeatedly stated that preventing nuclear proliferation remains a central pillar of his administration’s foreign policy and framed the operation as both defensive and strategic in nature.
Iran responded swiftly with retaliatory attacks aimed at Israeli territory and neighboring Gulf states, targeting U.S. and Israeli military installations throughout the region. The exchange of strikes has raised fears of a broader regional conflict, with military analysts warning that sustained engagement could draw in additional actors. Oil markets, global shipping routes, and diplomatic channels have all felt the ripple effects as governments worldwide closely monitor developments.
In an interview published March 1, Trump said the offensive could extend for “four to five weeks,” adding that coalition forces have already dealt significant damage to Iran’s naval assets and missile infrastructure. He characterized the campaign as progressing efficiently and claimed that U.S. and Israeli forces are “ahead of schedule” in achieving their operational goals. While he did not provide detailed metrics, he asserted that a substantial portion of Iran’s defensive and offensive capacity has been degraded, leaving the country “substantially weakened.”
When asked whether he anticipates a formal regime change in Tehran, Trump stopped short of making a firm prediction. He emphasized that it would ultimately be up to the Iranian people to determine their nation’s political future. “I don’t make a commitment one way or the other; it’s too early,” he said, suggesting that while military objectives are clearer, political outcomes remain uncertain. He reiterated previous statements encouraging Iranians to seek change if they desire it, but he avoided directly committing U.S. forces to enforcing a governmental transition.
Trump also referenced what he described as a “model scenario” involving U.S. intervention in Venezuela earlier this year, in which Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife were captured in a Jan. 3 operation and later faced criminal charges in the United States. Following Maduro’s removal, Venezuela’s Supreme Court appointed Vice President Delcy Rodríguez as interim leader, and she signaled openness to working with Washington. Trump indicated that a similar transitional arrangement could theoretically emerge in Iran if circumstances align, though he did not provide specifics on how such an outcome would be achieved.
Pressed on whether he has preferred candidates in mind to lead Iran should its current system collapse, Trump said he has “three very good choices” but declined to identify them publicly. He stressed that revealing names at this stage would be premature and reiterated that the immediate focus remains on concluding military operations successfully. The suggestion that alternative leadership options are being considered has fueled further debate about Washington’s long-term strategy in the region.
The president also signaled that U.S. sanctions policy could shift depending on how Iran’s leadership evolves. He said sanctions relief might be possible if a new government demonstrates a willingness to engage constructively and pragmatically with the United States. However, he cautioned that any easing of restrictions would depend on clear evidence of cooperation and commitments regarding nuclear development and regional security.
Meanwhile, senior Iranian official Ali Larijani announced that an interim leadership council will be formed to govern the country until a successor to Khamenei is selected, acknowledging the extraordinary political moment facing the Islamic Republic. The creation of such a council suggests that internal mechanisms for continuity are already underway, even as the nation confronts external military pressure and domestic uncertainty.
Exiled Iranian Prince Reza Pahlavi also weighed in, stating in a televised interview on March 1 that he stands ready to assist in guiding Iran through a democratic transition but does not intend to seek permanent office. Pahlavi, the son of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was overthrown during the 1979 Islamic Revolution, said his goal would be to help create conditions for free choice rather than reclaim monarchical authority. He described his potential role as transitional, focused on stabilizing the country and enabling Iranians to determine their own political future through open elections.
As military operations continue and diplomatic reactions unfold, the trajectory of the conflict remains uncertain. Regional governments are bracing for further escalation, while global powers weigh both the strategic and humanitarian implications of a prolonged confrontation. Trump’s remarks underscore that the coming weeks may prove decisive not only for the battlefield but also for the political direction of Iran and the broader balance of power in the Middle East.