When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations. During his eight-minute video announcing strikes on Iran, President Trump encouraged the Iranian people to use this once-in-a-generation opportunity to rise up and seize power. In this episode, we sit down with an Iran native and foreign policy expert to discuss what regime change could actually look like based on the priorities of the new generation of Iranians leading the anti-regime protests. I'm Daily Wire executive editor John Bickley with Georgia Howe. This is a weekend edition of Morning Wire. Let's be honest. Most of us have no idea what phytonutrients actually are, and that's exactly why our sponsor, Balance of Nature, makes getting them into your diet so simple. So here's the thing about phytonutrients. They're these naturally occurring plant nutrients and whole foods that actually give fruits and vegetables their color, taste, and smell. Now, what Balance of Nature does is they take all that produce, run it through their specialized vacuum-cold process that keeps everything stable, then they powder it down without any binders, fillers, or flow agents. Just the real stuff. Their whole health system is essentially a value bundle that combines their fruit and veggie capsules with their fiber and spice supplements, so you're getting 47 different ingredients, fruits, vegetables, spices, and fibers, along with those naturally occurring phytonutrients every single day. I really like the convenience that Balance of Nature offers. I can take my tablets with me on the go. I've even got some bottles loaded up in my work backpack for easy access. Plus, I feel great when I take them. So whether you've been on the fence for a long time or it's the first time you're hearing about them, I truly recommend that you go to balanceofnature.com and order their Whole Health System supplements as a preferred customer today. That's balanceofnature.com. As America turns 250 this year, we're going to hear a lot about the history and culture, but we'll probably forget the people who actually fed this country. America's ranchers. For generations, they've been getting up before the sun in every kind of weather to put real food on our tables. Good Ranchers is 100% committed to America, not just in slogan, but in practice. Every cut they sell is raised on local American farms and ranches, and from the pasture to the seal on every box, it all happens here at home, even including their in-house customer support. I enjoy my cowboy box giving me everything my family needs. It gives me ribeyes, sirloins, plenty of ground beef, and of course, I like to add on some Good Ranchers bacon because more bacon is certainly better than no bacon. As a Good Rancher subscriber, I love how easy it is to manage my box. If I'm traveling or life gets busy, I can pause, delay, or move my order in just a few clicks. So why wait? Subscribe to any box at goodranchers.com using our code WIRE to get free meat for life and $25 off your first order. Again, use our code WIRE at checkout for this exclusive offer. Goodranchers.com, American meat delivered. Joining us now to discuss the situation in Iran is Jonathan Saya, an Iran analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Jonathan, thank you so much for coming on. Thank you for having me. So we obviously have a rapidly developing situation on the ground in Iran, but we wanted to talk to you about specifically Trump calling on the Iranian people to rise up and overthrow this tyrannical regime. That's an exciting, incredible call, but there are a lot of questions, of course, about how this might actually play out. First of all, in terms of what we know about the Iranian people at large and how they feel about this regime. We've seen these sustained protests. Is there a sense that they really are poised now to fully overthrow this regime and create a new government? There certainly is. So we have to go a few years back to see how we really got to this point of this level of resentment against the Islamic Republic. So the first really anti-regime movement was in 2009. That's when I was active on the ground when I used to live in Tehran. But the key point back then was there was still hope of reform within the system, trying to somehow play the political game within the Islamic Republic, try to back a candidate that would be quote unquote, maybe more receptive to social or political reform. But those hopes died when in 2009, security forces opened fire on protesters, killing many. And just thinking about how President Obama addressed the situation, he thought American intervention would actually deter protests. Now, looking at where we are right now, of course, the economy is crumbling. Iran has the highest executions per capita. You're also talking about environmental collapse, water scarcity. So every angle of really society, economy, and politics you look at, Iranians see no way out but through. But it was really critical when the president called on protesters to expand. I remember talking to folks on the ground and them specifically telling me they are protesting because Trump said help is on the way. So of course they very receptive to foreign help That is something they pleaded for for years now And one key thing that I want to just end this specific comment on when it comes to foreign intervention this is something that the Islamic Republic was first to deploy They were the ones that brought in non-Iranian proxies, terror groups from Iraq, Lebanon, and Afghanistan to open fire on Iranian civilians. So because of how the regime has treated its own people, of course, in response, the masses are, of course, calling for another form of foreign intervention in the form of humanitarian aid that would aid this movement. So you said, look, you were on the ground back in 2009. You saw the beginnings of an uprising that was ultimately squelched. There's been other protest movements since that have also died. Is there a lot of residual fear that this is going to happen again? or is there a more concrete hope this time? Well, both in an interesting way. So we have to remember when the protests were really taking place about a month ago, these were the largest anti-regime demonstrations ever. And comparing the 2026 compared to 2022, 2021, 2019, and 2009, all these different protest waves, it never necessarily had a leader. Of course, it was really about regime change and really moving past the regime, but Iranians didn't know what to replace it with. So once the crown prince really took leadership, assumed leadership of this movement, that gave a lot of hope and that gave a lot of momentum, meaning people knew what they were protesting. So, of course, we saw them put their lives at risk. About 40,000 unarmed Iranians were killed, but we still see the momentum continue. That tells us, of course, fear is there. Of course, they do not want to really risk their lives ideally. But they're at a point that they think it is now or never, as the president noted, which is why we see them again come to the streets, actually cheering these strikes. And even prior to the military attack, we saw different civic movements take place in the forms of whether it was funerals or student activists or strikes led by business people. The movement continued because Iranians don't think they can return from what they started about a month ago. Now, the crown prince, you mentioned him being central to this new wave of resistance. Can you give us some more background on him for those not familiar with his claims to legitimacy? Absolutely. So his legitimacy really comes from the people. And the monarchy as an institution, of course, goes back 2,500 years. It is really intertwined with the Iranian identity. If you talk to an average Iranian and ask them what they're most proud of, they would definitely point to their past. and of course bring up different ancient kings, again, in the forms of a monarchy, whether it was Cyrus the Great, Xerxes, and so on until the current crown prince. But this specific dynasty was really critical in modernizing Iran. So if you look at different infrastructures throughout the country, for example, railroad, hospitals, schools, increasing the literacy rate, establishing a unified and a national army, all that was conducted under the Pahlavi dynasty. And of course, his father had to free the country following the 1979 revolution that was for the most part referred to as a quote-unquote peaceful revolution because of his father's reluctance to crack down on protesters en masse. And that is why Iranians now really think fondly of those times. They think about the social freedoms they had. They think about the strong economy that they had. But it is really critical for us to see that this is not only nostalgia. It is the past that could be used as a springboard for the future. But that said, the crown prince and all Iranians are really aligned on one key feature, which is that following the collapse of the Islamic Republic and once the power vacuum is really addressed, it's about holding elections for Iranians to decide what form of governance they want, if it's a republic or a monarchy or something in between. So how do you go from having a power vacuum to having elections? Are there organizations standing by with a concrete plan for this opportunity? What would that even look like? So getting into the details a little bit, there are a few factors that you want to ensure that are going to stay in place once the regime collapses. Number one, you want to ensure that you have national unity because you don't want to balkanize Iran. You don't want separatist group taking place. And you want to ensure that the person that's leading this transition is able to really unify these different groups. That's one aspect. The other aspect, you want to ensure that you can get sanctions relief so the economy can actually revive. And these two pillars are really essential for any transition movement. And that's what really the Crown Prince has been working on. The other aspect is really having a script, a manual, if you will, of what would happen exactly afterwards. So again, shortly after, there's going to be realistically some chaos because you're addressing such an Islamist regime that, again, it's very hyper-localized. It is really embedded throughout other parts of the Islamist society, unfortunately. So tackling that might take some time. But ultimately we seen Iranians really unify with specific demands of not only regime change but holding the 1979 flag And you talking about an educated population of course Iranians are familiar with political campaigns. Of course, elections are a sham in the Islamic Republic. But nonetheless, it has been a mechanism that has familiarized Iranians on how elections work, how checks and balances work, how party formations really take place. So if you look at all the features, it's really in place. It's really about getting there. But of course, external help is also key. American and Israeli intelligence services ensuring that different Islamist groups are not going to usurp the situation using the level that they've penetrated Islamic Republic's intelligence apparatus to ensure that should be a transition, there's not going to be another movement that would actually battle this one. So do we expect the necessity of the U.S. to help facilitate spinning up elections and tamping down these potential Islamist groups? If so, how is that going to be perceived? Obviously, that's a difficult process in terms of making sure that the Iranian public doesn't feel like this is a takeover by the U.S. Well, the way they look at it right now, it's a takeover by Islamism. The perception in Iran is that the country has been occupied by this Islamic force for the last 50 years. The country, the society really is going through radical change. Iran is about, I think, 60 percent under or about the age of 30. So very young population and a total of 90 million. So we're talking about a new generation of Iranians that have fundamentally rejected Islamism. And again, they're looking at the West. The form of animosity towards really the West or America doesn't really exist. I think sometimes when we frame it that way, we might be looking Iran through the Cold War lens in the sense that the population at the time in the USSR was isolated and they were only really getting information through disinformation and propaganda. That is not the case in Iran anymore. Of course, there are some internet issues and there's a lot of limitations, but the average young Iranian knows how the West operates, aspires to have these freedoms. And again, the way that they feel isolated from the international community and the way they've been fed this information that the West is your enemy, now we're seeing a rebellion against that by the young people. So once the US were to step in, as it's promised, I think that would be very well received by Iranians as we see right now. So they keep pleading for Trump to get involved. Of course, once he said help is on the way, they gave a lot of momentum, which again points to the fact that Iranians think without U.S. intervention, they cannot really push this regime towards its collapse. One quick follow-up to that, what role do you see the crown prince playing in that process? Well, he would have to be, of course, as we mentioned, the national figure, the unified figure, but he would really have to lead the country on a societal and political level to really inspire the masses. Looking at 1979, that's what Khomeini was able to do. He was able to inspire the masses, millions of Iranians to really come together. And this is what expectation is of a leader that would really ensure the average Iranian that the past is behind them. It is really about just political messaging and ensuring that elections are free and they have international monitoring. That would be his real role. And again, depending on what Iranians decide during the elections, that would also dictate how involved he would get, whether they want, let's say, a constitutional monarchy or a republic. That would really depend on how Iranians want to really cast their vote. Do you have a sense of which way they would lean, maybe constitutional monarchy? It is tough to say. You know, you're talking about 90 million people of different linguistic backgrounds and socioeconomic status. But I would say one thing. They look at the region, they compare republics to monarchies, and monarchies tend to be more prosperous. I think there's an understanding in the Middle East that if you allow too much social freedom, the situation and the context would be abused and exploited by Islamist factions. That's what happened in Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood took over because these groups are really good at organizing. So they look at Saudi Arabia, they look at UAE, they look at Jordan, and then they compare that to, let's say, Turkey, Iraq, or Lebanon. Turkey is technically a republic, but again, their inflation actually is comparable to the Islamic Republic that's been under sanctions for 50 years. So looking at that context, and given how legitimate inherently the monarchy is, I predict a form of a constitutional monarchy, there still has to be a parliament, there still needs to be checks and balances. I don't think Iranians want absolute one person dictating really the entire politics and foreign policy of the country. But his role would be pivotal to want to ensure national stability. But at the same time, I think Iranians would like to still vote because this is something they've gotten used to throughout the last few years, to have checks and balances campaigns and political parties Now relating to something you said earlier that the young people really have a different point of view than previous generations Over the years we all seen videos of Iranians chanting death to America But you've said there's a warmness toward the West among this younger generation. Where does the voting public stand by and large in terms of their feelings about the West? Is there a generational divide? And if they were given free and fair elections, what do you expect we'd see? Also, I understand it's still a predominantly Muslim country, but you're saying they reject Islamism, which is distinct. Where does the median citizen fall on those dimensions? So taking it case by case, of course, one is the role of religion. To the average Iranian, and, you know, having grown up there, this is something I experienced firsthand, is that religion is really forced on people in every part of day-to-day life. In school, textbooks, when you watch TV, even the form of advertisements. The economy also has, like, Islamist angles, believe it or not. So the way that it's been forced so aggressively to people, we're seeing an opposite backlash. And the key thing here is that it has not worked. Now, had it been some sort of a totalitarian system that was able to deliver to an extent, for example, looking at the CCP in China, that would have been a different case. But the way they look at it is that these people come and justify what they do using Islam, and it has not worked, and it, of course, has caused tens of thousands of deaths. So because of that, they don't see it as viable. I'm not necessarily envisioning a scenario where the average Iranian would actively go and hunt down people that are like believers or who have a Muslim faith. It's more so about having a very clear and distinct line between church and state. I think the idea more so is that you could still be a practicing Muslim as long as you don't really enforce that onto others. I do sincerely believe that's where society is headed. I do think a lot of religious people increasingly don't want to really impose Islam on others because they don't like what this regime has done to the image of Islam, domestically and internationally. So generationally speaking, again, we're talking about a population that's really majority young. Gen Z, millennials, these are people that have not even lived under the Iran-Iraq war or the generation of the Shah. They've only lived under the Islamic Republic and they've only really seen, I guess, just chaos and repression. For them, it's an outright rejection of what their parents have done. So there's this major generational divide that there was one generation that made a mistake. And that's what's really understood is that 1979 revolution was a mistake blank. There's no understanding that, well, 79 was not inherently a mistake. It was later on translated to be usurped to X, Y, Z. That is not the understanding. That was a mistake point blank. But that doesn't mean we want to literally go exactly to that. We want to be inspired by that to develop something new. And that's what I think, you know, when you look at Gen Z, that's why they probably want to see a constitutional monarchy, to have elements of both national Iranian pride and, of course, aspects of democracy. You mentioned the approach towards the United States, how they perceive America. Let's look at the protest chants for the past years. When Iranian civil society and ordinary Iranians were protesting, I'm not talking about regime-affiliated demonstrations that are displayed on propaganda. When ordinary Iranians go out, there's not been a single chant about U.S. sanctions. There's not been a single mention of somehow the U.S. is the Great Sainte. The most prominent chant, and I actually remember saying this myself personally, that has been very vibrant, is that, quote-unquote, they are lying to us when they say the United States is the enemy. Our enemy is right here, meaning it's the Islamic Republic. So that form of propaganda is not really working out. They see how life functions in the West. They look at their own lives. They know they're being lied to. The sort of animosity towards Israel or America is not really there because it hasn't worked. This narrative of working in the shadows and trying to defy the Western order, trying to somehow work with sanctioned entities such as Russia and China, that has not played out. They see that Eastern bloc, if you will, of North Korea, the axis of aggressors, as the losing game. They don't want to have a life like an average Russian. They want to really aspire to have a life more so like what we see in the West. So because of that, I don't really see a scenario where post-regime change, you're going to see this level of animosity. Of course, there's going to be criticism of every foreign policy decision made by different countries. But that said, this anti-Americanism that's so inherent to the Islamic Republic is not going to be their post-regime chain. Well, this is an exciting moment. It's a fraught moment for sure. But the whole world's eyes watching what happens in the next days, maybe weeks in Iran. Jonathan, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you for having me. That was Jonathan Saya from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. And this has been a weekend edition of Morning Wire. What?
