Iranian Opposition Debates Future Leadership Amid Ongoing U.S. and Israeli Airstrikes

As U.S. and Israeli air forces continue to conduct military strikes against Iranian leadership and facilities, intense discussions have emerged about who might rule Iran if the current regime falls. A central question among experts is whether the fragmented opposition groups can unite effectively to challenge the ruling theocracy.

The stakes are particularly high as military pressure on Tehran intensifies. Smoke has been seen rising over the capital, with strategic targets across the country reportedly damaged in recent operations. This military campaign has accelerated debates about Iran’s political future among opposition figures both inside and outside the country.

Lawdan Bazargan, an Iranian political and human rights activist who was imprisoned by the regime in the 1980s for dissident activities, cautioned against pushing for total unified opposition under a single banner. “Unity cannot mean everyone stands under my flag,” she told reporters.

Bazargan warned about the dangers of repeating history. “That model failed Iran once before. In 1979, one figure [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini] absorbed moral authority while claiming he wasn’t seeking office and ended up consolidating absolute power,” she explained. She also expressed concerns about automatically positioning someone who hasn’t lived in Iran for decades as the interim authority over 90 million people.

Many observers see Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of the last Shah, as a potential transitional leader. Mariam Memarsadeghi, a senior fellow at Macdonald-Laurier Institute and founder of the Cyrus Forum for Iran’s Future, emphasized Pahlavi’s responsibility to build coalitions. “When it comes to helping unite opposition forces, the crown prince has the most responsibility because he is leading. It is to everyone’s advantage for him to build true alliances and real cooperation.”

Some supporters claim Pahlavi already enjoys unprecedented backing. Reza Farnood, a researcher and activist, asserted, “In 48 years of activism and struggle, I have never experienced such broad unity and alignment. Even those who for years held firmly leftist views and were staunch opponents of the Shah and the Pahlavi family are now openly supporting the prince.”

However, significant divisions persist among opposition groups. Iran expert Alireza Nader criticized Pahlavi’s approach, particularly regarding ethnic minorities: “Unfortunately, the Iranian opposition is more divided than ever. And I blame much of it on Reza Pahlavi and his team.” Nader cited an incident where Pahlavi initially labeled a new Kurdish Iranian coalition as “separatists” before walking back his statement after learning of President Trump’s engagement with Kurdish leaders.

The Kurdish factor cannot be overlooked, according to Nader. “The Kurds are very organized and capable. And they are armed. Anyone who wants to free Iran has to work with them,” he said, adding that airstrikes alone cannot uproot the deeply entrenched ideological system that the regime has built over decades.

The Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), an influential exile organization operating under the umbrella of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), represents another significant opposition faction. The group claims to have active resistance units operating against the regime inside Iran, with a recent statement citing “30 operations in 15 cities, including Tehran, in the last days.”

MEK’s Paris-based leader, Maryam Rajavi, advocates for a secular provisional government. Ali Safavi, an NCRI official, emphasized principles over personalities: “Unity must be built on principles — republicanism, popular sovereignty, human rights and the separation of religion and state — rather than on personalities or nostalgia for past systems.”

Defending Pahlavi’s standing, Andrew Ghalili, policy director for the National Union for Democracy in Iran, highlighted a recent coalition: “At the Munich Security Conference in 2025, a broad coalition came together around Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi and four core principles for democratic transition. That includes monarchists, republicans, human rights advocates, ethnic minority representatives — all committed to a democratic, territorially intact Iran.”

Ghalili dismissed claims of opposition fracturing, arguing that true democratic forces are uniting while separatist movements and groups like the MEK, which he claimed “is universally reviled inside Iran,” are incorrectly lumped into the opposition discussion.

As international pressure on Iran’s leadership intensifies, Bazargan offered a warning about the path forward: “Iran does not need another supreme figure, even a secular one. It needs an accountable transitional framework so every Iranian feels they have a stake in their future. Without that, fragmentation will continue, and fragmentation only helps the regime survive.”

Memarsadeghi echoed this sentiment with a sobering reminder: “The Iranian people will not trust in any process that leaves in power any vestige of the regime that massacred them.”