U.S. and Israeli officials discussed installing former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran's leader after the killing of the country's supreme leader [1, 2].
The move represents a high-stakes attempt to reshape the Iranian government by placing a known entity in power. By selecting a hard-line figure, officials said they aimed to establish a regime that would align its policies with the strategic interests of the U.S. and Israel [1, 2].
The discussions occurred shortly after the killing of Iran's supreme leader and other top officials in May 2026 [1, 2]. The plan centered on the possibility of handing power back to Ahmadinejad in Tehran [1, 2].
Ahmadinejad is widely known for his previous tenure as president and his past rhetoric, which included calling for Israel to be wiped off the map [1]. Despite this history, U.S. and Israeli planners said they viewed him as a more pliable option for the post-conflict leadership structure [1, 2].
The strategy focused on creating a compliant regime that could be managed more effectively than the previous leadership [1, 2]. This approach sought to stabilize the region by ensuring the new Iranian administration would follow a predictable path aligned with Western security goals [1, 2].
Officials said they considered the feasibility of this transition as part of an early war goal for the conflict in Iran [1]. The plan aimed to utilize the vacuum created by the removal of the supreme leader to install a leader who, while hard-line, would be strategically manageable [1, 2].
“U.S. and Israeli officials discussed installing former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Iran's leader”
This reported strategy suggests a preference for 'strongman' stability over democratic transition in the wake of regime collapse. By attempting to install a former leader with a history of extreme rhetoric, the U.S. and Israel may have been betting that a predictable hard-liner is easier to manipulate or constrain than an unknown revolutionary force.
