Trump Says US Must Have Role in Choosing Iran's Next Leader as War Enters Seventh Day

Introduction

In a series of interviews with major news outlets on Thursday, March 5, 2026, President Donald Trump made his most explicit statements yet about the United States’ role in determining Iran’s future leadership. The president told Reuters, Axios, and NBC News that he believes the US must have a role in choosing Iran’s next leader following the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The remarks represent a significant escalation in rhetoric regarding US war aims and raise questions about the administration’s true objectives in the ongoing conflict with Iran, now entering its seventh day.

Trump’s Statements: What He Said

The Reuters Interview

In an exclusive telephone interview with Reuters on Thursday, Trump was direct about US intentions:

“We’re going to have to choose that person along with Iran. We’re going to have to choose that person.”

The president drew a parallel to Venezuela, where US forces removed President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026, leaving Delcy Rodríguez in charge—a transition Trump praised:

“We want to be involved in the process of choosing the person who is going to lead Iran into the future, so we don’t have to go back every five years and do this again and again. We want somebody that’s going to be great for the people, great for the country.”

Rejection of Mojtaba Khamenei

Trump specifically addressed reports that Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the late supreme leader, had emerged as a frontrunner to succeed his father:

“We want to go in and clean out everything. We don’t want someone who would rebuild over a 10-year period.”

According to The New York Times, Trump called Mojtaba Khamenei an “unacceptable” choice for Iran’s future leadership.

Potential Candidates

When asked by Reuters whether exiled Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of the last shah, was a possibility, Trump responded:

“I think everybody’s in the mix. It’s very early.”

In his interview with NBC News, Trump added:

“We want them to have a good leader. We have some people who I think would do a good job.”

He declined to name specific individuals but indicated he has people in mind:

“We are watching them, yeah.”

The Venezuela Model

Parallel to Recent Events

According to The New York Times, Trump’s model for Iran appears to be the recent Venezuela operation. In January 2026, a Delta team seized Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and transported him to a federal prison in Brooklyn, where he awaits trial. Delcy Rodríguez, formerly Maduro’s number two, was installed as the new leader.

Trump praised this outcome, saying Rodríguez “has done a wonderful job” and expressing his desire to replicate this approach in Iran.

Concerns About Replication

Analysts have raised concerns about applying the Venezuela model to Iran:

Scale difference: Iran is significantly larger and more populous than Venezuela
Complexity: Iran’s political and religious structure is more complex
Regional influence: Iran has extensive proxy networks across the Middle East
Military capability: Iran retains significant military capacity despite ongoing strikes

Contradictions Within the Administration

Official Position vs. Trump’s Statements

There appears to be a disconnect between Trump’s rhetoric and his top officials’ statements:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have insisted that regime change is not a US objective. They have emphasized:

Ending Iran’s nuclear program
Destroying Iran’s missile arsenal
Protecting regional allies

Hegseth specifically stated on Wednesday that the US is using “twice the air power of ‘shock and awe’ of Iraq in 2003” but insisted the administration would not engage in the kind of nation-building efforts that characterized the Iraq War.

He explicitly mentioned Paul Bremer, who led the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq and was deeply involved in setting up the Iraqi government, as an example of what the US would NOT do.

Trump’s Repeated Comments

Despite his aides’ insistence that regime change is not the goal, Trump has repeatedly returned to the topic of selecting new leadership in Iran. The New York Times notes that while he has avoided the term “nation building,” he is “determined to make sure American troops are not deployed inside Iran,” which would sharply diminish his ability to influence events on the ground.

Encouraging Kurdish Intervention

Call for Iranian Kurds to Attack

In his Reuters interview, Trump also addressed the possibility of Iranian Kurdish forces launching attacks from Iraq into western Iran:

“I think it’s wonderful that they want to do that, I’d be all for it.”

According to Reuters, Iranian Kurdish militias have consulted with the United States in recent days about whether, and how, to attack Iran’s security forces in the western part of the country.

When asked if the US would provide air cover for such operations, Trump responded:

“I can’t tell you that.”

But he added that the objective for the Kurds would be “to win”:

“If they’re going to do that, that’s good.”

International and Domestic Reactions

International Concerns

Trump’s comments about choosing Iran’s next leader have raised concerns internationally:

Sovereignty questions: Critics argue that foreign powers should not determine another nation’s leadership
Precedent concerns: The approach could set a dangerous precedent for international relations
Regional stability: Imposed leadership could face legitimacy challenges and resistance
Long-term consequences: US-selected leaders may lack domestic support

Domestic Debate

Within the United States, reactions have been divided:

Supporters argue:

The US has a right to influence outcomes after being attacked
Preventing hostile regimes from emerging is in US national interest
Active involvement could prevent future conflicts

Critics argue:

This represents dangerous nation-building
The US has a poor track record of imposing leaders abroad
Such statements could undermine diplomatic solutions
The approach violates principles of self-determination

The Current Situation in Iran

Power Vacuum

Iran faces a significant power vacuum following Khamenei’s death:

Supreme Leader position: The most powerful position in Iran is vacant
Mojtaba Khamenei: The late leader’s son has emerged as a potential successor
IRGC influence: The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps may expand its power if it survives the conflict
Exiled opposition: Figures like Reza Pahlavi have expressed willingness to return

War Status

As the conflict enters its seventh day:

Casualties: More than 1,000 people killed, including at least six US service members
Strikes continuing: US and Israel continue bombing Iranian targets
Iranian retaliation: Iran has launched attacks on Israel and Gulf states
Economic impact: Oil prices have jumped; shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has nearly halted

Historical Context

US Regime Change History

The United States has a long history of involvement in regime change:

Successful examples cited by supporters:

Germany and Japan after World War II
Panama (1989)
Venezuela (2026)

Failures cited by critics:

Iran (1953 coup)
Guatemala (1954)
Chile (1973)
Iraq (2003-2011)
Afghanistan (2001-2021)
Various Cold War interventions

Lessons Learned

Analysts point to several key lessons:

Imposed leaders often lack legitimacy
Local support is essential for sustainable governance
Nation-building is expensive and time-consuming
Unintended consequences are common
Military victory does not guarantee political success

Potential Scenarios

Scenario 1: US-Selected Leader

If Trump succeeds in installing a US-friendly leader:

Potential benefits:

Improved US-Iran relations
Reduced regional tensions (long-term)
End of nuclear program
Cooperation on counter-terrorism

Potential challenges:

Legitimacy crisis
Domestic resistance
Regional opposition
Long-term stability concerns

Scenario 2: Iranian Self-Determination

If Iran selects its own leader without US involvement:

Potential benefits:

Greater domestic legitimacy
International acceptance
Potentially more stable transition

Potential challenges:

Continued hostile regime
Nuclear program concerns
Regional proxy conflicts
US-Iran tensions continue

Scenario 3: Civil Conflict

Power vacuum leads to internal fighting:

Consequences:

Humanitarian crisis
Regional instability
Refugee flows
Economic disruption
Potential fragmentation of Iran

The Path Forward

Trump’s Timeline

Trump has not predicted how long the conflict will last but told Reuters:

“I would say it’s moving along ahead of schedule, and much stronger than anybody would have ever expected.”

Energy Concerns

Regarding rising oil prices, Trump dismissed concerns:

“They’ll drop very rapidly when this is over. And if they rise, they rise. But this is far more important than having gasoline prices go up a little bit.”

Military Objectives

The administration continues to emphasize:

Degrading Iran’s military capabilities
Destroying nuclear facilities
Eliminating missile threats
Protecting regional allies

Conclusion

President Trump’s explicit statements about US involvement in choosing Iran’s next leader mark a significant moment in the ongoing conflict. While his top officials insist regime change is not the objective, the president’s own words suggest a broader ambition.

The Venezuela model—removing an unfriendly leader and installing a more cooperative one—appeals to Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy. However, the complexity of Iran’s political system, its regional influence, and its history of resistance to foreign intervention make successful replication uncertain at best.

As the war continues and the death toll mounts, the question of who will lead Iran on the other side becomes increasingly urgent. Trump’s comments suggest he intends to have significant influence over that answer—but whether he can achieve that goal without prolonged conflict, massive casualties, and unintended consequences remains to be seen.

The international community, US allies, and the Iranian people themselves will all have roles to play in determining Iran’s future. Trump’s assertions of US prerogative in selecting leadership may complicate rather than facilitate a stable, peaceful resolution to one of the most dangerous conflicts in recent Middle Eastern history.

Sources

Reuters — “Exclusive: Trump tells Reuters US must have a role in choosing Iran’s next leader” — Source
The New York Times — “Trump Says He Should Have Role in Choosing Iran’s Next Leader” — Source
NBC News — “Trump says he wants Iran’s leadership structure gone and has preferences for a ‘good leader’” — Source
Al Jazeera — “Trump says he must be ‘involved’ in choosing Iran’s next supreme leader” — Source
Politico — “Trump says he’ll help pick Iran’s leader, predicts regime change in Cuba” — Source
Axios — “Exclusive: Trump says he must be involved in picking Iran’s next leader” — Source
PBS NewsHour — “Trump says he wants to be involved in picking Iran’s next leader” — Source