What's Next in Iran? w/Graeme Wood of The Atlantic

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit <a href="https://www.richardhanania.com?utm_medium=podcast&#38;utm_campaign=CTA_7">www.richardhanania.com</a><br /><br /><p>Graeme Wood (<a href="https://x.com/gcaw?lang=en" target="_blank">X account</a>), a staff writer for <em>The Atlantic</em> who has reported extensively on the Middle East, joins me on the livestream to discuss the bombing of Iran and what comes next. This is a busy day for him, so I appreciate Graeme making time and fighting through his cough. Just yesterday, he published a well-timed <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/02/jaber-rajabi-iran/686091/?gift=a7ZfnvnypLwrvJv5-HaR4m2np3Ojfui-yNB91Mau0PM&#38;utm_source=copy-link&#38;utm_medium=social&#38;utm_campaign=share" target="_blank">profile</a> of former regime official Jaber Rajabi, who argues that all you need to do is eliminate around ten people for the government to crumble. Well, as of this recording, reports are that the US and Israel may have taken out the top 5-10 members of the regime, with Khamenei confirmed dead. So it appears that we are testing that theory in real time. </p><p>We discuss Rajabi’s theory of the regime, and whether it is plausible. The conversation also covers Trump’s decision-making, whether the Iranians could have done anything to avoid this outcome, the logic of attacking the Gulf Arabs, the state of Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies, and the roles of the Europeans and Russians. At the end, I ask Graeme who else to follow to be informed on the situation, and he recommends <a href="https://x.com/ksadjadpour?lang=en" target="_blank">Karim Sadjapour</a> and <a href="https://x.com/arash_tehran" target="_blank">Arash Azizi</a>. </p><p>I wonder whether, if this intervention works out well, as Venezuela has so far, there may start to be some sense among foreign policy elites in Washington that perhaps Trump has a point in his approach to hostile regimes. I think that while Iraq and Afghanistan were understood to discredit interventionism, it’s anti-interventionism that has had a bad last few years. I lay out some thoughts <a href="https://x.com/RichardHanania/status/2027864982151684254" target="_blank">here</a> on a proper synthesis incorporating all the lessons learned over previous decades, which converges on the view that while trying to do social engineering through force has failed, simply killing bad people and being pragmatic about what comes next makes sense as an approach to American foreign policy. </p>