23/03/2026
TRUMP LINKS IRAN LEADERSHIP PLANS TO VENESUELA MODEL.
President Donald Trump said on Monday that the United States could, in theory, “find a leader … like we did in Venezuela” for Iran, as part of broader discussions about the future of Iranian governance amid the ongoing conflict. He added it could even involve “joint leadership,” though he did not provide specifics on what that arrangement would look like or who would be involved.
Trump’s remarks came as he announced progress in talks with Iranian officials, saying U.S. envoys — including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner — have been engaged in negotiations that have produced “major points of agreement,” raising the prospect of a deal to end hostilities. He said these discussions were not with Iran’s supreme leader but with a “respected” figure inside Iranian leadership, and suggested the possibility that a joint U.S.–Iran framework could emerge.
The president explicitly dismissed the idea that Iran’s current new supreme leader — Mojtaba Khamenei, son of the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — was a legitimate leader in his view and reiterated that the U.S. should have a role in choosing future leadership, drawing on the example of Venezuela’s recent transition after U.S. forces ousted Nicolás Maduro, leaving interim leader Delcy Rodríguez in charge.
Context: Iran conflict and leadership vacuum
These comments occur against the backdrop of a broader U.S.–Israeli campaign against Iran, which began in late February 2026 with airstrikes that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and severely damaged Iranian military infrastructure. The war has caused significant casualties and heightened regional tensions.
Iran’s leadership situation remains in flux. Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei was reported as the successor but has not appeared publicly since the strikes, leading to uncertainty about his status and prompting Trump and U.S. officials to question who is actually leading Tehran.
Negotiations are reportedly ongoing through indirect channels and with regional intermediaries such as Turkey, Egypt and Pakistan, though Tehran has publicly denied direct talks with Washington.
Political and strategic implications
Trump’s comments reflect a broader U.S. strategy that combines military pressure with political goals aimed at regime change or leadership transition in Iran — a strategy openly acknowledged by both Washington and Tel Aviv earlier in the conflict. Analysts note that such ambitions face deep structural, religious and political hurdles in Iran’s system, where leadership is tightly bound to clerical institutions and constitutional processes.
The comparison with the situation in Venezuela — where U.S. forces removed Maduro earlier this year and effectively installed an interim leader — underscores a more interventionist posture by the Trump administration, signalling that Washington seeks a significant say in who leads Iran once the conflict subsides.
What remains unclear
Who exactly Trump envisions as an alternative leader for Iran, or how a “joint leadership” would function in practice.
Whether Iran’s domestic political structures and public opinion would accept any externally influenced leadership outcome.
How other global powers, including Russia and China, would respond to any U.S. role in choosing Iran’s leadership.
