The David Frum Show: "What Comes Next for Iran?"

Date: June 18, 2025
Host: David Frum (The Atlantic)
Guest: Karim Sajapur (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)
Episode Theme:
A timely, in-depth exploration of Iran’s internal political realities, the potential fallout from the recent Israeli airstrikes, and what the future may hold for Iran’s regime and its people. Frum and Sajapur analyze the survival instincts of Iran’s leadership, the psychology of authoritarian endurance, the prospects for regime change, and the dilemma of American policy and influence.

Main Theme Overview

This episode pivots in response to breaking news: Israeli airstrikes on Iranian territory. Host David Frum and Iran expert Karim Sajapur discuss the internal dynamics of the Islamic Republic of Iran, focusing on regime survival, the calculus behind Iran’s nuclear program, the risk of conflict, and the complexities of external hopes for democratic change. The conversation also delves into the deep cultural heritage of Iran—and its lost potential—while honestly assessing both the dangers and the hopes for what may come next.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Frum’s Opening Reflections

• Limits of Western Understanding:
  Frum notes that while Israel’s internal politics are heavily scrutinized, Iran’s are far less visible or understood in the West.
  "We know a lot about the internal politics of Israel... we know a little bit less about the politics... of Iran." (01:34)

• Two Recurrent Hopes in U.S. Iran Policy:
  Policymakers swing between the hope for cooperation with the Islamic Republic and the hope for imminent regime change—both recurring, both repeatedly disappointed:

  • “The hopes always come to grief because it turns out that people who stage regular marches chanting Death to America are not actually all that interested in cooperating with the United States.” (03:09)
  • “Repressive regimes can be very powerful, especially those that come to power not by a coup, but by a mass revolution.” (04:06)

• Dangers of Revolution:
  He cautions against seeing regime change as an easy, bloodless possibility, reminding listeners of the often-violent realities seen throughout history:

  • “Regime change in Iran may turn out to be a very, very bloody business and a very protracted business that doesn’t end soon.” (05:20)

• Focusing On Capabilities and Intentions:
  Frum argues for U.S. policy to concentrate on what the Iranian regime can and intends to do, rather than on speculative hopes for change.

• Iran’s Cultural Heritage as Unfulfilled Potential:

  • “Iran is the center of a great and historic civilization... This is a society that has been cut off from its birthright and from its capability to contribute to humanity.” (07:56)

2. Profile of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei (w/ Karim Sajapur, 09:10)

• Khamenei as a “True Believer”:
  Sajapur references Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer to describe the mentality of the Supreme Leader, emphasizing his unwavering commitment to the 1979 revolutionary principles:

  • “Khamenei is now the last of the ‘first generation’ revolutionaries... He is committed to the principles of the revolution. In fact, we call them hardliners. They call themselves principalists.” (10:14)
  • “At this point you can distill it to three big ideas: Death to America, death to Israel, and the mandatory hijab.” (10:46)

• Conservatism as Survival:
  Khamenei is described as a survivor with excellent instincts for self-preservation, influenced by examples like Gorbachev’s failed reforms:

  • “You don’t get to be the longest serving autocrat in the world if you’re a gambler... even the most radical revolutionary becomes a conservative the day after the revolution.” (11:53)

3. Nuclear Program: Risk and Survival (12:41)

• Nuclear Program as Double-Edged Sword:
  Frum raises the high risks of nuclear pursuit—how many regimes have fallen amid such efforts—and whether survival of the regime or the program is the priority.

• Sajapur: Survival Trumps All:
  The regime always favors its own survival and is willing to make tactical compromises, even over the nuclear program, if necessary.

  • "If he responds too strongly, he could lose his head... if he doesn’t retaliate, he loses face... he’s in these very tight parameters at the moment." (14:07)

4. Perceived Weakness and Potential Consequences (15:18)

• "Looking Defeated":
  Frum presses on the risks of a dictatorship appearing powerless after the Israeli strikes.

• Sajapur: Outmatched in Every Area; Leadership Crisis Looms:

  • Iran is outmatched militarily, financially, technologically, and diplomatically.
  • Khamenei’s advanced age and outdated education leave regime continuity in question.
  • Dangers in succession: could move toward “national interest” over revolutionary principles, but could also swing to more dangerous militarism, seeking nuclear immunity North Korea-style.

5. Regime Change: Realistic Outlook (19:09)

• Bloodless vs. Bloody Revolution:
  Agreeing with Frum, Sajapur outlines potential futures for Iran:

  • “The challenge we have... is you have a regime with very limited popular support—at most, perhaps 20%... Their support may lack breadth, but it has real depth in the security forces.” (20:25)
  • Revolutionary regimes built on organizing principles endure longer and can be ruthless in self-preservation.

• Iranian Society: Leaderless and Unarmed:

  • Most oppose the regime but have no leadership or means for coordinated action.
  • “I see light at the end of the tunnel in Iran, but there’s no tunnel at the moment...” (22:56)

6. "Rally ‘Round the Flag"? (23:10)

• No National Unity for the Regime:
  Sajapur doubts the Israeli airstrikes will unify Iranians behind the leadership; instead, existing attitudes will intensify. Pro-regime minorities will feel vindicated, but the majority remains alienated and even more dissatisfied.

7. Social Trends and Attitudes (24:20)

• Don't Be Deluded about Iranian Society:
  Sajapur confirms that videos of public rejection of regime propaganda (e.g., refusing to step on U.S. flags, booing anti-Israel slogans) represent genuine societal attitudes:

  • “After having lived under a repressive theocracy for 46 years, it’s a society desperate to be part of the outside world... People recognize that Iran will never fulfill its enormous potential with slogans like ‘Death to America.’” (24:45)

• Leadership and Opposition Gap:
  There’s massive popular demand for change—what’s missing is coherent, credible opposition leadership.

8. Why the Bomb?—A Strategic Mistake? (25:57)

• Origins and Motives of Iran’s Nuclear Program:

  • Started under the Shah in a (ostensibly) civilian guise, paused after the revolution, revived out of strategic need post-Iran-Iraq war.
  • Decades of investment have brought massive costs: estimated $500 billion in lost revenue/opportunity.
  • “A colossal failure... a program which neither provides energy nor deterrence.” (27:42)

• Possible Lessons for Military Leadership:
  Some may now regret the slow, incremental approach—perhaps Iran should have “sprinted” for nuclear status like North Korea.

9. The Regime’s Self-Defeating Logic (30:10)

• Death to Israel, Death to America—at Odds with Iran’s Real Interests:

  • Sajapur: “We need to distinguish the ideological objectives... and the national interests of Iran, which are at odds with one another.” (31:09)
  • Historically, Iran and Israel collaborated; antagonism is ideological, not rooted in statecraft.

• Frum’s Notable Quote (31:05):
  “You can enrich uranium and call for Israel to be wiped off the map, but you can’t do both at the same time.”

10. Historical and Cultural Perspective (32:59)

• Iran’s Lost Potential:
  Frum and Sajapur reflect on Iran’s extraordinary cultural heritage and lost modern economic status:
  • “Iran, Turkey, and South Korea were at the same level [in 1977]... now, vision and leadership have made all the difference.” (38:52)
  • “A society that aspires to be like South Korea; a regime that aspires to be like North Korea.” (39:04)

11. The Regime’s Need for Isolation (40:44)

• Isolation as Power Preservation:
  Even normalization with the U.S. threatens regime survival. Sajapur recalls Sean Penn quoting Fidel Castro:
  “If America were to remove the embargo, he would do something provocative the next day to get it reinstated… his power is best preserved in a closed bubble.” (41:00)
  The Islamic Republic similarly fears openness more than enmity.

12. Can America Make a Difference? (42:24)

• Sajapur: U.S. Influence is Limited but Not Zero:
  • The U.S. can't force regime change, but can support Iranian society, especially via independent media and internet freedom (e.g., restoring Voice of America, supporting Starlink).
  • “The biggest impact we can have is in terms of media and communication... but ultimately, the future of Iran is going to be decided inside Iran.” (43:32)

13. Closing Reflections

• Frum’s Hope:
  To someday be able to visit Iran openly and rediscover its wonders—a testament to the enduring hope for a free and open Iran.
  “One of my great hopes in life is to someday embark on an art and archeology tour of the wonders of Persian civilization... this amazing civilization that has self-darkened itself so unnecessarily.” (44:32)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Frum, on regime change:
  “Regime change in Iran may turn out to be a very, very bloody business…” (05:20)

• Sajapur, on the regime’s unpopularity:
  “They may not have much in terms of the breadth of their support, but up until now, their support does have some depth... the Revolutionary Guards, the Basij militia have shown themselves willing to go out and continue to kill and die for the cause.” (20:37)

• Frum, on Iranian public sentiment:
  “We see these clips circulating on social media of Iranian soccer fans booing any mention of Palestine, of people walking, amending their paths so they do not step on the flag of the United States... Are we kidding ourselves?” (24:20)

• Sajapur, on the cost of nuclear ambitions:
  “The reality is this is a program which... has cost the nation... a conservative estimate would be at least $500 billion... for a program which barely provides just over 1% of Iran’s energy needs…” (27:43)

• Sajapur, on Iran’s place in the region:
  “There’s two kinds of actors in this region—those who aspire to be falcons and those who are vultures... you have Iran and its proxies, and they're not in the business of building. They’re in the business of destroying. They prey on the misery of others.” (36:04)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Opening remarks on U.S.–Iran policy swings: [01:34–05:20]
• Profile of Ayatollah Khamenei: [10:13–12:41]
• Nuclear diplomacy and regime survival: [12:41–15:18]
• Iran’s strategic fragility post-strikes: [15:18–19:09]
• Potential for regime change—bloodless or bloody?: [19:09–23:10]
• Will Israelis bombing Iran unify or further divide society?: [23:10–24:20]
• Social attitudes and leadership gap in opposition: [24:20–25:57]
• Origins and costs of the Iranian nuclear program: [25:57–30:10]
• The logic (or illogic) of nuclear confrontation: [30:10–32:59]
• Iran’s lost economic and cultural potential: [32:59–40:12]
• The regime’s need for adversaries: [40:12–42:24]
• How America can (and can’t) help Iran: [42:24–44:32]

Tone & Language

• Forthright, analytical, and reflective.
• Frum’s tone is characteristically thoughtful and skeptical, with an undercurrent of hopefulness for Iran’s future.
• Sajapur brings scholarly rigor, historical context, and a cautious realism, leavened with firsthand knowledge and anecdotes.

Summary

This episode provides an incisive, honest discussion of the stakes and dynamics of the Iranian regime in the wake of crisis, focusing on autocratic survival, the costs and logic of the nuclear pursuit, popular versus regime interests, and the enduring hope for a freer, more integrated Iran. Both Frum and Sajapur warn against overly simplistic expectations about rapid or peaceful regime change and urge attention to the deep roots, resilience, and real dangers of the current government—even while recognizing both the regime’s profound weakness and the society’s enormous, unfulfilled potential.