Podcast Summary: The Long Game with Jake Sullivan and Jon Finer

Episode: Can Iran’s Regime Survive?
Date: January 15, 2026

Episode Overview

In this timely episode, co-hosts Jake Sullivan (President Biden’s former National Security Advisor) and Jon Finer (former Principal Deputy National Security Advisor) tackle one of the most urgent national security questions of 2026: Can Iran’s regime survive the unprecedented, widespread protests and international pressure it currently faces? Drawing on their decades of policy experience—including time spent in the Situation Room and direct negotiation with Iran—they dissect the roots of the latest Iranian uprising, compare it to previous revolutionary moments, and debate the perils and possibilities of U.S. intervention at a crossroads moment for the regime, the region, and U.S. foreign policy.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Context: How Did We Get Here?

Timeline of Protests and Regime Crisis

• Origins: Protests began in late December 2025, initially over economic misery—especially out-of-control inflation.
• Unique Features: This time, the movement is broader, more cross-cutting, and includes not just reform-minded students or urban elites, but the merchant class (“bazaaris”), ethnic minorities, and young people nationwide.
• Layered Grievances: Besides economic hardship, protests are spurred by:
  • Decades of government repression
  • Strategic setbacks for the regime (e.g., military defeats, isolation)
  • Environmental disaster in Tehran: drying water, land subsidence, threats of evacuating the population
  • Continuing abuse and control over women (e.g., the legacy of Mahsa Amini’s death)
  • Exhaustion with the regime’s costly foreign “adventures,” especially funding regional proxies
  • Collective demand for dignity and freedom
• Regime Response:
  • Severe, indiscriminate crackdown—estimates of over 12,000 killed, a figure higher than the 1978-79 revolution.
  • Shutting down the Internet to <1% of capacity, throttling phone service, deploying mass threats against families of protesters.
  • Messaging from officials including threats of charging protesters with “war against God” (which carries the death penalty).

“The numbers today suggest that upwards of 12,000 people may have been killed, which…would be more than were killed in the Iranian revolution back in 78 and 79. A shocking human toll and seemingly rising as we go as the regime mobilizes every tool at its disposal to crack down on people in the streets.” – Jake Sullivan [09:05]

2. The Dilemma: Should the U.S. Intervene?

Trump Administration’s Public Posture

• President Trump has signaled that “help is on the way,” with White House spokespeople suggesting military options are imminent.
• U.S. has also announced new tariffs on countries doing business with Iran, especially targeting China.

The Debate: Military Action Pro vs. Con

Segment: "Red Team Blue Team" Exercise
Jake and Jon role-play advisors arguing for and against intervention, mirroring Situation Room deliberations.
[Timestamps: 40:06–51:03]

Case FOR Military Action (Jon Finer):

• The U.S. cannot risk repeating Bush Sr.’s 1991 mistake, when encouragement led to mass slaughter of Shi’a in Iraq with no protection (45:25).
• Trump has already created expectations; credibility and deterrence are on the line.
• Limited, disciplined military strikes (focusing on regime security forces, command/control, and preventing retaliation) could tip the scales and persuade security forces to abandon repression.
• U.S. would align itself with the Iranian people’s struggle for freedom.
• Because of earlier U.S./Israeli strikes, Iranian retaliation or defense will be less potent than in the past.

“If the regime is teetering, a push from you, a military push from you, will help topple them. … This would put you squarely on the side of the Iranian people. … The risk … will never be lower than it is today.” – Jon Finer [41:21–45:25]

Case AGAINST Military Action (Jake Sullivan):

• U.S. military options can't reliably stop or protect protesters—regime will likely still have capacity to repress.
• If the regime falls, the result might not be democracy, but chaos—splintered opposition, possible ethnic/separatist conflict, or a hardline replacement (reminding listeners of Libya or Syria).
• U.S. military engagement would risk escalation, possibly drawing in regional war, endanger American assets and bases.
• The perceived “success” of threats may be more valuable than the unclear aftermath of military attack; Trump’s unpredictability can itself be leveraged.
• U.S. can extract concessions from a weakened regime through diplomacy, pressure, not bombs.

“Let’s say the regime does crack. … This opposition is splintered, it’s basically leaderless. … And there are some pretty tough customers in Iran... So no guarantee we don’t get utter chaos in Iran. … And that may seem better today than the thugs currently in charge… But, man, this would still be a massive headache and we would own it.” – Jake Sullivan [48:18–49:00]

Notable Tone: The debate is sharp and realistic, reflecting the real policy divides in Washington, past national traumas, and the quirkiness of Trump’s unpredictability.

3. Historical Parallels & Lessons

[Timestamps: 17:00–39:43]

Key Moments

• 1953: CIA-backed coup ousts democratic leader Mossadegh, installs the Shah (absolute monarch).
• 1979: Shah’s repressive rule replaced by Ayatollah Khomeini, paving the way for theocratic clerical rule via Islamic Republic.
• 2009 Green Movement: Obama’s cautious public support, policymakers fearing overt U.S. endorsement would discredit protestors; Obama later called this restraint a mistake.
• Recent Lessons:
  • Overthrow in Egypt due to army refusal to crack down vs. Syria’s regime survival due to loyal security forces.
  • Previous U.S. failures to predict revolutionary moments—U.S. lacks an embassy or deep intelligence today, making real-time assessment extremely challenging.

“It is very hard to get good information about what is happening right now on the ground in Iran... There are wildly divergent numbers when it comes to protesters… rumors about regime figures departing the country… is very difficult.” – John Finer [11:13]

4. Military Scenarios: What Could Happen?

[Timestamps: 55:16–61:02]

• Menu of Options:

  1. Strikes on domestic security forces (to disrupt crackdown).
  2. Strikes to neuter Iranian retaliation capability (missiles, bases, naval assets).
  3. Hitting other “strategic” targets (nuclear facilities, major weapons).
  4. Direct attack on regime leadership (Supreme Leader, clerics—extremely high risk, reminiscent of Iraq 2003’s failed decapitation attempt).
  5. Attacks on Iran’s economic infrastructure (oil, banks—though less likely, as Trump values oil price stability).

• Risks:

  • Unpredictable Iranian retaliation (against U.S. bases, Israel, Gulf allies).
  • Potential for spiraling escalation if initial strikes don’t break regime and repression continues (trap of owning the aftermath).
  • Legal and diplomatic blowback—current White House appears less sensitive to these hurdles.

5. What To Watch For

[Timestamps: 67:13–70:16]

• US military action: If, when, and what kind (targets, objectives).
• Regime Cohesion: Signs security forces fracture or leadership flees, as happened in ’53 and ’79.
• Emergence of Opposition Leaders: None currently—possible return of former Shah’s son or others, but unstructured so far.
• Israel’s reaction: Will they act, especially if attacked?
• US/China dynamics: Will Trump follow through on tariffs? Impact on world markets?
• Ethnic tensions: Will minority communities push for autonomy or secession if regime control loosens?
• Internet/Information: Will regime succeed in isolating population? Has Trump’s prior defunding of circumvention efforts backfired?

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “Greenland is down in brown cow territory. Not so great in terms of what the president at least has put on the table as a threat.” – Jake Sullivan on Americans’ support for invading Greenland [04:38]
• “The water situation is wild… they’re also openly discussing whether they need to actually move the capital city, a city of upwards of 10 million people, to a less arid part of the country.” – John Finer [10:32]
• “Iran’s president said in November that they may have to evacuate part of the city [Tehran] if it didn’t rain soon.” – Jake Sullivan [08:19]
• “When the Iranian revolution took place…it was 70 rials to the US dollar. … When these protests kicked off, it was 1,450,000 rials to one US dollar.” – Jake Sullivan on Iran’s currency collapse [16:23]
• “We were having a hard time wrapping our arms around what was actually happening in ‘78 and ‘79. … Today, the United States of America has no embassy presence in Iran.” – Jake Sullivan [27:01]
• “Pahlavi… his name has come up a lot more over the course of the last few weeks” – Jake Sullivan on talk of restoring monarchy [30:05]
• “President Obama said he should not have listened to the folks who made this issue too complicated by suggesting somehow it was going to boomerang ... When you see people out in the streets claiming their rights… you should stand with them.” – Jake Sullivan [36:14]
• “It’s a wild card. It’s hard to tell.” – Jake Sullivan, summing up risks of escalation and unpredictable outcomes [54:58]
• “Does a leader of the opposition or group of leaders emerge… that does not appear to be forthcoming at the moment, but something to watch for.” – Jake Sullivan [68:35]

Tone, Language, and Style

• The discussion is urgent but rigorous, seasoned by humor and insider anecdotes (example: “Greenland is down in brown cow territory”).
• Both hosts are candid about the enormous uncertainties facing policymakers and repeatedly counsel humility in predicting outcomes.
• They are self-reflective about past U.S. policy errors, especially the limits of American knowledge and the unintended consequences of intervention.

Important Segments and Timestamps

• Introduction to the crisis in Iran: [01:24–07:14]
• Background on 2025/26 protest movement: [05:42–09:05]
• Regime crackdown and methods: [11:13–13:54]
• Trump administration’s stance and policy options: [14:01–14:52]
• History: 1953, 1979, and regime succession: [17:00–24:19]
• Case studies: Revolution prediction failures: [26:06–33:04]
• Obama-era Green Revolution policy debate: [33:10–37:31]
• Red Team/Blue Team military debate: [40:06–51:03]
• Military options and risks for US: [55:16–61:02]
• Regional reactions and Gulf countries’ fears: [51:18–53:01]
• What to watch in coming hours/days: [67:13–70:16]
• Security forces as the key variable: [70:48–72:21]

Summary Conclusion

Jake Sullivan and Jon Finer’s conversation provides deep insight not just into the immediate crisis—but into the broader mechanics and tragedies of revolution, the fraught challenge of US intervention, and the hard-earned humility of policymakers who know the risks of getting it wrong. The fate of Iran’s regime, they argue, will likely turn not on Washington’s rhetoric or even its bombs, but on the loyalty of Iran’s security forces and the unpredictable will of millions of Iranians demanding change. Their final word: events are unfolding quickly—stay tuned.

For further questions, comments, or to join the discussion:
Email: longgame@voxmedia.com
Substack: staytuned.substack.com

Hosts: Jake Sullivan & Jon Finer | Podcast Network: Vox Media
Executive Producer: Tamara Sepper
Senior Producer: Matthew Bay

Note: All times in MM:SS format based on the transcript provided.