The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway
Episode 385: Will the U.S. Go to War With Iran? — with Karim Sadjadpour
Release Date: February 26, 2026
Guest: Karim Sadjadpour, Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Theme: U.S.–Iran tensions, the possibility of war, and the prospects for regime change or negotiation
Overview
In this timely and sobering episode, Scott Galloway hosts Iran expert Karim Sadjadpour for a deep dive into U.S.–Iran relations at a moment of escalating tensions. Against the backdrop of increased American military presence off Iran’s coast and uncertainty over the intentions of both the Trump administration and Iran’s leadership, the discussion explores the likelihood, risks, and potential consequences of military intervention, as well as prospects for diplomatic solutions and regime change in Iran.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Current State of U.S.–Iran Relations
- Game of Chicken: Sadjadpour frames the current confrontation as “a game of chicken between two individuals: President Trump and Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei.” (12:03)
- Iran’s Intransigence: Despite immense economic and military pressure, Iran refuses to compromise, largely due to Khamenei’s hardline ideology centered on resisting America.
2. Trump Administration’s Strategy and Motives
- Galloway questions whether the administration is genuinely seeking a deal or simply posturing for strength:
“I would have described it as a fait accompli… I think he likes the flex and the macho sheen…” (13:11) - Sadjadpour responds that a peaceful deal is preferable to Trump if Iran capitulates, but recognizes that odds of a deal are currently low (13:41).
3. Is a “Good Deal” Possible With the Islamic Republic?
- Long-Standing Hostility: Both agree the U.S.–Iran relationship is deeply unnatural, seeing as “there are few nations in the world with whom the United States has more common interests and less reason to quarrel than Iran.” (16:48)
- Regime vs. People: Sadjadpour emphasizes the chasm between a “government that behaves like North Korea” and “society which wants to be like South Korea.” Most Iranians desire change and outside support.
4. Risks and Outcomes of Military Action
- Iran’s Weakness and Risks: Both discuss Iran’s vulnerability, but also how the regime prioritizes survival above all: “They're homicidal, but they're not suicidal.” (22:57)
- U.S. Overconfidence: Previous “rolls of the dice” (Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal, Soleimani’s assassination, Operation Midnight Hammer) did not trigger regional war, potentially emboldening U.S. leadership.
- Downside Dangers: Sadjadpour warns, “Everyone has a plan until you get punched in the mouth” — the region is fraught with unpredictability, and U.S. partners in the Gulf remain ambivalent about supporting direct military action due to fear of blowback (22:57, 30:45).
5. Regional Players’ Perspectives
- Israel: Openly supportive, likely to participate in joint operations with the U.S.
- Gulf States: Profound ambivalence; publicly oppose U.S. strikes due to vulnerability to retaliation, though private advice may differ. They fear a “hit and run” U.S. operation that could leave them exposed (30:45).
- European Allies: Notably less supportive; traditional support (e.g., from the UK) is waning.
6. Diplomatic Off-Ramps and Regime Incentives
- Galloway floats the idea of offering Iranian leaders a safe exit to prevent desperate, destructive escalation (34:31).
- Sadjadpour notes there’s “no overlap in what we're demanding and what they're prepared to offer.” The regime’s isolation and intransigence make such negotiated exits unlikely (35:27).
7. Boots on the Ground and Scenarios for Regime Change
- No Appetite for Invasion: Both left and right, Sadjadpour says, have little support for a ground invasion. However, targeted efforts such as assassinating senior leadership remain possible (39:14).
- Uncertain Aftermath: Whether the regime’s security forces would fracture or double down after such an event is unknowable (39:14).
8. Role of American Values & Soft Power
- Sadjadpour calls for a revival of American soft power and alignment of U.S. policy with the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people, reminiscent of Reagan’s approach to the Soviet Union (42:35).
9. Left/Right Politics and U.S. Domestic Response
- Galloway challenges the American left’s perceived hypocrisy in protesting western-aligned oppression but remaining silent on non-western regimes’ abuses (47:25).
- Sadjadpour notes this “anti-imperialist bias” is perennial on college campuses and the far left, but has little real impact on events in Iran or policy decisions (48:25).
10. Post-Khamenei Scenarios and Prospects for Democracy
- Regime on Borrowed Time: Sadjadpour predicts the Islamic Republic will eventually “crumble under the weight of its own economic malaise and unpopularity,” but cautions that transitions rarely lead directly to democracy (51:43).
- Geopolitical Upside: A nationalist (rather than revolutionary) Iran would transform the region and align with U.S. interests and values.
11. Iranian Society’s Outlook and Diaspora
- Sadjadpour recounts his own near-imprisonment in Iran in 2005 and notes the regime's hostility to its globally successful diaspora (56:52).
- Both host and guest agree that Iran’s youth are “probably the most secular society now in the Middle east” and deeply drawn to western values and capitalism (60:55).
- Hope for the Future: Sadjadpour: “Iran is probably the best example where American values and interests intersect. We’ve underestimated the draw of our soft power” (60:55–63:44).
Notable Quotes & Key Moments
-
On the deep government–society divide in Iran:
"There's no country in the world with a greater gap between the aspirations of its government and the aspirations of its people than Iran."
— Karim Sadjadpour [16:48] -
On military risk:
“Everyone has a plan until you get punched in the mouth.”
— Quoted by both Scott Galloway and Karim Sadjadpour [20:17], referencing Mike Tyson -
On regime survival instinct:
“They're homicidal, but they're not suicidal.”
— Karim Sadjadpour [22:57] -
On the Gulf’s progress:
“In 1979, Iran and the United Arab Emirates went to the same elevator and Iran pushed down and United Arab Emirates pushed up… The gap between these two countries is really enormous.”
— Karim Sadjadpour [30:45] -
On Iran’s revolutionary intransigence:
“...the mindset of the Supreme Leader is that if we give in to this pressure, it's not going to save us, it's going to invite even more pressure.”
— Karim Sadjadpour [35:27] -
On American influence:
“We prevailed [in the Cold War] because our values prevailed and think we should muster that same kind of energy vis a vis Iran now.”
— Karim Sadjadpour [60:55–63:44]
Timestamps for Key Segments
- State of U.S.–Iran Tensions: 11:29–13:41
- Possibility of a Deal vs. Military Action: 13:41–14:56
- Regime Survival and Iranian Public Sentiment: 16:48–20:17
- Risks of U.S. Military Action & Historical Overconfidence: 20:17–26:35
- Regional Perspectives & “Hit and Run” Concerns: 30:45–34:31
- Diplomatic Off-Ramps and Regime Change Scenarios: 34:31–39:14
- Boots on the Ground Discussion: 39:14–42:21
- Role of U.S. Soft Power: 42:30–45:54
- Left Wing Attitudes & Moral Consistency: 47:25–51:09
- Iran’s Future and Authoritarian Transitions: 51:43–56:49
- Sadjadpour’s Personal Experience in Iran: 56:52–58:39
- Iran’s Secular, Pro-Western Youth: 60:01–63:44
Conclusion
The conversation concludes with both Galloway and Sadjadpour expressing cautious hope for Iran’s future—one driven not by military intervention or diplomacy alone, but by the “soft power” of American values resonating with a young, secular, and increasingly pro-Western Iranian society. The coming years in Iran, Sadjadpour suggests, will be pivotal not only for the Iranian people but for the broader geopolitics of the Middle East.
For those wanting a reasoned, balanced update on the U.S.–Iran standoff, this episode is an indispensable listen, offering essential context, clear-eyed risk analysis, and a candid acknowledgment of both the limits and potential of U.S. power and values on the world stage.