As the war in the Middle East enters its fourth day, former US National Security Adviser John Bolton has defended Washington’s military actions against Iran, arguing that the objective goes beyond targeting nuclear facilities.
In a live television interview on Al Jezeera monitored by JolibaLive News, Bolton insisted that eliminating Iran’s ruling regime is the only sustainable way to end both its nuclear ambitions and its support for militant groups.
Speaking from Washington, he also weighed in on President Donald Trump’s shifting public justifications for the conflict, Israel’s strategic role, and whether any diplomatic path remains open.
Below are the insightful views of one of America’s staunchest neo-conservatives.
The Interview
Q How do you respond to Russia’s claim that the US justification for going to war with Iran is not credible?
Ans I have known Sergei Lavrov for 35 years, and he knows as well as I do that Iran was pursuing a deliverable nuclear weapons capability and making substantial progress. That alone is a legitimate basis for action, alongside Iran’s continued sponsorship of terrorism worldwide. The United States and Israel are justified in taking the steps they are taking. I have supported this course for over 20 years.
Q There have been mixed messages from the Trump administration. Initially, the war was framed as being for the Iranian people, but later the focus shifted solely to nuclear objectives. What do you make of that?
Ans The central logic remains the same: to eliminate Iran’s nuclear weapons programme and its support for terrorism. To truly achieve that, you must eliminate the regime in power. If the regime is merely weakened but left intact, it will rebuild its capabilities and we will return to the same situation in time.
Q Is regime change clearly one of the objectives of the US-Israel coalition?
Ans It is difficult to argue otherwise. Israel’s primary objective has long been regime change, and the United States understands that. We have assisted Israel, including through intelligence sharing that enabled key strikes in the opening hours of the campaign. Removing the regime is essential to permanently ending the nuclear and terrorist threats.
Q Who is leading this effort strategically — the United States or Israel?
Ans In terms of total combat capacity, the United States leads. But strategically, Benjamin Netanyahu is the principal thinker driving the regime-change objective.
Q If the goal is regime change and compelling Iran to surrender, what might be missing from the strategy?
Ans The Iranian response, including attacks on Gulf Arab states and a British base in Cyprus, resembles what I would call a long suicide note. Actions through proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis only weaken the regime further. Each strike against Revolutionary Guard facilities and leadership figures erodes the regime’s strength and encourages internal fractures at the top.
Q Could Iran’s attacks on Gulf states pressure the US to change tactics?
Ans The casualties so far have been minimal. Gulf governments understand that lasting peace and security in the Middle East require the regime in Tehran to be overthrown. They may prefer minimal disruption, but the situation has already escalated. The choice before them is whether to side with Iran or with the United States, and I believe that choice is clear.
Q Is there still a diplomatic off-ramp available?
Ans President Trump is always willing to talk and to make a deal. However, I believe that would be a mistake in this case. The only way to eliminate Iran’s nuclear and terrorist threats is to remove the regime. There is nothing to negotiate about that fundamental point. -END-
Rate, Like 👍, Comment 💬, Share this article, Follow us on our social media handles, and Submit your own story to get featured and earn rewards!
So it’s just regime change that prompted the joint forces of two states to fight another single state? Hmm, seems the later must be stronger than imagined.