In the days following the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by US forces under President Donald Trump, fresh speculation has emerged about a possible expansion of Washington’s aggressive foreign policy posture. Reports of contingency planning involving the United States and Israel have surfaced, even as the developments in Caracas appear to have deeply unsettled Tehran. Iranian officials are increasingly anxious amid widespread and intensifying anti-Ayatollah protests across the country, fearing that Iran could become the next target of American action.
The sense of alarm in Tehran has grown alongside images and signals emanating from Washington. On Monday, President Trump was photographed holding a signed “Make Iran Great Again” cap while standing alongside Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. Coming so soon after Maduro’s capture, the image triggered widespread discussion and speculation about whether Iran had moved closer to the centre of US strategic focus. For many observers, this was not dismissed as mere symbolism, especially given the mounting unrest inside Iran and the increasingly confrontational rhetoric from Washington.
Iran is currently witnessing some of the largest protests in years, with demonstrations reported in more than 200 locations across the country. At least 20 people have been killed so far, and thousands have been arrested as security forces attempt to clamp down on the unrest. Protesters have been chanting openly defiant slogans such as “death to Khamenei” and “long live the Shah,” marking a rare and direct challenge to the clerical establishment. By Tuesday, the protests had entered their tenth consecutive day, underscoring both their scale and persistence.
Against this backdrop, Israel’s Jerusalem Post reported indications that the United States may be considering some form of intervention linked to the protests in Iran. The report also suggested that Israel is reassessing its own strategic calculations, prompted in part by the unexpected US military operation in Venezuela. According to the newspaper, Israeli officials were taken by surprise by Washington’s move against Maduro, which forced a reassessment of what might now be possible with regard to Iran’s ruling clerical regime.
Until the events in Caracas, many Israeli officials reportedly believed that the protests in Iran, while significant, had not yet reached the critical mass necessary to seriously threaten the regime’s survival. The removal of Maduro, however, appears to have altered those assumptions. Israeli analysts are now questioning whether a similar external push could tip the balance in Iran, particularly if internal unrest continues to grow.
These concerns were amplified by President Trump’s own statements. Shortly after the Venezuelan operation, Trump warned that if Iran were to violently suppress peaceful protesters, the United States would intervene. In a post on Truth Social, he declared that Washington was “locked and loaded and ready to go,” a remark that was widely interpreted as a direct threat to Tehran.
Adding to the sense of escalation, reports from the Syrian-Kurdish Hawar News Agency, citing Israeli sources, claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had approved a contingency attack plan known as “Iron Strike.” According to these reports, the Israeli military has been placed on high alert, with its intelligence branch conducting military exercises in preparation for possible scenarios. Israeli news outlet i24news also reported heightened readiness across the armed forces.
Prominent Israeli political figures have further fuelled the debate. Former defence minister Benny Gantz publicly called on both Israel and the United States to actively support Iranian protesters. He argued that coordinated external pressure could either force the Iranian regime to concede or potentially lead to its collapse, framing intervention as a decisive opportunity rather than an unacceptable risk.
While these reports remain largely source-based and speculative, they have clearly resonated within Iran’s leadership. According to Reuters, officials close to Iran’s decision-making circles have privately acknowledged growing fear after the US action in Venezuela. One official said that some within the regime now believe Iran could be “the next victim of Trump’s aggressive foreign policy.”
Another senior Iranian official, speaking anonymously, told Reuters that anxiety is mounting over the possibility of US or Israeli military action similar to what occurred in June 2024. That month, Iran was hit by coordinated American and Israeli airstrikes, with Israel targeting both nuclear-linked facilities and conventional military assets, while US forces focused on nuclear infrastructure. Those strikes inflicted significant damage and remain fresh in the regime’s memory.
The current wave of protests has been driven largely by economic distress. Years of US sanctions, compounded by the 2024 strikes, have battered Iran’s economy. The national currency, the rial, has been in steep decline, fuelling inflation and eroding household incomes. As demonstrations have spread to at least 222 locations nationwide, the authorities have arrested thousands in an effort to contain the unrest.
Iranian officials now find themselves squeezed between internal and external pressures. One official told Reuters that the combination of mass public anger and intensifying threats from Washington has sharply reduced Tehran’s room for manoeuvre. Leaders, he said, face high risks no matter which path they choose, with few viable options left.
Publicly, the government has sought to downplay the protests by portraying them as purely economic in nature, while simultaneously accusing foreign enemies of stirring unrest. President Masoud Pezeshkian’s administration has announced limited relief measures, including a monthly electronic food credit of around $7, in an attempt to ease hardship. However, these steps have done little to offset soaring prices and the broader collapse in purchasing power.
At the same time, the clerical establishment has reacted angrily to Trump’s threats, denouncing them as external interference and incitement. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself has adopted a hardline tone, warning that protesters must be “put in their place.” Taken together, the mix of economic tokenism, uncompromising rhetoric and the looming prospect of US-Israeli action suggests that containing public anger may prove increasingly difficult for the Khamenei-led regime.
