Iran’s Nuclear Program Can Be Rebuilt—Only Regime Change Can Guarantee Peace, Says Former German Intelligence Official

Staff WriterJuly 26, 2025
Iran’s Nuclear Program Can Be Rebuilt—Only Regime Change Can Guarantee Peace, Says Former German Intelligence Official
Dr. Rudolf Adam, former Vice President of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service, speaks at a Berlin conference on July 25, 2025

Dr. Rudolf Adam, former Vice President of Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service, speaks at a Berlin conference on July 25, 2025
Written by
Shahriar Kia

At a conference in Berlin on July 24, 2025, Dr. Rudolf Adam — former Vice President of Germany’s intelligence service and ex-President of the Federal Academy for Security Policy — warned that despite recent strikes on its nuclear facilities, the regime retains the expertise and determination to rebuild its program within a few short years. He argued that only regime change from within, led by the Iranian people, can bring lasting peace and end Tehran’s support for terrorism.

Dr. Adam traced the failure of past sanctions and agreements—like the JCPOA—back to a lack of enforcement and the regime’s strategic duplicity. He emphasized that Tehran’s nuclear ambitions are not driven by national pride but by a desperate need for regime survival. He also warned against external regime-change efforts, insisting that lasting change in Iran must come from within—led by a self-confident, capable Iranian populace.

Praising the NCRI and its Ten-Point Plan, Adam said it presents a serious political alternative and urged Western policymakers to move beyond symbolic sanctions. “Only regime change,” he concluded, “can end Iran’s support for terrorism and restore dignity to its people.”

A translated version of the speech follows.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends from Iran,

It is difficult for me to add much after Ambassador Joseph’s persuasive plea. His two central points are ones I fully share:

First, we must support the Iranian people in their quest for self-determination.
Second, the danger posed by the Iranian regime goes far beyond its nuclear ambitions.

Still, I would like to complement his arguments with some further thoughts.

Last month’s U.S. and Israeli strikes dealt severe blows to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Key figures from Iran’s military and political elite were killed. Centrifuges at Natanz and Fordow were heavily damaged, and the Isfahan research center was largely destroyed. The regime is now weaker than it has been in years.

Yet there is no cause for triumphalism. What’s destroyed can be rebuilt. Those killed have already been replaced. You cannot bomb away the knowledge inside people’s minds.

Just consider Germany 70 or 80 years ago—a rubble-strewn nation. Within 15 years, we had rebuilt everything and created the economic miracle.

With sufficient funding and political will, Iran could restart its enrichment program within two to five years.

The difference between now and the 2015 JCPOA lies in two major geopolitical shifts:

First, the U.S. withdrew unilaterally under Trump in 2018. Without Washington’s binding commitment, Tehran sees no reason to honor agreements.

Second, Russia’s war on Ukraine—and its backing by North Korea—has created a new strategic triangle. North Korea has long supported Iran and now seems prepared to aid its nuclear program directly. Russia tolerates this because it relies on Iranian and North Korean support for its war.

As for the JCPOA’s snapback mechanism: it may be necessary, but I question its effectiveness. Political sanctions haven’t proven essential anywhere—Moscow, Pyongyang, or Tehran.

Even if the EU3 invoke the snapback now, I doubt Russia or North Korea would abide by any Security Council decisions. Sanctions might apply short-term pressure, but they offer no long-term guarantee of safety.

Iran doesn’t lack money. It has the know-how. And the political resolve—especially after the recent attacks—is stronger than ever. These three conditions are all it needs to pursue nuclear weapons.

To believe otherwise is naïve.

All imaginable sanctions may hinder or slow the program, but they won’t stop it. Trusting Tehran to honor agreements goes against 30 years of experience.

So that leaves the final option. Risky, yes—but the only one with lasting potential: regime change.

Not a return to the monarchy. Not a recycled theocracy or oligarchy. What Iran needs is a government supported by a clear majority of its people.

As I said at the outset, the Iranian people must develop self-confidence and trust in their own ability. They must no longer submit to authoritarian rule.

Such a transformation must come from within. Foreign interventions—in Iraq, Libya, Kosovo—should serve as warnings. Change must be internal and legitimate.

A new regime in Tehran must not be imposed. It should be liberal, secular, grounded in tolerance and freedom, and—while culturally inspired by Islam—governed by democratic principles.

Iran is rich in culture and intellect. It deserves conditions in which that richness can flourish.

Only a new regime can stop Iran’s support for groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Only new leadership can end the daily executions of dissidents.

The National Council of Resistance of Iran presents itself as a viable political alternative. It is ready to fill the vacuum after this regime falls. The NCRI’s Ten-Point Plan outlines a convincing alternative.

It’s time we turned words into action.

Thank you.

Staff WriterJuly 26, 2025
Arab-Islamic Committee in Defence of Ashraf
Back to top button