By Saurabh Katiyar | Washington
Leaked report alleges Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was considered for leadership after Israeli strikes
A shocking report published by The New York Times
has claimed that the United States and Israel secretly explored a controversial regime change plan in Iran that allegedly involved former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The report states that American and Israeli officials discussed Ahmadinejad as a possible figure to lead Iran after a series of military strikes and political instability inside the country. The allegations surfaced after recent Israeli airstrikes reportedly killed several senior Iranian officials and intensified fears of a wider regional conflict.
Former President Donald Trump recently suggested that “someone from within” Iran could eventually take power, fueling speculation about foreign-backed political changes in Tehran.
According to the report, Israeli airstrikes targeted areas connected to Ahmadinejad during the opening days of the conflict. Early reports claimed the former Iranian president had been killed. However, later updates from Iranian state media confirmed he survived the attack.
Sources cited by the newspaper claimed the operation may have been designed to eliminate Revolutionary Guard personnel stationed near Ahmadinejad’s residence. Officials allegedly believed the strike could free him from what sources described as unofficial house arrest.
Ahmadinejad’s Name Sparks Global Shock
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains one of the most controversial political figures in modern Iranian history. During his presidency from 2005 to 2013, he strongly opposed Israel and the United States while aggressively defending Iran’s nuclear program.
He also faced international criticism over crackdowns on political protests and civil rights inside Iran.
Because of his past anti-Western statements, reports that the US and Israel may have considered him as part of a future Iranian leadership plan surprised many analysts and political observers.
According to the New York Times report, Ahmadinejad suffered injuries during the airstrike but survived. Since then, he has reportedly disappeared from public view. His current location and medical condition remain unclear.
American officials quoted in the report allegedly viewed Ahmadinejad as someone capable of controlling Iran’s political and military structure during a period of instability.
However, many US officials reportedly doubted whether such a plan could realistically succeed.
You can also read our coverage on
White House and Mossad Avoid Direct Response
The report claims the broader strategy formed part of a multi-stage Israeli effort aimed at weakening or overthrowing Iran’s current leadership structure.
Political experts say the allegations raise serious questions about how far foreign governments may be willing to go to influence leadership changes inside rival nations.
The White House did not directly respond to claims involving Ahmadinejad or alleged regime change discussions. White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly avoided commenting on details mentioned in the report.
Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad also declined to comment publicly.
Analysts warn that any confirmed foreign-backed regime change operation in Iran could dramatically increase tensions across the Middle East. It could also trigger major diplomatic and military consequences between Iran, Israel and the United States.
Critics argue that attempting to reinstall controversial political figures could further destabilize the region instead of restoring order.
At the same time, supporters of stronger action against Iran’s government continue arguing that leadership changes are necessary to reduce regional threats and nuclear tensions.
The report has not been independently verified, and several details remain unclear. Questions continue surrounding the alleged operation, Ahmadinejad’s exact role and whether any concrete political transition plan actually existed.
As international attention grows, governments involved have so far avoided directly confirming or denying the explosive claims.
