Military intervention may be unavoidable to change Iran leadership, MEP says

PM Sebastian Tynkkynen told The Post that military intervention may be the final step needed to achieve regime change in Iran after sanctions and diplomacy.

Military intervention is the final step in ensuring a change of leadership in Iran, a member of the European Parliament, Sebastian Tynkkynen, told The Jerusalem Post on Monday, adding that diplomatic actions must first pave the way for a weakened Tehran.

Tynkkynen, the chief negotiator on the Iran resolution for the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, spoke with the Post shortly after finishing discussions with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte on forming a coalition of NATO countries willing to participate in a military intervention.

“NATO has two main enemies. Number one is Russia, and number two is terrorism,” he noted, adding that Iran falls into the latter category as “the biggest funder of terrorism.”

Before any final moves for regime change are enacted, the MEP stressed, the next steps in ending the Islamic Republic’s brutal reign involve listing the IRGC as a terrorist organization, stricter sanctions on Tehran, the end of all trade with Iran, and the expulsion of Iranian diplomats and their families.

“Softer tools” would only bring the world to the “last step,” Tynkkynen said. “What actually will weaken the leadership enough that regime change will come is the military intervention.”

End to executions

The European Parliament voted on Thursday in favor of a resolution calling on the Iranian regime to end executions and release detainees, and for the European Council to consider designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). That resolution was adopted by 562 votes in favor, nine against, and 57 abstentions.

Questioned about the concerns voiced by Belgian MEP Marc Botenga in the European Parliament last week, suggesting that sanctions directly harm the Iranian people and empower the regime, Tynkkynen shared that the Iranian people called for sanctions on the regime leaders regardless.

“This is what the Iranian people are demanding. They are fully aware that if we put harder sanctions on Iran, that would mean harsher conditions for the Iranian people in their country,” he said.

“Actually, the concrete reasons for these protests were poor living conditions, the country’s economic situation, and so on, which enabled people to take to the streets. They had a concrete reason for what to demand, and then the protests got bigger and bigger,” Tynkkynen continued.

Harder times ahead

“They want to tear down this regime that is not for the people,” he went on to say. “Iranian people know that harder times will come if we put more sanctions; they still want them because that’s one of the keys for the regime to collapse.”

The official shared that Iranian civilians frequently contacted him to make clear they are willing to sacrifice their own lives to ensure an end to the repressive reign enforced by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, leaving comments on his social media accounts and continuing to protest despite the great personal risk.

With some Iranian officials telling international media that the death toll inflicted by Tehran has reached tens of thousands, Tynkkynen made clear that the situation was heading toward a breaking point. “Clearly, if the state is doing anything like this to its citizens, the leadership is not legitimate, and a change must be achieved,” he said.

“It has to be achieved, the change for the leadership, because this leadership is not legitimate,” Tynkkynen asserted. “[There is] intentional state violence against their own people.”

The 12 Day War

Speaking on the 12-day war in June, which saw Israel and the US attack Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and personnel, he said, “I’m really, really grateful that Israel and the US did their responsibility. [With] military interventions, they have weakened the position of this Islamic dictatorship.”

Meanwhile, both members of the European Parliament and members of the United Nations Human Rights Council took the opportunity to discuss Iran’s human rights violations last week as a platform to condemn those military actions.

On social media, Tynkkynen claimed that the IRGC had infiltrated the European Parliament. As chief negotiator for ECR, he said he had been privy to some behind-the-scenes discussions, uncovering “worrying” recommendations from the Left.

“When we all know what the consequences of their suggestions [would be], I cannot call it naivety anymore… It must be what they are intentionally suggesting… what they’re suggesting is totally the wishes that the IRGC and the regime leadership,” he remarked, saying there were those in the European Parliament who wanted to see sanctions against the regime ease and condemnation of the military actions taken.

Tynkkynen disclosed what he said were the Left’s suggested amendments to the Thursday resolution and what they are “suggesting against the Iranian people” in a post.

Explaining the seeming lack of concern for Iranians among Western leftists, Tynkkynen expressed that for many, condemnations and protests are used as “virtual signaling.”

“They want to be seen in the light of: ‘they are good people,’ and then if the hegemony in the Western media, for example, would be against Israel, so then they have to be part of that hegemony,” he said.

“If they were really committed to supporting human rights, they would talk about Sudan. They would talk about Iran. They would talk about the security of the Israeli people.”