History shows that when powerful nations urge people inside rival states to rise up against their governments, the consequences can be unpredictable and often tragic. The lesson dates back to the aftermath of the Gulf War in 1991, when U.S. President George H. W. Bush publicly encouraged Iraqis to remove their ruler, Saddam Hussein.
Bush made the remarks during a visit to a Patriot missile factory in Massachusetts on 15 February 1991 while Operation Desert Storm was underway. Coalition forces led by the United States and United Kingdom were carrying out massive air strikes against Iraqi forces after Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait.
In his speech, Bush suggested that the Iraqi military and people should “take matters into their own hands” and force Saddam Hussein to step aside. At the time, the comment drew applause from the audience, but its impact inside Iraq proved far more significant.
After Iraqi forces were expelled from Kuwait and a ceasefire left Hussein in power, uprisings erupted among Shia communities in southern Iraq and Kurdish groups in the north. Many believed the revolt had the backing of Washington.
However, the coalition did not intervene to support the rebels. Iraqi government forces launched brutal counterattacks, using helicopters and heavy weapons to crush the uprisings. Thousands of Kurds and Shia Muslims were killed, and tens of thousands fled into mountainous regions seeking safety.
The humanitarian crisis eventually prompted Western nations including the United States, the United Kingdom and France to launch emergency relief operations and enforce no-fly zones in northern Iraq to protect Kurdish civilians.
Those events had long-lasting consequences for the region. The military presence that followed contributed to rising tensions across the Middle East and played a role in the emergence of extremist groups such as Al-Qaeda, founded by Osama bin Laden, who opposed the presence of Western troops in Saudi Arabia.
More than a decade later, Bush’s son, George W. Bush, launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq, toppling Saddam Hussein and reshaping the regional balance of power. One major beneficiary of that war was Iran, whose influence expanded after its long-time rival was removed.
Today, similar rhetoric is emerging again in the context of the current conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran. Leaders such as U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have suggested that the Iranian people have an opportunity to challenge the country’s ruling system.
The war’s stated objective is to cripple Iran’s military capacity and nuclear ambitions, which Israel views as an existential threat. Supporters argue that weakening the Iranian government could prevent it from developing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles that might threaten not only Israel and Gulf states but also Europe and North America.
However, critics warn that encouraging regime change without committing to direct support could lead to instability similar to what occurred in Iraq after 1991. Analysts also point to the complexity of the region’s political landscape and the risk that prolonged conflict could produce unintended consequences.
For Israeli leaders like Netanyahu, the conflict is also tied to a long-standing goal of weakening or dismantling the Islamic Republic. In speeches early in the war, he emphasized his determination to strike what he described as a “terror regime.”
Whether the strategy succeeds or instead triggers wider instability remains uncertain. What history suggests, however, is that wars in the Middle East often plant the seeds of future conflicts, and the political outcomes rarely unfold as planners initially expect.