Former hostage and U.S. press attaché at the embassy in Tehran, Barry Rosen, has expressed deep concern over the ongoing conflict in Iran, labeling it a “lose-lose situation” for the United States. Rosen, who was among the Americans held hostage for 444 days during the 1979 Iranian revolution, spoke with CBS News New York about the implications of U.S. military actions and the political landscape in Iran.
Rosen emphasized that the idea of inducing regime change in Iran through the assassination of its leaders may be overly simplistic. He cited recent remarks from former President Donald Trump, who has encouraged the Iranian populace to overthrow their government following the deaths of key figures, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. “I don’t see any possibility right now, perhaps even for weeks, for anything like this to happen,” Rosen stated. He highlighted the pivotal role of the Revolutionary Guards, suggesting that any significant shift in allegiance within this group could alter the current state of affairs.
Rosen questioned the broader objectives behind the U.S. military strategy, contemplating the potential fallout from the conflict. “If we want to see a democratic Iran, we might be seeing more chaos in Iran,” he remarked, noting the lack of a unified opposition to the regime. Despite widespread desires among the Iranian populace for a more open society, he fears that the situation could devolve into greater disorder and fragmentation.
The endurance of the Iranian regime remains a central theme in Rosen’s analysis. He asserted, “I think the regime is still intact,” despite the military setbacks it faces. He pointed out that the Islamic Republic has a history of resilience, with new leadership emerging even in the face of significant losses. Rosen elaborated that while Iran may be militarily weakened, the established leadership structure is likely to persist.
Concerns about Iran’s nuclear program were also raised during the conversation. Rosen expressed confusion over the current U.S. approach, questioning why decisive goals have not been articulated. “For me, I’m almost amazed that the president has not come out and said what he really wants,” he said, indicating a lack of clarity in the administration’s strategy.
Rosen characterized the military actions in Iran as detrimental to U.S. relations with its allies, stating, “I think it’s a lose-lose situation for the United States.” He noted recent attacks attributed to Iranian forces in Cyprus and the reluctance of the British public to support any military engagement. “The U.K. population does not want to see the British in any military operation at all,” he explained, suggesting that the European Union is similarly disinclined to back the U.S. in this endeavor.
Reflecting on the lessons learned from past conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Rosen cautioned against underestimating the complexities of military intervention. “The Iraq situation has taught many people in many governments in the E.U. that it went nowhere,” he remarked. He argued that the current strategy risks repeating previous mistakes, leading to further entanglement without clear objectives.
The question of whether Iran’s regime is on the brink of collapse is also contentious. Rosen pointed out that Trump’s military actions have not sufficiently degraded Iran’s capabilities to compel capitulation. He contended that any significant change would require “boots on the ground,” a prospect unlikely to gain support in the U.S. or Congress.
As to the timing of the recent military actions, Rosen posed a critical question: “That’s going to be the $64,000 question.” He underscored the need for a coherent strategy moving forward, one that considers both the immediate and long-term implications of U.S. involvement in Iran.
In summary, Barry Rosen’s insights reflect a profound skepticism regarding the efficacy of current U.S. policies in Iran. His concerns highlight the complexities of regime change and the potential for increased chaos, calling for a more nuanced understanding of the geopolitical landscape.
