Has the U.S. adopted a policy of regime change towards Iran? Government officials have sent different signals at different times.
In 2006, President George W. Bush called for a “free and democratic” Iran, which appeared to be an endorsement of regime change.
In 2013, President Obama explicitly disavowed a policy of regime change and referred to the country as the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” its post-revolutionary name, which was understood to convey recognition of the current Iranian leadership.
Most recently, the signals are mixed. “The Trump Administration has not adopted a policy of regime change, but there have been several Administration statements that indicate support for that outcome,” according to a newly updated report from the Congressional Research Service, which also takes note of the recent political protests in Iran. See Iran: Politics, Human Rights, and U.S. Policy, updated January 8, 2018.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
Libya: Transition and U.S. Policy, updated January 8, 2018
The U.S. Export Control System and the Export Control Reform Initiative, updated January 8, 2018
A Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment: Background and Congressional Options, updated January 8, 2018
Monetary Policy and the Federal Reserve: Current Policy and Conditions, updated January 9, 2018
Budget Enforcement Procedures: The Senate Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGO) Rule, updated January 9, 2018
Smart Toys and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998, CRS Legal Sidebar, January 8, 2018
Protecting Consumers and Businesses from Fraudulent Robocalls, January 5, 2018
Drug Compounding: FDA Authority and Possible Issues for Congress, January 5, 2018
Defense Primer: Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence), CRS In Focus, updated January 3, 2018
January saw us watching whether the government would fund science. February has been about how that funding will be distributed, regulated, and contested.
This rule gives agencies significantly more authority over certain career policy roles. Whether that authority improves accountability or creates new risks depends almost entirely on how agencies interrupt and apply it.
Our environmental system was built for 1970s-era pollution control, but today it needs stable, integrated, multi-level governance that can make tradeoffs, share and use evidence, and deliver infrastructure while demonstrating that improved trust and participation are essential to future progress.
Durable and legitimate climate action requires a government capable of clearly weighting, explaining, and managing cost tradeoffs to the widest away of audiences, which in turn requires strong technocratic competency.