A hostile Iran without nuclear weapons is a manageable Iran. I don't think any other variable is nearly as decisive in motivating a U.S. policy of regime change.
Some advocates of regime change in Iran may view the Iranian government as implacably hostile to the U.S. but this is not universally the case. I don't think Iran's hostility to Israel and use of proxy forces against it is a strong enough impetus alone to enable an American policy of regime change to move forward. The nuclear variable is the critical one. If that could be solved the primary and decisive motive for regime change would no longer exist.
I think that part of this is about pride and part of it is about the fear of dependence on foreign powers who have a history of covert as well as overt military intervention in their internal affairs. Why would Iran trust Russia, for example, given its historical relationship with Iran as well as its past decisions to cut off energy supplies to Europe?
The same argument could be made against the prospect of renewable energy cooperation but in this case Iran would be asked to weigh similar risks against much larger technological, financial, and diplomatic benefits. It would be a true opportunity for rapprochement and it would cause Iranian officials to question their current threat perception of the U.S. and consequently hostile posture.
A hostile Iran without nuclear weapons is a manageable Iran. I don't think any other variable is nearly as decisive in motivating a U.S. policy of regime change.
This is probably less likely than dissuading Iran from pursuing its own program. The latter would almost certainly have to come before the former.
Some advocates of regime change in Iran may view the Iranian government as implacably hostile to the U.S. but this is not universally the case. I don't think Iran's hostility to Israel and use of proxy forces against it is a strong enough impetus alone to enable an American policy of regime change to move forward. The nuclear variable is the critical one. If that could be solved the primary and decisive motive for regime change would no longer exist.
I think that part of this is about pride and part of it is about the fear of dependence on foreign powers who have a history of covert as well as overt military intervention in their internal affairs. Why would Iran trust Russia, for example, given its historical relationship with Iran as well as its past decisions to cut off energy supplies to Europe?
The same argument could be made against the prospect of renewable energy cooperation but in this case Iran would be asked to weigh similar risks against much larger technological, financial, and diplomatic benefits. It would be a true opportunity for rapprochement and it would cause Iranian officials to question their current threat perception of the U.S. and consequently hostile posture.