Did the U.S. and Israel Plan to Install Ahmadinejad? The Conspiracy Doesn’t Pass the Smell Test

A former aide to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissed a key part of a New York Times report that claims the former president’s home was targeted in order to free him from alleged house arrest and enable him to take control of the country. The location became one of the first targets on February 28, 2026, as Israel and the United States began bombing regime targets in Tehran. Ahmadinejad was briefly seen after the bombing and then disappeared.

Many Iran watchers have disputed the New York Times account, authored by Farnaz Fasihi, who claims to have sources within the Iranian power structures. Many were shocked when they read the article, expressing doubt that the U.S., and especially Israel, would trust a holocaust-denier for his once virulent antisemitism and anti-West rhetoric.

Abdolreza Davari, who was a close confidant of Ahmadinejad during his presidency, spoke with the relatively moderate Rouydad24 news website in Tehran and insisted that the former president was never under house arrest. He said that there was a routine security team protecting him, but they were not jailers.

Davari’s interpretation of the report is that the reference to “house arrest” means that figures such as Ahmadinejad remain under close watch, regarding their movements and daily activities, by their own security details. According to this interpretation, such a “protective cordon” would naturally fall under the authority of institutions responsible for protection and security, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and that this is what the New York Times meant by “house arrest.” He also claimed that after the bombing, Ahmadinejad was re-located to a different part of the country.

If the United States and Israel truly bet on having Ahmadinejad assume power after Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s death on February 28, neither he nor any other regime figure attempted such political change. On the contrary, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, senior political figures, and President Masoud Pezeshkian remained defiant and instead closed the Strait of Hormuz, claiming that Mojtaba Khamenei had replaced his father as leader.

Ahmadinejad had remained silent since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. In the previous six years, he was occasionally expressing contrarian views to the regime and even retreating from his anti-Israel, anti-West rhetoric. This possibly shows some sort of restrictions on him.

Although he might have residual support among some religious circles and regime ideologues, the elites and millions of Iranians who see him as the reason why the country came under sanctions pressure in the last two decades shun him. His rhetoric between 2005 and 2013 fostered an image of the Islamic Republic as a rogue state with a dangerous nuclear trajectory.

Against that backdrop, many analysts find it difficult to believe that Israel or the United States would view Ahmadinejad as a viable alternative to the current ruling structure. A polarizing figure with a narrow political base, no militia, and no visible backing inside the armed forces suddenly emerging from “house arrest” to seize power struck many commentators as implausible. Some described the scenario outlined by the New York Times as “cartoonish,” while others argued that if such thinking influenced the decision to launch the war, it would make the policy appear even more reckless.

In fact, Ahmadinejad remains so controversial inside Iran that presenting him as a possible replacement leader could damage the credibility of Washington and Jerusalem among ordinary Iranians. That, in turn, has fueled speculation that factions within Tehran’s power structure may have an interest in encouraging such conspiracy theories. If Iranians came to believe that the United States and Israel sought to install Ahmadinejad, many would question the sincerity of Western support for genuine political change. Such a perception could weaken the broader opposition movement by reinforcing the belief that outside powers are not truly interested in meaningful transformation inside Iran.

Meanwhile, as President Donald Trump said he had canceled a planned military strike and expressed optimism about negotiations with Tehran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ top commander, Ahmad Vahidi, threatened to widen the conflict beyond the region if attacks resume. He warned that Iran’s adversaries would face “devastating blows” and suffer a humiliation that “will be recorded in history,” language apparently intended to reinforce deterrence and signal the possibility of retaliation against U.S. and allied targets.