The New York Times’ Monday publication of Mossad’s plans to recruit and prepare former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to take over the Islamic Republic has raised a new question: Was the Ahmadinejad plan a success or a failure?
Between foreign reports, public confirmation by former head of Military Intelligence Tamir Hayman, and The Jerusalem Post’s own Western sources, these plans were known for some time.
The New York Times had more speculative reports on the issue, whose details Hayman eventually confirmed. This created the space for the Post to also receive confirmation, though Israeli journalists often cannot publish everything they know.
Some of the facts may indicate the plan to be a failure. Ahmadinejad is under house arrest. The plan’s inner workings have been exposed for all to see, likely by American sources seeking to prevent future Israeli adventurism. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) remains firmly in control of the country, with no sign of regime change in sight.
From an Israeli perspective, had the US acted differently, things might have gone differently.
Hayman had said: “Regarding Ahmadinejad, there was a sequence of special operations, very, very unique that was supposed to happen. And Ahmadinejad was a part of that sequence. The rest of the operations are not fully disclosed to the public, except for the Kurdish invasion.”
When questioned why the plan to replace Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with Ahmadinejad failed, Hayman replied: “Because the centerpiece of the [whole] sequence should have been started with the Kurdish invasion. According to what was published, [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan, who really considered the Kurds a strategic threat to the stability of Turkey, convinced [US President Donald] Trump that it’s a bad idea to give the Kurds a state. And backing the Kurds goes against the interests of Turkey, and I think that had something to do with Trump’s decision to cancel this operation.”
US was originator of using Kurds to topple Iran's regime
Sources close to former Mossad chief David Barnea previously told the Post that, in many ways, the US was the originator of the idea of toppling the Islamic regime by using the Kurds to initiate attacks on the ground. In 2003, the Americans had already used the Kurds in joint operations to help bring down Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
These sources emphasized that many of the same Kurds involved in that historic ground operation and who entered Baghdad – including Massoud Barzani, the first man who entered Hussein’s palace – were the ones whom Israel was hoping to use against the Islamic regime.
According to sources, both the Iraqi and Iranian Kurds have significant combat capabilities and do not require additional training beyond what they have already received. Utilizing the Kurds in the 2026 war would have saved the US from deploying and endangering its own forces.
In fact, Israeli sources believed that Washington would be willing to accept the idea. Israel was prepared to provide the Kurds not only with a no-fly zone, but with continuous aerial firepower to help them against Iranian forces.
The Kurds received both weapons from the US and the Mossad, many of which were “re-tasked” after the IDF captured them from Hamas in Gaza or from Hezbollah in Lebanon. These weapons, alongside the training the Kurds received from Israel, ensured that they would be fully ready to go.
There is a debate regarding whether Trump was convinced to veto the operation by some of his own officials or by Erdogan.
Even within Israel, some officials doubted that the operation would work.
However, Mossad officials and sources close to Barnea said that most of the agency’s operations require faith, and that they’ve already pulled off many operations that would boggle the mind.
Although CIA director John Ratcliff has been reported to have taken a strong position against the Kurdish intervention, Mossad sources said that he never told Israel that he was against it.
They pointed to public reports that the CIA provided the Kurds with weapons, which meant that the CIA acted to help the operation happen.
Israeli sources have accused American officials within the White House of leaking the plan to Erdogan so that Erdogan would have time to convince Trump to stop it.
During the war, the IDF started to bomb the Iranian regime and Basij forces stationed in Kurdish areas. However, while the IDF later said that 100% of “critical” and “essential” targets had been struck, the Post has learned that, possibly, only around 10% of the targets were actually hit.
These targets were not included in the operation’s broader numbers, as they were considered part of a separate stage of the war that never fully kicked in. In this plan, about eight million Kurds, and many other minorities such as the Sunnis and the Baluchis, would have been brought into the regime-toppling effort, akin to an avalanche.
No strikes on Iran's heart, energy sector complicated plan
Trump also vetoed Israeli strikes at the heart of the Iranian regime’s energy sector and remaining economic power. Initially, Trump allowed Israel some leeway, but then slammed the door shut in the most public way possible.
What would have happened with Ahmadinejad if none of these plans had gone awry? What if the Kurds had been allowed to advance, and the IDF struck the rest of its intended targets?
The New York Times leaves the impression that Ahmadinejad was unhappy with the operation to free him from his home – and that he broke ties with his Israeli recruiters over that and the war.
That brings us to another what-if. What if the war had gone differently, such that all of Israel’s plans had gone forward?
Would Ahmadinejad have stuck with the plan against the Iranian regime?
If so, then the entire saga has a decidedly different look.
It would mean that the Mossad had pulled off one of the most brilliant recruitments in history, turning Israel’s once greatest enemy against his own regime. It would mean that the Mossad had secured Ahmadinejad at the exact moment that he was needed against the Islamic regime.
It would mean that the agency may have only failed in the sense that Trump did not allow the full extent of its plans to play out.
However, until top Israeli and American officials set the record straight, some of this will remain purely speculative. As such, it would be premature to ask ourselves whether the Ahmadinejad plan was a success or failure.