In an interconnected world, a government’s policies can have consequences for other nations. When those consequences are unwanted, a country may decide to use force to change the regime and replace it with one that implements different policies. That is what is known as “regime change.” The temptation to get rid of a hostile government by force is a powerful one, and in the Middle East it has usually proven a recipe for disaster.
Regime change involves the forcible removal of an existing regime and its leadership, either by covert means or overt military action. Its main goal is to create a new regime that benefits the outside country or its people. It is distinct from democracy-building policies, which seek to strengthen democratic institutions and advance a range of interests, including economic ones.
The history of US regime-change operations since World War II shows no clear successes, several catastrophic failures, and universally high costs and unintended consequences. This recurrent pattern is not simply the result of hubris or overreach by American officials, but also cognitive biases that contribute to a focus on the desirability of the goals and a tendency to avoid thinking through what they will require in terms of resources and time.
A typical regime change operation starts with a foreign power appointing its own proxy to lead the country, often by questioning the legitimacy of the elected president (for example, recognizing Venezuela’s Juan Guaido as the nation’s legitimate leader). Then the country takes steps to overthrow the incumbent through a coup.