The Iran dilemma: Can bad motives still have a good outcome?

Labour MEP Daniel Attard is torn between his distrust of the geopolitical interests of Israel and the United States and his unwavering support for Iranian democratic voices. 

He recognises that Iran is a complex and diverse reality, without discounting that a sizeable minority of Iranian society still supports the murderous regime. 

In his role as Vice President of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Iran, Attard has championed human rights in Iran, pushed resolutions condemning repression, advocated targeted sanctions, and crucially called for the IRGC’s designation as a terrorist group. He has also engaged Iranian diaspora communities, urging the EU to link diplomacy to accountability and rights. 

While expressing discomfort with US President Donald Trump’s and Israel’s geopolitical gamble, Attard recognises that “with the decapitation of the leadership of the Islamic Republic, this is the closest we have been to the downfall of an oppressive regime.”  

An F/A-18F Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 41, makes an arrested landing on the flight deck of Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in support of Operation Epic Fury, 28 February 2026 (Photo: US Central Command)

“I recognise that there are ulterior motives on the part of the US and Israel, but we also have to see things from the perspective of the oppressed people of Iran,” adding that the dilemma facing US critics is how to achieve a change in Iran without intervening militarily. 

“In the absence of military intervention, it was hard to imagine change in Iran. Of course, one can also add that the prospect of change remains difficult even with military intervention.” But he also points out that from his engagement with Iranian diaspora voices, his impression is that Iranian democracy activists actually support intervention. 

He also recognises that views on Iran present a moral dilemma for the European left, torn between support for democracy and human rights in Iran and deep suspicion of the actors behind the attacks and the risks posed by foreign intervention. 

“The concerns are real but we also have to ask ourselves how change can actually take place,” he says. 

Attard insists that context is crucial to understand the current situation. He puts recent events in the context of the mass demonstrations in Iran, which unlike previous episodes, spread across the country and were not limited to Tehran. The protests also spanned a wide spectrum of society. This was reflected in the scale of repression, which saw thousands being executed. 

Labour MEP Daniel Attard is one of five MEPs wanted for investigation by Belgian prosecutors in relation to a probe involving Huawei (Photo: European Parliament)

Moreover, these protests were triggered by economic grievances and not just by concern for human rights. Secondly, Attard expresses doubts on the US president’s motivations, pointing out that Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran in 2018 actually contributed to the expansion of Iran’s nuclear programme. 

“It is probable that the intervention is not motivated by any concern for the aspirations of the Iranian people… but the outcome may be beneficial for the Iranian people.” 

And while his own party, the European Socialists, have advocated hard for diplomacy as an alternative to war, he also notes the difficulty of negotiating with a regime of this kind especially after the brutal crackdown of protests earlier this year.   

But while expressing distrust of the ulterior motives of Trump and Netanyahu, Attard insists that his principal role in the matter is to voice the concerns of the Iranian people, who cannot and should not be removed from the equation. 

His assessment from meeting the Iranian diaspora is that a majority of Iranians want change, but he dismisses the idea that Iranians are a monolithic block. He also recognises that a sizeable segment of Iranians remains firm supporters of the Islamic regime. 

Moreover, the Iranian opposition is itself pluralistic, pointing out that Iran is a country of 90 million people with sizeable minorities including Turks, Azeris, and Kurds. He notes that a five-party coalition representing Kurdish minorities, with whom Attard has recently met, is now demanding autonomy within Iran rather than independence. This would facilitate dialogue with the wider opposition which tends to be nationalistic and wary of separatists.  

He also appeals to unity in the opposition, noting that while over the past months there has been a move towards accepting a transitional role for Reza Pahlavi, the son of the despotic Shah deposed in 1979, other segments remain wary. 

“The West should be careful on imposing an individual on the Iranian people. At the same time, one has to recognise the need for a unity figure, albeit in a transitional role,” he says. 

When asked whether military action risks dragging Iran down the path of Iraq and Libya, Attard is wary of this danger but is moderately optimistic, noting that the Iranians have more “organised” structures, political culture, and a sense of nationhood based on a vibrant culture and sense of history. 

“Iran before 1979, despite being itself repressive, was a sort of cultural beacon for the rest of the region,” Attard says.