Although for most of the commentariat who have opined on the causes and effects of the 12-day  Israel/US-Iran war resulting in a tenuous ceasefire on June 24,  the issue of regime change is a no-go area, this consensus needs review. There is a strong case for regime change in all three combatant Middle East countries as a pre-condition for establishing strong and durable peace in the region. Durable peace in the Middle East is vitally important for the rest of the world, not least because of heavy international dependence on crude oil supply flowing from  this war-disrupted region. 

For all its faults, Israel is a functional democracy and regime change in this country is likely to be effected by ballot in the near future. On the other hand the plain truth is that Iran has been ruled by an unelected theocratic dictatorship of harsh religious clerics for over 40 years since 1979, after the ouster of Shah Reza Pehalvi, only a marginally less oppressive dictator who ruled from 1953-79 following an American CIA-engineered coup. After 80 years of suffering dictatorial rule during which personal freedoms and women’s rights in particular, have been almost obliterated, the long-suffering  people of Iran deserve democratic rule, even if it has to be imposed upon them.

Hamas, a militant group contesting under the banner of the Change & Reform Party won the Palestinian legislative election held in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 2006. Since then there hasn’t been an election in Palestine-Gaza. There is no evidence that the people of Iran and Palestine willingly support these dictatorships which have brought ruin and prolonged hardships upon them. 

In the newly emerged globalized world transformed into a global village by jet travel, real-time digital connectivity and climate change, even geographically contained wars pose great danger to the global community. In the present instance, nuclear radiation fallout from Iran could waft across national boundaries. Blockage of the Hormuz Strait would disrupt international trade and crude oil supplies which will wreck economies worldwide. In the new global village, war anywhere is dangerous everywhere.

In the circumstances this is an opportune moment in world history to resurrect and revive the  comatose 193-member United Nations. It might sound fanciful, but it is entirely feasible for multinational committees appointed by the United Nations General Assembly — not the Security Council restricted to five great powers — to constitute globally representative committees to conduct fair and free general elections in countries under prolonged autocratic rule. Admittedly, this proposal will pose significant procedural, constitutional and operational challenges requiring the UN to disregard national boundaries and sovereignty. Yet it will ensure that nations are not recklessly led to ruin by ruthless dictators who after subjugating their people, prolong their misery by leading them into bloody wars and conflict.