At a conference in Berlin on July 24, 2025, Dr. Rudolf Adam — former Vice President of Germany’s intelligence service and ex-President of the Federal Academy for Security Policy — warned that despite recent strikes on its nuclear facilities, the regime retains the expertise and determination to rebuild its program within a few short years. He argued that only regime change from within, led by the Iranian people, can bring lasting peace and end Tehran’s support for terrorism.
Dr. Adam traced the failure of past sanctions and agreements—like the JCPOA—back to a lack of enforcement and the regime’s strategic duplicity. He emphasized that Tehran’s nuclear ambitions are not driven by national pride but by a desperate need for regime survival. He also warned against external regime-change efforts, insisting that lasting change in Iran must come from within—led by a self-confident, capable Iranian populace.
Praising the NCRI and its Ten-Point Plan, Adam said it presents a serious political alternative and urged Western policymakers to move beyond symbolic sanctions. “Only regime change,” he concluded, “can end Iran’s support for terrorism and restore dignity to its people.”
A translated version of the speech follows.
#Berlin Conference: #Iran ’s Nuclear Program – Snapback, E3 Strategy
July 24, 11:30 a.m.
Speakers include Franz J. Jung, former German Minister of Defense, Robert Joseph, former U.S. Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Securityhttps://t.co/mTkAgbN8OA— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) July 23, 2025
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends from Iran,
It is difficult for me to add much after the powerful statement by Ambassador Joseph, because I fully agree with the two core messages of his presentation.
First, we must strengthen the Iranian people in their confidence and self-determination.
Second, the threat posed by Iran extends far beyond its nuclear ambitions.
Still, let me offer a few thoughts that may complement and clarify Ambassador Joseph’s impressive appeal.
The U.S. and Israeli attacks last month inflicted serious damage on Iran’s nuclear program. Several dozen senior figures from the military and political ranks were killed. The centrifuges at Natanz and Fordow were severely damaged. The laboratory at the Isfahan research center is largely destroyed.
The regime is more weakened than it has been in a long time. Nevertheless, there is no reason to celebrate. What is destroyed can be rebuilt. The killed experts and leaders have already been replaced by successors. You cannot bomb knowledge out of people’s heads. Think of our own country 70 or 80 years ago—Germany was in ruins, and within 15 years, everything was rebuilt, and we had the economic miracle.
There is no doubt that with the necessary financial means and political will, Iran’s enrichment program could be resumed within two to five years.
The difference from 2015, when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was adopted, lies in two major geopolitical changes.
First, under Trump in 2018, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the agreement. And without U.S. engagement—without binding international legal involvement—it makes no sense for Iran to submit to such commitments.
The second change is perhaps even more strategic: Russia’s war against Ukraine and its unconditional support from North Korea. North Korea has long maintained close ties with Tehran and now appears willing to support Iran’s program with all its own means. Russia tolerates this. A new geopolitical triangle is emerging:
Russia needs the support of North Korea and Iran for its war against Ukraine. In exchange, North Korea is allowed to back Iran’s nuclear efforts and receives desperately needed oil and gas shipments in return.
As for the snapback mechanism—it may be necessary, and possibly even effective. But I question its political efficacy. So far, political sanctions have not proven truly essential anywhere—neither against Moscow, nor against Pyongyang, nor ultimately against Tehran.
Konferenz: Irans Atomprogramm – Snapback,
E3-Strategie#Berlin – 24. Jul – 11:30 h
Am Vortag des E3-Treffens mit Vertretern Irans in Istanbul
Franz J. Jung, Bundesverteidigungsminister a.D.
Robert Joseph, ehem. US-Unterstaatssekretär f. Rüstungskontrollehttps://t.co/fbTmuJNtDw— Javad Dabiran (@JavadDabiran) July 23, 2025
It would be naive to expect that tighter sanctions alone would fundamentally change Tehran’s policy, as long as the leadership and its ambitions remain the same.
On the contrary, after the recent attacks, that leadership will do everything it can to acquire deployable nuclear weapons as quickly as possible—because it sees them as the only effective insurance for its own survival.
North Korea and Russia show that only nuclear weapons can secure the continuity of such regimes. When Pakistan advanced its nuclear weapons program 50 years ago, then-President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto said—and I quote, in German, as I don’t know how it sounds in Urdu—“We will eat grass, we will starve, but we will have our own atomic bomb.”
I suspect similar rhetoric is being used in Tehran today. Iran stands at a historic crossroads.
The current regime may pretend to give up its nuclear ambitions—which it has always denied—but secretly continue its program. Or it could take a credible, definitive step by replacing the current regime with a new constitution and a new government.
Accordingly, the West has three options: It can continue relying on agreements and contractual sanctions—that’s the snapback mechanism in JCPOA articles 11 and 12. But let me remind you: similar sanctions against Moscow and Pyongyang have proven largely ineffective.
Moreover, even if the E3 now trigger that mechanism, I strongly doubt that Russia or North Korea will comply with any Security Council resolution or document.
Such an approach may increase pressure in the short term—but it cannot guarantee long-term security. The financial means are there. The know-how remains available. The political determination—especially after last month’s attacks—is stronger than ever.
The three core requirements for building nuclear weapons remain in place. Ignoring that is naive. All conceivable sanctions might slow or hinder such a program—but not stop it.
Trusting the current regime in Tehran and expecting it to honor its agreements sincerely contradicts all experience of the past 30 years.
Dr. Rudolf Adam: The West must abandon illusions of reform. Only a new secular, democratic government in #Iran can bring peace. The Ten-Point Plan by @Maryam_Rajavi is a blueprint for real change.https://t.co/7IKiDF9l4I
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) July 24, 2025
That leaves the final path. It is the riskiest—yet the only one that could have lasting impact: A new regime and a new constitution in Tehran.
Such an approach cannot mean a return to the past. It can’t be a Shah or monarchy. It can’t be a new mullah regime or a new oligarchy. It must be a form of government supported by a clear majority of the people.
And for that, as I said at the beginning, the Iranian people must develop self-confidence and trust in their own abilities. They must no longer allow themselves to be dictated to by an authoritarian regime.
Such a regime change cannot come from outside. Our experiences in Iraq, Libya, and even Kosovo should serve as a warning. The change must come from within to be legitimate. An Islamic theocracy could be replaced by a liberal, secular constitution—one based on tolerance and freedom, though possibly still inspired in key ways by Islam.
Iran, a country so richly blessed in culture and intellect, deserves living conditions in which its creative talent and cultural wealth can flourish freely and proudly.
Only a regime change can guarantee that Iran will end its support for terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Only a new government can put an end to the daily oppression and killing of political opponents.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) presents itself as a political alternative to the current situation in Iran. This means that a force is ready to fill the power vacuum if the current regime falls. The NCRI’s Ten-Point Plan lays out a compelling alternative to the existing regime—and it is time to turn those words into action.
Thank you.