The Islamic Republic’s most serious crisis since the Mullahs seized power in 1979 is the wrong time to offer them a lifeline. Yet that is what some members of President Trump’s camarilla seem to be advocating. The “smartest” thing the regime could do now, Vice President Vance told reporters on Thursday, is to “have a real negotiation with the United States about what we need to see when it comes to their nuclear program.”

Such advice could spell trouble. Ask President Obama. In 2009, when Iranians filled the streets after a fraudulent election, some in his administration feared that American support could discredit the protesters. Now Mr. Obama is ruing his inaction. It was evidently driven by eagerness to talk about — yes — Iran’s nuclear program. Skilled in the ways of the bazaar, Tehran then seized an opportunity to waste time in negotiation, and the protest died out.

If the regime were “smart,” it would return to that template now. As the veteran Jerusalem-based Farsi-language broadcaster Menashe Amir tells our Benny Avni, the mullahs have no real answer to the Iranian people’s ever-growing anger. An incompetent, corrupt regime is ill-equipped to handle a citizenry frustrated with inflation, poverty, and oppression. Economic woes awakened an ever growing anti-mullah movement.  

The joint American-Israeli 12-day war in June has removed the Islamic Republic’s aura of invincibility. Iranian opponents of the regime have taken note. They adoringly chant the names of Prime Minister Benjamin Netnayahu and Mr. Trump, while booing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Degrading nuclear facilities and attacking atomic scientists gave hopes to Iranians that their oppressors could soon be gone.   

Some regime elites are already trying to get French visas for their families, Le Figaro reported Thursday. Others might defect and join the protesters. For others, though, the solution could be to launch an attack in the streets, as has been the pattern in the past. Now it “could trigger American and Israeli action,” Mr. Amir says. Mr. Trump on Thursday said that, if the killing widens, “they’re going to have to pay hell.”

The president could ask Elon Musk to deliver Starlink to protesters so they can override the regime’s blocking the internet. He could jam the Revolutionary Guards communication devices. Back in June Israel struck Guards posts around Tehran and known enforcement commanders. Targeting top leaders of the oppression in Iran’s 31 districts could now finally liberate Iranians. Ridding the Mideast of its most malign regime would be a bonus. 

Some in Washington might argue that since the protest movement lacks leadership, decapitating the regime could result in chaos. Perhaps that is why the son of the late Shah, Reza Pahlavi, has reportedly been invited to attend a breakfast prayer at Mar-a-Lago next Tuesday. Yet it seems that some are eager to avoid any confrontation. They might include the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and Mr. Vance. 

Claiming to “stand by anybody who’s engaged in peaceful protests,” as Mr. Vance did Thursday, would prove hollow if America were to engage the oppressors of these brave Iranians in diplomacy. An Iranian showdown is a possibility at any time. If it turns bloody, Mr. Trump would be tested. Would he opt for appeasement — or for regime change and the chance to change the face of the Mideast for the better for decades to come?