Opinion In Iran, old order may be near its end, new one is struggling to be born
Historical experience suggests that the Iranian people, on their own and without effective international support, have little chance of overcoming such an ideological and violent system
Protesters participate in a demonstration in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, Germany, in support of the nationwide mass protests in Iran against the government. (AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi) In 1979, the people of Iran rose with the hope of achieving three great ideals: Independence, freedom, and social justice. The revolution was meant to end foreign domination, guarantee political and individual freedoms, and establish a fairer system for the distribution of wealth and opportunity.
Today, after 47 years, many Iranians view the outcome not as the realisation of those ideals, but as a historical failure. The proclaimed political independence has, in practice, meant a shift in dependency: Severing ties with the United States while moving ever closer — often in a humiliating manner — to China and Russia. Political and civil freedoms have been severely curtailed, and even people’s lifestyles and personal choices are subject to surveillance and repression. Social justice, meanwhile, has fallen victim to structural and systemic corruption that has spread from the highest levels of power to the lowest layers of the bureaucracy.
Shrinking livelihood and a widening gap with rulers
The result has been a shrinking livelihood for the majority of citizens and a widening gap between rulers and society. Chronic inflation, the collapse of the national currency, rising unemployment, and economic insecurity have turned the daily lives of Iranian people into a constant struggle for survival. Thus, the repeated waves of protest seen in recent decades are hardly surprising — protests that have been violently suppressed each time, yet never eradicated, have re-emerged again and again in new and more radical forms.
Protesters in Berlin, Germany, participate in a demonstration in support of the nationwide mass protests in Iran against the government (Photo: AP)
The latest wave of protests, which began with strikes and gatherings at Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, carries particular symbolic significance. The bazaar is not only the economic heart of the capital but has historically been one of the traditional strongholds supporting the 1979 revolution and the Islamic Republic. That the protests began there indicates even social groups once considered the backbone of the regime have now joined the ranks of dissent. The movement quickly moved beyond sectoral and economic demands, evolving into nationwide protests with explicit political slogans in both large cities and small towns.
The government’s response has followed the familiar pattern of the past four decades: Harsh repression. This has included widespread internet shutdowns, severe communication restrictions, and even electricity cuts in some areas. The objective is clear: To create an information vacuum in order to control the narrative and carry out violence away from the world’s eyes. Persian-language media outlets abroad have reported large numbers of protesters killed — figures that cannot be independently verified due to the communication blackout, but whose scale and frequency point to the severity of the crisis. Despite this, protests have continued, and in some areas have escalated into direct, face-to-face clashes between citizens and government forces.
ALSO READ | ‘Will set the region on fire’: Iran warns neighbours amid threat of US attacks
Islamic Republic an obstacle for Iranians
Over the past 47 years, the Islamic Republic has demonstrated that it is not only an obstacle to the Iranian people’s aspirations for freedom, but also a dual threat at the regional and global levels. Its nuclear programme, ballistic missile development, support for proxy groups in the Middle East, and record of terrorist activities have turned Iran into a focal point of instability. Domestically, any demand for reform or change is routinely dismissed as the work of “foreign enemies.”
Historical experience suggests that the Iranian people, on their own and without effective international support, have little chance of overcoming such an ideological and violent system. Conversely, the international community cannot bring about sustainable change without relying on the social forces within Iran itself. This is why a large segment of Iranian society hopes that, this time, the world will stand with the people rather than with the government.
What the US can do
Statements by US President Donald Trump expressing support for protesters and warning against the killing of civilians have now reached a decisive point. If the US fails to act after widespread reports of bloody repression, the message sent to Tehran will be that the cost of violence remains manageable. In such a scenario, repression will intensify, public despair will deepen, and the risk of the country sliding into internal violence or even urban warfare will increase.
Broadly speaking, the US response can be envisioned in three scenarios.
First, a purely symbolic and non-decisive response aimed at preserving political credibility — one that would only embolden the regime.
Second, a moderate response, such as targeting Iran’s nuclear and missile facilities — an action that could contain Iran’s regional threat but would likely lead to intensified repression at home.
Third, a decisive response aimed at the apex of power and the main instruments of repression — an option that could significantly shift the balance of power in favour of the people.
Fragmented Opposition not helping people’s cause
Inside Iran, the government’s capacity for repression is gradually eroding, even though its will to suppress remains intact. Internationally, Russia — preoccupied with the war in Ukraine — lacks the capacity to fully support Tehran. Yet the Achilles’ heel of the popular movement remains the fragmentation of the Opposition. The divide between republicans and monarchists has prevented the emergence of unified leadership. Monarchists, centred around the son of Iran’s last shah, enjoy a stronger media presence, while republicans fear the reproduction of another form of dictatorship. The most prominent republican figure, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, has been under house arrest for years and is absent from the political scene.
Iran’s future now depends on several key variables: The response of foreign powers, the degree of unity within the Opposition, and the level of violence the population can endure. What is clear is that the Islamic Republic has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of a large portion of Iranian society. Another decisive factor is the condition of the regime’s ageing leader. His death or removal could expose deep internal rifts within the system and fundamentally alter the trajectory of events.
As a teenager, Iranian Filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf participated in the anti-Shah revolution and set up a guerrilla-style political group to overthrow the monarchy. He was jailed for five years for attempting to stab a soldier. Later, he recreated this “moment” in his legendary film Moment of Innocence (1996). Now in exile for decades, Makhmalbaf still dreams of an Iran that neither goes back to monarchy nor succumbs to Islamist forces
Share
