The discussions among analysts and Iranians are intensifying as protests erupt across Iran, with increasing reports of deadly government crackdowns resulting in significant casualties. Is this the most substantial threat the Islamic Republic has faced since 1979, or does it still possess enough power to remain intact?
For Mehdi Ghadimi, an Iranian journalist who spent years protesting the regime before his exile, things feel markedly different now.
“From the time I was 15, in 1999, until I had to leave in 2024, I was part of every protest against the Islamic Republic,” he shared. “Initially, I backed the reform movement, but after 2010, it became clear to us that reform was impossible—changing the factions was merely an illusion.”
Ghadimi believes a fundamental shift is occurring within Iranian society, indicating a decisive moment of collective insecurity.
“This is the first time in 47 years of resistance against the Islamic Republic that returning to the pre-1979 era has become the sole demand unifying the nation,” he remarked. “We’ve seen an unprecedented turnout, with people from all over Iran taking to the streets.”
The chants heard during protests reveal this transformation. Instead of merely calling for economic relief or changes in dress codes, demonstrators are now demanding an end to the Islamic Republic and expressing support for the Pahlavi dynasty.
“It felt different this time; it was more than just a protest,” he emphasized. “We were evolving into a revolution.”
However, Ghadimi also pointed out the factors preventing the regime’s impending collapse. “It’s straightforward: the government imposes no boundaries on killing its own people.” He noted a troubling sense of assurance within the Iranian government that they won’t face consequences for their actions. “They’re reassured that even if we survive through international efforts, no punishment for these blatant human rights violations will ensue,” he stated. “Diplomatic avenues will remain accessible for them, even with blood on their hands.”
He described how the regime’s strategy includes cutting off internet access to hinder coordination between dissidents abroad and opposition leaders within the country. Ghadimi observed a significant drop in the reach of messages from exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi when the internet was cut off.
While many Iranians feel they are on the brink of a revolution, security and policy experts argue that structural conditions still heavily favor the regime. Javed Ali, a professor at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, mentioned that the Islamic Republic faces greater risks now, with a blend of military, regional, economic, and diplomatic pressures converging.
According to Ali, following last summer’s war with Israel, the Revolutionary Guards are in a weaker position than before, experiencing leadership change and a loss of military capabilities.
Ali added that Iran’s deterrent capabilities are dwindling. “The so-called axis of resistance has significantly weakened,” he noted, referencing the losses faced by groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Internally, challenges are mounting as Iran’s youth grow increasingly frustrated by their deteriorating economic conditions and the constant suppression of dissent.
Ali further pointed to the evolving international dynamics that limit Tehran’s flexibility. He highlighted the strengthening U.S.-Israeli relations, potentially supporting the ongoing protest movement inside Iran.
Amidst this backdrop, Israeli sources indicated that while Israel has no desire to intervene, they recognize the Iranian regime’s tactic of deflecting domestic unrest onto its adversaries.
One official remarked that it’s better for Israel to remain low-key rather than igniting tensions that the Iranian regime could exploit. “The regime wishes to frame this as a battle against us,” they said, “but we see through that.”
While experts express concern over the implications of a regime collapse, they emphasize that internal loyalty remains strong among the Revolutionary Guards and other coercive organizations, driven by a blend of loyalty, ideology, and self-interest.
Alas, it’s unclear whether fears regarding potential collapse could incite any changes in loyalty from within the regime. “I’m not sure if insiders believe the regime is on the verge of falling and want to be part of the change,” Ali commented.
Predicting a 25% chance for internal collapse, he noted that while it’s feasible, it’s not very likely. Iran stands at a crossroads—public sentiment strongly against the Islamic Republic, but security forces still prepared to react with brutal force to maintain control.
As Ali highlighted, just pressure isn’t enough to topple a regime; it ultimately depends on whether those tasked with repression choose not to follow orders anymore.
With ongoing unrest and uncertainty, Ghadimi expressed doubt about the outcome. “After these chaotic days with no news about those who joined the protests, it’s hard to assess whether our movement is winning,” he reflected.
He recalled a recurring sentiment he encountered before leaving Iran. “I often heard, ‘We have nothing left to lose, and we will persist in demanding the end of the Islamic Republic—even if it costs us our lives,’” he recounted. “They wanted me to promise to represent them from outside Iran.”
“That determination gives me some hope for a positive outcome,” he concluded, “but my analytical side warns me that if the regime continues its oppressive tactics unchecked, and if it’s willing to commit mass violence, then winning might take a miracle.”
