Opinion: Why hopes for regime collapse in Iran are misguided

Iranian commuters pass a huge anti-American billboard reading in Persian, "The devil army will be drowned in the Persian Gulf," in Tehran on Monday. Photo by ATTA KENARE/AFP via Getty Images

Article content

British historian G. M. Trevelyan memorably described the European revolutions of 1848 as “the turning point at which modern history failed to turn.” The current of history seemed to sweep European states towards ever greater personal freedom, expanding democracy and nationalism. But those liberal revolutions fizzled out.

Article content

In our own time, the turning point where history fails to turn is the collapse of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Every wave of nationwide protest, every round of sanctions, every economic crisis and every military confrontation since the Iran-Iraq War has been presented as the moment when the system would finally give way. Despite rising internal discontent, regime incompetence and external pressure, the Islamic Republic endures.

Article content

Article content

Article content

The answer as to why this is the case begins with a persistent analytical mistake. Policymakers and commentators wrongly assess the Islamic Republic as though it were a conventional government whose survival depends primarily on economic performance, public consent and diplomatic legitimacy. They assume that falling living standards, political isolation, widespread anger and military pressure must eventually produce regime change.

Article content

Article content

But the Islamic Republic does not exist for the sake of prosperity, but for two unrelated purposes: to preserve the revolutionary order established in 1979; and to resist the United States, Israel and the broader western world. Doing so is not merely a foreign-policy position, but a vital source of the regime’s identity and legitimacy. Confrontation allows Iran’s leadership to present economic hardship as sacrifice, sanctions as proof of independence and isolation as evidence of revolutionary commitment.

Article content

Compromise, or even the appearance of compromise, is therefore a serious threat. Concessions to the West may occasionally be necessary, but they are rarely presented as genuine changes of direction. The Islamic Republic continues to practise a politics of resistance and performance for its domestic audience, even when senior officials recognize that the existing social contract is morally bankrupt, economically destructive and fiscally unsustainable.

Article content

Article content

The Islamic Republic’s endurance also depends on its willingness to deploy force. The security establishment has repeatedly shown that it is prepared to suppress domestic opposition with extreme brutality whenever it believes the system faces a mortal threat. The massacre of protesters deepens public anger and further destroys political legitimacy, but the regime has consistently placed its survival above social reconciliation.

Article content

Article content

Governments do not collapse simply because they are unpopular. They collapse when the institutions responsible for defending them stand down, fracture or lose the ability to act. So far, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the broader Iranian security apparatus have rallied to defend the system.

Article content

The IRGC is not merely a military organization. It is the main pillar of the Islamic Republic’s deep state. Its influence extends throughout the country’s intelligence and internal security networks, provincial administrations, strategic industries and large parts of the economy. This network gives the Islamic Republic far greater resilience than a state that depends on a narrow circle of political leaders or a single chain of command.