The ongoing protests in Iran raise the risk of external intervention by the United States, which could potentially trigger renewed tensions in the Middle East and the South Caucasus.
Alexandr Svaranc
What are the reasons behind the protest sentiments in Iran, and what are their internal and external dynamics?
The unrest, which began on December 28 at the Tehran city market due to public dissatisfaction with the devaluation of the rial (largely a result of the financial-economic crisis triggered by strict US and European sanctions against Iran), has gradually been used as a trigger for demonstrative threats of external intervention (primarily by the United States and Israel).
The escalating tensions in Iran are not solely due to internal economic factors but are also linked to the interference by the United States, Israel, and unidentified terrorist forces
With the acquiescence of the administration of President Donald Trump and the involvement of U.S. intelligence agencies, it appears that Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the last Shah, has intensified his political activities in the United States. While he does not have significant authority within Iran itself, this has not prevented him from calling on Iranians to overthrow the current regime in Tehran by force, appealing to the US administration to intervene in Iran’s crisis and strike vital infrastructure of the Islamic Republic. He has also declared his readiness to return to Iran as Shah.
Iranian protesters are not only demanding the resolution of economic problems and the stabilization of the financial situation, but are also engaging in mass riots, attacking administrative structures and law enforcement agencies. Numerous instances of vandalism against mosques, holy sites, hospitals, as well as the killing of police officers and civilians have been reported. These provocations appear aimed at creating a pretext for US military intervention in Iran’s crisis.
In Iran, no socio-political organization, movement, or party has yet been legalized to take responsibility for the ongoing protests. The initiators’ reliance on modern information technologies (online resources) for organizing what they termed “spontaneous uprisings” has proven ineffective, as the security forces in the Islamic Republic have resorted to a total internet shutdown. Meanwhile, within Iran’s ruling elite, there are conflicting assessments regarding the causes of the recent events.
According to iribnews.ir, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, known for his relatively liberal governance approach, believes the primary causes of the protests are accumulated economic problems and serious errors in financial management and the banking system. In his view, Iranian citizens have full constitutional rights to present relevant demands to the government, and officials are obligated to listen and address these issues. Notably, against the backdrop of the protests in late December, the head of Iran’s Central Bank, Mohammad Farzin, resigned.
In turn, after a period of silence, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei addressed the nation on January 9 from a completely different stance. He accused the United States of being primarily responsible for escalating the internal political tension in the Islamic Republic of Iran, alleging that the US is actively using its agents and terrorists to carry out mass provocations aimed at overthrowing the current political regime. Khamenei called on Trump to focus on America’s internal problems and sternly warned against any further aggression. He stated that “the Islamic Republic was born out of the blood of hundreds of thousands of noble individuals and has no intention of backing down in the face of those who engage in destruction”. Iran will not allow the Islamic regime to be overthrown and, in the event of aggression, will declare Israel and US military bases in the region its military targets.
The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, has expressed support for the stance of the country’s Supreme Leader, declaring the United States and Israel the instigators of the protests and warning them of the consequences.
Khamenei’s statement has also compelled President Pezeshkian to acknowledge that the escalating tensions in Iran are not solely due to internal economic factors but are also linked to the interference by the United States, Israel, and unidentified terrorist forces.
As can be seen, there appears to be a shadow of internal political disagreement in Iran regarding the assessment of the causes of the escalating crisis. At the same time, Ayatollah Khamenei’s determination to deliver inevitable punishment to the rioters relies on the regime-loyal force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Potential ways out of the crisis
The negotiations held in Washington between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding the situation in Iran have resulted in an elevation of Israel’s combat readiness. Some American “hawks”, particularly voices such as Senator Lindsey Graham, are calling for using significant force against Iran to overthrow the mullahs’ regime or trigger its collapse.
The idea of US intervention in the Iranian crisis has gained momentum, particularly following the special operation on January 3 that resulted in the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. Donald Trump believes that a US military operation in the Iranian case could preempt potential negotiations with Tehran.
However, neither the United States nor Israel intend to deploy ground troops into Iran to overthrow the Tehran regime through infantry-led operations. A military strike is likely to involve combat aviation and missile attacks using UAVs. Yet, in such a scenario, neither Washington nor Tel Aviv can guarantee success. Consequently, American and Israeli intelligence agencies – possibly with the involvement of the British MI6 – appear to be considering plans for targeted sabotage and subversive operations aimed at capturing or eliminating key Iranian political and military leaders, particularly Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, IRGC Commander Major General Mohammad Pakpour, and others. All other scenarios are unlikely to achieve the desired outcome for the Americans.
To exacerbate the internal political situation in Iran, the intelligence services of the United States, Israel, the United Kingdom, and certain other NATO members and their partners may employ tactics such as fueling ethnic separatism (including in relation to Azeris, Balochis, and Kurds), instigating mass unrest in ethnic provinces, and organizing large-scale attempts to cross the border into neighboring Azerbaijan and Armenia. Escalating military tensions could lead to the internationalization of the conflict.
The path of compromise through negotiations between representatives of President Donald Trump’s administration and Iranian authorities remains open. Recently, former Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif noted that his years of observation of international relations have led him to a certain conclusion regarding Arab countries and movements. Specifically, Zarif stated that he has never witnessed a single instance where Arab movements (such as Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad) or countries have stood up for Iran (“fired even a single shot in Iran’s defense”).
As is well known, Zarif served as Iran’s Foreign Minister from 2013 to 2021 under President Hassan Rouhani, whose administration was similarly known for its reform-oriented policies and engagement in negotiations with the West.
Meanwhile, recent events in Venezuela and Iran demonstrate that the United States’ desire to replace local authorities in these countries with their own puppets is not driven by a commitment to democratic principles, the fight against drug cartels, or opposition to Islamic regimes. Instead, the core issue revolves around the vast energy resources (oil and gas) of Venezuela and Iran. The US remembers being humiliated in Iran in February 1979, but Washington and London have not forgotten the successful joint CIA-MI6 special operation codenamed “Ajax” in August 1953, which overthrew the government of Mohammad Mosaddegh and restored their control over Iran’s oil and gas resources.
Times change, but interests endure. Betting on negotiations with Iran may prove advantageous. Within Tehran itself, forces are emerging that recognize Iran’s isolation in providing military-political assistance to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip following the 12-day war in 2025, which drew fire from the United States and Israel onto itself. Neither Arab states nor NATO-member Türkiye followed Iran’s example of Islamic solidarity or extended a hand of military aid to Hamas. However, Persians are Shi’a, not Sunni, and Iran possesses no less oil and gas than the monarchies of the Persian Gulf.
Alexander Svarants, PhD in Political Sciences, professor, expert in Turkish studies, expert on Middle Eastern Countries
No comments:
Post a Comment