The Islamic Republic Is Unravelling — The World Must Not Rescue It Again

By
BrusselsReport.eu
-
Ayatollah Khomeini (Copyright: Different, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons)

By Lars Adaktusson, a former Swedish MEP and MP 

After 47 years of clerical rule, Iran stands at a historic turning point. The question is no longer whether change will come, but whether the world will once again attempt to stabilise a system that has lost its legitimacy.

What is happening in Iran today is the result of 47 years of brutal dictatorship, misguided regional policies by major powers, and the rise of the only theocracy in modern history to the status of a mid-level power with its unconventional approaches to defence, economics, society, culture, and foreign policy. This regime stands out negatively in almost every possible way. It rules over one of the most sophisticated and culturally rich civilisations, one that has, time and again, proven its ability to recover and revive, no matter how brutal the occupation or dictatorship.

Iran shifted from a benevolent dictatorship (at worst, the most negative assessment of the late Shah) to a hardline Shia clerical theocracy practising extreme brutality both domestically and abroad. A moderate Muslim society Under the Pahlavi dynasty, evolved into one of the most secular societies in the Middle East as a result of religious tyranny, with the highest rate of conversion to Christianity in underground churches.

This regime was doomed to collapse from its inception and has only survived by executing its former political partners, those who made the revolution possible, prolonging the war with Iraq to drain the youth’s will for a democratic Iran, and launching mass executions as soon as the war ended. It has managed the population with false reforms, playing political games with the middle class for about 30 years until recently, when the masses made their stance clear with the famous slogan: “Islah Talab Osoolgara, digeh tammome majara” (Reformist or hardliner, the story is over), a direct threat to the regime’s very existence.

Additionally, the regime’s regional hegemonic ambitions, its shifting alliances during and after the Cold War, and the clerics’ theological approach to geopolitics have destabilized the region and beyond for decades through proxies, campaigns of terror and fear, meddling in other countries (even as far as Europe and America), installing foreign ministers and political leaders, and fuelling civil wars. The export of its revolution has reached from the Middle East to Southeast Asia, West Africa, South America, and beyond. A mix of leftist, anti-imperialist Islamic rhetoric which appealed to various opportunists and conformists, from African warlords with hardline religious inclinations, to drug cartel leaders seeking profitable alliances, to former communist officers or leftist academics with identity crises. Leveraging these possibilities, the Islamic regime has exhausted and agitated all its neighbours and even alienated its few traditional friends.

From crimes committed in Syria to adventures in Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, and Venezuela, the Iranian regime’s list of wrongdoing is non-exhaustive. And here comes the icing on the cake: its nuclear ambitions alongside its ballistic missile program, a dangerous combination. While the picture is now clear, there remain naïve politicians, elites, and a segment of the middle class willing to accept, negotiate, and tolerate the regime as it defines itself. If this isn’t madness, what is? Years of negotiation, delay, and diversion summarise the Islamic regime’s nuclear pursuits.

During my political career, I have had the opportunity to encounter, study, and understand Iran, its people, and its regime on both parallel and separate levels. The distinctions are too broad for this discussion, but recognising them is key to understanding the current, or rather the latest, dilemma concerning Iran.

The regime is finally disintegrating, a process that would have occurred years earlier if not for the aid and persistence of certain EU and American policymakers determined to salvage it. The snowball effect began last summer, culminating in a limited Israeli-American military campaign, historically unprecedented, which shifted the confrontation from proxies to direct engagement. The speed and execution of these actions caught the Iranian regime and even many of its allies by surprise. Since then, the regime has been unravelling, even as other political crises have dominated the headlines. The social struggles in Iran reached the point of the largest uprising in 47 years, met with the most brutal crackdown in history: over 30,000 killed in two days, with unknown numbers wounded, disappeared, executed, or on death row. (To give you a good comparison, the recent Palestinian-Israeli conflict claimed  about 70,000 lives in 2 years). This occurred less than two months ago, but the West saw only a fraction of it. News and photos from those two days of massacre are still emerging.

The second, and hopefully final, blow to the regime took place this past Saturday, marking a new era in Iranian modern history. The elimination of the regime’s second dictator, who ruled for 36 years, shocked the world and paralysed the regime’s apparatus. This is a controlled demolition of a monster built over 47 years, dismantling more than 16 intelligence services and two parallel, non-conventional armed organisations that cannot be considered a national armed force. The West shares some blame for this through mishandling, indecisiveness, leniency, negligence, and occasional support to keep the regime in place. Even now, some opportunists benefiting from the regime’s continuation are seeking an alternative or a new leader to maintain the status quo. Salvaging the regime is a disastrous policy that will bring misery to generations in and around Iran.

This may not sit well with those unwilling to see Iran’s return to glory or those who, due to their so-called anti-imperialist ideology, reflexively dislike the Pahlavis. But if you know Iranian history, even without speaking Farsi or having Iranian friends, it’s clear what the masses in Iran are chanting. From the deepest villages to the major cities, from Abdanan to Mamassani, there is only one name: “King Reza Pahlavi.” This shows what over 80 million Iranians want, in stark contrast to the two million regime affiliates who cannot escape due to their history with the regime and some more millions who are willing to adopt a sort of Marxist Islamism or leftist republic.

Some leftist or anti-imperialist sentimentalists may wonder: how can millions chant for the son of a former dictator? Did Reza Pahlavi do something to distinguish himself from his father? The truth is, despite his modern and democratic language, Prince Reza Pahlavi is seen by the majority of Iranians as the only possible leader precisely because of their country’s history with his father, the late Shah, and his grandfather, Reza Shah the Great. Iranians from Tehran to villages across the provinces, and even in Brussels, Toronto, Munich, Malmö, Gothenburg, and Stockholm, chant his name, making it clear they want no trace of the current regime and have no appetite for leftist or MEK alternatives. Reza Pahlavi is the only viable alternative, at least for the transition period. The West and Europe must support the will of the people. As Reza Pahlavi himself has stated, ‘’The final ballots will determine the future political system. That system must be secular and democratic; whether it will be a parliamentary monarchy or a republic will be for the people to decide.’’

Returning to current events: the military campaign is seen by Iranians as a liberation, not an invasion, which is why they are celebrating. Iran is not Iraq, and this is not the 2003 Iraq invasion. Socially, Iranians are different from Iraqis (with all due respect, this is purely a social comparison). The Iranian uprising of January 8 and 9 was the people’s last attempt, and unfortunately, it cost 30,000 lives, proving the regime’s willingness to kill. Thus, the promised military campaign became inevitable. On top of that, as anticipated, the regime persisted in its clandestine nuclear ambitions. At this point, leaders in Israel and the US declared, “Enough is enough.” The only way forward is to support the Iranian people, avoid searching for alternatives within the regime, soon to be the former regime, and act swiftly, since the regime’s policy is to expand the conflict, drag others into war, and cause widespread suffering. The regime has many proxies and sleeper cells worldwide, and if its lifeline isn’t cut, it could activate them, triggering a wave of terror.

There is no way out of this but regime change. Some are reluctant for various reasons, including financial interests, but in the long run, it is in everyone’s best interest to see this regime gone and a prosperous Iran emerge. Iran, with its 92 million people and significant geopolitical position, has shown, even at its weakest, how its influence can affect the daily lives of those nearby who were under the illusion of security.

 

Disclaimer: www.BrusselsReport.eu will under no circumstance be held legally responsible or liable for the content of any article appearing on the website, as only the author of an article is legally responsible for that, also in accordance with the terms of use.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR