I remember a few years ago at LUMS, Syed Babar Ali, the founder of LUMS, asked Vali Nasr, the American-Iranian expert on Middle Eastern politics, how long, in Nasr's view, will the Iranian regime survive. Nasr replied that although there is no impending threat to the regime in the foreseeable future, how long will the regime survive depends on how it navigates its policies and actions with the changing international, regional, and internal demands.
The ongoing disastrous demonstrations against the Iranian regime after the death of a 22-year-old girl, Masha Amini, over the forceful imposition of hijab, allegedly at the hands of the Iranian morality police, once again resurfaced doubts about the future of the regime. The Islamist regime has had bigger and more violent protests, like the 1999 student protests, the green movement of 2009, and the November 2019 protests. The regime has mastery in quashing protests and they appear successful this time as well, but recurrent anti-regime protests signal the beginning of the end of the regime.
This is not the first time that the Islamist regime had to face international backlash over internal restrictions on personal freedom. Iran, however, ostracizes the West for its selective use (or misuse) of human rights rhetoric to accomplish the strategic goal of ousting the government of the jurists (Vilayet-e-faqih). There is no contestation that the United States has always orchestrated regime change operations where it suited them, for both strategic and ideological reasons, regardless of the consequences, be it in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Chile, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Cuba, or any other country.
The regime-change attempts led by the US have a long history, even in Iran, to bring a pliable government in place of the hardliner clerics. America reinstated Reza Shah in 1953 after ousting the popular government of Muhammad Mosaddeq after the latter attempted to nationalize the oil reservoirs of Iran. America's blatant support of Saddam Hossein during the Iran-Iraq War (1982-89) and the coveted support to the 2009 violent protests leave a bad impression on America. The staunch involvement of the Iranian diaspora loyal to the Shah residing in the US during the 2019 protests and the ongoing hijab protests strengthens the Iranian regime's doubts over the involvement of foreign-backed protests. Iran's supreme leader has blatantly accused the West and the US of their involvement in the ongoing protests. Iran's successful proxies in the Middle East irk the US-led western bloc, which speeds up the regime change attempts.
Although the US attempts of ousting the Iranian regime is a fact, it would be illogical to squarely blame outsiders for the quagmire Iran currently is in. The religious establishment of Iran has maintained the status quo since its inception through coercive mechanisms and draconian, non-elected religious bodies responsible to none. The fire was burning under the radar and an explosion was unavoidable. The immediate answer to why the Titanic sank is that it collided with an iceberg, while the detailed studies of the debacle argue that the main reason for the catastrophe was manufacturing defects, its low-quality steel, and weak rivets.
The same applies to political upheavals. While the immediate political upheavals appear to be the reason for political unrest, the main causes are much more deep-rooted and much more subtle.
The catalyst to the Arab Spring was the Tunisian citizen Mohmed Bouazizi who set himself on fire, but the main reason for the intra-continental protests was that the Middle Eastern and African rulers had failed to give relief to its subjects.
With changing national and international dynamics and the inflating economic woes, the Iranian people are in favour of non-interventionist foreign policy and freedom of choice within Iran. Anyone who has been to Iran would attest that outside the two cities with most of the religious seminaries, Mashad and Qom, hijab is rare to find in Iran. According to a 2018 survey, 70 percent of Iranian women are not in favour of hijab or do not wear the Islamic hijab as directed by the state. The younger generations are not following the strict religious codes imposed by the religious sections and even the clerics are cognizant of this fact. Clerics led government enforces hijab and other religious practices as a means to legitimize its rule and to maintain the status quo, as the revolutionary zeal of the 1980s and the 1990s has withered away and the anti-Americanism rhetoric of Ahmadinejad is no more relevant.
Iran's supreme leader's stance that the protests are entirely orchestrated by the imperial powers to oust the Islamist regime, and some sections of the Iranian populace, have fallen to the propaganda. It is another manifestation of orchestrating an enemy to legitimize its actions while the need is to reform and adapt to the changing domestic demands. Senior Iranian cleric, Naser Makarem Shirazi blames, "Foreign enemies, an abandoned virtual space, and people's economic and livelihood problems" for the ongoing protests.
While one can't expect a sudden regime change in Iran, as the roots of the regime are deep-rooted and institutionally safeguarded, the ongoing crisis has unleashed the diminishing popularity of Iran's Islamist government. The downfall is imminent if the regime persists with the same policies that spurred the ongoing crisis. The slogan of the movement 'women, life and freedom' is antithetical to the government's policies and represents the aspirations of the people. Although the government has silenced the protestors by unleashing unbridled force and have pushed them to the walls to silence them, they would only be able to halt the impending regime change if they start reading the writings on the wall and addressing the grievances.
The ongoing disastrous demonstrations against the Iranian regime after the death of a 22-year-old girl, Masha Amini, over the forceful imposition of hijab, allegedly at the hands of the Iranian morality police, once again resurfaced doubts about the future of the regime. The Islamist regime has had bigger and more violent protests, like the 1999 student protests, the green movement of 2009, and the November 2019 protests. The regime has mastery in quashing protests and they appear successful this time as well, but recurrent anti-regime protests signal the beginning of the end of the regime.
This is not the first time that the Islamist regime had to face international backlash over internal restrictions on personal freedom. Iran, however, ostracizes the West for its selective use (or misuse) of human rights rhetoric to accomplish the strategic goal of ousting the government of the jurists (Vilayet-e-faqih). There is no contestation that the United States has always orchestrated regime change operations where it suited them, for both strategic and ideological reasons, regardless of the consequences, be it in Afghanistan, Vietnam, Chile, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Cuba, or any other country.
The regime-change attempts led by the US have a long history, even in Iran, to bring a pliable government in place of the hardliner clerics. America reinstated Reza Shah in 1953 after ousting the popular government of Muhammad Mosaddeq after the latter attempted to nationalize the oil reservoirs of Iran. America's blatant support of Saddam Hossein during the Iran-Iraq War (1982-89) and the coveted support to the 2009 violent protests leave a bad impression on America. The staunch involvement of the Iranian diaspora loyal to the Shah residing in the US during the 2019 protests and the ongoing hijab protests strengthens the Iranian regime's doubts over the involvement of foreign-backed protests. Iran's supreme leader has blatantly accused the West and the US of their involvement in the ongoing protests. Iran's successful proxies in the Middle East irk the US-led western bloc, which speeds up the regime change attempts.
Although the US attempts of ousting the Iranian regime is a fact, it would be illogical to squarely blame outsiders for the quagmire Iran currently is in. The religious establishment of Iran has maintained the status quo since its inception through coercive mechanisms and draconian, non-elected religious bodies responsible to none. The fire was burning under the radar and an explosion was unavoidable. The immediate answer to why the Titanic sank is that it collided with an iceberg, while the detailed studies of the debacle argue that the main reason for the catastrophe was manufacturing defects, its low-quality steel, and weak rivets.
According to a 2018 survey, 70 percent of Iranian women are not in favour of hijab or do not wear the Islamic hijab as directed by the state. The younger generations are not following the strict religious codes imposed by the religious sections and even the clerics are cognizant of this fact.
The same applies to political upheavals. While the immediate political upheavals appear to be the reason for political unrest, the main causes are much more deep-rooted and much more subtle.
The catalyst to the Arab Spring was the Tunisian citizen Mohmed Bouazizi who set himself on fire, but the main reason for the intra-continental protests was that the Middle Eastern and African rulers had failed to give relief to its subjects.
With changing national and international dynamics and the inflating economic woes, the Iranian people are in favour of non-interventionist foreign policy and freedom of choice within Iran. Anyone who has been to Iran would attest that outside the two cities with most of the religious seminaries, Mashad and Qom, hijab is rare to find in Iran. According to a 2018 survey, 70 percent of Iranian women are not in favour of hijab or do not wear the Islamic hijab as directed by the state. The younger generations are not following the strict religious codes imposed by the religious sections and even the clerics are cognizant of this fact. Clerics led government enforces hijab and other religious practices as a means to legitimize its rule and to maintain the status quo, as the revolutionary zeal of the 1980s and the 1990s has withered away and the anti-Americanism rhetoric of Ahmadinejad is no more relevant.
Iran's supreme leader's stance that the protests are entirely orchestrated by the imperial powers to oust the Islamist regime, and some sections of the Iranian populace, have fallen to the propaganda. It is another manifestation of orchestrating an enemy to legitimize its actions while the need is to reform and adapt to the changing domestic demands. Senior Iranian cleric, Naser Makarem Shirazi blames, "Foreign enemies, an abandoned virtual space, and people's economic and livelihood problems" for the ongoing protests.
While one can't expect a sudden regime change in Iran, as the roots of the regime are deep-rooted and institutionally safeguarded, the ongoing crisis has unleashed the diminishing popularity of Iran's Islamist government. The downfall is imminent if the regime persists with the same policies that spurred the ongoing crisis. The slogan of the movement 'women, life and freedom' is antithetical to the government's policies and represents the aspirations of the people. Although the government has silenced the protestors by unleashing unbridled force and have pushed them to the walls to silence them, they would only be able to halt the impending regime change if they start reading the writings on the wall and addressing the grievances.