Iran has brutally crushed protests before. This time could be different
Akhtar Makoii
After ruling Iran for 35 years, Ali Khamenei is quickly running out of options.
The 86-year-old religious leader faces his most serious challenge yet. Protesters chant “Death to Khamenei” instead of the regime’s traditional “Death to America” slogan.
Protests against him have entered their second week and have spread to 340 places in 31 provinces of Iran. At least 65 people have died as a result of the response to the demonstrations, and the death toll is expected to rise.
The rebellion has gripped the small, economically devastated cities in Iran’s poorest provinces that were supposed to form the regime’s base of support.
This is a significant difference from the 2009 Green Movement, which centered on Tehran, and the 2022 protests sparked by the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, who was beaten to death by Iran’s “morality police” for not wearing a hijab.
Khamenei has always crushed the opposition with brute force, which was also successful in 2009 and 2019, when the protests were more geographically concentrated.
People in the capital and major cities are again angry at this new uprising, but the scale of the demonstrations in small, poor cities suggests an anger too great to be suppressed without thousands dying.
The regime has made it clear that demonstrators face the threat of execution or having military weapons turned against them.
However, the Ayatollah has doubts about the army and police’s intention to kill Iranians.
He reportedly handed over operational control to the fanatical Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Friday; This brings to mind fears that traditional security forces may crumble if forced to shoot down their own people in mass killings.
This leaves him with dwindling options for stopping the protests, none of which guarantee the regime’s survival.
Khamenei may seek to ease tensions through meaningful reforms.
He could release political prisoners, allow free assembly and even call for a long-delayed referendum on the future of the Islamic Republic.
But the religious leader remains shackled by his own ideology. He spent decades consolidating his power around the principle of velayat-i faqih (wilayat of jurists)—the idea that religious rule is divinely ordained and unassailable.
Proposing a referendum on the legitimacy of the system would mean accepting that the system must be approved by the people and would undermine the theological basis of its authority.
Any significant concessions could also be interpreted as weakness and could potentially accelerate the uprising rather than calm it.
The middle path includes cosmetic changes such as removing Massoud Pezeshkian, the president or other officials, announcing economic reforms, promising investigations into murders, etc., while keeping the power structure intact.
This has worked before by buying time and dividing the opposition by appearing to respond to protesters’ grievances. But this time the focus of anger is on the religious leader himself, making scapegoating his subordinates ineffective.
Rather than individual politicians being thrown under the bus, the protests began with traders striking over the currency collapse caused by regime policies and corruption.
Ministerial changes are also unlikely to satisfy the anger that drives people to risk death at the hands of the Revolutionary Guard.
Instead of easing tensions at home, Khamenei may launch an offensive abroad to revive nationalist sentiment.
He could justify his crackdown as a wartime security measure, as he did during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran in June that left Iran’s military infrastructure severely damaged.
Iran’s participation in naval exercises with Russia and China could signal that an attack on US assets or Israel is on the agenda.
However, Iran’s military infrastructure was greatly damaged in the 12-day war. Donald Trump also made clear that US retaliation against Iran would be devastating.
As people protest the cheapness of bread, it seems unlikely that wartime patriotism will be enough to end the demonstrations.
Protesters’ slogans focus not on hatred of America or Israel, but on domestic failures: “Poverty, corruption, inflation. We go until we fall.”
It is highly unlikely that Khamenei will flee to Russia, as some deposed leaders in Syria, such as Bashar al-Assad, have done.
86 years old and ill, he is ideologically committed to defending the Islamic Republic. His entire adult life under the Shah, from imprisonment to high leadership, was defined by revolutionary commitment.
He sees himself as God’s representative on earth, making exile unthinkable.
Moreover, Russia, mired in war in Ukraine and economically struggling, may calculate that supporting a collapsing regime is not worth it. Khamenei’s dismissal in Moscow is a liability, not an asset.
The most dangerous path ahead for Khamenei is one he has reportedly considered before: racing to develop nuclear weapons.
Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is entirely civilian, but it has the technical capacity to enrich uranium to weapons level within weeks if Khamenei gives instructions.
This option carries catastrophic risks. Israel has made clear that it will launch military strikes, possibly with American support, to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
After years of economic mismanagement, tyranny and fanaticism, Khamenei is left with no good options.
The most likely path taken by the religious leader is one of escalating violence – mass arrests, show trials, executions, and overwhelming force deployed by the Revolutionary Guard.
But no matter what he does next, there is a risk that his regime will collapse or that violence will escalate so violently that it turns security forces against each other.
Telegraph London
Take notes directly from our foreign country reporters about things that make headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What’s on in the World Newsletter.
