Protests in Iran: regime change on the cards?
Protests broke out in Iran at the end of December, and the regime is taking a hard line against demonstrators: according to activists at least 35 people have died and around 1,200 have been arrested. There have also been deaths among the defenders of the regime. Initiated by angry traders in Tehran, the protests have now engulfed more than half the country.
External pressure is a real factor
The Iranian regime has its back against the wall, writes Der Standard:
“This time there is danger on two fronts, from inside and outside the country: demonstrators, some of them ready to resort to violence, are chanting 'Down with the dictator!', and threats from the US and Israel which no longer sound unrealistic after the 12-day war in June 2025. ... US Secretary of State Marco Rubio never tires of spreading the message, including on the US State Department's Persian-language X account, that everyone knows by now that Donald Trump means what he says. According to Rubio, the US president wants to 'come to the aid' of the demonstrators if the regime uses violence against them.”
Change must come from within
Iranians must take fate into their own hands, urges sociologist Azadeh Kian in Le Monde:
“Trump's threats of military intervention, which were renewed following the kidnapping of Maduro, as well as the declarations of solidarity with the people of Iran by Mossad and Benjamin Netanyahu, ultimately only benefit the Islamic regime: it can accuse all opposition figures of being agents of the US and Israel. ... It's up to the Iranian people to bring about regime change. And it is only the convergence of the struggles for freedom of the different social, ethnic and religious groups that can free Iran from the stranglehold of the regime.”
Lacking a strategy and coordination
This won't work, says El País:
“Some commentators are cheering on the protesters as if they were watching a football match. ... The new wave of protests is fuelling expectations among those who long for the collapse of the Islamic Republic. But we shouldn't place an unreasonable burden on the Iranian people. ... Without a clear leadership, a well-organised movement or a strategy that challenges the real power base - not the old ayatollahs, but the generals of the Revolutionary Guard - the protests will only further weaken Massoud Pesezhkian's government, which is already constrained by the system's architecture and unable to implement the promised reforms. Meanwhile, the hardliners will be strengthened.”
Structured protest across different milieus
In a guest commentary in L'Obs, Iranian political scientist Hamid Enayat points to clear differences vis-à-vis past protests:
“Unlike previous uprisings, this one is far more structured. Resistance groups have managed to maintain the momentum of the movement across very different milieus - from bazaars and universities to provincial towns. Furthermore, unlike in the past, French politicians and states publicly condemned the regime's repression from the day after the revolt began. International pressure is undeniably limiting its repression capacity.”
Back them for our own sake
Europe would also benefit from the regime's downfall, Svenska Dagbladet notes:
“The theocratic regime also poses a threat to us. Our freedom of expression, and above all our freedom to criticise Islam, has not been the same ever since the fatwa issued against author Salman Rushdie in 1989. And more recently, Iran has ordered attacks by gang leaders against Iranian exiles and Israeli targets in Sweden. This is just one of many examples of how Iran is playing a leading role in the increasingly globalised cooperation between dictatorships that seek to protect authoritarian rulers from their own own people. Democracies therefore have a vested interest in supporting people's quest for freedom, also in Iran.”
The Ayatollahs are right to be nervous
Strikes in the bazaars put the regime under serious pressure, writes the taz:
“Because in the past this has been a warning signal: from the tobacco movement in 1891 to the revolution in 1979, bazaars have always been a catalyst for political upheaval. The regime attempted to protect itself from this and secure loyalty in the bazaars by awarding licences and official posts. With a few exceptions, the bazaars have since been regarded as a conservative pillar of the system. And they remained silent while others protested. These strikes now cast doubt on the legitimacy of that system.”
No revolts
Polityka dampens any hopes of a regime change:
“The current unrest is not on the same scale as the protests in 2009 or those that followed. ... No leaders can be identified. And ultimately, the third element of a revolution is missing: at least up to now, there are no visible 'cracks' in the regime. ... In previous centuries, uprisings in the bazaars frequently determined the future of Iran, formerly Persia. However, this was only the case when these uprisings were followed by revolts in large companies and factories, particularly in the oil sector, which is crucial to the regime's financial stability – and there is currently no sign of this.”
Terror and nuclear programmes instead of water
Phileleftheros describes the background to the protests:
“A proud people with a long history in a country with vast natural resources and other riches are living in poverty and with almost no water under a regime that spends vast sums on nuclear programmes, ballistic missiles and financing terrorist organisations. ... Recently, Iranians learned that Tehran – home to ten million people, or fifteen million if you include the suburbs – may have to 'move' because the state is unable to supply it with water. All the attention and resources have been focused on other things: weapons and rhetoric about the destruction of Israel.”