Iran's Enduring Regime: Navigating Decades Of Power And Pressure

Prof. Waino Jacobi PhD 20 Jun 2025

The Islamic Republic of Iran, a political entity that emerged from the tumultuous 1979 revolution, has shaped the nation's destiny for over four decades. Understanding the intricacies of the regime in Iran is crucial for anyone seeking to comprehend the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East and beyond.

From its revolutionary genesis to its current complex challenges, the Iranian regime has demonstrated remarkable resilience, yet it faces an unprecedented confluence of internal unrest, economic collapse, and regional setbacks. This article delves into the origins, structure, influence, and future prospects of this pivotal government, offering a comprehensive look at a system often misunderstood but profoundly impactful.

The Genesis of the Islamic Regime in Iran
- From Monarchy to Mullahs: The 1979 Revolution
- Establishing the Theocratic State
The Pillars of Power: Structure and Control
The Regime's Regional Footprint and Shifting Alliances
- Allies Under Strain: Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria
- A Diminishing Circle of Influence
Internal Pressures: Economic Hardship and Popular Dissent
External Confrontations: Israel's Relentless Pressure
Paths to Change: Debating the Future of the Iranian Regime
The Nuclear Deal and Sanctions: A Double-Edged Sword for the Regime
Unpacking the Complexities: Hardliners, Reformers, and National Interests

The Genesis of the Islamic Regime in Iran

The story of the current Iranian political system is inextricably linked to the dramatic events of 1979, a year that fundamentally reshaped not only Iran but also the broader Middle East. Understanding how the Islamic Republic came into being is crucial to grasping the foundational principles and enduring characteristics of the regime in Iran.

From Monarchy to Mullahs: The 1979 Revolution

For decades prior to 1979, Iran was governed by the Pahlavi monarchy, a dynasty that had sought to modernize and Westernize the country. However, growing discontent simmered beneath the surface, fueled by political repression, economic disparities, and a perceived erosion of traditional Islamic values. The culmination of these grievances led to widespread strikes and demonstrations that paralyzed the country. The Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, ultimately left Iran for exile in January 1979, marking the end of millennia of Persian monarchy.

The power vacuum created by the Shah's departure was swiftly filled by the charismatic figure of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. After a long period of exile, Ayatollah Khomeini would return in February of the same year, greeted in the capital of Tehran by several million Iranians. His return signaled the triumph of the Islamic Revolution and the beginning of a new era for Iran, one defined by religious governance and anti-Western sentiment.

Establishing the Theocratic State

With Khomeini at the helm, the new leadership moved quickly to consolidate power and establish the foundations of the Islamic Republic. A key instrument in this process was the formation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Established in the wake of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution, the IRGC began as a volunteer militia tasked with protecting the newly established regime. Unlike the regular army, which was viewed with suspicion due to its ties to the former Shah, the IRGC was ideologically committed to the revolution and its principles. Over the decades, the IRGC has evolved from a revolutionary militia into a powerful military, economic, and political force, deeply embedded in every aspect of the Iranian state and serving as a primary guarantor of the regime's survival.

The Pillars of Power: Structure and Control

The regime in Iran is a complex hybrid of theocratic and republican elements, where ultimate authority rests with the Supreme Leader. This unique structure, designed to ensure the perpetuation of Islamic rule, is supported by various institutions that exert tight control over the country and deepen its influence both domestically and regionally.

At the apex of this system is the Supreme Leader, currently Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who holds vast powers, including control over the military, judiciary, and state media. Below him, a network of unelected bodies, such as the Guardian Council and the Assembly of Experts, ensures that all laws and policies align with Islamic principles and that only candidates loyal to the system can run for office. This often leads to situations where what appears to be a democratic process is heavily manipulated, as seen in "the Iranian regime's presidential election scam," where candidates are vetted and often disqualified, leaving little genuine choice for the populace.

The IRGC, as previously mentioned, is another crucial pillar. Beyond its military functions, it controls vast economic enterprises, influencing everything from construction to telecommunications. This economic power gives the IRGC immense leverage and helps the regime tighten its grip on the country and deepen its influence. Through various intelligence and security apparatuses, the regime maintains a pervasive presence in society, monitoring dissent and suppressing opposition movements. This comprehensive control mechanism is central to the longevity and stability of the Iranian regime.

The Regime's Regional Footprint and Shifting Alliances

For decades, the regime in Iran has pursued a foreign policy aimed at expanding its influence across the Middle East, often through a network of proxies and strategic alliances. This regional strategy has been a cornerstone of its power projection, but recent developments suggest a significant shift in dynamics, challenging the very foundations of its long-standing alliances.

Allies Under Strain: Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria

Iran's support for various non-state actors and governments has been a defining feature of its regional policy. In Gaza, Hamas—backed by Iran—suffered severe military losses during and after the October 2023 conflict with Israel. This setback not only weakened a key Iranian ally but also exposed the vulnerabilities of Iran's "Axis of Resistance."

Similarly, Hezbollah, once a key Iranian asset in Lebanon, has faced increasing challenges. While still a formidable military and political force, it has become politically isolated and is increasingly rejected by the Lebanese public, who blame it for contributing to the country's economic woes and political paralysis. This growing public discontent directly impacts Iran's ability to wield influence through its proxy.

In Syria, Iran has invested heavily in supporting the Assad regime, a crucial land bridge for its regional activities. However, a shifting power dynamic and regime realignment have weakened Iran’s position. While the Assad regime has largely survived the civil war, the increased presence of Russia and other actors, coupled with Israeli strikes, has complicated Iran's strategic objectives and limited its freedom of action within Syria. Iran's efforts at "Iranization and Shi'ization in Syria" have also faced local resistance and international scrutiny.

A Diminishing Circle of Influence

The challenges faced by Iran's key regional partners underscore a broader trend: a shrinking circle of reliable allies. The demise of the Assad regime, had it occurred, would have halved the number of states that Iran counts as an ally, leaving only Venezuela, a nation emptying itself of its people. While Assad remains in power, the sentiment highlights the precariousness of Iran's alliances and its increasing isolation on the international stage. This erosion of regional influence adds another layer of pressure on the Iranian regime, forcing it to recalibrate its foreign policy in an increasingly hostile environment.

Internal Pressures: Economic Hardship and Popular Dissent

While the regime in Iran has long projected an image of unwavering strength, it is currently grappling with an unprecedented confluence of internal unrest, economic collapse, and regional defeats. These domestic challenges pose a significant threat to its stability and future, arguably more so than external pressures alone.

The Iranian economy has been severely battered by decades of mismanagement, corruption, and crippling international sanctions. High inflation, rampant unemployment, and a declining standard of living have fueled widespread public discontent. This economic hardship is a primary driver of the frequent protests and demonstrations that have rocked the country in recent years. While often met with brutal suppression, the underlying grievances persist and intensify.

The depth of this internal frustration is evident in the public sphere. Isolated cries of “death to Khamenei” rise into the night sky, indicating a direct challenge to the Supreme Leader's authority. The Iranian regime is grappling with escalating fears of an imminent uprising, driven by worsening economic crises and the growing influence of organized resistance, particularly the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). These groups, though often operating clandestinely, capitalize on public anger and aim to galvanize broader protests into a sustained movement for change. The widespread mourning for "martyrs in the 2022 uprising" in places like Khorramabad, western Iran, further illustrates the depth of public grievance and the human cost of the ongoing struggle.

External Confrontations: Israel's Relentless Pressure

Beyond internal strife, the regime in Iran faces persistent and escalating external pressure, particularly from Israel. This long-standing rivalry has intensified in recent years, with Israel adopting a more overt strategy aimed at disrupting Iran's nuclear program and its regional military capabilities.

Israel’s relentless war on Iran is likely to fundamentally reshape the trajectory of the latter’s history. This "war" often takes the form of covert operations, cyberattacks, and targeted assassinations. The talk of regime change was no doubt intensified by the success of Israel’s extensive intelligence campaign against Iran, leading to assassinations of Iran’s military leaders and nuclear scientists. These high-profile operations demonstrate Israel's capability to penetrate Iran's security apparatus and inflict significant damage on key personnel and programs.

The Iranian regime faces pressure as Israel strikes military targets, often in Syria, where Iranian forces and proxies are present. These strikes aim to degrade Iran's military infrastructure and prevent the transfer of advanced weaponry to groups like Hezbollah. Iranian Americans advocating for the overthrow of what one Iranian American describes as a "paper tiger regime" further amplify the external pressure, adding a significant voice to the international chorus calling for fundamental change in Iran. The targeted senior military officers had deep ties to Iran’s regime and were known personally by the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, particularly Bagheri, according to Vatanka, highlighting the precision and impact of these operations.

Paths to Change: Debating the Future of the Iranian Regime

Given the multifaceted pressures on the regime in Iran, discussions about its future and potential for change are constant. There are many paths to regime change in Iran, ranging from internal collapse to external intervention, each with its own set of complexities and potential consequences.

One perspective, often debated in policy circles, suggests that external powers could play a role in facilitating a transition. In 2020, two prominent analysts (Edelman and Takeyh) wrote an essay in Foreign Affairs in which they outlined a way to topple the Islamic Republic. At that time, they assumed that the use of force was off the table and that outside powers could only gradually erode the regime's power through sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and support for opposition movements. These efforts were bolstered by the NCRI’s international campaigns and conferences, which raised awareness and called for the overthrow of the regime, advocating for a democratic alternative.

However, it is widely acknowledged that this is not likely to be a regime change as it’s typically imagined, a swift, decisive overthrow. The Iranian regime is deeply entrenched, with vast security apparatuses and a core of loyalists. Any change is more likely to be a protracted process, potentially leading to a complex internal struggle. The resulting power vacuum, some Israelis hope, could lead to an internal struggle among competing factions of regime insiders, spiralling regional fragmentation or even a popular revolt in Iran. This highlights the uncertainty surrounding any potential transition and the diverse outcomes that could emerge.

Furthermore, there's a critical consideration regarding the post-regime landscape: if the Supreme Leader is toppled, the next government would not likely be any friendlier to the West. This cautionary note suggests that even a successful regime change might not necessarily align with Western strategic interests, underscoring the complexities and potential unintended consequences of such a dramatic shift.

The Nuclear Deal and Sanctions: A Double-Edged Sword for the Regime

The nuclear program has been a central point of contention between the regime in Iran and the international community, particularly the United States and its allies. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, was a landmark agreement designed to limit Iran's nuclear capabilities in exchange for sanctions relief. However, its tumultuous history reveals how sanctions have been a double-edged sword for the regime.

The premise of the deal was clear: in exchange for foregoing nuclear weapons, the U.S. lifts sanctions on Iran. For the regime, this offered a lifeline, allowing it to access frozen assets and resume oil exports, theoretically alleviating some of the economic pressures. In this scenario, the regime survives, albeit a shell of its former self, and Iran limps along more or less, stuck with a theocratic regime that is unpopular and living on borrowed time. This outcome, while preventing nuclear proliferation, essentially preserves the existing political structure, albeit in a weakened state.

Conversely, the reimposition of sanctions, particularly after the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, has severely crippled Iran's economy, exacerbating the internal unrest discussed earlier. The debate continues whether maximum pressure through sanctions will lead to the collapse of the regime, or if it merely strengthens hardliners who can blame external forces for the country's woes. The current difficulty facing Iran’s regime will indeed lead to its demise remains to be seen, but the economic squeeze from sanctions undeniably contributes to its precarious position. The possibility that the Iranian regime collapses, and the Ayatollah’s reign is over, is a scenario often considered by those advocating for continued pressure, believing that economic strangulation is the most effective path to fundamental change.

Unpacking the Complexities: Hardliners, Reformers, and National Interests

To truly understand the regime in Iran, one must look beyond simplistic labels and delve into the nuanced interplay of factions and ideologies within its power structure. A landmark study that offers clear and understandable answers to fundamental questions about the most complex facets of the Iranian regime probes the lines between hardliners and reformers, revolutionary and national interests, theocracy and electoral politics, and more. This internal dynamic is crucial for predicting the regime's responses to challenges and its future trajectory.

The conventional wisdom often divides the Iranian political landscape into "hardliners" and "reformers." While hardliners prioritize ideological purity, revolutionary principles, and resistance to Western influence, reformers advocate for greater social freedoms, economic liberalization, and improved international relations. However, these lines are often blurred, and individuals and factions can shift positions based on pragmatic considerations and national interests. Even senior military officers targeted by external operations had deep ties to Iran’s regime and were known personally by the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, particularly Bagheri, according to Vatanka, indicating a cohesive, albeit internally diverse, power structure at the top.

The tension between theocracy and electoral politics is another defining feature. While elections are held, their outcomes are heavily influenced by the Guardian Council's vetting process, which ensures that only candidates loyal to the Supreme Leader and the system can run. This creates a façade of democratic participation while maintaining ultimate control in the hands of the unelected clerical establishment. The struggle between revolutionary ideals (exporting the revolution, supporting proxies) and national interests (economic stability, avoiding war) also constantly shapes the regime's decisions, leading to a complex and often contradictory foreign and domestic policy. This internal complexity means that whether the current difficulty facing Iran’s regime will lead to its demise remains to be seen, as its capacity for adaptation and internal negotiation should not be underestimated.

Conclusion

The regime in Iran, born from a revolutionary fervor in 1979, has proven to be a remarkably resilient and adaptable political entity. From its origins as a nascent theocracy protected by the IRGC to its current status as a regional power grappling with immense internal and external pressures, its journey has been fraught with challenges. The confluence of economic collapse, widespread popular dissent, and an eroding regional influence, compounded by relentless external pressure, paints a picture of a regime under significant strain.

While the future of the Iranian regime remains uncertain, the ongoing debates about "regime change" highlight the global interest in its trajectory. Whether through internal evolution, popular uprising, or external pressures, the path forward for Iran will undoubtedly be complex and impactful, not just for its own citizens but for the entire world. The cries of "death to Khamenei" echoing in the night sky serve as a potent reminder that beneath the veneer of state control, the desire for fundamental change persists.

What are your thoughts on the future of the Iranian regime? Share your perspectives in the comments below, and don't forget to share this article with others interested in understanding this crucial geopolitical player.

The right strategy for Iran isn’t regime change. It’s regime collapse

Iran has the ingredients for revolution — but a strong regime to ward

Opinion | The Brave Women Protesters in Iran Deserve More U.S. Support

HeadlineSphere