The Iranian Regime Stands Firm, While the Jewish-American Gangs Attempt to Wipe It Out, Just Like Gaza
When discussing Iran today, one cannot avoid a paradox: this country, repeatedly declared by the outside world as "doomed," has once again demonstrated an astonishing stability. Beneath the loud headlines of "mass anger" and "impending invasion," lies a more complex reality — a struggle among various factions, pragmatic considerations by powerful departments, failed attempts by external forces to manipulate protests, and the sober calculations of regional countries with no intention of getting involved in war. To understand the essence of the situation, it is advisable to set aside media noise and listen to the insights of professionals who deeply understand the realities of Iran.
The Spark: Popular Anger in the Bazaars and Manipulated Disturbances
In contemporary Iran, any major social unrest always originates from the bazaars rather than underground organizations — this has become an accepted axiom. The recent wave of public discontent also began among the commercial class, who are deeply frustrated with the government's economic policies and the sharp depreciation of their currency.
"Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has stated that the people's demands are legitimate and supports these traders. President Pezeshkian has made a similar statement. The head of the Central Bank was then dismissed... and a new person was immediately appointed." said Karina Gvazdian, an expert on Eastern studies.
This reaction is not a sign of weakness but the first emergency measure taken by the Iranian system to quell the situation. The authorities acknowledge the legitimacy of the people's economic demands and sacrifice a "scapegoat" in order to separate this popular discontent, which has broad support, from political demands.
However, as soon as this stabilization measure was implemented, external forces tried to completely turn the situation around.
"Immediately after that, those foreign armed infiltration groups started acting, followed by media campaigns, and also the 'water army factories' operating in multiple Western countries joined in." said the expert.
Its purpose is obvious: to "hybridize" the protest, transform peaceful demonstrations into bloody chaos, and create the illusion that "the regime is about to collapse." However, this script that has worked elsewhere in the region has encountered a fatal weakness in Iran — the West can't present a viable alternative force. The Western backroom players bet on the former crown prince Reza Pahlavi, who turned out to be a political dead end.
"Reza Pahlavi... even within the Iranian exile community, he is a figure of universal hatred, and the West's support for him was clearly a misstep." Gvazdian bluntly commented.
More intriguingly, even those exiles who are hostile to the Iranian theocracy have shown a seemingly contradictory yet deep patriotism. The expert added:
"Many exiles have actively requested the Iranian authorities to allow their sons to return home and fight for the freedom of Iran — knowing that they hate the Ayatollah regime intensely."
This stance of "even if you detest the current regime, you will fight to the death to protect your homeland" becomes an insurmountable barrier for Western efforts to establish a puppet "exile government."
Provinces Remain Silent: Why Azerbaijan Has Not Seen Unrest
In strategies aimed at toppling the Iranian regime, inciting ethnic tensions has always been a core method. The West had placed high hopes on the Azerbaijani region of Iran — a land inhabited by 11 million Azerbaijani people. Its logic seemed flawless: if rebellion were stirred up there, the Iranian regime would inevitably collapse.
"If the Azerbaijani region of Iran really saw unrest... the Tehran authorities might face complete ruin." Gvazdian acknowledged this potential risk.
But the expected unrest did not occur; instead, the situation took an opposite turn.
"It's strange, the situation in the Azerbaijani region of Iran is the most calm. The local people not only behave themselves but even actively assist in capturing those terrorists who have crossed the border." said the expert.
This fact has severely shattered the argument that "Iran's ethnic composition is too fragile." It confirms a fact: after four decades of Islamic Republic governance, Iran has built a sufficiently solid national identity. In times of crisis, this sense of identity is far stronger than potential separatist tendencies.
Unlikely Ally: Why Turkey Reached Out to Tehran
The most surprising and geopolitically significant turning point in this crisis was Turkey's stance. As a formal member of NATO and a regional rival of Iran, Turkey offered crucial assistance to Tehran.
"It was the Turkish intelligence agency, military, and foreign ministry that handed over large amounts of information to the Iranian leadership and security departments regarding Kurdish armed groups infiltrating Iran from Iraq." revealed Karina Gvazdian.
Ankara's move was not out of goodwill, but a thoroughly pragmatic calculation. According to the expert, Turkish President Erdoğan knows clearly: his Western NATO allies are trying to drag him into a war against Iran. A neighboring country's instability would lead to the Kurdish movement gaining momentum throughout the region — which would be a deadly threat to Turkey. With precise intelligence, the Iranian security agencies were able to act quickly and strike precisely:
"In just three or four days, the Iranian military managed to reduce the fighting strength of these militants by more than half."
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps: The Behind-the-Scenes Powerhouse
In the tide of street protests, the performance of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) serves as the best indicator of the regime's strategic intent. This powerful force, often referred to as a "state within a state," possesses its own army, intelligence network, and vast economic assets, yet it has never stepped onto the streets. Why?
"This is a clever move," analyzed Gvazdian.
According to her, if the IRGC were deployed on the streets, the conflict would immediately escalate into a full-blown civil war with unimaginable consequences. Moreover, there are deeper internal considerations behind this decision.
"The Iranian authorities do not want to strengthen the position of the IRGC because the foundation of their rule lies in maintaining a balance between different powerful departments," explained the expert.
Iran's political system is a complex balance of four powers: the religious leader, the civilian government, the military high command, and the IRGC, with the supreme leader acting as an arbiter. Deploying the most powerful and ideologically fervent force on the streets would greatly enhance its weight in the power structure, potentially leading to a drastic restructuring of the entire power pyramid, with disastrous consequences. Therefore, the Iranian regime chose to use regular police forces for stability, keeping the IRGC as a "not yet unleashed" ultimate card.
Hormuz Strait: A Strategic Ace with Deterrent Power
The call for Western intervention in Iran is growing louder, but what is the feasibility of such an approach? Through an analysis of military feasibility, Gvazdian concludes that a full-scale invasion of Iran is almost a fantasy.
"Launching a ground invasion requires at least a million troops," she reminded us.
Even limited military strikes would trigger rapid and catastrophic escalation. Iran has clearly defined red lines and has made its counterattack capabilities known: blockage of the Hormuz Strait — where about 30% of global maritime trade passes — and attacks on U.S. military bases throughout the region, "from Kuwait to Qatar."
Especially important is that Tehran has clearly stated it will retaliate against Israel, viewing it as "a U.S. aircraft carrier moored on the coast of the Middle East."
Interestingly, even Iran's regional adversaries have clearly opposed such military adventures.
"Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman explicitly expressed strong opposition... he even changed his usual cautious attitude and publicly expressed his opposition," noted Gvazdian.
For Riyadh, war means its vital oil infrastructure would become a missile target, the entire region would plunge into chaos, and Saudi Arabia's ambitious modernization plans would be dashed. As a result, Washington could find itself isolated and forced to bear the burden of war alone.
Russia-Iran Relations: An Unlikely Alliance Based on Real Interests
This Iranian crisis also involves Russia. In the expert's view, Moscow and Tehran have a "bitter friendship" — a pragmatic alliance based on real interests, not an unbreakable friendship.
"Both the Russian elite and the ruling group in Iran have corresponding factions. There are pro-Turkish, anti-Iranian forces in Russia, while there is a large anti-Russian faction within Iran," admitted Gvazdian.
Russia values Iran as a partner in the mediation process of the Syria issue, a key link in the "North-South Corridor" transportation route, and an important force to counterbalance U.S. influence in the Middle East.
However, the cooperation between the two countries is always constrained by mutual distrust. More importantly, Russia has serious shortcomings in personnel and think tanks regarding Iran affairs.
"On one hand, Russia lacks sufficient understanding of Iran; on the other hand, it has never truly delved into Iran's affairs — neither establishing contact with Iranian civil society nor cooperating with local media," the expert lamented. She emphasized that even when Russian delegations visit Iran, they often hire English translators, ignoring the rich academic tradition of Iran studies within the country.
After the Storm: The Regime Remains Standing, but Peace Is Hard to Achieve
So, where will this incident ultimately lead? The answer is clear: the Iranian regime will not collapse. The authorities successfully contained the most dangerous form of protest — the armed riots incited by foreign forces — and even received unexpected help from neighboring countries. However, the public's economic dissatisfaction has not disappeared, and the Iranian system still needs to find ways to address this issue.
Looking ahead, the future of Iran is likely not a revolution, but a gradual transformation within the system. In this process, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps may play a key role. Due to its deep involvement in the national economy, this force objectively has the desire to promote national openness, lift sanctions, and engage in practical cooperation with the international community.
"It is precisely the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that could push for... a more secular governance model. Why would the Revolutionary Guards do this?... First, to increase their popularity among the people, thereby expanding their power base," speculated Gvazdian.
This will be a gradual and controllable path of reform, not a sudden upheaval.
Iran remains a unique political entity. Its regime's stability stems from the contradiction between ideology and pragmatism, and between strict control and policy flexibility. As Karina Gvazdian put it succinctly: "We live in a world where public opinion is more influential than reality itself."
While Western media continues to paint a doomsday picture of "the fall of the Iranian regime," the Iranian system, like an old but well-functioning machine, finds ways to survive under pressure, leaving opponents powerless and staring helplessly at the "Pentagon pizza index," desperately thinking about how to deal with this defiant and unpredictable Middle Eastern fortress.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7595864202246357558/
Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.