Iranian researcher: External intervention prolongs regime's lifespan, solution is internal

In light of the current escalating tension between the United States and Iran, analyzes by newspapers and international research centers often focus on measuring the balance of power and determining whether Washington is still capable of imposing its global hegemony. However, the human rights writer and expert on Iranian affairs, Nizam Mir Mohammadi, has a different approach. He believes that the fundamental issue is not related to the decline or rise of American hegemony, but rather to the nature of the ruling system in Iran and the internal factors that determine the course of change.

He explains that experience has shown that this regime does not change through external wars or political bargains, but relies on internal repression and exploiting external tensions to prolong its lifespan. Therefore, any failure to "resolve" the crisis is not only explained by the limits of American power but also by the fact that the real solution lies within Iranian society itself.

He adds that the problem is not in Washington's ability to impose its will, but in the fact that changing the equation in Iran cannot be done from the outside. He points out that the current escalation has prolonged the crisis without decisive results, which gives the regime an opportunity to continue by leveraging the conflict in its favor. Therefore, the focus from the opposition's perspective should remain on the internal factor as the decisive element, not on the international balance of power.

Mir Mohammadi points out that while the continuation of crises without clear solutions may reflect on the image of any international power, in the Iranian case, it once again shows that relying solely on external pressures does not lead to real political change. The regime in Iran has proven its ability to absorb pressures and turn them into internal propaganda tools by portraying itself as a party in an external confrontation.

He continues, "The most significant impact is not on the status of the major powers, but on the continued suffering of the Iranian people, in the absence of a solution based on the will of the people and their social and political forces."

He explains that the Iranian regime has always tried to leverage its international relations, whether with the East or the West, despite its slogan "Neither East nor West," as a means to alleviate pressures, not as a path to resolve the internal crisis. Therefore, any talk about "opportunities" for other powers does not change the fundamental truth, which is that the Iranian people are the absent party in these equations.

He emphasizes that, based on this, the focus should be on the right of Iranians to self-determination and their right to defend themselves, not on redistributing influence among international powers.

Regarding the nature of the international system, and whether the world is moving toward multipolarity or a repositioning of American power, Mir Mohammadi asserts that this discussion does not touch the essence of the crisis in Iran. Whether the world moves toward a multipolar system or remains within traditional balances, this does not provide a solution in itself for the Iranian crisis.

He adds that the main issue is that the regime in Iran benefits from these international tensions to postpone the necessity of internal change, presenting itself as part of a regional or international equation, while the real problem is purely internal.

ANHA