Iran is facing the most severe and complex existential threat since the Iranian Revolution led by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. The ongoing protest in Iran that has persisted for more than two weeks, resulting in hundreds of deaths and injuries, is escalating rapidly within an exceptionally sensitive geopolitical context. While these protests are not unprecedented, Iran has been subjected to many protests and faced with lethal repression as well. However, what differentiated the current protest and made it dangerous is its convergence with the gradual collapse of Iranian power and deterrence internally and externally. These pillars has consituted the base of Iran's security doctrine and a core source for its domestic legitimacy.
اضافة اعلان
The Four Pillars of Iran's Security Doctrine
The Iranian state is characterised by significant ethnic and religious diversity and vast geographical expanse, factors that necessitate an unusually complex security architecture to maintain control. Iran’s security doctrine was built upon four fundamental pillars that collectively served as a strategic shield, enabling political maneuverability and sustained influence over critical regional decision-making processes.
The first pillar is the utility of strategic depth capabilities. Iranian security thinking has been centred around the idea that national security defence begins beyond state borders. Iran is leveraging this principle by operationalising ideology, particularly the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih, which granted Supreme Leader Ali Khomeini transnational religious authority over Shiite communities in the region and beyond. This ideological framework enabled Iran to construct loyal proxy forces and armed networks far beyond its territory. This alliance cost Iran billions of dollars from its public treasury. Through this system, Qassem Soleimani operated across the region with unrivaled influence—effectively as a king without a crown. However, many of these proxy arms were neutralised during the Gaza war, most notably Hezbollah, Iran’s most critical regional asset and the “crown jewel” of its deterrence architecture.
The second pillars were Iran's strategic investment in the Syrian regime. The collapse of the regime in Syria has been a catastrophe for Iran's influence in the region. It is estimated that Iran spent in Syria estimated at approximately USD 30 billion. The fall of the Syrian regime was one of the reason of Hezbullah defeat in South Lebanon as its supply route from Iran through Syria had been blocked. The collapse of the Syrian regime stripped Iran of its capacity to exert geopolitical influence across the region. Consequently, Iran developed deep resentment toward Syria’s new rulers and has actively sought to destabilise the country to reclaim lost leverage.
The third pillar is Iran's nuclear program. Iran’s nuclear program constituted the third pillar and was designed as a decisive instrument of regional dominance. Had Iran succeeded, it would have emerged as the uncontested hegemon of the Middle East, forcing regional and international actors to accept it as a fait accompli. However, the twelve-day war significantly reversed this trajectory, setting the program back by many years. The conflict resulted in the loss of billions of dollars in nuclear investments and substantially weakened Iran’s negotiating position and deterrence credibility.
The fourth pillar is Iran’s missile program, which—by military standards—represents a notable success. Despite decades of sanctions, Iran succeeded in developing long-range ballistic missiles that inflicted tangible damage on Israel during the recent conflict. This program remains Iran’s most effective strategic deterrent and, arguably, the most advanced in the region.
From External Deterrence to Internal Implosion
Through this security doctrine, Iran was able to preserve internal cohesion and foster a relative national consensus around the sanctity of Wilayat al-Faqih, driven by external tactical successes and the rhetoric of “resistance.” However, as these pillars collapsed sequentially, the regime’s internal legitimacy eroded alongside its deterrence doctrine. A profound rift between state and society emerged, rendering the current protests a direct outcome of this structural collapse. The Iranian people’s alignment with the regime dissipated as the foundations of deterrence crumbled.
In its pursuit of exercising external deterrence and establishing a balance with Israel and other regional actors, Iran has systematically neglected the welfare and prosperity of its own people. The majority of Iran's financial resources have been allocated to military and security efforts and to sustaining regime elites rather than public welfare. Many reports suggest that the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) maintains its operations by controlling the majority of the oil shipments. Recent and severe economic sanctions further constrained the regime, compelling it to prioritize survival over citizen-centered development. Nearly 90% of Iranian oil exports are directed to China, which dictates payment mechanisms—often non-monetary—benefiting the ruling clerical system rather than Iranian society.
The Water Crisis: A Symbol of Governance Failure
The Iranian regime has demonstrated acute failure in managing national resources, most visibly in the water crisis that ignited the protests. While Iran depends heavily on rainfall, dams, and limited river systems, drought alone is not the primary cause of water shortages. For years, water infrastructure has suffered from neglect, with no meaningful investments in system repair, new dams, or pipeline maintenance. Rather than addressing these failures, the regime externalised blame—accusing neighbouring Arab states and Turkey of conducting cloud seeding operations, allegedly preventing rainfall over Iran.
The water crisis has affected electricity supplies due to Iran’s reliance on hydroelectric power. Persistent power outages in an oil-rich state not only undermine daily life but also cripple vital infrastructure and public institutions. These failures have fueled political unrest, with citizens openly accusing the regime of mismanagement and indifference to basic living conditions.
The Collapse of Narrative and Exposure of the Regime
Protest slogans reflect widespread anger over the diversion of national resources toward regional and external actors that failed to protect themselves and squandered Iran’s wealth. The twelve-day war with Israel intensified public resentment, as it exposed the collapse of regime narratives, the dramatic failure of key weapons systems, the assassination of senior leaders, and unprecedented intelligence penetrations—all of which stripped the regime of its aura of invulnerability.
During both Trump administrations, stringent sanctions were imposed on Iran’s financial system and its shadow banking networks, further suffocating the regime’s access to currency. Developments in Venezuela and statements by President Trump may have emboldened protesters and supporters of secular political currents. Collectively, these dynamics have produced an unprecedented crisis for the Iranian regime—one that could ultimately threaten its survival.
Regional Implications and the Strategic Dilemma
From an Arab perspective, the prospect of regime collapse may appear tempting—offering an opportunity to dismantle a sectarian, theocratic system that has exploited nearly every regional crisis for its own benefit. However, the critical question remains: is the fall of the Iranian regime as advantageous for Arab states as it is for Israel? Or does it represent a deceptive blessing, concealing future instability?
Would post–clerical Iran remain unified and align with Israel and the West? Or would it fragment along ethnic, sectarian, and religious lines—becoming a new source of regional instability, akin to a Middle Eastern Pandora’s box?
