Belgium (Brussels Morning Newspaper) – By mid-2025, the Islamic Republic of Iran faces a historic crisis. Following the collapse of its regional influence – the so-called Axis of Resistance – Iran has now entered into a direct military confrontation with Israel, with its strategic depth eroding on all fronts. The downfall of the Assad regime in Syria, the decimation of Hamas in the Gaza War, the systematic dismantling of Hezbollah’s military capabilities, and the retreat of Iraqi Shi’a militias from active operations have left Iran increasingly isolated. This geopolitical isolation was compounded by Israel’s October 2024 pre-emptive strikes, which degraded Iran’s air defence systems and exposed the vulnerability of key nuclear and military sites.
On 13 June 2025, Israel launched a full-scale aerial campaign aimed at crippling Iran’s nuclear programme and military command structure. Targets have included uranium enrichment sites, IRGC headquarters, missile launchers, military infrastructure, and energy facilities. The operation followed the IDF’s declassified intelligence report, citing IAEA data suggesting Iran had reached a “point of no return” in nuclear weaponisation.
In retaliation, Iran launched waves of ballistic missile attacks on mostly civilian Israeli targets. However, Israel has retained air superiority, systematically dismantling critical infrastructure and assassinating senior IRGC officials.
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has now explicitly stated that the goal of the war is the fall of the Islamic regime, which continues to vow the destruction of the Israeli state.
Systemic Resilience and Revolutionary Legacy
Despite sustained military setbacks, Iran’s political system is not easily overturned. The 1979 Revolution – though initially a broad anti-Shah coalition – was ultimately captured by Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamist vision. This led to the establishment of a theocratic state under Islamist principles, where clerical authority overrides democratic institutions. Key to the regime’s endurance is its revolutionary identity, rooted in sacrifice and resistance. The ruling elite, many of whom are veterans of the Iran–Iraq War, operate within an ideological framework that sanctifies martyrdom and frames resistance as religious duty. This psychological and moral rigidity makes the regime both durable and dangerous under existential threat.
Moreover, while urban centres may host reformist or anti-regime sentiment, the regime retains substantial support across the rural heartland, bolstered by patronage networks, ideological education, and economic dependency. Western observers often underestimate this deep-rooted loyalty.
At the same time, Iran’s geography, demographic cohesion (over 90% Shi’a), and loose ethnic identities among most groups – with the notable exceptions of Kurds and Baluchs – make it a fundamentally different case from Iraq or Syria. Internal disintegration is not easily achieved. Although Israel may attempt to exploit separatist narratives, domestic separatism remains marginal and lacks critical mass. Azeris are the largest minority in Iran (~15–25%), comprising a majority in the country’s northern provinces. They are largely integrated into the regime, while their religious belief prevails over ethnic identity and nationalist aspirations. Supreme Leader Khamenei himself has Azeri roots. Most importantly, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is not merely a military force – though powerful within Iran. It is an economic empire and ideological backbone. Even if clerical authority weakens, a militarised state structure could preserve systemic continuity under new authoritarian leadership.
Nevertheless, despite its resilience, the regime faces growing internal challenges. Urban youth, comprising over 60% of Iran’s population, express frustration with economic stagnation and social restrictions, as seen in the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests. At the same time, economic hardship – 40% inflation, 12% unemployment, and disrupted oil exports – may threaten even rural loyalty.
Scenarios Ahead
A sober forecast must explore not just outcomes, but mechanisms of change. Several scenarios, each drawn from contemporary indicators and structural analysis, can be considered:
A. Full Regime Collapse and Power Vacuum
This is the outcome desired by Israeli leadership. While it cannot be ruled out, it is improbable in the short term due to regime cohesion, IRGC control, and the absence of a unified opposition. A vacuum could fuel insurgency, economic collapse, or even proxy conflict. Regional players, including Turkey and Israel, might move quickly to fill the void. A transitional government may emerge, potentially secular and internationally supervised. Another option is the Western-backed reinstallation of the Shah’s rule. As history shows, however, sudden regime change rarely ends with democracy or stability.
B. Ideological Reversal or Internal Civil Confrontation
A long-term possibility involves an internal ideological rupture, where Islamic-reformist, nationalist, or even secular movements emerge as counterweights to theocratic power. The most peaceful and pragmatic option is a managed transition led by moderate forces within the regime – particularly pragmatic clerics and technocrats. Any other option would eventually lead to civil unrest, which could evolve into fragmented governance, especially if military or provincial elites defect. This might mirror the 1920 dual-power crisis in collapsing Ottoman Turkey (Constantinople vs. Ankara). The IRGC remains the greatest obstacle to this scenario.
C. IRGC-Led Military Authoritarianism
A plausible outcome is the militarisation of the regime, sidelining clerical rule in favour of IRGC hardliners. The regime would survive in structure but shed its religious legitimacy. The result would resemble other authoritarian systems where the military consolidates power in the name of national stability.
D. Reformist Transition or Foreign-Brokered Settlement
Least likely, but not impossible, is a gradual reform process – triggered by elite negotiation or mass mobilisation. This would require either internal consensus or external pressure backed by credible incentives and security guarantees. However, the current war climate makes such a solution remote.
4. Federalisation or Balkanisation
Though unlikely, prolonged instability could push Iran towards decentralisation or even disintegration. Long-suppressed ethnic tensions might emerge, especially if exacerbated by external meddling. Kurdish separatism or Baluch unrest could flare. But the odds are low. Iran’s geography acts as a fortress, its borders ringed by mountains and deserts. Most minorities are culturally Persianised or loyal to the Iranian state. Even calls for federalism are politically taboo, viewed as preludes to national fracture.
Worst case? A Yugoslavia-style breakup. But barring massive war or state collapse, Iran’s internal cohesion makes this a remote scenario.
Conclusions
The Israel–Iran conflict may mark a dangerous escalation in this already fragile region. Iran’s strategic position has deteriorated dramatically, and Israeli ambitions have shifted from pre-emption to regime destruction.
Yet Iran’s internal coherence, geographic resilience, and military entrenchment offer buffers against sudden collapse. It is crucial to understand that most of these transformations cannot realistically occur without external intervention.
Yet, despite the severity of recent developments, there remains little appetite for full-scale intervention. The United States, especially under the leadership of Donald Trump, is unlikely to launch a regime-change war. The American public is still reeling from the legacy of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Israel, though capable of precision strikes, lacks the military or political capacity to invade and rebuild Iran. Even Saudi Arabia and the UAE — despite their traditional rivalry with Tehran — fear the destabilising effects of total Iranian collapse.
In short: regime change through force is conceivable but unsustainable without a long-term, multinational commitment. And today, no global actor is willing to pay that price. If the regime survives, it may do so in a transformed, militarised, or ideologically fragmented form. But this kind of survival comes at the cost of legitimacy, economic devastation, and further isolation.
Whether the Islamic Republic falls or mutates, the outcome will reshape the regional balance of power. It already has with the collapse of Iran’s “proxy empire”.
What is certain is that the Middle East will not return to the pre-2025 status quo.
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
