As military escalation in the Middle East continues, external strikes have not led to the collapse of the Iranian regime. This reality highlights a frequently underestimated fact: Iran’s political evolution depends прежде on its internal dynamics.
After several weeks of conflict, the hypothesis of a rapid collapse of the Iranian regime has not materialized. Despite nearly 8,000 targets reportedly struck according to CENTCOM, and the elimination of Ali Khamenei in the early hours of the conflict followed by that of numerous high ranking military and security officials, the ruling system remains in place.
On March 12, Reuters, citing three sources familiar with U.S. intelligence assessments, reported that the Islamic Republic was not facing an imminent risk of collapse. This situation underscores the limits of a strictly military approach to what is прежде a political crisis.
War as a Constraint on Internal Dynamics
In this context, war paradoxically acts as a short term stabilizing factor. When the entire territory is exposed to bombardment, the population’s priority becomes daily survival, pushing large scale political mobilization into the background. Yet these same citizens have, in recent years, demonstrated their capacity to challenge the authorities through successive waves of protest.
The regime appears to be exploiting the situation to rebuild a form of internal cohesion. Official rhetoric, marked by the repeated call to pursue the war to the end, seeks to reframe the political environment in security terms, even as the human and economic costs of the conflict continue to rise.
Increasing Militarization of Urban Space
At the same time, the militarization of cities has intensified. According to the Fars News Agency, the number of security patrols has reportedly tripled. Alongside police forces and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps IRGC, paramilitary groups particularly the Fatemiyoun and Zeynabiyoun brigades Afghan and Pakistani mercenaries affiliated with the IRGC have been deployed to reinforce the security apparatus.
Their presence, especially in night patrols, contributes to creating a climate of deterrence aimed at containing any form of dissent. Statements by security officials reflect this hardening stance. Ahmad Reza Radan, commander of Iran’s police force, declared:
“If anyone takes to the streets at the behest of the enemy, we do not consider them ordinary protesters, but enemies and we will treat them as such.”
He added:
“All our forces have their fingers on the trigger, ready to defend the revolution and support the people and the nation.”
A Crisis with Regional and International Implications
Beyond the national framework, the Iranian crisis is part of a broader regional dynamic. Current tensions from Gaza to direct confrontations with Israel illustrate the effects of a political system whose internal logic extends beyond its borders.
More broadly, given Iran’s geopolitical weight, the Iranian question stands as a central issue for Middle Eastern stability, as well as for global energy and security balances.
The Decisive Role of Internal Dynamics
In this context, a key question remains: to what extent can political transformation in Iran be driven from the outside. Historical experience suggests that external pressure, while capable of weakening a regime, is not sufficient to produce lasting transformation. Such change depends primarily on internal dynamics social mobilization, organized resistance, and the emergence of credible political alternatives.
Twenty one years ago, Maryam Rajavi, a leading figure of the Iranian opposition, stated at the European Parliament:
“The solution for Iran lies neither in appeasement nor in war, but in a third option regime change by the people and an organized resistance.”
This approach argues that neither military confrontation nor policies of accommodation alone can produce durable change.
An Organized Force Inside the Country
If external constraints were lifted, Iranian society and opposition forces would have the capacity and determination to drive this change. This path also appears to be the only one capable of preventing the prolongation of the current conflict and the emergence of further crises.
Alongside widespread social discontent, structured opposition movements are active داخل the country. These include Kurdish, Baluchi, and Arab organizations in border regions, as well as nationwide resistance units. Established since 2016 by the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran MEK, these units form an extensive network present in the capital and across many provinces.
This network presents itself as an operational force for regime change. Over the past year, several thousand actions against repressive structures are reportedly attributed to this network. During the January 2026 uprising, more than 2,000 members of this network were reported missing, and their fate remains unknown. This has not prevented the continuation of their operations, reflecting a significant level of organization and resilience.
One of the recent turning points was the February 23 attack carried out by MEK resistance units against the Khamenei complex one of the regime’s most secure command centers which was subsequently targeted and destroyed by aerial strikes. Of the 250 fighters involved in this operation, 82 were killed or arrested. The regime, for its part, attempted to conceal the event.
An Equation Still Unresolved
The current situation illustrates a classic feature of political crises: external pressure may weaken a regime, but it does not necessarily transform it. Given Iran’s geopolitical weight, the emergence of a structured force within society itself appears to be an essential factor not only for democratic change, but also for ensuring stability and peace in the region.
