Beyond war and deals: speakers urge ‘third way’ for Iran—people-led change backed by a democratic roadmap

As global attention remains fixed on conflict dynamics around Iran, a wide-ranging online conference advanced a different proposition: neither foreign intervention nor renewed accommodation with Tehran, but a “third way” centered on Iranian-led regime change, guided by a defined democratic blueprint.

Giulio Terzi, Italy’s former foreign minister and now a senator, framed the moment as one of decisive consequence for Iran’s future. He highlighted what he called an unprecedented international signal—more than 1,000 lawmakers and former senior officials signing a joint statement supporting the NCRI’s newly announced provisional government. For Terzi, the significance was not only the number, but the implication: that a cross-party international constituency increasingly views an organized, legitimate transition framework as both necessary and feasible.

The conference’s core argument was consistent across speakers: appeasement has failed, and war is not a solution. John Baird, Canada’s former foreign minister, said decades of experience since 1979 show that concessions merely extend the life of the regime. But he also warned that external military “boots on the ground” do not deliver genuine political transformation—pointing to Iraq and Afghanistan as cautionary examples. The alternative, he said, is to support leadership, organization, and networks inside Iran capable of mobilizing society to overthrow dictatorship.

That is where Maryam Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan was repeatedly cited as the practical center of gravity. Speakers described it as a roadmap for a democratic, secular republic: free elections, separation of religion and state, gender equality, minority rights, abolition of the death penalty, and a non-nuclear Iran committed to peaceful coexistence. Crucially, the plan was presented as rejecting all dictatorship—clerical autocracy as well as any return to hereditary rule “of the Shah.”

Geir Haarde, Iceland’s former prime minister, reinforced the “no war, no appeasement” thesis, arguing that military strikes may degrade capabilities but rarely produce durable political change against an entrenched theocracy. He urged recognition of the NCRI’s provisional government as a bridge to free elections, while emphasizing civilian protection and the safeguarding of infrastructure.

In one of the sharper critiques, speakers also noted what they see as a gap in international media coverage of Iran’s organized opposition—arguing that meaningful Western policy requires structured engagement with democratic alternatives rather than commentary confined to the battlefield or to short-term diplomatic tactics.

Taken together, the conference advanced a single policy demand: stop betting on force from outside or bargains with the rulers in Tehran; instead, recognize and engage an organized democratic alternative and its transition plan—so that Iranians, not outsiders, determine what comes next.