Survival Is Not Stability: Op-ed

As the clerical regime faces escalating internal and external crises, a central question emerges: how has it remained in power despite economic collapse, repeated uprisings, international isolation, and the erosion of its social legitimacy? The answer is clear: the regime’s survival does not reflect real stability, but a combination of repression, security maneuvering, and international circumstances that have repeatedly extended its lifespan.

Hossein Daeeoleslam, member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said: “The greatest mistake in reading the Iranian situation is to view the regime’s survival as evidence of strength. This regime is living on borrowed time, not stability. It rules through fear, not legitimacy, and relies on repression, not public consent.

He emphasized that “four decades of international appeasement, regional wars, and shifting geopolitical priorities have given the regime repeated opportunities to postpone its downfall. But none of these factors has addressed its core crisis: the widening gap between society and the state, and the collapse of public trust in its institutions.”

Daeeoleslam added: “The regime today is not only facing external pressure; it is facing a society that has broken the barrier of fear. Protests by workers, retirees, women, students, and marginalized groups show that rejection of the regime is no longer seasonal or limited, but part of a broad social consciousness.”

He noted that “Iran’s economic crisis — from inflation and unemployment to collapsing purchasing power and medicine shortages — is not merely a failure of management, but the direct result of a corrupt ruling structure that spends national resources on repression and foreign projects while leaving citizens to face poverty, illness, and insecurity.”

According to Daeeoleslam, “the regime is trapped between two costly choices: continuing its nuclear and regional policies accelerates economic collapse, while making major concessions risks deepening internal fractures within its security and ideological structure.”

In this context, attention is turning to the major Iranian demonstration in Paris on June 20, 2026, with around 100,000 Iranians and supporters of freedom expected to take part, sending a message that the Iranian people’s alternative is neither chaos nor a return to the past, but a democratic republic based on freedom, separation of religion and state, and popular sovereignty.

Daeeoleslam concluded: “The regime remains in power, but it is no longer stable. It stands on a fragile balance guarded by repression, while Iranian society steadily moves toward freedom. The question is no longer whether the regime’s legitimacy has ended, but when this deep erosion will turn into a decisive moment of change.”