Version imprimableThis deadly and complex conflict threatens to destroy the social and civil fabric of Iranian society. The Israeli government demands “regime change,” more precisely the “fall” of the Islamic Republic and/or a dislocation of state structures. Such a “fall” or dislocation would mainly benefit fascist, chauvinist and ethnic armed factions, which are already emerging, even outside the current regime. These groups dream of profiting from this tragic situation, they only see their selfish interests, to the detriment of the population. These groups, along with hundreds of militias emerging from the potential fragmentation of the Islamic regime’s armed forces, could wage a bitter war against each other, using missiles and drones to destroy cities and homes. This war waged by Israel and its American ally, although destructive for the regime of the Islamic Republic, would then only serve to strengthen militarized, chauvinist and separatist factions. Such a scenario could plunge Iran into chaos similar to that of post-Saddam Hussein Iraq or post-Muammar Gaddafi Libya.
A conflict with complex geopolitical stakes
Israel’s military attack is not only about the Iranian nuclear issue. This justification is reminiscent of the lies about the “weapons of mass destruction” that were used to legitimize the invasion of Iraq. This is a struggle for influence between world imperialist powers and regional powers, in which the US seeks to maintain its declining dominance through military demonstrations of force.
Israel, whatever its claimed autonomy, remains the armed wing of the United States in the Middle East. It therefore plays a central role in this strategy. The regular bombing of Gaza is not only aimed at massacring the Palestinian people. They also serve to remind the world of the scope of Israeli military power and its American ally.
Israel’s military attack on Iran, undoubtedly carried out from the outset with the support of the United States, stunned the entire world with the advanced and combined use of sophisticated technologies. This operation once again demonstrated the military superiority of Israel and the United States, sending a clear message to their geopolitical rivals. One of the objectives of this attack was precisely to highlight their technological and military dominance.
In Ukraine, Russia’s “deterrence” capacity limits direct intervention. In regions/countries such as Gaza and the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and now Iran, this show of force is being implemented without hindrance. While the strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon have not aroused massive regional fear, the attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly through the use of robots and artificial intelligence, generates much greater terror, especially given its insertion into this specific geographical area.
The Islamic Republic, the other protagonist in this war, is a regime seeking to ensure its preponderance in the distribution of power in the Middle East. Its opposition to Israel, which acts in accordance with the policies implemented by the US in the region, is in reality an attempt to claim a dominant position in the regional balance of power.
The weakening of the Islamic Republic’s regional influence, following economic sanctions – which do not exonerate the regime and its neoliberal kleptocracy from their disastrous management of the economy – the neutralisation of its Islamic proxies, the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime and the threat of popular uprisings, had forced Tehran to enter into nuclear negotiations in order to reach a compromise and preserve its place on the regional chessboard.
However, the US and Israel ultimately judged that a military solution would be more effective in forcing the Islamic Republic to submit to the “order” they wish to impose and in asserting their superiority in the eyes of the world.
The suffering of the Iranian people
For the people of Iran, this war only aggravates already dire conditions: poverty, inequality, dictatorship and brutal repression, imprisonment, torture, daily executions, repression of women, imposition of compulsory veiling, the religious state, as well as the oppression of religious and ethnic minorities.
A protracted war risks destroying Iran’s economic and social infrastructure, plunging it into chaos similar to that of Syria or Afghanistan. This could set Iranian society back, or even plunge it into chaos and a dark scenario of state disintegration.
Although the Islamic Republic retaliates by bombing Israeli cities, these attacks also affect innocent civilians. Yet in Arab countries, these acts are seen by many as revenge for decades of occupation and various humiliations inflicted by Israel. Will the Iranian regime, insofar as it emerges more or less unscathed from the present war, be able to take advantage of this acquiescence of sectors of the Arab population to rebuild a network of regional influence? This is a debated hypothesis.
In contrast, the refusal of most Arab leaders to condemn the Israeli bombing resonates with segments of the Iranian population influenced by the right-wing opposition and its media, who rejoice in Israel’s military attacks on Iran while ignoring or downplaying the Israeli genocide in Gaza.
Challenges for the Iranian opposition
The Islamic Republic’s dire economic and political situation has placed the regime in a vulnerable position, making it possible for it to collapse under massive military strikes. The strikes, carried out by Israel, are aimed at destroying Iran’s critical economic infrastructure, including gas and oil production, as well as its strategic ports.
In this context, some factions of the right-wing opposition, as well as fringe groups such as the Mujahideen, Abdullah Mohtadi’s Kurdish Komala group allied with the monarchists, and other ethnic nationalist movements, see this scenario as an opportunity to be exploited. These reactionary opposition groups have expressed their satisfaction with the Israeli military strikes and encourage their escalation, hoping to use them to mobilize the population against the regime. However, their strategy risks exacerbating the suffering of the population.
While ordinary citizens are desperate to protect themselves from the bombings, these factions are calling for a “final” confrontation with the regime. Such a strategy, under the current conditions, could only lead to bloodshed, utter despair and worsening of the suffering of the Iranian people. This situation makes the struggle for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic even more complex and perilous for the popular movement.
The preparation of the people to confront the Islamic regime is based on the preservation of the gains of previous struggles, on organization against the war with the difficult conditions it imposes. At the moment, it is not a question of attacking, but of resisting and organizing. Although the Islamic Republic is not militarily capable of competing with Israel and the United States, it exploits the war situation to suppress popular uprisings with increased brutality and perpetuate the repression of any opponent.
Immediately pushing the people to directly confront the regime under these circumstances is a criminal action, encouraged only by reactionary and irresponsible forces and groups, the extreme right and monarchists.
The left and progressives, for their part, insist on the importance of solidarity and organization in the face of the challenges of war. They call for humanitarian and solidarity actions, a mobilization for an immediate ceasefire and fighting against nationalist and warmongering discourse. Faced with the suffering of the war, they put forward demands such as:
– Providing essential resources and equipment to citizens forced to flee their homes and cities;
– Ensuring the full payment of rights and compensation for these displaced persons;
– Ensuring basic needs for subsistence, health and living conditions;
– Providing immediate assistance to the population in the event of bombing;
– Fighting for an immediate end to the war, exerting pressure on the regime for a ceasefire and a swift end to the conflict.
At the same time, they oppose nationalism that seeks to rally the people to support the regime, as well as warmongering groups and nationalists of all kinds who rejoice in war, the destruction of society and bombings, under the pretext of “overthrowing” the regime.
This is how, with the most conscious workers and citizens, it is possible to play an effective role in all short- and long-term eventualities. These contingencies include:
– Exploiting the weakening or defeat of the Islamic Republic in the war until its total collapse;
– Moving society away from dark scenarios of chaos and widespread disorder;
– Preparing the masses to intervene in the face of possible internal coups, and supporting the complete collapse of the regime.
In such circumstances, the policy of the forces claiming to be on the left should consist of:
– Organizing the population to take on the management of society.
– Arming workers and citizens to ensure their self-defence against the regime, as well as against all present and future criminal factions.
This approach aims to ensure that society remains united and ready to overcome challenges, while building a future based on social justice and democratic participation.
The right-wing opposition in Iran is not content to wait for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic through military intervention or a coup. It also envisages that a popular uprising, from a right-wing perspective, could complement and accelerate its policy of “regime change.”
In this perspective, the right-wing opposition seeks to capitalize on popular discontent, not to establish a more just and egalitarian society, but to serve narrow interests aligned with external or elitist agendas. This highlights the risk that the legitimate aspirations of the people will be diverted to projects contrary to their fundamental interests.
Over the past three decades, almost all regime change in the world has been achieved with the massive participation of the population, often through popular uprisings. The call by Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah, and other right-wing currents for strikes and uprisings is neither mere posturing nor a lie, but a strategy to spread their own political vision within the general aspirations of the people. The Israeli military intervention and the growing desperation of the population give this vision more weight to influence events.
Only the "populists" who blindly follow these right-wing currents conceal this reality, seeking to mask their objectives under the pretext of "popular" struggles.
In such a conjuncture, the role of the left currents, and in particular those claiming to be socialist, is to neutralize these attempts, to combat the spread of the right-wing vision within society and its solutions, and to isolate these forces in the struggle for the overthrow of the Islamist regime. To do this, they must rely primarily on the strength of the progressive workers’ movement, which has the capacity to rally the people around it. Their goal must be to protect society from catastrophic scenarios and regime changes orchestrated by external agendas, while stimulating popular sectors towards a truly emancipatory alternative based in particular on social justice.
A struggle for peace
The Iranian people aspire to peace, not war. They want a future free from dictatorships and foreign interventions. An immediate ceasefire and an end to the bombing of cities in Iran and Israel is essential to avert an even greater catastrophe and to create the conditions for a democratic and revolutionary transformation. The struggle to make this orientation triumph can lead Iranian society away from the black and appalling abyss of war and create the necessary conditions for an offensive against the regime. It is in such a process that the revolutionary overthrow of the Islamic Republic can be achieved.
In the end, the fall of the Islamic Republic, if it is to occur, must in no way be the result of foreign intervention, but that of a popular uprising organized and led by the people themselves.
20 June 2025
Translated by International Viewpoint from ESSF.
