Go Persians, go!

[The Minsky Moment]

Regime is living on borrowed time.  The old veterans from the Iraq-Iran war that are the base of regime support aren't getting younger, and they've blown whatever remnants of other public support they might have been able to claim.  The bazaari merchants turned out big in these protests which is always a bad sign for an Iranian regime.  The real old timers and top leadership in IRGC may bitter end it, but the mid-level elechons are going to start to think about what a successor regime might look like and whether they would be better off getting out in front of that process.

[Sheilbh]

I agree with all of that - although on that count I think that's where Pahlavi die-harders in the West are not particularly helpful (although perhaps they just don't matter).

The slight thing I'd question is about the mid-level because, as Tonitrus says I can remember several rounds of very significant protests in Iran. But I can't think of any elite defections or security service defections. I think those are key factors in successful revolutions. I'm not sure the extent to which, like under Assad, it is simply impossible for those people to imagine an alternative under a successor regime and the extent to which their material and status is tied up in the regime enduring.

[Tonitrus]

...Pahlavi die-harders in the West are not particularly helpful (although perhaps they just don't matter).

That exiled prince dude, and the attention he gets amid these events is pretty ridiculous.  Iran doesn't need to replace mullahs with a failed/discredited monarchy.

That said...the prospects for any kind of democratic movement there will have lots of difficulties from the start.  The democratic/republican institutions from the pre-Shah days are pretty far gone in the past, and there is a large cohort of regime loyalists/sympathizers/leftovers who would still be around to push things in a regressive direction.

Even if a popular revolution would to push over the line to topple the regime, there is a great danger of things going along the lines of the post-USSR Russia...years of poverty/beggary followed by a slow or quick retrenchment into thuggery.

But maybe I am too cynical.

[Jacob]

The number of dead is horrendous... but sadly, not out of character for the regime.

Does it look like the US will take any action?

[Legbiter]

The number of dead is horrendous... but sadly, not out of character for the regime.

Does it look like the US will take any action?

They have a lot of kit assembled in-theater but what would a sustained bombing campaign even do? You can bomb leadership targets, the lower rank move up but facts on the ground remain the same. If the US seizes/blows up Kharg Island on day 1 then I'll believe they're serious about tossing the Islamic Republic out. Unless the opposition is armed with weapons on the ground this is like Venezuela 2.0

[Tonitrus]

I have enough low opinion of the current US government mafia that I suspect Venezuela 2.0 might be exactly what they're thinking.

However, I also suspect the Iranian ayatollahs are not as pliable as it seems Maduro's successors turned out to be, even if they are bombed.

[Tonitrus]

And I am much more skeptical that a "snatch and grab" operation of Ali Khamenei would work out as well either.  For us or for them.

[Sheilbh]

The number of dead is horrendous... but sadly, not out of character for the regime.

Does it look like the US will take any action?

I think there's reasons to think it. They've moved a lot of hardware into the region. The UK have deployed the RAF in a "defensive capacity" to Qatar (a very close ally). The regime has issued some very bellicose statements. Reports in Turkiye are that the government are activating emergency plans for a US-Iran conflict.

(Very much not important but I'd just note on this from a Euro-centric perspective that the Syrian conflict resulted in around 1.5 million refugees in Europe - and had a big destabilisnig effect on our politics. And worth noting that Turkiye took significantly more in - closer to 3-4 million. But seen an article from several years ago estimating a war in Iran could lead up to as many as 8 million refugees in Europe - again probably far more within the region.)

Agree on all of that though Tonitrus.

I think this is a far more hardened regime that I think will be prepared and preparing for an attack (see their very aggressive statement). There is a leadership class at the top that are ideologically committed and came through (often as the young radicals) a revolution and existential war. I suspect even more broadly than that there is a broad class whose material well-being depends on the survival of the regime. As I say I think there is more of an Assad style zero-sum aspect with the opposition here too.

On the other hand I slightly query quite what the regime can do in response - and I think it does show the worth/sense of their "forward defence" policy in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen for the last forty year. As it's a lot easier to attack Iran when they don't have proxies to move in the region. I'd also add that Saudi is re-aligning interestingly.

Having said all that - the attack in Venezuela was extraordinary, so I'm very reluctant to write of the US military.

[mongers]

I have enough low opinion of the current US government mafia that I suspect Venezuela 2.0 might be exactly what they're thinking.

However, I also suspect the Iranian ayatollahs are not as pliable as it seems Maduro's successors turned out to be, even if they are bombed.

Yes, the US is after all their 'Great Satan' and I'd guess many do genuinely believe that after the Iran-Iraq war, during which the US extensively cooperated with the Iraqis to mount the most successful chemical weapons campaign on the battlefield.

And not forgetting all of the European country's chemical companies that supplied the base chemicals and for whom European countries turned a continent wide blind-eye.

My point being that if so many of the regime have survived chemical weapons attacks, they'll forever hold the US and the West responsible, so for them martyrdom of one form or another is no big deal.

[Jacob]

I'd also add that Saudi is re-aligning interestingly.

How so?

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

Saudi Arabia has been warming relations with Iran over the past few years.  They even went so far as to lead the condemnation of Israel's strikes last year.

[grumbler]

Yes, the US is after all their 'Great Satan' and I'd guess many do genuinely believe that after the Iran-Iraq war, during which the US extensively cooperated with the Iraqis to mount the most successful chemical weapons campaign on the battlefield.

And not forgetting all of the European country's chemical companies that supplied the base chemicals and for whom European countries turned a continent wide blind-eye.

My point being that if so many of the regime have survived chemical weapons attacks, they'll forever hold the US and the West responsible, so for them martyrdom of one form or another is no big deal.

I don't think that the Iranians believe that the US "extensively cooperated with the Iraqis to mount the most successful chemical weapons campaign." Nor that "many of the regime have survived chemical weapons attacks."

Martyrdom in Shia Islam is definitely seen as a sacred thing.