Three-minute read
Amid rising regional tensions, Iran’s clerical regime is grappling with a deepening internal crisis, characterized by growing anxiety, infighting, and efforts by officials to address low morale among its ranks. While leaders attempt to project a façade of bellicosity, recent statements reveal a regime struggling to maintain its narrative, as fears grow that a regional conflict could trigger widespread unrest in a society that has consistently seized every opportunity to overthrow the clerical dictatorship.
The ongoing crisis has been reflected in statements made by Iran’s senior clerics, who have been vocal in their attempts to address concerns and shore up support among the regime’s base. In a Friday sermon on October 18 in Birjand, Mohammad Mokhtari sought to counter a wave of defeatism. He lamented, “It is truly heartbreaking that recently we lost prominent figures like Dr. Ismail Haniyeh and Sayyed Hassan [Nasrallah], who were martyred under tragic circumstances.” He acknowledged the grief these incidents have caused but attempted to pivot to a more positive note, adding, “Amidst these sorrowful events, there are also inspiring and proud moments. So, there is no reason for despair.”
“Some people, misguided by Western propaganda, still ask, ‘What do Israel and Palestine have to do with us? Why are we involved in Yemen, Syria, or Iraq? Why don’t we focus on our own country instead?’” His remarks underscore the widespread skepticism within the regime’s own ranks, where questions are being raised about the costs of Tehran’s regional interventions.
More Signs of #Iran’s Regional Strategy Collapse Emerge as #Lebanon Pushes Backhttps://t.co/FpMuRXmaN8
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) October 19, 2024
Mokhtari also said, “Perhaps one percent of Iran’s budget is spent on supporting the oppressed people of Palestine and others, and if this expense is not made, tomorrow we will have to fight the enemy inside the country and on the borders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
On October 19, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the Speaker of the regime’s Parliament, delivered a speech in Mashhad, where he explicitly addressed the fear spreading among the regime’s forces. In a 20-minute address aimed at boosting morale, Ghalibaf repeated the word “fear” thirteen times, attempting to rally the audience with phrases like, “We must not be afraid! Why should we be afraid? Even if the enemy possesses advanced technology, there is no reason for us to fear. Let us not give in to fear!”
Ahmad Alamolhoda, a representative of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Mashhad, expressed disapproval of those within Iran who question the country’s regional activities. During a sermon on October 19, he remarked, “Unfortunately, some people say, ‘Why should we get involved in conflicts between Israel and Palestine? Why are we investing our resources in these conflicts?’ This is not an ordinary involvement; it is a significant and powerful engagement.”
Yousef Tabatabaei-Nejad, Khamenei’s representative in Isfahan, addressed the growing criticism of Tehran’s military interventions during his October 19 sermon, taking aim at those he labeled as “cowards.” “There are some cowards who say, ‘If we launch missiles at Israel, what will they do? They will retaliate.’ They ask, ‘Why should we be concerned about their conflicts, why don’t we just focus on our own country?’” he said, adding that such attitudes stem from ignorance.
#Iran News:
Fearing Regional Pressure, Once Again Iran’s Regime Resorts to #Nuclear Bomb Extortionhttps://t.co/LvjE6Ym3dT— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) May 9, 2024
He added, “We must not be afraid. God has commanded us to stand firm against our enemies, and our commitment to this cause will not falter.” By invoking religious duty, he sought to reinforce the regime’s narrative that its actions were not just political but a matter of faith.
The fear of potential domestic upheaval has also been openly acknowledged by officials. During a sermon on October 13 in Bandar Abbas, Mohammad Ebadizadeh warned about the risk of protests. “More than being worried about enemy airplanes bombing a particular site, we are concerned that their agents and associates might attempt to lead this nation into chaos and disorder,” he said.
Ali Salehabadi, editor-in-chief of Setareh Sobh Online, wrote on October 19, “Who could have predicted that after the October 7 attack—one of the largest intelligence, security, and military blows to Israel—the regime would find an excuse to raze Gaza, assassinate leaders, and destroy homes, and now threatens to extend this scenario to Lebanon, with the risk of ultimately drawing Iran into a conflict that could backfire against us?”
Appeasement Brought #War, Only Regime Change in #Iran Can Deliver Peacehttps://t.co/S6Izl20Atd
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) October 6, 2024
Iran’s desperate regional diplomacy reflects a dual approach as tensions escalate. In recent weeks, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the regime’s President Masoud Pezeshkian have toured multiple regional capitals, urging de-escalation while warning of Iran’s readiness for conflict. At the same time, lower-ranking officials have hinted at nuclear weapons development, combining pleas for peace with veiled threats. This blend of mixed messaging and threats exposes the duplicity of a regime desperate to avert a broader conflict that could destabilize its already fragile hold on power at home.
Iran’s clerical regime is under unprecedented pressure, weakened by low morale, internal divisions, and fear of unrest. Despite orchestrated displays of mass mourning and aggressive rhetoric from its military cadres, the international community must see through this facade and recognize the regime’s vulnerabilities.
Nevertheless, despite these evident weaknesses, the regime remains committed to its aggressive regional policies and proxy support. It continues to fund and arm its allies across the region, signaling that its strategy of interference will not change. Therefore, the international community must increase pressure, especially on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). An essential step would be the immediate designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization. Without this, there is a risk of underestimating the regime’s persistence in its interventions or assuming that its current weakness will lead to a change in behavior.
