Notes on Iran: regime collapse or survival?

Source: https://www.afr.com/world/middle-east/in-pictures-iran-war-s-global-impact-20260302-p5o6ol

There are several reasons why one can be optimistic about the survival of the current regime in Iran following the illegal and unprovoked war on the nation waged by the USA and Israel. First, the regime managed to overcome its most dangerous and fragile moment, that is, immediately after the assassination by Israeli bombs of Khamenei, his family members and his entourage of senior leaders. At 86, and after having ruled Iran for 40 years with an iron fist, Khamenei decided to become a martyr. Hence, he was at his office – a publicly disclosed location – when he was killed. This was both a spiritual and strategic move. Martyrdom plays a vital role among the Shia faithful. The decision to die in this manner was strategic because it signalled to the Iranian population that a succession plan was in place in line with constitutional provisions. Iran is a constitutional republic that has endured for 50 years. It is not a lawless theocracy dependent on the whims of an aging Ayatollah.

Second, and this follows from the first, Trump and Netanyahu failed to understand the multi-layered structure of the Iranian regime. They thought with Khamenei and his senior entourage gone, the regime would collapse and the thankful Iranians would dance with joy in the streets and enthusiastically engage with a new pro-American and pro-Israeli political settlement. Both Trump and Netanyahu would declare victory and go home. This did not happen. Instead, the regime maintained its constitutional continuity. The bombing continues, hundreds have been killed so far (550 at last count). It is difficult at this stage for the average Iranian to treat the Americans and Israelis as liberators when they are being killed and maimed by made in USA bombs and missiles.

Third, Iran has shown that it can retaliate against the combined military might of USA and Israel by using a most potent weapon of modern warfare – long-range (but not intercontinental) ballistic missiles that draw on North Korean, Russian and Chinese expertise. According to some estimates, Iran possesses more than 3,000 of them. Admittedly, both USA and Israel have so-called interceptors, that is, defensive technology that can intercept incoming missiles. But, as Israel is finding to its cost, such a technology is not fool-proof. Most importantly, the very sophistication of this technology is also its Achilles Heel. It is extremely expensive to operate, stocks are limited and has high turnaround times to replenish. It has been suggested that neither the USA nor Israel has the capacity to sustain full-scale use of the interceptors beyond a few weeks before critical shortages emerge.

Fourth, Iran has fully adopted the tools of asymmetric warfare which weaker parties deploy against formidable adversaries. Unlike the last war (June 2025), when it was attacked by Israel, Iran decided from the very beginning that there are no ‘red lines.’ Hence, it is hitting the Arab allies of USA in the Gulf monarchies and causing them considerable grief and consternation. This is being done by inflicting damage on US bases hosted by the Gulf states, targeting sensitive civilian assets entailing airports, ports, luxury hotels and energy infrastructure. The result is mayhem. The famous airlines of the Middle East – Emirates, Etihad and Qatar – are all grounded. ‘Hundreds of thousands of travellers’ are caught in limbo. The carefully curated images of Bahrain, Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha as safe playgrounds for affluent, hedonistic hustlers have been severely damaged. Most importantly, energy prices are projected to rise sharply, partly because countries such as Qatar have temporarily stopped LNG production. Iran has also choked off traffic in the Straits of Hormuz to a trickle. This is highly significant because Hormuz hosts oil tankers that supply 20-30% of the world’s oil.

The attack on the Arab allies of USA might appear that an Iranian regime is lashing out against its neighbours in desperation, but the strategic rationale is different. By attacking the Gulf states in such a brazen way, Iran is sending a clear message: US protection of its Arab allies means extraordinarily little when push comes to shove. This is a move by the Iranians that was not part of the strategic calculus of USA and its allies.

Fourth, it is by no means clear that Trump has the appetite for a long war which is deeply unpopular among Americans (75% oppose the war on Iran, according to some polls). He has brazenly broken his election pledge that there will be no more ‘wars of choice.’ Trump’s approval rating is low. His MAGA base is becoming restless, caught in the grip of a cost-of-living crisis that is likely to worsen with the projected increase in energy prices. Mid-term elections are approaching and Trump has little to show as accomplishments other than vacuous showmanship. American military personnel are paying for Trump’s war of choice with their lives – six dead so far with many more injuries. The pain threshold for the average American is low when such needless deaths occur.

In sum, ‘victory’ for Iran means regime survival even when facing formidable foes. If Iran can pull it off, it will be seen as the mythical David prevailing over Goliath. Of course, the costs will be extremely high in terms of death and destruction and adverse economic consequences that will linger for years, but the Iranian leadership could say that it did not choose this suicidal path. It was forced to defend the nation against implacable and powerful enemies.

Stranger in My Own Paradise

By

Aunul Islam, PhD (Imperial College, UK)

Synopsis:

This is a deeply personal narrative yet layered with history. What stands out is how the narrative intertwines individual memory with collective national trauma. The author moves between moments of hope (1971, independence) and disillusionment (1975, the assassination of Bangabandhu, and later political upheavals), showing how “paradise” shifts from a homeland to a fragile state of mind.

In Bangladesh, memory serves both as a unifying force and a source of division

Paradise. For me, it was never a distant dream—it was home. The land where rivers meandered through green fields, where the air carried the scent of liberation and hope. In 1972, at sixteen, I left that paradise behind, boarding a plane to the United Kingdom with a heart full of ambition and a mind still echoing the cries of victory from a bloody war of independence. Bangladesh was free, and I believed its future would be bright.

Image 1: A huge crowd celebrates the Bangladesh Liberation War

Three years later, I returned. The contrast with Britain was stark, yet I felt no dissonance. My country was poor, scarred by war, but it was mine until 15 August 1975, when paradise bled again. The Father of the Nation—our beacon of freedom—was brutally murdered along with his family in a military coup. What shattered me was not only the violence but the silence that followed. A nation that had fought so fiercely for liberty now stood mute, whether paralysed by shock or poisoned by betrayal. My dream of returning home after my education crumbled that day.

Image 2: The dark night of Bangabandhu’s assassination: how it unfolded…bdnews24.com, 15 August 2021

I tried again in 1979, hoping time would heal. But the spirit of the liberation war was fading, replaced by whispers of corruption and compromise. In 1985, I returned to settle, married, clinging to the hope that roots could still grow. Yet the soil felt strange beneath my feet. By 1988, I went back to my newly adopted paradise—the UK—carrying the ache of a homeland slipping away.

From 1995 to 2006, I made another attempt. I walked the streets of my childhood, searching for the rhythm I once knew. But the society had changed beyond recognition. The ideals we fought for were eroding; the language of freedom was drowned in the noise of greed and power. I was a stranger among my own people.

And then came the final blow. From 2006 to 2025, I watched from afar as history was rewritten. In 2024, another political upheaval erased the very memory of our liberation struggle—the foundation of our identity. The dream that had carried me across oceans was gone. My paradise was not just lost; it was betrayed.

Image 3: Celebrating the July uprising…but where is the nation heading?

Image 4: Bangabandhu Sheik Mujib’s home is destroyed as a crowd watches with a combination of fear and fascination

What does it mean to lose paradise? For me, it is not the loss of land or flag, but the slow death of ideals—the erosion of truth, justice, and memory. I fought for a country that promised freedom, dignity, and hope. Today, that promise lies buried beneath the weight of power and silence. Paradise, I have learned, is not a place. It is a state of mind—a fragile vision we carry within us. And when that vision dies, even home becomes foreign.

I am a migrant twice over—once by choice, and now by necessity. My adopted land gave me shelter, but my heart still wanders the streets of a homeland that exists only in memory. I am, and will remain, a stranger in my own paradise.

Democracy promotion, regime change and US foreign policy: The case of Bangladesh

On August 5, 2024, a student-led movement toppled Sheikh Hasina’s deeply entrenched authoritarian regime. The redoubtable Economist magazine voted Bangladesh ‘the country of the year’ (2024) because students led a movement that ‘toppled a tyrant’ and paved the way for a brighter future.

Do the student leaders really deserve such praise, or was there the not-so-hidden hand of external forces?

It is reasonable to argue that the legitimacy of a home-grown pro-democracy movement is impaired when it is co-opted by powerful external actors whose geopolitical considerations might not be aligned with a country’s national interest.

The Economist is silent on this issue, and there is hardly any national debate on this vexed question, perhaps because the media is still not free in the post-Hasina era.

The prime suspect that aided and abetted the expulsion of the Hasina regime is the USA.  This proposition is supported by a combination of historical records and circumstantial evidence.

To find out more, follow this link: