Trying to forecast Iran’s political trajectory has been something thats tempted analysts into false certainty for a very long time. The country resists linear prediction not because it lacks patterns, but because its moments of rupture rarely announce themselves clearly in advance. Iran’s political history shows that crises often unfold slowly, unevenly, and beneath the surface of apparent continuity. This remains true today, even as global observers attempt to interpret protests, regional escalation, and elite manoeuvring as signals of imminent transformation.

Iran’s modern political order was forged through upheaval. The revolution that toppled the monarchy was not experienced by contemporaries as an inevitable outcome, but as a prolonged period of instability marked by contradictory forces, incomplete information, and rapidly shifting loyalties. At the time, economic breakdown, social mobilisation, and state violence were visible, yet their ultimate convergence into a new political system was far from obvious. That ambiguity is instructive when assessing Iran’s present moment.

Managed Instability at Home

Today’s Iran exists under conditions both familiar and fundamentally altered. Economically, the country remains constrained by sanctions that have hollowed out state capacity and reduced living standards. Energy wealth continues to coexist with domestic scarcity, a paradox that fuels popular resentment. Periodic protests, sparked by economic hardship, political repression, or social grievances reveal a society under strain. Yet unrest alone does not equate to regime collapse. The state retains coercive capacity, institutional coherence, and a security apparatus deeply embedded in political life.

What complicates analysis is the nature of Iran’s political equilibrium. Rather than stability or imminent breakdown, the system operates in a state of managed instability. Protest is tolerated up to a point, repression is calibrated rather than absolute, and concessions are selective. This allows the regime to absorb pressure without fundamentally altering its power structure. At the same time, opposition forces remain fragmented. While dissatisfaction is widespread, it has not yet coalesced into a unified political project capable of challenging the state from within.

The digital age has intensified this ambiguity. Images of protest and repression circulate instantly, creating the impression of unprecedented transparency. Yet this abundance of information often obscures more than it clarifies. Leadership structures within opposition movements remain unclear, while elite decision-making processes are deliberately opaque. Despite constant updates, external observers still struggle to distinguish between episodic unrest and structural rupture.

Geopolitics as Regime Insurance

What most sharply distinguishes the current period from earlier moments of crisis is Iran’s geopolitical positioning. Unlike the late 1970s, Iran is no longer a peripheral actor aligned with Western interests, but a central node in multiple regional and global fault lines. Its strategic relationships with Russia and China, its role in regional proxy networks, and its direct confrontation with Israel and the United States embed domestic politics within a far broader geopolitical calculus.

Recent escalations between Iran and Israel illustrate this dynamic. Limited strikes, shadow warfare, and carefully calibrated retaliation reflect a shared interest in avoiding full-scale war, yet they also heighten the risk of miscalculation. For Tehran, projecting strength abroad is not simply foreign policy posturing; it functions as a mechanism of internal legitimacy. Regional influence has become intertwined with regime survival, reinforcing the state’s resistance to both domestic reform and external pressure.

This entanglement poses challenges for Western policy. Framing Iran as perpetually on the brink of collapse may be politically convenient, but it encourages reactive strategies focused on containment rather than long-term engagement. Sanctions and isolation have weakened Iran economically, but they have not produced the political outcomes many anticipated. Instead, they have reinforced the regime’s security logic and deepened its reliance on non-Western partnerships.

Iran today is neither stable nor on the verge of imminent transformation. It exists in a condition of prolonged tension, where unresolved social, economic, and political pressures accumulate without producing decisive change. History suggests that when transformation does come, it will likely appear sudden only in hindsight. For now, humility remains the most valuable analytical tool. Iran’s future will not be shaped by prediction alone, but by the unpredictable interaction of domestic endurance and geopolitical confrontation forces that continue to resist simple narratives.

Written by:

*Dr Iqbal Survé

Past chairman of the BRICS Business Council and co-chairman of the BRICS Media Forum and the BRNN

*Chloe Maluleke

Associate at BRICS+ Consulting Group

Russian & Middle Eastern Specialist

**The Views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Independent Media or IOL.

Source link