Tehran faces a mega-crisis with seven challenges

Hardline Islamist-led opposition forces are just as much a threat to Iran as they are to Assad, a Syrian analyst told the Eye for Iran podcast.

“Iran's real borders, from the Iranian regime's perspective, are not in Iran. Iran's borders are in Syria,” said Qutaiba Idlbi, a senior fellow with the Washington DC-based Atlantic Council covering Syria.

Tehran has extended its influence to the Mediterranean through its Lebanese ally Hezbollah, using Syria, which has been under Assad family rule for decades, as a key conduit.

“Iran uses Syria as a land bridge to other places. As we've seen since 2019 there has been an extensive Iranian effort through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to try to get to Jordan through Syria using illicit networks. They've been trying to smuggle weapons and build networks within Jordan to try to have more influence over the country,” said Idlbi.

But that land bridge is currently not operational in part due to heavy Israeli airstrikes targeting Iranian interests in Syria. Iran’s alleged smuggling routes supplying Hezbollah and alleged IRGC weapons facilities have been the target of Israel for more than a year.

Because of its geographic strategic importance, Iran invested heavily in Syria over the years spending tens of billions of dollars, securing investment projects like allowing Iran to control phosphate mines and take over 5- thousand hectares of farmland and 1-thousand of oil and gas, according to Reuters.

Under the late President Ebrahim Raisi, Tehran and Damascus signed a “strategic cooperation memorandum of understanding."

Syria is of vital importance to Iran and its quest for regional hegemony, but there have been more recent blows to the Iran-backed axis losing access to key border crossings.

US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an alliance of Syrian Kurdish fighters, seized the eastern city of Deir ez-Zor and a nearby Iraqi-Syrian border crossing used by Iran to arm Lebanon's Hezbollah, Reuters reported on Friday.

Ultimately this undermines Iran's ability to rescue Assad.

As Iran's position weakens, Assad may become even less willing to abandon his closest ally, despite alleged pressure from the United States and Israel.

The reason, according to Idlbi, is that Iran may represent Assad's only viable chance for survival—and vice versa. Idlbi added that while Assad might tell world leaders he is willing to distance himself from Iran, he is unlikely to follow through, given his reputation for dishonesty.

"He [Assad] does have the reputation of being a big liar, basically, where no one can really trust a word that comes out or any promise or commitment that he makes for sure."

So far, there is no sign that Iran is planning to militarily intervene to save Assad. Local sources are reporting that some Iranian forces are withdrawing into Iraq from eastern Syria.

On the world stage Iran is full of bluster, Idlbi argued.

While the Iranian establishment is publicly supporting Assad, there is only so much aid Iran may be able to provide as city after city falls to the insurgents' lightning advance.

Convincing Iranians to fight in the war in Syria may be another challenge, said Idlbi.

Idlbi, who fled Syria after being imprisoned twice and faced torture for his political activities, said Iran would not be able to find an airport to land their plane.

Iran and its regional militia fighters, chief among them Hezbollah and Hamas, are all degraded after more than a year of war with Israel.

Other than sending Iran-backed Iraqi Shi'ite militias to Syria in addition to recruiting forces from Afghanistan, Iran's military might is limited but their determination is unbowed, according to Idlbi.

“I don't think Iran will stop looking for a solution. I think they're actively trying to break some of those boundaries to be able to provide the support to Assad.”

“Without Syria, the regime [Iran] would really lose a lot of its intelligence and military capabilities and leverage over countries in the region.”

And just how far Iran could go to salvage its stronghold on Syria largely depends on Russia’s next move.

It appears Russia isn’t going to save Assad like it did in 2015 by shoring up its rule with airstrikes and troop deployments. The Kremlin told all Russian citizens to flee Syria Friday as rebel forces continue to make advances in the north.

Idlbi said Russia doesn’t appear willing or even capable of saving Assad this time as Putin is preoccupied in Ukraine.

“It seems some in Russia, specifically in the Kremlin, are thinking maybe enough is enough. Maybe we've invested a lot in Assad. We have an important base in Syria's coast, in Latakia and Tartus.”

The lack of action on Russia’s part harms Iran, despite the hundreds of drones Tehran has sent to Russia to aid its full-scaled invasion of Iran.

You can watch the full episode of Eye for Iran featuring the Atlantic Council's Qutaiba Idlbi, on YouTube or listen on Spotify, Apple, Amazon, Castbox or any other major podcast platform.

One such call to civil disobedience came from Abdollah Naseri this week, a former managing director of Iran's official news agency (IRNA), who called the hijab law “pure evil”.

“It is a good time for the revolutionary men and women of ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ to take over the streets again and without violence shout the right to freedom of how to dress, a gift from God to his creatures,” Naseri said in a note published by the banned Kalemeh website Tuesday.

Like the prominent jailed dissident Mostafa Tajzadeh, Naseri is a member of the banned Mujahedin of the Islamic Revolution, a small but once very influential Reformist political organization withing the Islamic Republic's political elite.

Naseri has been one of several activists and political figures to be vocally against Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s leadership and policies including his insistence on the necessity of hijab. The hijab laws have continued to worsen in the wake of the uprising in 2022, sparked by the death in morality police custody of Mahsa Amini, arrested for not wearing her head covering properly.

He said the current situation as laws continue to become ever more draconian, is “extremely unstable”.

Vasmaghi, a female Islamic scholar and politician, has argued that the Islamic Sharia does not require women to cover their hair and alleges that the Islamic Republic has used it to enhance its discrimination against women.

After years of wearing the hijab by choice, Vasmaghi posted a video of herself in October 2023 that showed her unveiling in protest.

In a note published on Telegram about the new hijab law, Isa Saharkhiz, another dissident and former politician, has warned that the new hijab law has the potential to trigger a national civil disobedience movement and an “unpredictable domino [of events]”.

One must emphasize that an opportunity has presented itself now to test the ruling establishment’s reaction to a peaceful but effective “national movement” against the new law, he wrote.

Saharkhiz also raised the question of whether given his declaration of total obedience to Khamenei, President Masoud Pezeshkian will eventually yield and carry out Khamenei’s wishes or resign if he could not honor his promise to stop hijab enforcement.

Some dissident politicians appear very optimistic about what civil disobedience against the hijab can achieve.

“Iranian women’s resistance will defeat the Hijab and Chastity Law,” Ardeshir Amir-Arjomand, the spokesman of the Coordinating Council of the Iranian Green Movement and a former senior adviser to Mousavi, tweeted Sunday.

Amir-Arjomand, who lives in exile, argued in his post that the solution to the problem caused by the new hijab law is “resistance and civil disobedience” rather than appealing to the Supreme Leader to abolish it by using his extraordinary powers as some politicians and the media in Iran have suggested in the past few days.

The UN has called Iran's hijab enforcement a form of "gender apartheid" and rights groups have called it a "draconian campaign" to force women to veil and a "war on women".

Q: How and when did Khamenei approve the 2013 nuclear talks?

On September 17, 2013, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei signaled his approval for nuclear talks with world powers, using a religious analogy in a speech to suggest that "flexibility" is sometimes necessary to achieve victory against adversaries.

Two weeks later, he expressed support for the diplomatic initiative of then-President Hassan Rouhani’s administration in another speech.

Between April and July 2015, as nuclear talks neared their conclusion, Khamenei cautioned military officials against allowing "aliens" to inspect military facilities "under the guise of supervision and inspection." He warned against halting Iran’s defense development or permitting the interrogation of Iranian nuclear scientists. Khamenei also pledged continued backing for the Islamic Republic’s "friends in the region," including the "peoples" of Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, and Lebanon.

Additionally, Khamenei insisted that all sanctions, whether imposed by the United Nations or the United States, must be lifted immediately once a deal was finalized.

Q: What role did Khamenei play in the 2015 nuclear deal?

Khamenei has consistently claimed that he was not directly involved in the details of the nuclear negotiations with world powers, which began in November 2013.

However, officials’ statements suggest that the negotiating team regularly reported to him, followed his instructions, and adhered to the “red lines” he established. A deal, by all accounts, required his ultimate approval.

In July 2013, Khamenei showcased his in-depth knowledge of the negotiations, citing technical terms and specific figures during a speech to government officials.

“Regarding the enrichment capacity, they aim to make the Islamic Republic consent to 10,000 SWU, but they began by demanding a limitation to 500 SWU or 1,000 SWU. 10,000 SWU is produced by the 10,000 old-type centrifuges we had and still have. Our officials say we need 190,000 SWU. This is the country’s definite need,” he said.

SWU (separative work units) refers to the amount of separation achieved in the uranium enrichment process.

Q: Did Khamenei accept responsibility for the 2015 nuclear deal?

Khamenei avoided taking direct responsibility for the nuclear deal, deferring its final approval to the conservative and hardliner-dominated Parliament. He neither explicitly endorsed nor opposed the agreement.

Speaker Ali Larijani expedited the parliamentary vote, reportedly acting on Khamenei’s instructions, and blocked debate on the legislation despite objections from hardliners. The deal passed with 161 lawmakers voting in favor, 59 opposing, and 13 abstaining.Some reports claimed that Khamenei had conveyed his desire for the deal’s approval through Asghar Hejazi, an official in his office. However, the office issued a statement denying such allegations.

Q: When did Khamenei first publicly criticize the 2015 nuclear negotiation team?

After the US withdrew from the nuclear deal – formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – in May 2018, Khamenei described the negotiations as a mistake in an August speech.

He stated that he had permitted the talks because senior officials, likely President Hassan Rouhani and his negotiation team led by Javad Zarif, had insisted on pursuing them.

In the same speech, he accused the negotiators of crossing the “red lines” he had set.

Q: Has Khamenei issued a fatwa prohibiting the development of nuclear weapons?Iran's government has consistently stated that it will not pursue nuclear weapons, citing a fatwa (religious edict) by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei banning all weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms.Iranian officials first referenced Khamenei’s fatwa at an IAEA meeting in Vienna in August 2005 and reiterated it at the International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament in April 2010.

According to Khamenei’s official website, Iran’s mission later pledged to submit a translation of the fatwa in several languages to the UN for registration as an official document.

In an October 2019 speech, Khamenei declared that building and maintaining nuclear weapons is "absolutely haram," meaning strictly forbidden under Islamic law. He stated that although Iran had the capability to develop a bomb, it chose not to. He emphasized there is no justification for pursuing a weapon that is religiously prohibited.

However, analysts argue that the so-called fatwa is merely an advisory opinion rather than a binding legal decree. They argue it was intended to mislead the international community about the true intentions of a nuclear program that Tehran insists is peaceful.

Q: Can Khamenei’s ‘nuclear fatwa’ be overturned?

Fatwas are issued by Shia Marja – senior clerics recognized as sources of emulation in Islamic jurisprudence.

Skeptics say that such fatwas are not immutable; they can be revised or revoked based on the “requirements of time and place.” This principle allows rulings to adapt to new circumstances, as shown by historical instances where one Marja or another has altered earlier decisions.

The law mandates extensive surveillance of public spaces to identify women who fail to comply with full hijab regulations, imposing hefty fines and even prison sentences on violators.

The new law also demands businesses including hospitality establishments, retail shops, and taxi services refuse service to unveiled women or report them to the authorities to avoid being penalized themselves.

"The main goal of those insisting on the implementation of the hijab law, in my view, is to bring down Pezeshkian’s government," prominent reformist politician and journalist Abbas Abdi wrote on Wednesday.

Many others, from reformist politician and former vice-president Masoumeh Ebtekar to conservative Qom Seminary teacher Hojjat ol-Eslam Mohsen Gharavian have objected to the provisions of the hijab law ultra-hardliners insist must be implemented.

The government must reject and protest to the hijab law, Gharavian who argues that the punishments stipulated in the law, such as withdrawing the fine for unveiling from people’s bank accounts without their consent, is unacceptable even from the religious point of view, Gharavian said in an interview with Khabar Online news website Tuesday.

According to Pezeshkian’s special aide in matters of social freedoms and rights, Sakineh-Sadat Paad, the President is planning to consult with Chief Justice Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, and Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf in a meeting of the heads of the three government forces to find a solution for the problem.

The rush to implement a law that is questionable to Muslim religious jurists, legal experts, sociologists, and others is not rational, she argued in an X post a day before Pezeshkian’s televised interview Monday. “A good law must be acceptable to the society,” she added.

Since the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom protests, a significant number of Iranian women have refused to wear the hijab, often facing confrontations with morality police in the streets. Beyond the oppressive nature of the new law, individuals close to the Islamic government worry that violent enforcement of hijab regulations could ignite social unrest.

As president, Pezeshkian is required to give the new law official status by signing it and communicating it to all government bodies for implementation. In a televised interview Monday, he insisted that it would be hard to implement and warned that its enforcement would lead to widespread discontent in Iranian society.

Pezeshkian also said he was conferring with other top officials to find a way not to enforce the hijab law.

Critics of the new law within Iran's political establishment, spanning from reformists to numerous conservatives, have called on President Pezeshkian to appeal to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to use his extraordinary powers to issue a decisive ruling and resolve the impasse.

Critics suggest that Pezeshkian could attempt to persuade Khamenei that enforcing the new law runs counter to public and national interests, urging him to either order its suspension or refer the matter to a state body for further deliberation.

Pezeshkian can request through a letter to the Supreme Leader to ask him to have the law removed from the country’s agenda because it is against the fundamental rights of the nation, public interests and national interests, the reformist Sazandegi newspaper wrote Monday.

Khamenei, who has consistently maintained that everyone must adhere to hijab laws regardless of their personal beliefs because "it is the law," has so far refrained from commenting on the new legislation.

Another option critics, including prominent lawyer and member of the central council of the reformist Servants of Construction Party, Mahmoud Alizadeh-Tabatabaei, have proposed is for Pezeshkian to bring the issue before the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC). They contend that the Council holds the authority to suspend the law’s implementation if it determines the matter impacts national

As president, Pezeshkian heads the SNSC. Nevertheless, nearly all the other members including the chiefs of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), Police, and Joint Staff of the Armed forces are directly appointed by Khamenei and answer only to him, not the president.

Article 176 of the Iranian Constitution also stipulates that all the decisions taken by the Council must be endorsed by the Supreme Leader to become effective.

A third solution proposed by others, including a group of legal experts who penned an open letter to Pezeshkian, is to call for a national referendum on the issue. Alternatively, the legal experts suggest referring the matter to the Expediency Council, which, under Article 112 of the Constitution, can deliberate on any issue assigned to it by the Supreme Leader.

The proposal to hold a referendum, however, requires the approval of two-thirds of all members of Parliament which s dominated by hardliners and ultra-hardliners. The hijab law was approved in the previous term of the parliament in October 2023. However, ultra-hardliners have a stronger foothold in the new Parliament which started work in late May.

Reformist-leaning media in Iran criticized Elmira Sharifi-Moghaddam, a female anchor for state TV channel IRINN, for posing challenging questions to President Pezeshkian about the state of the economy.

Commentators seen as reformists argued that her questions were unfair, overlooking long-standing issues Pezeshkian faces, such as sanctions and a deeply inefficient economic system.

However, the questions raised during the interview were far less probing than those typically posed by European or American TV anchors. The interview's style appeared intentionally crafted to align with state TV's political leanings, closely tied to the ultraconservative Paydari party, whose members are known to influence the broadcaster's news and current affairs policies.

A former Tehran mayor, Gholamhossein Karbaschi, who owns and runs the centrist daily Ham Mihan, criticized the President's decision to participate in a live one-hour interview on state television. 

In an article for Iran, the state-owned newspaper, Karbaschi argued that Pezeshkian should have refused the format dictated by state television, instead asserting control over when and how he addressed the nation

"He should have changed the state TV's game and chosen when and for how long to speak to the public," Karbaschi suggested, adding that Pezeshkian could have delivered "just two sentences to convince the people."

Karbaschi argued that the interview was intended to undermine the president rather than facilitate meaningful communication with the public. 

"What we saw on TV was an honest president speaking transparently while facing unfairly challenging questions," he wrote.

The former mayor also accused the anchor of frequently interrupting Pezeshkian and raising provocative topics, such as a potential gasoline price hike, to derail his explanations of the administration’s performance.

Karbaschi further claimed that the president was given limited time to express his views on the controversial hijab law.

Domestic media appeared to express frustration upon realizing that the interview with Pezeshkian, his second since taking office on August 1, differed from those with previous presidents – when anchors typically refrained from challenging their guests and even assisted in portraying their performance in a favorable light. This was especially true in interviews with former President Ebrahim Raisi, much of the media noted.

Conservative columnist Abdoljavad Mousavi commented that "Pezeshkian spoke in the same manner about everything, making it difficult to assess his weaknesses and strengths," but argued that the president spoke with candor and honesty.

In contrast, Amir Hossein Jafari, a columnist for the pro-reform outlet Rouydad24, argued that Pezeshkian's remarks on various issues "hardly convinced the public."

Jafari highlighted key topics addressed in the interview, such as gasoline price hikes, internet censorship, and pressures stemming from the new compulsory hijab law.

"Apart from hijab, the president did not say much about other matters," he noted.

The word "disparity" dominated Pezeshkian's interview, reflecting gaps between the government’s financial resources and expenditures, production and consumption levels, and public expectations versus what the government can realistically deliver.

Throughout the conversation, Pezeshkian emphasized the lack of funding as a core issue. He acknowledged several economic challenges, many of which have escalated into crises, but maintained that there is little the government can do to address these disparities.

Pezeshkian offered no tangible solutions for short- or medium-term problems, instead suggesting measures that would only have been effective had they been implemented years ago.

He frequently remarked, especially regarding cultural issues, "Things should have been addressed when people were in primary school. It’s too late and too difficult to fix them now."

After the interview, Pezeshkian invited feedback on his X account. Many Iranians criticized his approach, calling him too timid.

"You should talk like a hammer!" one social media user urged.

Others expressed discontent over Pezeshkian’s perceived failure to uphold campaign promises, such as improving the economy, lifting internet censorship, and easing pressures on women over the hijab.

As one observer noted, "He has realized that things are not as easy as he thought when he made those promises during his campaign."