By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A recent analysis by BBC Verify and BBC Persian has revealed protests in at least 17 of Iran’s 31 provinces, marking a significant challenge to the current regime. This analysis, limited to verified video footage, likely underrepresents the true scope of the demonstrations, with reports of protests in an additional 11 provinces. The protests began on December 28th, sparked by a devaluation of the Iranian currency, and rapidly spread across the country. Verified footage demonstrates anti-government gatherings in over 50 towns and cities, including regions traditionally loyal to the government.
Read the original article here
Iran anti-government protests spread to a majority of provinces, a situation that’s capturing global attention and raising a lot of questions. From what I gather, it’s pretty clear this isn’t just a localized event; it’s a widespread expression of discontent. It’s a significant development, especially given the history of protests and the regime’s firm grip on power. The fact that the demonstrations are expanding across so much of the country speaks volumes about the depth of the issues and the level of frustration among the population.
Now, the natural question is, why haven’t these protests brought about change sooner? Well, one of the biggest factors seems to be the regime’s control. They have a strong hold over the military, the police, and various social services. They’ve also established a network of informants, fostering an environment of fear that can be incredibly effective in quashing dissent. It’s a classic case of a government using its power to maintain its position, regardless of the people’s wishes. This isn’t your run-of-the-mill police force, either. The police in Iran are essentially a paramilitary force, directly controlled by the Ayatollah, which means any challenges to the established order are met with significant force.
It’s also important to acknowledge that the regime isn’t without some support. There are religious segments within the population who still align with the current government. Additionally, there’s a real fear of instability, and what might follow if the regime were to fall. This uncertainty can act as a powerful deterrent, especially when coupled with the very real threat of violence.
This is where things get really complicated. When you look at how the government gets its money, it’s mostly from oil. Even when the economy is in bad shape, the government could still use that oil money to buy weapons and pay people to keep it in power. Think about that for a second: the regime has the means, and the will, to stay in charge.
The economic situation and corruption have become even bigger problems, making things unstable. The Iranian currency has lost a lot of value, and the government is having trouble paying its supporters. This financial instability has created an even more volatile environment.
Looking back, we see that the US and UK’s actions in the 1950s—specifically overthrowing a democratically elected government and installing a dictator—are significant pieces of this puzzle. It’s a reminder of how past actions can create long-term problems, making it harder to rebuild trust and stability.
There’s also this interesting point about the divide between the city and the countryside. The protests seem to be stronger in the big cities, but the government still has some support in the more rural, conservative areas. That division can play a big role in how things play out.
Another important element is the role of outside players. Some folks think that external intervention might be what’s needed, while others are strongly against it, fearful of what that could bring. The thing about foreign intervention is that it’s not always a cure-all, and it can bring about its own set of problems.
However, change is still possible. Protests have gained momentum in several ways. The economy is in shambles and sanctions aren’t helping. The Iranian currency is basically worthless. There seems to be something of a shift, with certain elements of the security forces starting to show solidarity with the protestors. Every step forward is a step towards a possible change.
The protests themselves don’t always create change on their own. For the most part, the government has the weapons, and the protesters don’t. This is why some people are even thinking about armed revolts, which is a sign of how desperate some people are. The Iranian government can be very brutal when suppressing protests.
Of course, there is always hope. The regime appears to be weakening, which is why there may be a chance for a change. What will happen next? That’s the million-dollar question, and the answer is far from clear.