For weeks, Iran has been convulsed by some of the most intense anti-government protests in its modern history. What began in late December 2025 as localized demonstrations against deepening economic hardship rapidly spread into nationwide unrest, challenging the very legitimacy of the Islamic Republic. Iran’s current economic crisis did not emerge overnight; rather, it is the result of multiple long-term structural weaknesses aggravated by external pressures and internal policy failures. A foundational factor has been Iran’s heavy dependence on oil exports as its primary source of foreign exchange revenue. U.S. sanctions have significantly curtailed Iran’s access to global oil markets. Furthermore, the twelve-day war with Israel acted as the final blow to an already fragile Iranian economy. The protests erupted amid severe currency devaluation, rampant inflation, and widening socioeconomic inequalities, all of which fueled public anger. Many Iranians are denouncing a regime that demands continuous sacrifices from its citizens while failing to meet their basic economic and social needs. The unrest has taken the form of massive demonstrations demanding regime change, and in some instances, flags from the pre-Islamic Revolution era have been hoisted, symbolizing calls for a revolutionary transformation. According to reports by the BBC, at least 2,000 people have been killed during the demonstrations.
This situation raises the question of whether external actors, particularly Israel, have played a role in the unrest. During the protests, Iranian authorities reportedly arrested an individual allegedly affiliated with the Zionist regime’s intelligence agency, Mossad, who was identified and detained while covertly inciting unrest in Tehran. Iranian officials have cited such incidents as evidence of foreign involvement, suggesting that Israel may be supporting anti-government activities within Iran. Repeatedly, officials in Tehran have condemned the protests as foreign-backed sedition, specifically accusing Washington and Tel Aviv of fomenting unrest and providing operational support to destabilize the country. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has labeled former U.S. President Donald Trump a “criminal” for supporting protesters and for alleged external interference in Iran’s internal affairs.
Moreover, statements by former U.S. President Donald Trump have further intensified speculation regarding external interests. Trump warned that the United States would “hit hard” if Iranian authorities did not stop killing protesters. Such remarks indicate Washington’s political interest in the unfolding crisis. The United States and Israel have long opposed Iran’s nuclear program and share a history of strategic rivalry with Tehran. Additionally, U.S. interests in Iran have often been linked to energy security and access to Iran’s vast oil reserves. The enduring rivalry between Israel and Iran has also been a contributing factor behind Trump’s emphasis on intervention.
In the event of the fall of Ayatollah Khamenei’s regime, exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi, who resides in the United States, is frequently cited as a potential successor. In a recent statement outlining his vision of a “Free Iran,” Pahlavi asserted that Iran’s nuclear program would be terminated. He further stated that relations with the United States would be normalized, Israel would be recognized immediately, and civil liberties would be restored. Additionally, his vision includes expanding frameworks such as the Abraham Accords to include Iran, Israel, and the wider Arab world. These declarations are interpreted by critics as confirmation of U.S. and Israeli interests in a regime change. Should Reza Pahlavi succeed the Islamic Republic, the strategic objectives of both Israel and the United States would likely be advanced. Statements by both Pahlavi and Trump have reinforced the perception that the protests are not solely the result of economic crisis but are also linked to broader regime-change dynamics, as the fall of Khamenei’s regime would directly and indirectly benefit Israel and the United States.
In conclusion, it would not be inaccurate to argue that the United States and Israel have played an indirect yet significant role in Iran’s economic crisis. U.S.-led sanctions on crude oil exports and financial transactions have contributed to currency devaluation, high inflation, unemployment, and a reduced state capacity to provide public services. These conditions have triggered anti-government protests that can no longer be viewed solely as an internal matter. The crisis has increasingly taken on an international dimension, with external actors perceived to be influencing events in pursuit of strategic interests. If Reza Pahlavi were to come to power, Iran’s Islamic laws would likely be repealed, and relations with Israel would be normalized. Given that Israel has long regarded the Khamenei regime as a major security threat, the removal of the current leadership aligns with both U.S. and Israeli strategic objectives. Consequently, regime change could facilitate greater Western access to Iran’s energy resources while addressing Israel’s long-standing security concerns.
Be the first to comment