September 7, 2025
The 12-Day War has made the situation in the Islamic Republic more chaotic than before, its incompetence more evident, its empty claims more confused, and the position of its "commander" Khamenei more weakened than ever; it has increased fear and hesitation in decision-making within the regime. More than two months have passed since the ceasefire, but the regime's leaders have still not been able or have not wanted to take a step towards resolving the problems that led to this war. On the contrary, disagreements within their ranks over continuing talks on the nuclear program, uranium enrichment, and changes in regional policy have increased. Without a definitive decision to end the Islamic Republic's nuclear program and resolve the disputes over it, as well as abandoning the Islamic Republic's tension-provoking and destructive regional policy, our country will not be able to move beyond the current situation and get out of the cycle of military conflict and war. Therefore, the effects of the recent war and the policies that led to it are still the issues of our society today:
1- Aftershocks of the War
The Israeli and American aggression was a shock that came to our society. Even today, despite the temporary end of the war, its political, economic, and psychological effects remain in all aspects and everything is in a state of suspension. The conditions of the country and society have worsened in every respect and the pressure on the people has become more severe than before the war; the water and electricity crisis continue throughout the country. Living conditions for the overwhelming majority of people, especially in the field of livelihood, are getting worse every day. Protests against the poor living conditions, soaring prices, and inflation have also become a daily occurrence in manufacturing establishments, especially in the oil industry, in recent weeks. The housing problem has become an insolvable public problem. Unemployment has become more widespread. People’s purchasing power is decreasing day by day, and daily necessities are gradually disappearing from their kitchen tables. The rate of inflation is so high that, according to the Statistical Center of Iran, the price of bread and grains increased by 16.6 percent in one month, and the monthly inflation rate for red meat was 5.8 percent. This is while the minimum wage for workers is below the poverty line. Wages are out of proportion to inflation of over 40 percent and continuous price increases. Retirees, teachers, and other wage earners are losing part of their purchasing power every month. Of course, not all of these are the consequences of the war, but they are affected by the policies that have plunged the country into war and misery. The war has added to the scope of public misery and has left behind a lot of human and financial damage and losses in a short period of time. The risk of another war is a double threat to the increase in the daily problems of the people. This combination has increased the possibility of internal collapse and has made insecurity and even urban riots possible.
2- What is the Solution?
Without a doubt, for the country to emerge from the current situation, a fundamental change in policies is needed and the administration of the country's affairs has to beentrusted to the elected representatives of the people. At the present moment, the interests of the Iranian people are to put pressure on the regime to adhere to international obligations, including those regarding the Additional Protocol, and to resolve the dispute over the nuclear program through dialogue and diplomacy. If public pressure on the regime increases, it is likely that the rulers will be forced to voluntarily suspend uranium enrichment until the ambiguities and disputed issues regarding the nuclear program are resolved, and at the same time, take steps to normalize their relations with other countries. Announcing the suspension of uranium enrichment and its unilateral halt could be a step towards opening such a path. The Islamic Republic has so far been aliened to such an approach, and the current situation is the result of its adventurous policies over the past 46 years. Insisting on continuing uranium enrichment over the past two decades has resulted in nothing for the Iranian people except losing billions of dollars in material capital, jeopardizing the country’s security and destroying its infrastructure.
3- Why is the Risk of War Still Serious!
All parties involved have currently chosen to continue the “no war, no peace” situation. The Islamic Republic has no will get out of this situation. This makes the situation even more unpredictable. On the other hand, the invasion of Iranian territory in the midst of previous negotiations has also damaged the minimal trust between the parties. Evidence suggests that the United States is in no hurry to reach an agreement with the Islamic Republic and is waiting for Europe’s action to activate the snapback mechanismto bear fruit. Europe’s pressure on the Islamic Republic to talk to the United States means nothing in practice except accepting Trump’s conditions, but there is no willreach an agreement with the United States at the leadership level of the Islamic Republic.
Enrichment remains the main issue of dispute. Few in the Islamic Republic have the courage to admit the failure of this destructive policy and turn away from it. Although it is clear that after this war, it will no longer be practical to continue enrichment and concealment of a nuclear project that is fundamentally devoid of economic value for the country. The regime's eastern "allies," Russia and China, also have no fundamental disagreement with European countries and the United States regarding transparency regarding Iran's nuclear program.
The conditions in which the Islamic Republic finds itself and the speed with which events have taken place have left no room for maneuver on how to negotiate. The regime is now forced to make a decision. But all evidence indicates that the leaders of the regime do not have a clear and common understanding of the dimensions of the disaster that are about to unfold and the will to make a decision. Even if some have made a decision, they do not have the courage to announce it. Complete confusion has cast a shadow over the regime’s foreign policy. The mildest calls for change within the ranks of the regime continue to be met with an onslaught of internal opposition movements. Insisting on a change in current policies is considered treason. Despite the fact that there are many within the regime who admit that without an agreement, a military conflict is not ruled out, no serious action has been taken to do so.
4- Activation of the Snapback Mechanism, Intensification of Differences
Now, the move by three European countries to activate the snapback mechanism, after the meetings with the Islamic Republic to agree on the terms of its extension were fruitless, has added to the complexity of the situation. The purpose of activating the snapback mechanism is to restore the sanctions contained in six UN resolutions that were approved before the JCPOA agreement and were suspended with the signing of the JCPOA, as well as to re-place Iran's nuclear program under Article 41 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The Europeans have set three conditions for the six-month suspension of this mechanism, which include starting negotiations with the United States, cooperating with the Atomic Energy Agency, and clarifying the status of Iran's 60 percent enriched uranium. In contrast, Khamenei has once again declared the dispute with the United States "irresolvable." Although some regime operatives continue to talk about Khamenei’s agreement with indirect negotiations with the United States, such an agreement has not been officially announced and is practically shrouded in ambiguity.
In addition to expanding the scope of sanctions, the activation of the snapback mechanism will increase the risk of intervention by major powers, including the United States, in Iran. We consider uranium enrichment to be unprofitable, costly, and a major cause of sanctions, an obstacle to development, public welfare, the spread of poverty, and a pretext for war and aggression in the country, and for these reasons, we oppose its continuation.
5- Possible Outlook
Since the ceasefire of June 24, the regime has not taken any serious steps to overcome these conditions. Desperation and helplessness in putting the situation in order has clearly increased in all cases, the regime is wandering between compromise and conflict and is divided into two camps: those who favor compromise and those who resist at all costs. For a large part of the regime’s supporters, continuing on the current path is practically stepping on the path to the collapse of the system. Another part is looking for adventure and war. At the same time, the demand for change has increased in the ranks of reformists and in parts of the fundamentalists. With each passing day, the number of those who believe that the current path cannot be continued increases.
The rulers, with their destructive policies and reactionary thinking, have dragged the country from one crisis to another over the past forty-seven years, and they continue to insist on continuing on this path, taking the country with them to the abyss. As long as the pressure of sanctions and external pressures on our people persist, as the experience of the past 46 years has shown, none of the current crippling and devastating crises can be resolved. In order to provide the basis for resolving the crises and dangers, the people must ultimately bring down this regime; but this does not negate the pressure on the regime to retreat from its domestic and foreign policies. It is clear that without the presence and organized and widespread struggle of the people and the presence of a strong democratic and progressive alternative, the regime will neither step down spontaneously nor accept changes in its policies.
6- War and its Reflection in the Ranks of the Opposition
The set of conditions in the country in the absence of strong democratic opposition has greatly increased the grounds for collapse and the risk of blind rebellions and insecurity. Any unforeseen event could open a deep rift at the top that would take the country out of the hands of the rulers. It could also encourage some opposition forces to use war to change the regime.
Undoubtedly, the recent war dealt a fatal blow to the authority of the Islamic Republic, and especially its leader Khamenei. The system’s incompetency became more apparent after this war, accelerating its internal collapse and highlighting the end of the Islamic Republic. For this reason, efforts to form “transition councils” and invite all Iranian opposition forces inside and outside to transition from the Islamic Republic increased. Statements were even issued by civil activists, including those from within the Islamic Republic, calling for a referendum and the election of a Constituent Assembly to determine the fate of this system. Reformists have called for a paradigm shift in the Islamic Republic and have called for a suspension of enrichment. All of these statements and demands are a sign of the hopelessness of the current situation in the country and the need to prepare for a transition to a democratic and secular system in Iran.
The recent war has also deepened some of the divisions within the opposition. In the face of this war, the following groupings have become clearer:
A: Forces that took a stand against the Israeli and American aggression against Iran with the slogan “No to war, no to the Islamic Republic.” These forces included activists from social, civil, and trade union movements, as well as leftist and democratic-republican movements, who both condemned foreign aggression and emphasized the struggle to free country from domestic warmongers, who have dragged the country into war and put it at risk of collapse with their destructive policies.
B: On the other hand, there are movements that actively defended the Israeli military attack and declared their readiness to accompany it. The war energized these forces and brought them more openly to the stage. Especially the monarchists who demonstrated in Europe and America with the Israeli flag. Reza Pahlavi’s “Munich II” conference and the program of allegiance to him, the announcement of the “Emergency Handbook” were the peak of this show.
C: Other forces also remained silent about the Israeli and American aggression on Iranian soil and the violation of international laws and did not take a position on it, they only attacked the Islamic Republic and the domestic warmongers. Some leftist, national and ethnic forces were in this spectrum.
D: And finally, the grouping known as the “Axis of Resistance” basically took a position in line with the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic, against the Israeli and American aggression.
The disagreement and division over foreign interference in Iran’s internal affairs already existed within the opposition, but it became clearer during this war and could have an impact on future alliances and coalitions.
The Left Party of Iran believes that our society today needs an opposition that looks to the future; while explicitly opposing war and aggression by foreign forces and their interference in Iran’s internal affairs, it will pursue a plan to overthrow the Islamic Republic and establish a free and just society for Iran’s future. The big problem today is the lack of a united and trusted opposition to change the current situation and confront war and its warmongers. Our duty as a leftist party is, in addition to defending the interests of workers and wage earners, to consolidate the progressive coalitions existing among the leftist and republican forces, to expand them, to try to foster dialogue in order to form coordination and cooperation with the democratic and republican forces around the principles of democracy and to make a broad call to end the regime and establish a secular democratic republic in Iran. An organized and coordinated opposition can take steps towards ending the Islamic Republic by relying on and accompanying popular movements in the country.
Council of the Left Party of Iran
September 7, 2025
Add new comment