Iran International
The weakening of the Islamic Republic’s legitimacy among Iranians is most evident in increasingly bold statements against its founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
Younger people seeing their deteriorating economic situation in Iran, and those who have left their country for exile abroad, blame the 1979 revolution for their hardships.
Many former revolutionaries who wholeheartedly supported Khomeini in 1978-1979, as the father-figure of the revolution, sooner or later admitted that he hijacked what they believed was a revolution for democracy, social equity, and non-alignment in international relations. They accuse him of purging loyal revolutionaries and setting up a dictatorial clerical regime, with Islamic rule.
Some former regime supporters, who avoid criticizing Khomeini, have vehemently turned against his successor, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, labeling him as the enemy of the people.
Khamenei has also become a hated figure among many younger Iranians, to the degree that university students protesting on campus last year unleashed the worst derogatory and unheard-of insults at him. Most of the slogans during the protests were in fact political and even sexual insults directed at Khamenei, such as, “Khamenei the dictator”, the “bloodsucker”, the killer of the youth, just to mention some of the political statements.
Top regime insiders have come to admit that “the sanctities” of the revolution have been badly assaulted and lately they have tried to at least save Khomeini’s reputation.
Last week, Khomeini’s grandson, Hassan Khomeini had to address the issue of increasing disdain for his grandfather by speaking to local media. He said to blame Ruhollah Khomeini for today’s economic and social crises is unfair, and the younger generations are not aware of his philosophy and personality.
However, for many Iranians, facts speak for themselves. The Iranian economy has persistently deteriorated since Khomeini established the Islamic Republic. While before the revolution incomes were rising and the Iranian rial was a stable and strong currency, in 44 years it has declined from 70 rials per US dollar to 500,000. The inflation rate has seldom been single-digit, with consistently above 40-percent annual rate in the past five years. Around 1.5 trillion dollars in oil income has evaporated in four decades, with Iran having little to show for it. Iran’s GDP in the past year was less than half of Turkey’s and Saudi Arabia’s, with no prospects for improvement. Even without sanctions, the economy would be seriously under-productive, with the government, clerical foundations and the military controlling 80 percent.
On top of economic hardship, younger Iranians with access to information in the Internet and social media era, deeply resent to be told how to live by clerics whose education and worldview is limited to half-mythical Islamic teachings from the 7th and 8th centuries.
Another senior cleric, Mohammad Ali Movahedi Kermani, Tehran's interim Imam for Friday Prayers responding to attacks on Khomeini stated last week that "Such claims are unfounded, and the public does not subscribe to them. People recognize [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeini as a divine and spiritual figure who dedicated himself to service."
But many Iranians not only reject Ayatollah Khomeini, but they also even strongly dislike former US President Jimmy Carter who is perceived as having abandoned the Shah in 1979 and indirectly helped the Islamists to gain power. A young female user wrote on ‘X’: “You betrayed the late Shah of Iran and helped Khomeini to power. You deserve a miserable life and I hope you will never be happy, any second of this life, for what you did to generations of Iranian people and the whole middle east.”
Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh told Didban Iran [Iran Monitor] website in Tehran that the country is facing a serious challenge as one of its gateways to Europe is threatened because of the military development in the Caucasus.
Falahatpisheh also pointed out that Iranian officials and military commanders who used to deliver passionate speeches about Iran's interests and authority in the region are silent in the face of threats to Tehran's interest.
During the past months, several Iranian military commanders and politicians warned Azerbaijan not to attack Armenia and avoid closing Iran's gateway to Europe at its borders with Armenia. As Azerbaijan expelled 120,000 Armenians from the enclave, it now threatens to enter and occupy the narrow strip of land connecting Iran via Armenia to Russia and Europe.
Iran has also long warned Azerbaijan about its close military relations with Israel, which is the Baku’s main arms supplier.
Mashregh News, a media outlet with close links to Iranian security and intelligence organizations on September 9, called an attack on Karabakh Iran's "red line" and maintained that such an action will entail consequences for Azerbaijan. The threat later proved to be hollow.
Iran's silence in the face of the development is apparently linked to a visit to Iran by Russia's Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu immediately before the attack. Meanwhile, Tehran's inaction was quite embarrassing for the regime and its military commanders considering months of bragging on IRGC media outlets and social media channels about Iran's swift reaction in case Azerbaijan attacked Karabakh.
Some Iranian social media users ridiculed the Iranian military and posted a photo of a smiling Iranian military attache' walking alongside victorious Azeri officers in Karabakh following the attack. One user wrote: "I wrongly thought that the Iranian regime's officials were trying to be strategically patient in the face of Azerbaijan's alliance with Israel."
Falahatpisheh told Didban Iran that "All this is an outcome of Iran's outdated foreign policy. At times we saw Iranian officials delivering irresponsible speeches at the borders with Azerbaijan. If what is happening now is Iran's real policy, those speakers should be accountable for agitating the society at the expense of Iran's national interests."
The former lawmaker said that the forced displacement of ethnic Armenians in Karabakh is not the end of the conflict. On the contrary, it marks the beginning of a new crisis in the region. Tens of thousands of Armenians have been displaced and their private and public rights poses a new challenge for the region's leaders. This is likely to turn into a chronic challenge not only for Azerbaijan and Armenia, but also for other players such as Turkey and Israel. Particularly because Iran will perceive Israel's presence at its borders as a true challenge.
He said: "Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan's stance during the conflict were more realistic that the other leaders involved. At least he acknowledged that Iranians are not going to like the closure of one of their key gateways to Europe and the outside world.
Meanwhile, Erdogan’s call for a meeting between the leaders of Turkey, Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia to discuss the aftermaths and implications of the attack on Karabakh, without mentioning Iran.
Falahatpisheh pointed out that Iran's policy about the region dated back to three decades ago and Tehran was oblivious to the developments and dynamics that have been taking shape during the past thirty years in the region.
He argued that as a result of the current conflict, Azerbaijan will have to allocate a major part of its annual budget to military spending. He added that by inviting countries from beyond the region into this conflict, Azerbaijan has made a mistake. It could have solved its problems with Armenia in a different way.