At five in the afternoon, Cairo time (61).. Iran: The End of the Rule of the Ayatollahs (2–2)

 

Khamenei and the System of Resilience

Any discussion of ending the rule of the Ayatollahs must begin with an understanding of the nature of the system itself.
The Iranian system is not a traditional dictatorship.
Nor is it a purely military regime.
Rather, it is a hybrid structure that combines:

• Religious legitimacy
• Formal republican institutions
• A deep security grip
• A quasi-military economy

First: The Revolutionary Guard as a Central Node

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is not merely a security apparatus.
It is:

• A military force parallel to the army
• An economic empire
• An intelligence network
• An instrument of external influence

Therefore, any attempt to end the system without dismantling the Revolutionary Guard would result in its reproduction in another form.
Herein lies the difficulty of the task.

Second: The Economy… The Internal Battleground

The Iranian economy suffers from:

• High inflation
• Rising unemployment
• Collapse in the value of the currency
• Broad reliance on the informal economy

At the same time, however, the regime possesses absorption tools:

• Targeted social subsidies
• Patronage networks
• A resistant nationalist discourse

The American wager rests on the assumption that quantitative accumulation will lead to qualitative transformation.
Yet experience indicates that ideologically driven regimes can endure longer than expected.

Third: Regional Proxies

Over the past two decades, regional proxies have formed a strategic safety net.
Recent developments, however, have revealed a paradox:

Every external front requires funding and support,
and under sanctions, financing becomes a burden.

The more fronts ignite, the greater the pressure on the domestic arena.

After the Ayatollahs

If we assume that the U.S.–Israeli strategy succeeds in weakening the regime, what is the alternative?
This is the question preoccupying Western think tanks.

Scenario One: Soft Transition

• Internal conflict within the elite
• Decline in the Supreme Leader’s role
• Rise of a pragmatic leadership
• Gradual understandings with the West

Advantage:
It preserves the state and prevents chaos.

Drawback:
It may keep the Revolutionary Guard as a major power broker.

Scenario Two: Limited Military Shock

A concentrated strike that disrupts decision-making centers.

The wager:
Confusion leads to internal division or uncontrolled chaos.

Risks:

• Broad regional retaliation
• Disruption of global energy supplies
• Unpredictable interventions

Scenario Three: Sudden Collapse

Mass protests, security fragmentation, and a power vacuum.

This scenario could open the door to:

• Internal conflict
• External interventions
• Unpredictable geopolitical reconfiguration

It is the scenario that could transform Iran into a major regional epicenter of chaos.

Conclusion

The current confrontation is not a struggle over uranium enrichment.
Nor is it merely a reaction to a military round.

It is a struggle over the shape of the future Iran.

Israel seeks to eliminate an existential threat.
The United States seeks a Middle East that is less tense and more manageable.

But ending the rule of the Ayatollahs is not merely a military decision.
It is a complex equation in which the following intersect:

• Ideology
• Economy
• Security
• Iranian national identity

The question that will determine the course of the coming months is:

Is Washington betting on time…
or is the hour of shock approaching?