An Agreement with the Islamic Republic: Stability or Artificial Respiration for a Worn-out Regime? S. Rouzbeh ۱۴۰۵/۰۲/۰۷ Can a lasting agreement be made with a government that has lost its popular support through killings, imprisonment, exile and repression? An agreement that ignores those killed in protests, political prisoners, grieving families and the will of the Iranian people is neither peace nor stability; it merely buys time for a regime whose legitimacy at home has collapsed. S. Rouzbeh Can a lasting agreement be made with a government that has lost its popular support through killings, imprisonment, exile and repression? Can the West and the United States build something called ‘stability’ on the economic, political and moral ruins of Iran? And, most importantly, an agreement that asks nothing about those killed in protests, political prisoners, families seeking justice and the will of the Iranian people: whom is it an agreement with, and at what price? The issue is not simply that the Islamic Republic is now facing external pressure, economic crisis, internal erosion and social distrust. The central issue is that this regime can no longer claim to represent the people of Iran. A government that has answered protests with bullets, filled the streets with forces of repression, killed the people’s children, imprisoned young people and put families seeking justice under pressure may be able to stay in power by force for a time, but it cannot build a future. An agreement with such a regime, if it takes no account of the people of Iran, is neither peace nor stability. It is merely buying time for a government whose real problem is not sanctions, negotiations or a foreign enemy; its real problem is the collapse of its legitimacy within the country. Saadi made this truth clear centuries ago: ‘Neither that majesty nor that kingship will remain; nor will that oppression of the villagers endure.’ This couplet is not merely moral counsel; it is a law of history. No power founded on oppression endures. Dictators may rule through fear for a time, but fear can never take the place of trust. Mercenaries, dependants and forces of repression may control the streets for a while, but they cannot restore a nation’s allegiance to its government. If the West stays silent, and the United States thinks that signing an agreement can turn the Islamic Republic into a trustworthy actor, it will once again have fallen into the same old error: mistaking silence for stability. A society that has been repressed is not silent; its grievances have accumulated. Anger, demands for justice, poverty, a futureless existence and national humiliation are embers beneath the ashes, not things that have disappeared. The central question is: what do they intend to build on Iran’s ruins? A reformed government? Such a thing is incompatible with the Islamic Republic’s present structure. Regional stability? A government that sees its survival in creating crises cannot guarantee stability. A security agreement? Security in which the people of Iran have no share is merely the government’s security, not the country’s. Rumi expresses the same idea in different words: oppression lives in darkness and crumbles when the truth is brought to light. For years, the Islamic Republic has tried to preserve itself through propaganda, fear, lies and the creation of enemies, but Iranian society has now moved beyond it. The distance between the government and the people is no longer a simple political divide; it is a historic rupture. So the answer is clear: an agreement with the Islamic Republic, if based on ignoring the people of Iran, is unstable. The principal party to the crisis is neither America nor Europe, but the people of Iran. Without addressing their demands for justice, ending repression, releasing prisoners and recognising the people’s right to determine their own fate, any agreement is just a piece of paper laid over a nation’s open wound. The conclusion is this: the West can make a deal with the Islamic Republic, but it cannot create legitimacy through that deal. It can postpone the crisis, but it cannot resolve it. It can give a worn-out government artificial respiration, but it cannot bring it back to life. The Islamic Republic stands on force, not consent; and any structure built on force, blood and lies will sooner or later collapse. Source: https://srouzbeh.com/en/posts/archive-8bf987cc-0424-1a6c-4040-ce88d2102c76 Please credit the author and link to this edition.