Dr Qaisar Rashid
The Arab Spring of 2010 transformed several Arab countries within two years. Some saw their monarchies toppled. Some saved themselves by introducing reforms into the social and economic spheres. The major effort had been to save one’s monarchy – even by paying a cost.
The Arab monarchies were taken by surprise. They had underestimated the impact of social media and digital technologies on informal interconnectivity of their citizens. The connection defied the state narratives being transmitted through either the state-operated public sector media or the state-influenced private sector media – both print and electronic. Circumventing the grasp of the state, people nurtured collective activism to raise their voice for shared sovereignty encompassing social, economic and political affairs.
The change in thought imperiled the traditional order wherein existed the sustenance of the monarchies and rulers. In the post-traumatic phase, to their dismay, the survived monarchies and lived rulers discovered that the internet was the sole culprit, which connected social media and linked digital technologies. That something had to be done with the internet to obviate any next upheaval remained the consensus. This is why the internet, which had been considered an instrument of making the world a global village, became suddenly the nemesis of any ruling regime yearning for its perpetual presence in power. Like power outages in developing countries, internet outages were executed in Arab countries to ward off discontent.
It was Barack Hussein Obama that used the word “change” to woo voters of the United States (US) to enter the corridors of power in 2009. Later on, the word “change” became contagious travelling from one country to the other, spreading around ripples of upheavals. Obama had to support any uprising occurring anywhere predicating on the slogan, “change”. The people of East Europe, Middle East and South Asia got fascinated by the word, “change”, and yearned for a new phase in their lives. Under the tutelage of Obama, the US supported them. It was the word “change” that necessitated the advent of populism, thereby letting change and populism go hand in hand. Both made several countries their victims.
The Arab Spring of 2010 could not set foot on the soil of Iran. However, in 2022, Iranian women launched the “woman, life, free” (Jin, Jiyan, Azadi) movement in reaction to the death of Mahsa (Jina) Amini on alleged hijab violation in the custody of the moral police. Inspired by the past history of women activism, the movement protested against compulsory dress codes and demanded basic human rights, personal freedom of choice, and mobility, besides demanding an end to the state’s control over women’s lives. Demands such as the abolition of patriarchal laws and the removal of social constraints were also raised. Women protestors removed and burnt hijabs to register their dissent, which ended in naught. Women-specific indigenous movement remained otiose in the face of resistance posed by the ruling religious clergy.
In June 2025, launched by the US, the Operation Midnight Hammer destroyed Iran’s nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, thereby rendering the ruling regime politically frail and socially fragile – if not entirely dysfunctional. The inability of Iran to retaliate indicated Iran’s weakness in front of a superior military might. The consequent vulnerability spurred people into raising their voice for a collective cause of freedom against oppression. The major problem has been the economic downturn with inflation rate reaching fifty two percent for most commodities including food items in December 2025, detaching the state from the streets. The price rise is considered a result of prolonged economic sanctions on Iran. For the past two weeks, Iran’s streets have been witnessing demonstrations, showing a lack of faith in the ruling regime. This is how women activists and economic crusaders have got coalesced to synthesize the current movement.
Whereas people are pouring onto the streets of Iran, the ruling regime has been trying to insert inter-people disconnect by shutting down the facility of the internet and resorting to an information blackout. The objective is to keep people less interconnected and poorly informed. That is, a solution is sought in separating one individual (citizen) from the other, instead of addressing their concerns.
The hiatus between the ruling regime and people in the streets has offered an opportunity to US President Donald Trump to come open to support protestors in case the ruling regime resorts to suppressing their voice violently. There are reports of massacres wreaked with live ammunitions, besides cutting supplies of electricity and even the internet. However, the spirit of campaigners refuses to expire. They have taken the matter into their own hands and been risking their lives by coming out.
This seems to be a beginning of a new phase in the life of Iran as well as the future of US-Iran bilateral relations. The US is even ready to launch military (air or missile) attacks on civilian buildings being used for administrative purposes to overpower the demonstrators violently. Such an attack would deteriorate the civilian command structure and daunt administrative manpower from taking stern actions against the marchers. The consequence may be the regime change.
Whereas Iran is heading for a regime change, the message of people’s discontent inspired by change is also proliferating. People also want a change in the foreign policy, asking for Iran first. The fall of Iran’s ruling regime would have far reaching consequences on the Arab countries which think that introducing reforms here and there can appease their citizens, who demand freedom from oppression. Though it is also expected that Iran’s ruling regime will open the door of negotiations and show readiness to introduce reforms in order to weather the imminent threat of a regime change, the current movement is full of the zeal for now or never.
The writer is a former diplomat and freelance columnist. qaisarrashid@yahoo.com
