As the government responds to protests with lethal force, and with increasing reports of thousands killed, a central question is being discussed by both analysts and Iranians: Is the Islamic Republic confronting its gravest challenge since the 1979 revolution, or does it still have sufficient coercive power to endure?

For Mehdi Ghadimi, an Iranian journalist who protested the regime for decades before his exile, the current situation feels distinctly different from past events.

“From 1999, when I was around fifteen, until 2024, when I was forced to leave Iran, I participated in every street protest against the Islamic Republic,” Ghadimi stated. “For about half of that time, I backed the reformist movement. But after 2010, we became convinced that the Islamic Republic cannot be reformed, and that changing its internal factions is an illusion.”

Ghadimi says this understanding slowly permeated Iranian society, leading to what he calls a pivotal change in the present unrest.

“For the first time in 47 years of opposition to the Islamic Republic, the goal of returning to the pre-January 1979 era became the single demand and unifying principle for the people,” he explained. “Consequently, we saw the most extensive participation of people from every city and village across Iran in the streets, on a scale never seen in earlier protests.”

Ghadimi asserted that the protesters’ chants mirrored this change. Rather than calling for economic aid or alterations to dress codes, demonstrators explicitly demanded the end of the Islamic Republic and the restoration of the Pahlavi dynasty.

“At that moment, it no longer felt like we were simply protesting,” he remarked. “We were, in essence, conducting a revolution.”

However, Ghadimi was unequivocal about what he thinks is stopping the regime from falling.

“The answer is very straightforward,” he said. “The government imposes no restrictions on itself regarding the killing of its own citizens.”

He added that Tehran seems comforted by the absence of repercussions for its conduct. “It has also been reassured by the conduct of other nations that if it survives, it will face no punishment for these flagrant crimes against humanity,” he noted. “The doors to diplomacy will always be open to them, even with blood on their hands.”

Ghadimi explained how the government restricted internet access to disrupt coordination between protesters and opposition leaders abroad. He stated that once internet access was cut, the audience for video messages from the exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi fell significantly.

While some Iranians speak of a revolutionary atmosphere, security and policy experts warn that structural factors still benefit the regime.

Javed Ali, an associate professor at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, said the Islamic Republic is confronting much more severe threats to its power than in previous years, due to a combination of military, regional, economic, and diplomatic pressures.

“The IRGC is in a considerably weaker position after the 12-day war with Israel last summer,” Ali stated, mentioning “leadership removals, ballistic missile and drone capabilities that were expended or impaired, and a substantially degraded air and radar defense network.”

Ali said Iran’s regional deterrence has also severely declined. “The so-called Axis of Resistance has been greatly weakened throughout the region,” he said, referring to setbacks for Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Shiite militias aligned with Tehran.

Domestically, Ali noted that demographic pressures are heightening the challenge. “Iran’s youth are more frustrated than ever due to worsening economic conditions, persistent social and cultural constraints, and repeated violent suppressions of dissent,” he explained.

Ali also highlighted changing external dynamics that are restricting Tehran’s options, including what he characterized as a strengthened alliance between the U.S. and Israel linked to the Netanyahu-Trump partnership. He added that there are “potential joint operations already in progress to support the protest movement inside Iran.”

Israeli security sources, speaking anonymously, said Israel has no desire to intervene in a manner that would enable Tehran to shift domestic turmoil outward.

“Everyone realizes it’s wiser to wait quietly and avoid drawing fire toward Israel,” one source commented. “The regime wants to frame this as a conflict with Israel and the Zionist enemy and initiate another war to crush internal protests.”

“This is not Israel versus Iran,” the source continued. “We understand the regime aims to provoke us, and we do not wish to assist in that.”

The source said the collapse of the Islamic Republic would have profound implications. “If the regime falls, it will impact the entire region,” the official said. “It could usher in a new epoch.”

Ali stated that Iran is becoming more diplomatically isolated. “There is increasing isolation from Arab nations, the fall of Assad in Syria, and only lukewarm backing from China and Russia,” he said.

Despite these pressures, Ali warned that Iran’s coercive institutions remain steadfast.

“I believe the security forces, along with the Ministry of Intelligence, remain loyal to the regime due to a combination of ideology, religion, and self-interest,” he stated, referring to “power, money, and influence.”

It remains uncertain whether fear of collapse could prompt insiders to defect. “Whether there are insiders prepared to switch sides due to a perception of the clerical structure’s imminent collapse is difficult to ascertain,” Ali said.

He estimated the likelihood of an internal regime collapse at “25% or lower,” describing it as “possible, but much less probable.”

Currently, Iran seems trapped between two realities: a populace increasingly united in its rejection of the Islamic Republic, and a security force still prepared to use extreme force to maintain it.

As Ali observed, pressure by itself does not topple regimes. The critical juncture arrives only when those commanded to carry out repression conclude it is no longer advantageous for them to comply.

Despite the widespread unrest, Ghadimi warned that the final result is still unclear.

“After these four horrific days, without knowing the fate of our friends and loved ones who took to the streets, or whether they are even alive, it is very hard for me to provide a clear evaluation and declare if our revolution is advancing toward victory,” he expressed.

He remembered a message he heard frequently before leaving Iran, in various cities and across social strata.

“The only thing I consistently heard was this: ‘We have nothing left to lose, and even at the cost of our lives, we will not take a single step back from our demand for the fall of the Islamic Republic,'” Ghadimi recounted. “They made me promise that since I am outside Iran, I would be their voice.”

“That spirit is what still gives my heart hope for victory,” he added. “But my mind tells me that when mass killing goes unpunished, and when the government has enough bullets, guns, and resolve to crush dissent, even if it means killing millions, then achieving victory would necessitate a miracle.”