Protests in Iran ended with victory for current regime – Oleg Makarenko

Speaking with Alpha News, political scientist and Middle East expert Oleg Makarenko commented on the events in Iran.

“The protests in Iran at the present moment have ended with the victory of the current political regime—that is beyond doubt. The authorities managed to consolidate society: they brought their supporters out into the streets, and there were quite a lot of them, which was demonstrated on television. If the international community failed to notice, that is its own problem. As for the forceful suppression of the protests, it showed that the security agencies are on the side of the existing political elite and are not going to surrender their positions. The protests have practically died down for several reasons. First, they have no leader who could lead the masses. Second, they are indeed fueled from outside, from Kurdistan. The main driving forces, as in 2016 and now, are representatives of the Kurdish ethnic group, who dream of their own state at the expense of Iraq, Iran, and Syria. As for a possible US invasion, it is theoretically possible. Yet, unexpectedly for many, the United States has begun withdrawing its forces, including certain units, from the region. This indicates that Washington is realistically assessing Iran’s capabilities, which can inflict serious firepower damage using ballistic and other missiles, while the US does not have sufficient air defense forces to repel such a strike. A military option is possible, but I assess it as minimal, since Trump does not need a protracted war with losses, and such a scenario is quite realistic. He would like to repeat the ‘Venezuela Project 2.0,’ but while in Venezuela he managed to find approaches to the political elite, in Iran he failed to do so. I believe that within Iran’s current political elite there are no people who would meet Trump halfway to replace the country’s current political leader,” the political scientist said.

Makarenko emphasized the influence of events in Iran on the South Caucasus region and highlighted Tehran’s special role in Armenia’s security.

“Speaking of the South Caucasus, Iran has repeatedly said that it will not allow political and, most importantly, territorial changes, including changes to the status quo of the so-called ‘Zangezur corridor.’ It has always regarded it as Armenian and nothing else. If Iran leaves the region, Armenia’s position will become extremely weak. This is very bad, since it will effectively be left alone against its two adversaries—Azerbaijan and Turkey.

Looking more broadly, Israel is now strengthening, which nobody in the region needs, especially the Arab states that distanced themselves from the ‘Abraham Accords.’ Meanwhile, in Iran, statements are already being made by the shah in exile, who dreams of returning to power and has expressed readiness to sign the ‘Abraham Accords.’ In other words, the current instability in Iran serves no one’s interests,” he concluded.