We are excited to have the following piece by Iranian theorist Parviz Sedaghat^,[1] translated into English by Leila Faghfouri Azar and first published in Farsi in pecritique.com.

1)
Israel’s military attack against Iran started in the early hours of Friday June 13 by targeted assassinations and widespread destruction of military and civilian infrastructure. This act of aggression has once again placed Iran at the heart of a decisive and fateful historical dynamic. The Iranian people face another critical juncture that echoes what they have encountered in similar moments for over a century, repeatedly imposed by colonialists and imperialists, represetend today by Zionist interventions. Each time, these interventions have pushed the country into crisis or deeper instability. The Russian military invasion following the defeat of the Second Constitutional Movement in the 1910s, the Allied occupation in August 1941, the CIA-led coup of August 1953, the eight-year war after the 1979 revolution (which played a decisive role in stabilizing the new post-revolutionary order), and the “neither-war-nor-peace” condition of the past decade under crushing sanctions, all mark pivotal moments shaped by foreign interventions. At present, once again we are witnessing a direct Zionist-imperialist military intervention resulting in the destruction of Iran’s infrastructure.

Perhaps the most important lesson that must be restated is the same one we learned from the earliest struggles for freedom during the Constitutional Revolution: no democratic or emancipatory struggle in Iran can endure without embracing an anti-imperialist position. No struggle for social justice and freedom can ignore the destructive global order that has obstructed democratic and justice-oriented liberatory movements in the Global South for over a century, under the guise of democracy and human rights. Imperialism and Zionism can never be even tactical allies of progressive and liberatory forces and movements in the Middle East. Any force or movement that falls into such a trap will ultimately either become an agent of imperialist powers or be slaughtered by imperialist, sub-imperialist, or authoritarian states. This is the key lesson these events offer to political activists engaged in democratic and justice-driven movements. Thus, in Iran and the broader Middle East, one cannot be pro-freedom without being anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist.

2)
Since the 1970s, the trajectory of political developments in the Middle East has faced immense new obstacles due to two important factors. Firstly, together with the entrenchment and expansion of Israel’s colonial regime, we have seen the accumulation of hundreds of billions of dollars in reactionary and authoritarian Gulf states which has fueled a regional surge in militarism. Secondly, within the context of uneven capitalist development, a number of reactionary ideological movements, enabled by increasing access to these financial resources, have gained momentum. This has been intesified further, particularly due to the weakening or absence of leftist, secular-progressive forces. These developments paved the way for the rise of a reactionary version of political Islam. Since then, the peoples of the Middle East have found themselves confronting two enemies, each seeking to co-opt and undermine their struggles. This bitter historical pattern now threatens to repeat itself. The democratic and liberatory struggles of many Iranians over the past two decades is at the risk of being derailed by Israeli and U.S. military intervention.

The Iranian regime, particularly since the mid-2010s, has largely survived by relying on oppression. At the same time, it lacks both the economic capacity for capital accumulation and redistributive economic policy, as well as the political legitimacy to rally support from the majority. Today, it cannot be ignored that the combination of poverty, inequality, systemic dysfunction, and the ideological delegitimization of the Iranian regime has created fertile ground for the current military aggression.

3)
If we recognize that the current war is a continuation of long-standing policies of militarization, imperialist interventions, and hegemonic rivalries, then we must also highlight the policies that result from it. Based on official statements of Israeli politicians, it is reasonable to infer that their military interventions intends to push Iran toward becoming a “failed state”. This, in turn, could facilitate a regime change in favor of imperialist and Zionist interests. Given the rapid pace of developments and the covert nature of imperialist schemes, it is very difficult to predict the consequences. However, it is highly likley that Iran runs the risk of turning into a failed state. 

At the same time, the absence of a coherent pro-imperialist political and military force within the country makes regime change appear unlikely, at least for the time being. The current development does not resemble a post-2003 Iraq after the US occupation. Rather, it shows similarities with the first Gulf war in early 1990s. After this war, the Iraq was marked by internal repression, escalating crises, economic collapse, and the disintegration of the country’s social fabric. Therefore, we need to recognize the perilous nature of the current situation and emphasise the urgent need to call for a ceasefire and peace. It is expected that certain elements and factions within the ruling financial oligarchy, particularly those not fully aligned with the hardline anti-Western policies of the regime, take steps to preserve their political power.

4)
At the regional level, it seems unlikely that this war, or even the taming or elimination of Iranian regime as a “rogue state”, will resolve the broader problematic of regional hegemony. Israel faces deep internal and regional crises. It cannot achieve regional hegemony merely through military power and perpetual warfare. This is because even with possible backdoor deals, reactionary Arab governments will find it difficult, if not impossible, to convince their own people to establish strategic relationships with this state. Moreover, Turkey, another regional power, is promoting its own hegemonic ambitions portrayed as the revival of a neo-Ottoman empire.

This power struggle unfolds in the context of a larger, crisis-driven global capitalist order as well as the instability of the nation-state paradigm. Establishing a new geopolitical order in the region requires a stable and effective international system of governance led by dominant nation-states and global institutions. But today’s international system is in crisis and incapable of maintaining this order. From Europe to the Middle East, we are witnessing armed conflicts. Moreover, the spectre of war looms over East and South Asia. In this chaotic geopolitical context, overthrowing a rogue state can too quickly lead to the rise of another one. This reality turns Netanyahu’s and Trump’s childish dreams into a nightmare. To conclude, the Israel-Iran war takes place in a region of devastating economic, social, and environmental crises, and a world order splintered into rival poles. This war, regardless of its outcome, will only serve to prolong and intensify regional and global geopolitical crises.

5)
The only positive effect of this war for the Iranian liberatory struggle is that it exposes the desctructive role of pro-imperialist and far-right opposition figures. These figures are currently cheering for the bombs that destroy the lives of their own people, and the history will remember them.^[2] Nor should we forget the propaganda of media outlets and their pundits who joyfully reported the bombing of Tehran.^[3] They will go down as the shameful ones in history books. 

6)
Without falling into a reductionist economism, one can observe a close relationship between this war and the long circuits of global capital. In addition to the direct interests of militarized and extractive capital, this war is also linked to geopolitical competition. It intersects with the rivalry between China’s “Belt and Road Initiative” and the proposed “India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor”, which runs from India through the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, and Greece to Europe. This is clearly part of the broader U.S.–China geopolitical confrontation.

7)
During his recent visit to the Arab states, Donald Trump addressed authoritarian leaders in these words: “While you have been constructing the world’s tallest skyscrapers in Jeddah and Dubai, Tehran’s 1979 landmarks are collapsing into rubble […]  Iran’s decades of neglect and mismanagement have left the country plagued by rolling blackouts lasting for hours a day […] While your skill has turned dry deserts into fertile farmland, Iran’s leaders have managed to turn green farmland into dry deserts […] They get rich but they don’t let the people have any of it. 

And then of course there’s the key difference at the root of it all While the Arab states have focused on becoming pillars of regional stability and world commerce Iran’s leaders have focused on stealing their people’ s wealth to fund terror […]”. In simple terms, Trump imposes a false authoritarian dichotomy upon the people of Iran and the Middle East: either a pro-imperialist authoritarian state or a rogue authoritarian state to be besieged, sanctioned, and bombed. This shows the Western Saviours have dropped the mask of democracy and human rights and have fully drawn the swords.

In the face of this false dichotomy, the liberatory and democratic movements in Iran (over the past decades) and indeed across the Arab world (since the uprisings of 2011) have proven to represent a ‘third voice’, despite all repression, and setbacks. This voice, which is deeply rooted in these societies, has consistently pursued and will continue to pursue its own genuine liberatory alternatives.

June the 18^th 2025, Tehran 

English translation by Leila Faghfouri Azar

^[1] Parviz Sedaghat is an Iran-based expert and researcher in political economy, and the chief editor of the Farsi-language platform Critique of Political Economy. This opinion piece was originally published in pecritique.com on the afternoon of Wednesday, June 18; the sixth day of Israel’s bombardment of Iran under a nationwide internet outage [added by translator].

^[2] This refers to the political stance and public statements of Reza Pahlavi, the U.S.-based son of Iran’s last monarch. He and his supporters have openly endorsed Israeli military strikes against Iran, presenting such interventions as legitimate tools for regime change in the name of advancing human rights and democracy for the Iranian people [added by translator]. 

^[3] This refers to the propaganda of Iran International, a London-based media outlet with opaque financial sources and unclear political affiliations [added by translator].