Revolution, Religion, and Regional Ambitions: Unraveling Iran’s Political Evolution

• The internal rumblings within Iranian civil society and the masses led to the rise of the momentous Constitutional Revolution in the year 1906.
• The Islamic Revolution of 1979 was a pivotal turning point that had the most disruptive impact and imprint on modern Iran.
• Iran is now a complex nation that combines Islamic theocracy and republicanism in a way that makes its political structure unique worldwide.
• Iran’s support for proxy groups and militant organizations reflects a strategic blend of ideology and geopolitics deeply rooted in the country’s pursuit of regional influence.

The political dynamics in Iran Provide us with a unique blend of nationalism, religion, and an innate desire for independence from foreign control. Internal political turbulences, socio-political upheavals, and interventions by Western powers have shaped this complex story. From the decline and fall of the Qajar dynasty to the rise of the Islamic Revolution, Iran’s political dynamics have oscillated from glorious years of victories and valour to the return of an orthodox theological order. The Khomanies and their iron-clad clergy have held absolute political power and authority in Iran from 1979 to the present. 

The Rise of the Qajar Dynasty and the upsurge of Constitutional Revolution:

 Iran was ruled by the Qajar dynasty (1785–1925) in the early 19^th and 20^th centuries. In this period, Iran experienced a state of fragile central authority, frequent internal conflicts, and constant interventions from foreign powers, mainly from Russia and Britain, who desired to take control of Iran’s resources and influence its geopolitical position. The poor governance of the Qajars failed to protect Iran from increasing foreign interference. This adversely impacted the country, leading to widespread disillusionment amongst the various segments of Iranian society, including the intellectuals, merchants, and the clergy. As the clergy possessed a significant influence over the masses, especially in the rural parts of the country, they aggressively projected their inherent religious authority to mobilize the masses against the misgovernance of the Qajar rule. The clergy also cited the dynasty’s failure to uphold fundamental Islamic principles such as justice, equality, and the protection of the Islamic faith, and safeguard the country from overt foreign influence.

The internal rumblings within Iranian civil society and the masses led to the rise of the momentous Constitutional Revolution in the year 1906. This was indeed a milestone for Iran’s pledge and surge towards modernisation. The newly induced constitutional framework aimed to curtail the monarchy’s power and establish a parliamentary government with checks and balances and a transparent governance model. Although the revolution successfully developed a constitution along with the parliament (Majles), its aims and objectives were disrupted by the continued interventions of foreign powers. The internal divisions among the reformists and conservatives widened over time, which led to the eventual reassertion of the Qajars’ royal authority. However, the revolution profoundly impacted Iran’s political evolution, which offered the country hope for its future political landscape.

The Rise of Reza Shah Pahlavi:

Perhaps the first critical paradigm shift in modern Iran was the iconic rise of Reza Khan, an exemplary military commander who led the famous coup of 1921. By 1925, he succeeded in deposing the last Qajar monarch, declared himself the ‘Shah of Iran’, and founded the Pahlavi dynasty. He became famous as Reza Shah eventually. He played a pivotal role in the modernization of Iran. He established his leadership credentials through his visionary reforms, such as the abolition of the veil, the promotion of Western attire and dress, and the establishment of a secular education system through modern schooling and the university system. The secular, authoritarian modernization efforts of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk of Turkey inspired his efforts in modernising Iran. 

In Shah’s Reign (1925-1941), significant modernisation and centralisation took place in Iran. He ensured that the influence of the foreign powers came down. He ensured that Iran’s military was strengthened and introduced a wide range of reforms, which included the modernisation of the economy and the society at large. The reforms included a wide range of infrastructure projects, such as the construction of the railways, the modernisation of the education system, and the establishment of a centralised bureaucracy. Also, Reza Shah was responsible for introducing land reforms to redistribute land more equitably among the population and introduce robust industrialization projects to boost the country’s economy.

However, at the same time, Reza Shah’s policies came across as being repressive. The power of the clergy was curtailed under him, and policies to weaken the ethnic minorities were systematically carried out. His push for modernisation was seen as a deliberate attempt to Westernize Iran by compromising the core Islamic and Persian identity of Iran. This sowed the seeds of future discontent for the Shah’s regime. 

The Oil Nationalization Movement and Mohammad Mossadegh

Reza Shah abdicated the throne in 1941 during the 2^nd World War, and his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was crowned as the new Shah. The post-war period in Iran was marked by the growth of political pluralism and the increase in tensions over the foreign control of its oil industry, mainly by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), which embarked on the symbol of British domination. The nationalist government, which Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh led, was determined to end this foreign control. In the year 1951, the Iranian oil industry was nationalised by Mossadegh’s government. He became a hero in the eyes of millions of Iranians as a result of this bold move, but Britain and the USA were provoked by this move and opposed it strongly. In 1953, the CIA and Mi6 Jointly organised a coup and overthrew Mossadegh from power, which naturally led to the restoration of The Shah’s absolute power as a monarch.

This coup was a pivotal event in the modern history of Iran as it deepened the anti-West sentiment and created a legacy of distrust towards the USA and Britain that persists to date. The Shah’s rule became increasingly autocratic. He developed closer ties with the West, particularly with the Americans., further alienating the critical mass of the Iranian society. 

Islamic Revolution of 1979 and the rise of the Khomanies

The Islamic Revolution of 1979 was a pivotal turning point that had the most disruptive impact and imprint on modern Iran. By the late 1970s, Shah’s authoritarian regime had attracted widespread discontent amongst the masses. The economic disparities in the country were on the rise, and the perceived superficial Westernization of Iran had reached a tipping point. The revolution brought together a diverse bandwagon of people from religious conservatives, leftists, and intellectuals. But the leadership of the Shia cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ultimately gave it a final shape.  The Pahlavi dynasty was overthrown, and an Islamic Republic was established under Khomeini’s leadership as a consequence of this revolution. With the clergy at the centre of social and political life, the new dictatorship aimed to establish an Islamic-based government. The Shah’s rule, Western influence, and secularism were all rejected by this movement, which marked a significant shift in Iran’s political and ideological climate.

Post-Revolutionary Iran and the Contemporary Era

Iran has faced numerous internal and external difficulties since the revolution. Shortly after the revolution, the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) erupted, causing significant harm to the nation but simultaneously strengthening the regime’s hold on power and igniting nationalist feelings. Saddam Hussein of Iraq started the conflict, which cost Iran a significant number of lives and valuable resources. However, it strengthened the legitimacy of the state and encouraged the populace to stand together against a shared enemy. The regime has been able to overcome many obstacles, such as economic suffering, political unrest, and international sanctions, by combining republican institutions with theocratic governance.

Iran is now a complex nation that combines Islamic theocracy and republicanism in a way that makes its political structure unique worldwide. The country’s identity is greatly influenced by its foreign policy, especially its anti-Western posture and regional aspirations. Internally, Iran is distinguished by continuous debates about economic growth, modernization, and the place of religion in public life, underscoring the persistent conflict between tradition and modernity that has defined its history over the previous century. Iran has established itself as a major actor in the Middle East by providing ideological and financial support to several militant groups and proxy groups. Its dedication to the velayat-e faqih (Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist) concept, which prioritizes Shia leadership and aims to increase its influence across the area, is the foundation for this support. Supporting non-state actors who share its ideology and further its geopolitical goals—particularly in opposition to those of the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia—is a key component of Iran’s strategy. 

The most prominent illustration of Iran’s proxy network is the Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran has given Hezbollah financial support, military training, and cutting-edge weapons since the 1980s. In exchange, Hezbollah has led Iran’s anti-Israel campaign and played a significant role in backing the Assad government in Syria, ensuring Iran’s strategic presence in the Levant. Iran assists several Shia militias in Iraq, mainly via the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF). These organizations were vital to the battle against ISIS. However, their power has also given Iran the ability to have a significant military and political impact in Iraq, frequently undercutting the American objectives in that region. Iranian assistance directly benefits organizations like the PMF’s Kata’ib Hezbollah and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq. Iran supports the Houthi rebels in Yemen as they battle the coalition commanded by Saudi Arabia. The Houthis have reportedly been using Iranian armaments, including missiles, to target Saudi Arabian infrastructure despite Iran’s denials of direct involvement. Managing these ties seamlessly is a key function of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), especially its Quds Force. Iran increases its strategic depth, offering its support to proxy groups, which helps it project power beyond its territory, while it also escalates sectarian disputes and springs up regional instability frequently. 

Anti-Jewish and Anti-Israeli nature of Iran’s Ruling Class

For several years, the Iranian clergy has aggressively promoted anti-Israel and anti-Jewish discourse motivated by both political and intellectual factors. This position dates back to the Islamic Revolution of 1979 when Ayatollah Khomeini saw Israel as an enemy of Islam and a nation that reflects the imprints of Western imperialism. Their understanding of religious obligation and Iran’s status as a leader in the Islamic world are at the heart of the clergy’s strong anti-Israel feelings, which are frequently entwined with anti-Jewish sentiment. This stance is reflected in Iran’s national security strategy, which actively backs anti-Israel organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. Iranian clergy actively supports the liberation of Palestine. It believes that the protection of Muslim interests in the Middle East depends on the destruction of Israel. The gruelling fissures between Iran and Israel are sustained by the clergy’s theological position as well as the fixation on its national security as a means to an end. 

Frustrations and Apprehensions of Commoners in Iran

Close to two-thirds of people in modern-day Iran believe that its clergy is the main barrier towards its aspirational goal of modernization and holistic progress. Traditional orthodoxy, which has upheld several antiquated laws and beliefs in Iranian culture, is the dominant mentality of the clergy. Iran desperately needs a major wave of modernization and reform to reduce the grave risk of domestic strife and public unrest. Either regime change or internal modernization promoted by the ruling class could bring about this much-needed change. 

Contemplating the path Ahead with the imminent challenges

Iran’s support for proxy groups and militant organizations reflects a strategic blend of ideology and geopolitics deeply rooted in the country’s pursuit of regional influence. By backing groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shia militias in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen, Iran leverages these proxies to extend its impact, counter Western and regional rivals, and project power beyond its borders. While this approach has bolstered Iran’s standing as a key player in Middle Eastern affairs, it has also exacerbated regional instability, heightened sectarian tensions, and led to international scrutiny. Iran’s reliance on non-state actors ensures it maintains a strong foothold in conflicts that serve its strategic goals. Still, this method also perpetuates cycles of violence and conflict, challenging peace and stability in the region. Understanding Iran’s proxy network is critical to analysing the broader geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East and the continued impact of Iranian foreign policy.

It’s no secret that Iran has long positioned itself as a staunch opponent of Israel, both ideologically and strategically. Through proxies like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, Iran seeks to challenge Israeli dominance and influence in the region. Hezbollah’s substantial missile stockpile, funded and supplied by Iran, presents a persistent security threat to Israel, making it a critical factor in any potential military engagement. Similarly, Iran’s support for Hamas fuels instability in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, this proxy warfare escalates the risk of confrontation between Iran and Israel, primarily as Israel responds with pre-emptive strikes against Iranian military assets in Syria and other regions. The challenge lies in the proxy-driven, indirect nature of the conflict, which complicates diplomatic efforts where there is no guarantee of continued international peace, even in the case of the Iranian government’s consistent efforts towards achieving it. A potential way forward would involve regional and global actors facilitating de-escalation through dialogue, addressing Iran’s security concerns and Israel’s need for safety. Reducing proxy influence and fostering negotiations can be considered a viable way to stabilize the region and ease tensions. However, both nations must be willing to prioritize diplomacy over continued conflict. 

References: 

1. _{When referring to the Qajar dynasty and the Constitutional Revolution: (Author, Year, p. X) or (The Emergence of Modern Iran, Year, p. X)}
2. _{The Emergence of Modern Iran. (n.d.). Comparative conflict analysis of Iran and Israel with its domestic political dynamics. Unpublished manuscript.}
3. _{Brumberg, D., & Farhi, F. (Eds.). (2016). Power and Change in Iran: Politics of Contention and Conciliation. Indiana University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1bmzp38}
4. _{Hashim, A.S. (1995). The crisis of the Iranian state: domestic, foreign and security policies in post-Khomeini Iran.}
5. _{Fitzpatrick, K. (2023). The Soft War: Understanding Iran’s Domestic Ideological Crisis. American Enterprise Institute. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep53455}
6. _{Zimmt, R. (2022). Three Months of Protest in Iran: A Revolutionary Situation, Sans Revolution. Institute for National Security Studies. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep47003.}

Viswapramod C

Viswapramod is a PhD Scholar at the Department of International Studies and Political Science, Christ University, Bangalore. He has an MA in International Relations. Views expressed are the author’s own.