TEHRAN – Daniel M. Rosen, in his recent article for the Jpost, argues that Iran is on the brink of collapse, citing economic hardships posed by U.S. sanctions, evolving situation in the West Asia region, and what he calls internal discontent. However, predicting the Iranian government’s imminent downfall overlooks historical resilience, strategic recalibrations, and Tehran’s evolving regional posture.

One of the arguments for Iran’s alleged decline by Rosen is the country’s economic situation. However, Tehran has repeatedly demonstrated adaptability under sanctions. Tehran has cultivated economic ties beyond the West, particularly with China, Russia, and regional partners, allowing it to bypass conventional economic restrictions. 

Tehran, through mechanisms such as cryptocurrency trade and local currency deals, mitigates sanctions imposed by the West. The country has promoted domestic production in sectors like agriculture, pharmaceuticals, and military technology, reducing reliance on imports. While economic hardship is undeniable, Iran’s ability to function within an alternative financial framework suggests that economic collapse is not foreseeable. 

The article then contends that Iran’s military posture has suffered major defeats, particularly in Syria and Gaza. However, it underestimates Hezbollah in Lebanon, Resistance groups in Iraq, the Ansarallah movement in Yemen, which still can be considered a huge leverage for Iran’s defensive strategy, countering efforts to weaken Iran’s reach. Over the years, Iran has been modifying its defensive approach, emphasizing drone warfare, cyber operations, and missile capabilities. Iran retains control over key shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, allowing it to exert pressure on global trade networks in case of any attack on its sovereign soil. Although Iran has faced challenges in the West Asia region, labeling it a “paper tiger” underestimates its ability to adjust strategy and maintain regional influence. 

Tehran has faced multiple waves of unrest, some of which were openly or covertly supported by Western governments. However, as demonstrated by over four decades of the Islamic Republic’s history, uprisings alone do not necessarily lead to ‘regime change’. Iran's security apparatus remains a crucial pillar of the state’s ability to counter anti-Iran elements. Tehran has developed extensive counterintelligence capabilities aimed at thwarting foreign intervention. Iranian security forces closely monitor entities collaborating with foreign governments. They have been capable of dismantling multiple foreign spy networks, particularly those linked to Western intelligence services and regional adversaries. Tehran has enhanced its ability to counter digital espionage and has disrupted most of the hostile intelligence-gathering efforts. While dissatisfaction can be seen in a range of issues, mainly caused by Western sanctions, there is no single issue that a political entity can ride on to initiate a major uprising. 

Also, anti-Islamic Republic elements lack cohesion to mobilize against Tehran. The revival of the ‘maximum pressure’ strategy under the Trump administration has been widely framed as a decisive move to cripple Iran’s economy and force its leadership into submission. However, historical patterns suggest that such measures have consistently fallen short of their intended objectives. While sanctions placed economic strain on Iran, they failed to trigger a fundamental shift in its policies. Instead, these restrictions accelerated Iran’s strategic pivot toward alternative global actors, particularly Russia and China, fostering deeper economic and political integration. By strengthening ties with these nations, Iran has mitigated the impact of Western financial restrictions. 

Trade agreements, energy partnerships, and alternative payment mechanisms have enabled Tehran to maintain a degree of economic stability despite external pressures. Moreover, the increasing fragmentation of the global financial system, with the rise of non-dollar trade agreements and alternative banking mechanisms, has further diminished the effectiveness of unilateral sanctions. In this context, the notion that maximum pressure could serve as a final blow to Iran appears increasingly tenuous. Rather than isolating Iran, these policies have contributed to its realignment within a broader geopolitical framework, reinforcing its role as a key player in multi-polar global dynamics. 

Iran’s engagement in diplomatic negotiations should not be interpreted as an act of desperation, but rather as a calculated move within a broader strategy aimed at securing national interests. Over the years, Tehran has demonstrated an ability to leverage negotiations as a means of extracting concessions while maintaining its core political and strategic objectives. Rather than signaling surrender, Iran’s negotiation stance suggests strategic pragmatism. 

For decades, various analysts and policymakers have predicted Iran’s imminent collapse, citing economic distress, political challenges, and external pressures. Yet, the Islamic Republic has not only endured but demonstrated remarkable resilience in the face of adversity. From the devastating Iran-Iraq War to periods of severe economic hardship induced by international sanctions, Iran has repeatedly adapted to shifting geopolitical and domestic realities. 

This resilience stems from a combination of structural, political, and social factors. Unlike authoritarian regimes that rely on centralized, rigid power structures, Iran maintains a complex governance system that blends Islam with democratic elements. This hybrid model includes institutions such as the Expediency Council and the Assembly of Experts, which provide mechanisms for political adjustment and elite consensus. Moreover, elections allow for shifts within the political landscape, helping the system recalibrate rather than collapse under pressure. 

Beyond political structures, Iran’s enduring sociopolitical cohesion plays a vital role. Despite internal differentiating viewpoints, the government has maintained strong support among the masses. Additionally, nationalist sentiments and historical memory reinforce Iran’s drive for autonomy, making external pressure a unifying rather than destabilizing force in many cases. Thus, rather than facing abrupt dissolution, Iran’s ability to recalibrate policies and strategically shift alliances underscores its long-term endurance. While challenges remain, the repeated survival of the system suggests that predictions of collapse fail to account for its adaptability and the evolving global order.