BEIRUT—As Iran once again finds itself under intense political, economic, and media pressure, the current moment cannot be understood in isolation. 

What is unfolding today—crippling sanctions, economic suffocation, externally inflamed unrest, and relentless demonization—is not spontaneous. It is the revival of a familiar Western playbook, one that is repeatedly deployed against states that refuse submission to American hegemony and the Israeli enemy’s strategic dominance.

History shows that when a state insists on sovereignty, independent decision-making, and control over its resources, it becomes a target. Iran’s experience is neither unique nor new; it is simply the latest chapter in a long record of engineered destabilization.

The 1953 overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh remains a defining case study.

Mossadegh’s crime, in the eyes of Washington and London, was not authoritarianism or corruption, but nationalization of Iran’s oil and reclaim of economic sovereignty. The response was not open war but covert subversion.

The coup did not begin with tanks. It began with economic pressure, media manipulation, funded opposition networks, and the deliberate inflation of social tensions.

Internal chaos was manufactured to create the illusion of state failure. Once the narrative of collapse was established, democracy was crushed and the Shah was restored as a loyal Western client. Iran paid the price with decades of repression and dependency.

Today, the same logic operates through modern instruments. Crushing sanctions, financial suffocation, frozen assets, and trade restrictions are presented as consequences of internal mismanagement rather than what they truly are: acts of economic warfare.

These measures are designed to exhaust society, provoke anger, and weaken the bond between state and people.

It is dangerously naïve to believe that those responsible for currency collapse and rising poverty are suddenly motivated by concern for Iranian dignity or freedom.

Hunger is weaponized, not out of humanitarian impulse, but as a tool of coercion. Economic strangulation is not diplomacy—it is destabilization by other means.

Peaceful protest is a legitimate right and an essential component of any society. The real danger, however, lies in the systematic hijacking of genuine grievances and redirecting them toward violence, institutional breakdown, and calls for regime collapse.
This pattern is well known: legitimate demands are exploited, protests are radicalized, and the state is pushed toward internal disintegration.

What is sought is not reform but collapse. Not accountability, but fragmentation!

This strategy relies on turning social pressure into existential crisis, weakening the state from within while external actors wait for the decisive rupture.

The obscene double standards of Donald Trump exemplify this approach. While openly defending perpetrators of brutal acts inside the United States—such as in the Minnesota crime—and justifying violence in his war against immigrants, Trump postures as a moral authority on Iran.

Despite mass protests and widespread anger within the U.S., he continues his reckless interference in Iranian affairs under the banner of “freedom.”

For nearly two weeks, Iran has witnessed protests that began with economic demands but were quickly pushed toward violence, chaos, and explicit calls for regime change. 

Statements issued by Western leaders and coordinated media narratives confirm that American and European involvement is neither accidental nor marginal. Washington seeks to penetrate Iranian society, restore its own influence, and incite the public against the system, while Europe follows suit, amplifying unrest and legitimizing disorder.

This is not improvisation. Studies of prominent Western and Zionist think tanks reveal a clear shift toward harsher, enforceable strategies against states that are classified as part of the Axis of Resistance.

Institutions such as Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), and the Gatestone Institute converge on one conclusion: sanctions must evolve from “containable” pressure into full economic suffocation.

INSS recommends targeting Iran’s aviation sector, expanding international oversight, and linking civilian infrastructure to security roles—technically feasible steps constrained only by political will and international double standards.

FDD advocates extending maritime blockade models used against Venezuela to Iran, a path that risks international confrontation, particularly with China.

Gatestone proposes sweeping measures that expose the gap between ambition and enforceability.

They are targeting not just Iran’s political system, but the integrity of the country—its economy, military capacity, and social cohesion. This threat extends across the region!

Some Arab states have begun to sense the danger, realizing that chaos, once unleashed, does not respect borders or alliances.

Political disagreements with Iran should not obscure the larger project at work. Any state that insists on sovereignty and strategic autonomy becomes a target. The lesson of 1953 remains painfully relevant.

History is repeating itself. The only question is whether the region will recognize the pattern in time—and resist it!