Nationwide Protests in Iran: The Return of the Streets to Power Equations
According to Iran Gate News Agency, the new wave of protests in various Iranian cities cannot simply be seen as a temporary reaction to economic pressures. What has occurred in the streets of Tehran, Isfahan, Mashhad, Kermanshah, Qom, Arak, Hamedan, and several smaller cities in recent days is more than anything a sign of the accumulation of unresolved economic, social, and political crises. Crises that have been warned about for years but have not received effective and lasting responses.
The protests began with demands related to livelihoods. The continuous fall in the value of the rial, high inflation, and the erosion of purchasing power have brought a large segment of society to a point where even meeting basic needs has become difficult. The closure of markets and protest gatherings by merchants were clear signs of economic trust disintegration. However, the rapid spread of protests and the joining of students, workers, and urban classes showed that the issue goes beyond bread and currency and is tied to a sense of voicelessness and lack of a clear outlook.
In many gatherings, slogans moved beyond economic demands to direct criticism of the country’s governance, managerial inefficiency, and lack of accountability. This change in tone indicates a deep rift between society and the decision-making structure—a rift that not only has not been healed by the repeated cycle of protest, suppression, and temporary silence but has become deeper each time.
The reaction of security institutions has largely focused on street control and coercive measures, following the familiar pattern of past years. Reports speak of the arrest of protesters, the use of tear gas, and, in some cases, human casualties. While there is no necessary transparency about the number of deaths and arrests, this lack of transparency has fueled public distrust instead of calming the atmosphere. Experience has shown that security measures without providing real solutions only postpone the issue.
Official positions of the authorities have mostly fluctuated between understanding the people’s economic problems and warning about enemy exploitation—a stance that is not convincing for a large part of society. The repeated emphasis on external factors without acknowledging the role of internal structures in shaping the crisis conveys the message that the government still avoids deep criticism of its policies.
International reactions have been predictable: expressing concern about the treatment of protesters and calling for respect for citizens’ rights. However, the reality is that the root of the crisis lies not in external pressure but in the chronic inability to implement effective economic and political reforms—reforms that have been delayed for years.
In summary, the recent protests should be seen as a serious alarm. A society that repeatedly returns to the streets to express its demands is, in fact, signaling the closure of normal channels of dialogue and reform. If the government’s response remains limited to security crisis management and vague promises, the likelihood of these protests recurring and even intensifying is not far-fetched. The future of social stability in Iran is tied more than anything to this question: Is there a genuine willingness to listen, accept responsibility, and make reforms or not?