salehiisfahani3_Kaveh KazemiGetty Images_iran revolution

The Islamic Revolution at 40

Feb 12, 2019 Djavad Salehi-Isfahani

US President Donald Trump’s administration seems to hope that, with a nudge from sanctions, ordinary Iranians will rise up and overthrow the Islamic Republic. But the economic data do not support the view that the Iranian public has been driven into abject poverty since 1979, let alone that it is on the brink of revolting.

BLACKSBURG, VIRGINIA – The Islamic Republic of Iran marks its 40th anniversary this week. But, with the country beset by a severe economic crisis, the question on everyone’s lips –within Iran and the diaspora alike – seems to be whether the Islamic Revolution has actually improved Iranians’ lives.

Since last May, when the United States withdrew from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – better known as the Iran nuclear deal – and re-imposed its toughest sanctions on Iran, the Iranian economy has taken a nosedive. The currency has lost 70% of its value, and prices are rising at a 40% annual rate, placing new strain on an already underperforming economy, in which one-third of university-educated young people are out of work.

US President Donald Trump’s administration seems to hope that, with a nudge from sanctions, ordinary Iranians will rise up and overthrow the Islamic Republic. In a major speech to the Iranian-American community last July – widely viewed as a call for regime change – US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that the Islamic regime had put “Iran into a long-term economic tailspin,” pushing “a third of Iranians … below the poverty line.”

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 6 in all 6 Comments on this article

nigel southway Feb 17, 2019

The best way to deal with them is to exclude them from our economy which is what trump did Any hint of aggression must also be met with force
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Feb 14, 2019

Djavad Salehi-Isfahani says Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran and the re-imposition of sanctions lifted in 2015 aim at regime change. The administration and its allies – Isreal and Saudi Arabia – hope that widespread dissatisfaction could accelerate an implosion in Iran, when ordinary people would rise up and overthrow the Islamic Republic. Yet the 2017–2018 anti-government protests across Iran fuelled by hyperinflation and unemployment did not spiral out of control.
The author says “the economic data do not support the view that the Iranian public has been driven into abject poverty since 1979, let alone that it is on the brink of revolting.” The first decade was tough, especially when an acute economic crisis – the price of Iranian oil fell to close to $11 a barrel – combined with the burdens of the war with Iraq, diverted the regime from its goals of economic development and compassion for the poor.
Iran’s economy is based on a single asset, oil, turning the country into a classic example of a rentier economy, whose negative impacts are many. Due to the relatively easy and ongoing income from oil, the government has no impetus to develop other business sectors or diversify the economy, even if sanctions were not in place. Without a diversified economy, a business sector does not develop and opportunities for young people, especially graduates, become limited.
Rampant corruption is a way of life in Iran, with abundant opportunities for an authoritarian regime to develop as power becomes closely tied to a single resource. The citizenry are kept in subjugation, living on government handouts. Human capital is wasted as advanced technological jobs are not created. Eventually, a dramatic wealth gap develops, separating the privileged, that are close to the regime, from the tens of millions, who live below the poverty line.
The country is plagued by stagnating production, high unemployment and lack of capacity. Youth unemployment is especially high, as one-third of the entire population is between the ages of 15 and 29. The nuclear deal with world powers undermined the dominance of hardliners, who made fortunes off smuggling and their control of state industries. The Revolutionary Guards are the biggest player in Iran’s main industries: energy, construction, car manufacturing and telecommunications.
Despite widespread grievances, last year’s protests remained fragmented, localised and uncoordinated. Iranians do not support Trump’s call for “regime change.” He believed Iran was just months away from collapse and stepped up pressure on the country, hoping it would implode. He could not be more wrong. Not only is the regime far from demise, His narrow focus is counter-productive and goes against what most Iranians really want – prosperity and stability.
There is a difference between today’s Iran and the one that emerged 40 years ago. Thanks to isolation the country learns to adapt and mature. It has become more pragmatic and less keen on spreading the revolution and its ideology. The government’s reaction to the wave of protests last year was a recognition that blaming outside powers would not work. The political establishment, led by the supreme leader, legitimised protesters’ demands and promised reform.
The reform-minded president, Hassan Rouhani knows that any lasting change for the better can only come from within the country, spearheaded by Iranians. The country has to evolve domestically, trying to keep up with a dynamic and changing society, while improving living standards for average Iranians, who “are in many ways measurably better under the Islamic Republic than they were under the Shah.” However, high unemployment....and the social restrictions that have been imposed since 1979” are a thorn in many young Iranians’ side. They want change, but not Trump’s version of it.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Friesen Feb 13, 2019

It's always good to find a piece like this, which at least seems to present the objective facts about a country the "western" media love to hate. Thanks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Markus Schumann Feb 13, 2019

The west has had two important moments to avoid the Mullah regime: In 1953 and in 1979.

In 1953, non-acting (by the US/CIA) would have helped. Mosaddegh was a democratic politician, however he dared to sell persian oil instead of giving it away for free. The CIA intervention was the major cause of todays "Islamic Republic".

In 1979, acting (by France) would have kept Khomeini in France, maybe in jail, out of Iran.

It is the west, who is to blame for most of what is happening. Other similar examples are the US Afghanistan policy: From Mujahideens to Taliban to Al Qaida to ISIS, all the way with US taxpayers money, and the Gulf wars: Decapitating Iraq, Libya, almost Syria and then wondering about the effects.

All-in-all: Trump is right by stopping the "treaty" and wrong otherwise. US should for once keep out of all other 192 countries of this planet.
- P. Kamath Feb 13, 2019
  
  It is silly to use these worn out sayings " ..if only we could have done this or that .. Sort of things..." . How about turning the clock back to start with or having 20-20 vision gulping magic pills!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/HCdi404

Cookies and Privacy

The Islamic Revolution at 40

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

The Islamic Revolution at 40

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification