15 January 2026

Why Socialists and Anti-Imperialists Should Support the Iranian Protest Movement Against the Regime and Defend the Regime Against Israel and US Imperialism

Liberation for the Palestinians and the people of the Middle East Will Not Be Achieved on the Backs of the Oppression of Iranian Workers, Women and Youth

We are witnessing the biggest rebellion of Iranians against the theocratic regime in Iran for decades. Whether the regime succeeds in repressing the demonstrations and surviving is an open question. I suspect, at least in the short term, it will survive because the Iranian state's repressive apparatus bears many similarities to those of classical fascism, e.g. in its abolition of trade unions and there is no strong or coherent opposition.

Let us be clear at once for the benefit of the 'anti-imperialists' who have forgotten what socialism means. Socialism is the emancipation of the working class and oppressed not the dictatorship of a theocratic regime.

As the statement of the independent Iranian trade unions make clear, neither Israel nor the United States are in the slightest bit interested in freedom for the Iranian masses. Both states were more than happy to support the vicious repression under the Shah of Iran, whose son Reza Pahlavi they are trying to bring back. The BBC as always is happy to act as their propaganda stooge.

Threats of military action and bombing by the US and Israel, far from weakening the regime, have the opposite effect by forcing people to rally round it. The cynicism of the genocidal Zionist regime and Trumps neo-cons beggars belief.

This is the BBC's 'Balance'

The regime of Supreme Ruler Khameini and President Masoud Pezeshkian has been responsible for the murder of thousands of protesters, with the security forces using machine guns and live fire. It is impossible at this time to estimate how many people have been killed but it must run into thousands.

It is now resorting to mass hangings of protesters in an effort to coerce and intimidate the opposition.

There is no doubt that Israel and Mossad have played a part in the protests, but I also have no doubt that Israel has hyped its presence and operations for propaganda reasons.  I find it strange that those who usually doubt everything Israel says are now willing to believe these pathological liars.

It would be a grave mistake to believe that the demonstrations are the creature of Israel. People are on the streets because they have their own grievances with a dictatorial, corrupt and repressive regime.

Israel and the US want to see an end to the Iranian regime but what they don’t want is a democratic society to emerge in its place. Their problem is in finding a replacement which is why Trump’s words have not, so far, matched his actions. The last thing Trump, Israel and the West want is popular sovereignty.

Iran’s regime has its own neo-liberal agenda. Indeed its response to the sanctions has been to further privatise the economy, the exact opposite of what a socialist oriented regime would do. It is the poor in Iran who have paid the highest price for sanctions

Iran’s response to decades of sanctions has involved a turn to market-based policies rather than the socialisation of the economy. The state has pursued privatisation and liberalised certain market mechanisms, resulting in ‘crony capitalism’.

To withstand sanctions, Iran adopted a "resistance economy" strategy. This has integrated neoliberal-style policies, such as: 

·         Privatisation of State Assets: Successive governments have targeted the sale of state-owned enterprises to reduce government spending and settle debts.

·         Subsidy Reform: In late 2025, the government further reduced cash subsidies for energy and food, shifting toward a "ration-style voucher" system to manage fiscal deficits.

·         Price Deregulation: Major industrial producers in sectors like petrochemicals and metals are increasingly allowed to sell at international market prices domestically to maintain profitability despite sanctions. 

Iran’s privatisation efforts have largely benefited quasi-governmental entities. 

·         Institutional Control: Many 'privatised' firms were transferred to institutions linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or supreme leader-controlled foundations (bonyads).

·         Oligarchy and Corruption: These policies have fostered a "crony capitalist" system based on nepotism, where the powerful maintain control over wealth while the middle and working classes face extreme inflation—projected to reach 60% in 2026. 

The entrenchment of neoliberal ideology and policies has been an alternative to developing effective economic strategies to shield the working class and small craftsmen from the devastating effects of sanctions. Rather than adapting policies to protect vulnerable economic sectors, the establishment has doubled down on two core positions:

1.   Accelerating neoliberal policies

2.   Pursuing compromise with US imperialism, primarily to attract foreign investment.

See Neoliberalism Against Revolution: Iran’s Challenges for Resistance

The hypocrisy of Israel and the United States over the death of protesters is to be expected. However it would be a mistake to take their posturing as reflecting their true views. Israel has perpetrated a genocide of tens of thousands of people in Gaza. The US and the Trump regime has funded and supplied weapons for that genocide. They are hardly likely to be concerned about the death of Iranian protesters.

The ‘support’ of Israel and the US for the demonstrations and protests is cynical and self-serving. Both states are the partners of vicious dictatorial regimes all over the Middle East. The only disagreement they have with Iran’s clerical regime is in its independent foreign policy and its opposition to Israeli hegemony in the region.


There is a section of the anti-imperialist left, represented by people like Max Blumenthall, who take the view that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This is a  mistake. The same people supported the Ba’athist regime of President Assad of Syria and we know how that turned out.


Anti-imperialism can never be successful when it relies on regimes which are hated by their own people. In the long term this can only strengthen the Israeli state. It allows Zionism and US imperialism to pass themselves off as the friends of the Iranian people.

The origins of the Islamic Republic lie in collaboration with the United States in order to thwart a genuine revolutionary challenge to capitalism and exploitation. This is not surprising since the clerical regime that emerged was based on the Bazaaris, the merchants and shopkeepers of the traditional marketplaces who represent a powerful and heterogeneous commercial class that has functioned as a central pillar of the country's economic and political history.

On 9 November 1978, in a now-famous cable, "Thinking the Unthinkable," the US ambassador to Iran, William Sullivan, warned that the Shah was doomed. He argued that the US should get the Shah and his top generals out of Iran, and then make a deal between junior commanders and Khomeini.

Sullivan's suggestions caused friction with Jimmy Carter but by early January 1979 Carter had concluded that the Shah had to go.

While the U.S. did not formally support Khomeini, historical evidence confirms that the Carter administration engaged in secret diplomatic negotiations with him in January 1979 to ensure an orderly transition and prevent a radical leftist or workers revolution from taking hold. 

In 1979 during the Iranian revolution the US effectively backed Khomeini for fear of a workers revolution. Khomeini initiated a dialogue with the Carter administration to secure his return to Iran and prevent a military coup that might have kept him from power. 

From January 15 to 27, 1979, direct talks occurred in Neauphle-le-Château, France, between Khomeini’s chief of staff, Ebrahim Yazdi, and U.S. diplomat Warren Zimmermann. On 27 January Khomeini told the US just weeks before the overthrow of the Shah's government:

It is advisable that you recommend to the army not to follow Bakhtiar (...) You will see we are not in any particular animosity with the Americans. (...) There should be no fear about oil. It is not true that we wouldn’t sell to the US. (...)

The primary goal of Carter was to preserve US interests and prevent civil war and an opening to Soviet influence. U.S. policy makers believed they could "do business" with the incoming regime, especially with moderate, Western-educated figures like Yazdi and Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, who were close to Khomeini at the time

Their major fear was of a potential communist or socialist takeover, which was a real possibility given the strength of the working-class movement and the influence of the USSR. Accommodating Khomeini was seen as a way to prevent Iran from falling to the left. 

The primary U.S. motivation for communicating with Khomeini was the fear of a power vacuum that would benefit the Tudeh (Communist) Party or Marxist guerrillas. There were three components to US strategy:

·         The "Soft Landing" Strategy: U.S. officials, including National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, feared a chaotic collapse of the state would invite a Soviet invasion or a takeover by local Marxist groups.

·         Khomeini’s Guarantees: From exile in France, Khomeini sent messages to the White House promising that he was not anti-American and that an Islamic republic would be a "stable" bulwark against communism.

·         Neutralizing the Military: To avoid a bloody civil war that leftists might exploit, the U.S. sent General Robert E. Huyser to Tehran to convince the Shah's generals not to launch a coup against the burgeoning revolution. This effectively cleared the path for Khomeini's return. 

Suppression of the Working Class and Leftists

Below is a Collective Statement of Independent Iranian Organizations  and Trade Unions opposing both the threats from Israel and US imperialism and the Islamic regime.  It is a statement that puts to shame all those 'anti-imperialists' like Miller, Galloway and Blumenthall who forget that imperialism is the projection of western capitalism and its concomitant political domination of weaker countries. 

Capitalism is the source of the oppression of workers and peasants, be it the American or the Islamic version. To support the Iranian regime when it is waging class war against its own workers and people is unforgivable.

Once in power, Khomeini moved aggressively to dismantle the secular, working class and socialist movements that had participated in the revolution:

·         Crushing the Left: By 1983, the regime had totally crushed the Tudeh and Fedayeen parties, executing thousands and imprisoning hundreds of thousands of political opponents.

·         Banning Trade Unions: The new regime banned trade unions and independent workers' councils (shoras), replacing them with state-controlled "Islamic Labor Councils" to ensure control over the working class. This is exactly what Hitler did with the formation of the Labour Front on 2 May 1933.

While the Iranian Constitution (Article 26) theoretically permits "professional associations," the 1990 Labour Code and subsequent government actions have replaced genuine unions with state-controlled entities. The Islamic Labour Councils are tripartite organisations involving the Ministry of Labour, employers, and selected workers chosen based on loyalty to the state.

The "Workers' House" is a state-sponsored institution that ostensibly represents workers but is widely criticized for prioritising government policy over labour rights.

·         Intelligence Sharing: Reports indicate that even after the 1979 revolution, the U.S. provided the Khomeini regime with a "hit list" of Tudeh members in 1983 to help eliminate Soviet influence in Iran.

·         Leading global labor bodies like the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) rank Iran in their worst category for workers' rights.

Fear of a Leftist Takeover

·         Communist Strength: Various communist organisations, particularly the Tudeh Party, had significant support, including among the crucial oil workers, and posed an existential threat to both the Shah's regime and the nascent Islamic revolutionary government.

It was unfortunate in the extreme that after 1979 the Tudeh Party supported Khomeini until he turned on them.

·         Soviet Influence: During the Cold War, the U.S. was committed to preventing Soviet expansion. A communist Iran, with a shared border with the USSR, was a major strategic concern.

·         The Power Vacuum: The working-class movement, organised through factory councils known as shoras, had effectively taken control of key industries, including the oil sector, which paralysed the economy and created a power vacuum.

·         Khomeini's Assurances: Khomeini's secret messages to the Carter administration included assurances that he had no "particular affinity" for the Soviet Union and that an American presence was necessary to counterbalance Soviet influence. These messages made U.S. policymakers believe that they could work with the Islamists to maintain a non-aligned Iran. 

Today, unlike in 1979, the left is weak. That is the central problem facing the current demonstrations. Without a strong workers’ party it is difficult to see an alternative government arising.

Anti-imperialists see the present uprising in terms of, above all, the Palestinian question and Gaza. This is understandable but misplaced.

Iran’s anti-imperialism has been forced on the regime primarily by the opposition of the US and Israel to the regime. In order to preserve its power the Iranian regime constructed the Axis of Resistance, which today lies in ruins.

Hezbollah, an indigenous resistance movement, which arose out of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982, has been severely weakened with the assassination of Nasrallah, its leader and the pager attack. Whether it will be able to respond to a renewed Israeli attack on Lebanon, which the US is trying to reconfigure by disarming  Hezbollah, is open to question.

Hezbollah was the jewel in the crown and was heavily engaged in supporting Assad in Syria at Iran’s behest. With the overthrow of Assad the route from Iran to Lebanon for arms supplies has been largely halted.

Hamas in Gaza undoubtedly obtained some help from Iran but it is noticeable that since October 7 Iran has not done anything to support the Palestinians facing Israel’s genocide. Even when it had a chance, when Israel sued for a ceasefire, Iran did not make its agreement conditional on an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

The reality is that the Iranian regime has been in confrontation with imperialism and Israel despite itself. We should not forget that from 1981-86 Israel was supplying Iran with weapons in what became known as the Iran Contra Affair.

Whether or not the Iranian regime survives, one thing is for certain. That it will continue to be a friend of the Palestinians only so long as it deems it in its interests.

The Islamic Regime is a Barbaric Regime

The Iranian regime, with its rate of executions estimated to have doubled to 1,500 last year, is a barbaric state. It has the second highest number of executions of any state after China. Its method of execution, hanging from a crane, strangulation, is also the most barbaric.

The human rights record in Iran includes the persistent use of torture and what Amnesty International called a Wave of floggings, amputations and other vicious punishments.’ Iran is certainly not a model state for socialists or anti-imperialists to idolise.

As regards the current clashes between the Iranian state and protestors, I have no doubt at all that the regime is using massive, lethal violence against the demonstrators. Amnesty International talks about:

a coordinated nationwide escalation in the security forces’ unlawful use of lethal force against mostly peaceful protesters and bystanders since the evening of 8 January....

Verified audiovisual evidence depicts severe and, in some cases, fatal injuries, including gunshot wounds to the head, including eyes, as well as individuals lying motionless on streets or being carried away amid what is believed to be continued sound of gunshots. Other footage shows patients bleeding profusely or appearing lifelesson hospital floors. In several videos, the people filming state that individuals have been killed.

At least two videos show security forces chasing and directly firing at fleeing protesters who appear to pose no threat warranting the use of force, let alone firearms or other prohibited weapons.

In an account shared with Amnesty International, a journalist from Tehran said:

“Tell the world that unspeakable crimes are being committed in Iran… Tell the world that if they do nothing, they [authorities] will turn the country into a graveyard.”

There are shills for the Iranian state like David Miller who, whatever the state does, however many people it hangs, it can do no wrong. 

the Islamic Republic of Iran is on the front lines of anti-imperialism and is actually the main defender of human civilisation that we have left.

There is no reasoning with such nonsense just as talking to 99% of Zionist apologists for genocide is like conversing with a brick wall.



 Israeli Involvement in the Protests

A favourite argument of Miller,  Blumenthall and others is Israel’s claims of massive involvement in the Iranian protests. There is no evidence for this.  It is an attempt by Israel to recover from some of the damage caused by their genocide in Gaza and to pretend that for once they are on the side of human rights.  

Quite frankly I don’t believe half of the nonsense that they and their hasbarists are putting out. It serves Blumenthall and others to go along with this narrative but it is a narrative at the expense of the Iranian people for whom Israel doesn't give a damn.


I agree (for once) with Owen Jones. It is using the thousands of dead and murdered Iranian people for its own racist and genocidal purpose.  But nothing will make Zionism or Genocide smell more sweetly.  It is useful for Blumenthall and others to latch on to Israeli claims but why believe Israel now when normally we call them liars?

As I said at the beginning, our support for the Iranian state is only against imperialism and Zionism not its own people.

A Region Wide Strategy

The original mistake of the PLO was to always believe that it could become just another Arab regime, as we see with the Palestinian Authority today. Their trust in the Arab regimes was entirely misplaced.

It is also clear that a military strategy against Israel is also doomed. What then?  Is Israel invincible?  I don’t think so.  In addition to its own internal problems with deep divisions in its settler population which the attack on Gaza, Lebanon and Iran have hidden, there is the danger of over extending itself as it invades yet more countries.

The main use of Israel to imperialism has always been its ability to help neuter radical Arab regimes and come to the aid of quisling ones like Jordan. Israel’s utility to imperialism comes from its role as a counter-revolutionary state in the heart of the Middle East.

The real question is to develop a strategy aimed at toppling the main Arab client regimes of the United States, in particular Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Iran does not provide a model to the people of the Middle East. Nor does it seek to overthrow  any of the surrounding regimes. It looks for co-existence with them in much the same way as it would like to co-exist with the United States.

The overthrow of the Arab regimes is the key to the overthrow of Zionism and imperialist influence in the Middle East.  There is no other way.

Tony Greenstein 

24 comments:

  1. Advocatus diaboli15 January 2026 at 18:19

    Piffle, this is a fabricated protest, same as Syria.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Advocatus diaboli15 January 2026 at 23:03

      https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1AcfdCM8h5/

      Afshin Rattansi begs to differ.

      Delete
    2. why do people make facile comparisons such as Iran and Syria - there's no similarity - one was a secular dictatorship the other is a clerical dictatorship

      Delete
  2. Thanks TG for your clarity of events in Iran.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. It is disrespectful to the Iranian people to argue that their courageous uprising is at the behest of Israel and the US. "I know the terrible cost of speaking out in Iran and I beg the world to stand with those speaking out now. " Nasrin Parvaz survivor of 8 years imprisonment and torture in Iran. The Guardian, Opinion Thursday 15 January 2026. Tony is facing the very serious consequences of speaking out here in the UK and perhaps this is why he understands better than some on the anti imperialist left the position of the Iranian working class.

      Delete
  3. What a complete Dishonest Twat you are

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rather than throwing around insults, could you actually engage with and refute what's he's saying ?

      Delete
  4. So what's you're answer then Tony - how can people resist the possible 'colour revolution' attempt by the West and support the Iranian people ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't accept this is a colour revolution - it is a resistance to the corrupt clerical caste that runs Iran

      Delete
    2. Ok. What do you make then of the strong pro American and Zionist sentiment that seems to exist amongst the Iranian regime change crowd ? Wrapping themselves as they were on the weekend in London, in Israeli flags and going on anti Palestinian tirades. And are you cool with the corporate media having Omid Djalili, a man whose played racist Arab stereotypes in films like The Mummy, being a go to expert on Iran ?

      Delete
    3. Not surprisingly among the Iranian diaspora support for the Shah is strong, so what? I have no control over the corporate media, sorry

      Delete
    4. No one suggested you control the media, I was asking how you reconcile being pro Palestinian and the fact a big contingent of the Iran regime change crowd, which you seem to also support, are anti Palestinian. But you just evaded given any real answer.

      Delete
  5. Richard Lightbown16 January 2026 at 14:09

    There are some rather dodgy sources used here. Turning to a recent BBC report on Iranian hangings takes the biscuit. I really think we deserve better than that. Then there is dear old Amnesty International, the NGO that with the greatest reluctance managed to make some lightweight criticisms about the plight of the UK hunger strikers. (Perhaps they didn't want to upset their corporate sponsors.) This is the same NGO that falsely reported on removal of babies from incubators in Kuwait. It did eventually roll back those lies, but I don't think it ever apologised for publishing them in the first place. It also still stands by the claims of Syrian government involvement in the Ghouta chemical attack, and it must have took them at least 20 years to admit that Israel is an apartheid state.

    I hadn't heard of Iran International before, but I wonder how much legitimacy I should give to a London-based, Saudi-financed outlet that was set up in part using journos who had previously worked for the BBC and VOA? Let's be brutally honest about this Tony, Max Blumenthal is a far better source than some of the junk you're relying on here.

    Alastair Crooke said the agitators were trained by the CIA in Albania. He claims that the collapse of the Rial was as a result of massive short selling by the US. Does he know what he is talking about? Generally speaking, yes. How about Prof Marandi? He too has spoken about outside agitators. Is he just a government mouthpiece, as Piers Morgan claims? Is that why he doesn't support the claims of "thousands of dead and murdered people"? (Nice piece of tautology!) But for the record, where is the evidence of all these thousands of victims? That is a lot of people killed in a short period of time: it's on a par with the Gaza genocide at its peak. So where are the photos of these piles of bodies? If it happened they must exist somewhere, but I haven't seen them. I understand there were policemen killed by rioters, (there were certainly funerals for these alleged victims) some of them in appalling circumstances. I'm disappointed that you didn't find room to comment on those reports Tony, since it does change the perspectives of the narrative.

    Legitimate criticism of Iranian human rights abuses should not be used as cover for long-standing imperial meddling in Iran by the likes of Britain, US, Israel and Russia. The two are separate issues and the existence of the first is only likely to be exacerbated by any chaos created by the second. Both the US (with its European puppets) and Israel make no secret of their desires for regime change in Iran in order to remove the central pillar of the anti-Zionist resistance in West Asia. Those who support that resistance would do well to get their priorities right here. Fools like Uri Avnery who supported the NATO assault on Libya came to regret it in the end. Downplaying the recent imperial terrorist attacks in Iran is only playing the same stupid game.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wasn't it also an Amnesty International co-founder, Luis Kutner, who helped the police assassinate Fred Hampton and wasn't another one of them, Peter Benenson, from a Zionist family that fundraised for colonization pre-Nakba; his mother co-founded the Women’s International Zionist Organization in 1920, which continues to co-opt the framework of women’s rights to legitimize the colonization of Palestine to this day ?I
      If that's true, then why should anyone trust you when you use them as a source ? If I remember rightly, it was also Amnesty that had advertising thanking NATO for apparently liberating women in Afghanistan.

      Delete
  6. Richard, well I'm glad to have stirred up some debate but when you turn of all the Internet and social media t hen of course it becomes difficult to verify all the allegations see Reject all dead ends https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1568/reject-all-dead-ends/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Richard Lightbown17 January 2026 at 11:39

      I always admire your support for freedom of speech Tony.

      Turning off the internet was a necessary evil. Alastair Crooke said that the fifth-columnists were sent orders via Starlink. Iran disabled that and neutered the coup. John Kiriakou (who claims that Iran International is an Israeli outlet) made some interesting comments on the situation here: https://www.youtube.com/@DeProgramShow starting around 12:30.

      Delete
    2. Richard, I think its possible to condemn Israeli/US involvement in Iran (though we don't know the extent of their involvement in the protests) and at the same time to condemn the regime murder of the demonstrators. I have no doubt that the numbers involved meant it was a genuine protest just as the Women Freedom Life protests were.

      What I did was try to separate the two and also show that the regime was a neo-liberal and reactionary one underneath

      Delete
  7. Tony, you really should try not to slag off fellow travellers on the left, some of them very well informed analysts and seasoned political operators - you erode the respect in which you are held by continually doing so of late. There may be popular discontent in Iran largely due to the ravages of Western sanctions but on the back of it, this was first and foremost an attempted re-run by Mossad and the CIA of 1953, when the West installed the Shah. Ordinary Iranians didn't burn mosques or shoot policemen ( where did they get the guns?), just as they didn't co-ordinated things from safe houses using Musks Starlink We should respect the right of the Iranian people to determine their own future and to that extent support Iran, even though what is an authoritarian theocracy may not be to our taste. Having said that, looking at what's going on in the UK and US right now it ill behoves Western critics to deliver sermons on what constitutes civic freedoms

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know who you are referring to so it is difficult to respond. I am well aware of the overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953 and there is simply no similarity with that. The workers and trade unions opposed to Khameini are firm in their opposition to imperialist intervention

      Delete
    2. You mention George Galloway, Max Blumenthal and David Miller a little bit dismissevely, and I understand that you think they are mistaken in their analysis which is fair enough. I suppose I am particularly concerned about the differences between you and David Miller. Many of us look up to you both and it seems a shame you can't come to some sort of comradely modus vivendi via respectful debate.

      Regarding the characterisation of the civil unrest in Tehran, It's very difficult to conclude anything other than it being an attempted re-run of 1953 given Mossad involvement which has been made transparent by a comment from Mike Pompeo no less, as well as Israeli media. That and mutterings about the former Shah's son as a potential leader make it very difficult to conclude it was anything other than an attempted re-run of 1953, or an attempted coup d'etat by the West and the installation of a puppet regime. I take the point a out the opposition of thee trade unions and workers to outside interference, but I'd suggest they weren't responsible for taking civic protest into the realms of civil insurrection in the form of mosque burning and shooting policemen - that was CIA Mossad (ask your brother 😉). However as always Tony, a really interesting article and I'm sure I'm not the only one who learnt about the neo-liberal proclivities of the Khamanei regime for the first time. Thank you

      Delete
    3. The differences between David Miller and me are too large to paper over. He really thinks that the US/UK supports Zionism because of 'infiltration' of Zionists into the state. Basically he doesn't understand why imperialist states, regardless of their composition, support Israel in the Middle East.

      I have challenged David to debate but he refused to take part in a debate which is not surprising since his outpourings are increasingly unhinged.

      Delete
  8. Why have the protests suddenly stopped?

    ReplyDelete

Please submit your comments below