Iran in regional and international confrontation

Iran describes its political system in a framework of "religious democracy" — the "Islamic Republic" established by "Imam Khomeini" in 1979, headed by the "Supreme Leader" under the doctrine of "Velayat-e Faqih" (Guardianship of the Jurist). Western and Israeli pressure across all phases — sanctions, support for opposition, broadcasting, military action — is framed as a single 45-year imperial "regime change" campaign disguised under successive pretexts (nuclear, terrorism, human rights). The diaspora opposition is delegitimised: the "MEK" / "Mojahedin-e Khalq" is termed "Munafiqin" (the hypocrites) and "foreign-backed terrorists" responsible for thousands of Iranian deaths; the "Pahlavi pretender" Reza Pahlavi is framed as an irrelevant son of an overthrown dictator; "Iran International" is framed as Saudi-funded propaganda. The 2022-2023 protests are framed as "foreign-instigated unrest" stoked by hostile media — "rioters" rather than "protesters" — though the underlying social grievances are sometimes acknowledged. The 2025 and 2026 Israeli and American strikes on Iranian leadership are framed as "war crimes" and "state terrorism" against a sovereign government; the "martyrdom" of "Imam Khamenei" and Larijani is framed as elevating them rather than ending their authority, and as binding the Iranian nation in unity against the aggressor. Resilience framing dominates: "we will not bow", "stronger after every blow", "national unity in the face of aggression". The narrative prescribes: continued sovereignty without external concessions, military preparedness for further aggression, sustained orderly succession (the Assembly of Experts process), continued material and rhetorical pressure on Western and Israeli legitimacy, and rejection of any negotiating framework that treats the Islamic Republic as a temporary or replaceable government.

The European Union and the E3 (France, Germany, United Kingdom) frame their Iran posture around preserving diplomatic channels while applying calibrated pressure on enrichment and proliferation. The vocabulary is "JCPOA preservation", "Vienna talks", "snapback mechanism", "IAEA safeguards", "diplomatic off-ramp", "engage rather than isolate", "return to compliance", and "calibrated pressure". The narrative explicitly registers concern about enrichment escalation, ballistic-missile transfers, and IAEA cooperation, but rejects unilateral military strikes as the answer — preferring sustained diplomacy under multilateral institutions. Prescription: keep talks alive, threaten snapback as leverage rather than execution, and position the EU as the indispensable convening power between Washington and Tehran.

China, Russia, the DPRK, and Global South commentary frame the Iran confrontation as US-Israeli "hegemony" and "interference" against a sovereign state. The argument: enrichment is a legitimate "sovereign right" under hostile sanctions and standing military threat from Israel; the actual escalator is American-Israeli pressure, not Iranian conduct. The vocabulary is "sovereignty", "unilateralism", "collective punishment via sanctions", "diktat", "imperialism", "BRICS solidarity", "Global South", and "dollar de-dependence". The narrative is not Iranian self-defence (that lives in iran_sovereign_existence) — it is the external multipolar voice that legitimises Iran's position by framing Western pressure as systemic aggression. Prescription: Russia-China-Iran-DPRK alignment as counterweight, BRICS+ expansion, sanctions relief through multipolar institutions, and rejection of Washington's right to set the terms.