On October 24, Iran regime’s state television aired a speech delivered by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to regime supporters three weeks earlier, revealing deep concerns about the precarious state of the regime both regionally and domestically. Khamenei, comparing current challenges to the Iran-Iraq War, stated, “Nearly 10,000 people from this province were martyred. They are two or three times more veterans; they did their work then. Now, these young people are needed no less than on the day of war; we need them today.” His words, though intended to rally support, underscore a growing anxiety within the regime.
This invocation of wartime sacrifice and the need for renewed commitment signals the severity of the regime’s internal fears. If Khamenei truly didn’t have to care about the vanishing moral of his followers, he would admit that today’s situation is even more fragile than during the Iran-Iraq War. Iran now faces mounting regional crises, increased international isolation, rising discontent among its populace, and fractures within its ruling elite.
A Demoralized Base
To address the regime’s waning morale, Khamenei has directed Friday prayer leaders to uplift the spirits of his supporters. However, this effort has proved insufficient, necessitating the involvement of top IRGC commanders to rally regime loyalists. This urgency and reliance on military figures to shore up civilian morale reflect an increasing lack of faith within the regime’s ranks.
State-run media outlets have also mirrored this insecurity. On October 21, the daily Ham Mihan expressed rare criticism: “War is poison. It is easy to theorize about a grand plan for a big war from a room. But in practice, it is ordinary people who die.” This sentiment starkly contrasts the rhetoric of the regime’s founder, Ruhollah Khomeini, who once claimed war to be a “blessing and gift” and argued that peace would be the “burial of Islam.” Ham Mihan‘s concern over potential loss of life reflects a regime losing confidence in its proxy wars, which seem increasingly detached from public support and long-term strategic logic.
Growing Voices Against War
On October 20, another state-run publication, Jomhouri Eslami, issued a cautionary statement, rebuking those who equate eagerness for war with bravery. It emphasized, “War is evil, and everyone should try to prevent it.” The editorial argued that in the current fervent atmosphere, seeking peace and avoiding conflict is a true display of courage. This is a stark divergence from typical regime narratives that frame conflict as a patriotic duty, suggesting rising unease even within government circles.
These publications, though state-controlled, have become surprising forums for airing discontent with the regime’s escalating involvement in regional conflicts. In a Friday sermon, Mohammad Mokhtari, the prayer leader in Birjand, vocalized public discontent: “They say, Sir, Israel and Palestine are fighting; it’s not our business. Palestine is not our business. Yemen is not our business. Syria, as well as Iraq, is not our business. We should care about ourselves and spend the money we use there on ourselves.”
Strains on Diplomatic Ties and “Strategic Depth”
In the wake of Hamas’s October 1 attack on Israel, a move backed by Tehran, the Iranian Resistance expressed that the regime’s decision was a critical misstep with repercussions soon to follow. Even regime-affiliated media have since questioned this alignment. On October 21, Shargh daily advocated a shift, urging that “the country’s diplomatic capacity should not be limited only to the foreign minister’s visits. Different delegations should join this process to share the country’s unified peace-loving policy through constructive initiatives and diplomacy.” This call for engagement suggests an awareness that Iran’s so-called “strategic depth” in the region is reaching an unsustainable breaking point.
As the regime faces unprecedented instability, Khamenei’s references to wartime sacrifices ring hollow, revealing desperation rather than strength. Iran’s regional ambitions, long touted as its “strategic depth,” are faltering, with officials confronting an increasingly skeptical public and a fatigued supporter base. The regime’s very survival now hinges on its ability to address not only external pressures but also the mounting discontent within. The coming months may determine whether Iran’s regime can reverse course, or if it has indeed reached a point of no return.
