The Islamic regime in Iran is now on a path to demise and it is time to discuss the arguments for and against its survival. Every observer of Iran’s political developments will consider the advantages and disadvantages of this demise.
There have been some letters (Ezzatullah Sahabi) and statements (Mir Hussein Mousavi) describing the developments of the Green Movement and criticising its speed, but they do not offer any definition of moving fast or slow while complaining about the pace of activists’ actions. This requires discussions on the necessity or the lack of necessity to overthrow the Islamic regime, including the background and consequences.
Most of the people who are against the existing government and do not talk about its demise use this position to avoid radicalisation of the political situation and violence. They are aware of the levels of violence and bloodshed in social revolutions and are frightened of repeating the experience of 1979 when the situation went from bad to worse. Nevertheless, the continuation of this regime may lead to more bloodshed, compared to the price that protesters pay to overthrow it.
Those who believe in overthrowing the regime have very clear reasons: inefficiency, its black profile in violating human rights, its despotic character, a long experience of resistance to reform, multiple dead ends and contradictions in the legal system, and institutionalised discriminations and privileges.