By Chuck Wald We have passed the six-month mark of the war between the United States and the Iranian regime. Whatever Tehran’s rhetoric may suggest, its theocratic dictatorship is weaker today than at any point since its establishment in the aftermath of the 1979 Revolution. As this situation continues to unfold, it is increasingly important for Western governments and the broader international community to consider the policies needed to help bring about change driven not by foreign intervention, but by the Iranian people and their organized resistance. The country’s economy, already suffering from years of decline before the war, is now exhibiting some of its worst indicators in decades, including inflation exceeding 100 percent on key consumer goods. Predictably, these pressures have intensified factional infighting within the regime. The turmoil has been compounded by the loss of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on the first day of the war, February 28. Khamenei has be...
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
Warsaw conference, its reflections, outcomes and consequences
The Warsaw Summit has had very widespread reflections on the international media, from American to European media, in particular from Poland to Albania, the Balkans and other countries that participated in the summit, including the Arab media.
These reflections emphasized 2 points:
First, the necessity of overthrowing the Iran regime, in particular, the talk of Rudy Giuliani in the demonstrations of supporters of resistance and interviews with various media.
“It is the only way to change the regime in Iran in order to establish peace and stability in the Middle East,” said Rudy Giuliani, “…” The Warsaw conference is organized to deal with these regime actions.
Second: emphasis on the role of the replacement of Iranian resistance after the overthrow of the Iran regime, which was very impressive in media coverage.
In this case, the terms of Giuliani’s title one were many of the media’s news, which emphasized the readiness of the alternative by supporting Mrs. Maryam Rajavi’s plan for Iran tomorrow.
In addition, two major issues, namely the need to overthrow the regime and the emphasis on the role of the PMOI alternative, the subject matter of the media interest was the end of compromise and negotiation with the Iranian regime.
Senator Robert Torricelli, in this regard, said: “The martyrs of the Iranian Resistance, who are lying in their graves, testify to the fact that no negotiations with this regime are relevant.”
At the conference, attention was drawn to the strong and clear statement by Vice President Mike Pence, “the biggest threat to peace and security in the Middle East is the Iranian regime.” The Iranian regime is the first supporter of terrorism in the world.”
Pence also noted the history of terrorist acts in the regime in Europe, calling on Europe to move away from the regime and pointing to the persistence of the uprisings of the Iranian people, and emphasized that we, along with the freedom-loving people of the world, are firmly and powerful against the Iranian regime.
The media in the world, especially the statement, had emphasized US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said that “there was no state in support of Iran’s regime.” This was the first headline statement of many media outlets.
Reflection of the Financial Times with a great photo of Ms. Maryam Rajavi on the front page and the New York Times, The Washington Times, Newsweek, and especially the media in Poland, Albania, and the Arab world were also widespread.
This indicates the importance of the issue and the importance of the role of the Iranian Resistance.
In a very brief summary, the conference’s implications can be as follows:
– A coalition against the regime was formed, nobody objected to the coalition and no one defended the regime.
– Pompeo’s words showed that solid and ongoing American policy will continue to meet the goals of the conference.
– The goal of the summit was announced by Giuliani outside the conference and said: “Ending the ruling system in Iran.
Reza Hoseani is a writer, analyst, expert on Iranian affairs, a human rights activist and a defender of the rights of women, children and political prisoners
Written by Shamsi Saadati Paris, France – On Saturday, May 17, 2025, an influential international conference convened in Paris, uniting parliamentarians and prominent political figures from a wide array of countries including the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, Malta, Switzerland, Romania, Portugal, and the Netherlands. The central theme of the gathering was the urgent need for a new, decisive international policy towards Iran, with a strong emphasis on supporting democratic change and recognizing the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) as a viable alternative to the current regime. The event served as a significant platform for global lawmakers to voice their concerns over the deteriorating human rights situation in Iran, the regime’s escalating domestic repression, its destabilizing regional activities, and its persistent pursuit of a nuclear program. A recurring call throughout the conference was for Western governments to adopt a firmer stance, including the ...
By Reza Hoseani Iran’s economic crisis is no longer just a headline — it has become part of everyday life. Skyrocketing prices, the continuous collapse of the national currency, and shrinking household purchasing power are now affecting nearly every segment of society. But an important question remains: Are these hardships truly the direct result of war and external pressure, or are they rooted in domestic economic policies and political decisions? While state media repeatedly blame regional tensions and foreign conflicts for inflation and market instability, many economists argue that the current crisis is driven far more by internal policymaking than by war itself. War as a Cover for Internal Economic Failure For years, whenever Iran’s economy entered a deeper phase of crisis, official narratives pointed to external enemies and international tensions. However, economic experts say the immediate impact of war rarely causes inflation on this scale in such a sho...
By Reza Hoseani Is Washington’s economic fury more effective than military warfare? An examination of the United States’ new sanctions targeting the IRGC’s financial lifelines and their impact on Iran’s explosive social environment. Amid the regime’s paralyzing deadlock between war and restraint, Washington has made its choice unmistakably clear: an all-out economic war instead of a large-scale military war. This choice is not the product of moderation. Rather, it reflects an understanding that economic pressure may be more lethal to the regime, less costly for the West, and more socially acceptable to the Iranian people than military intervention. 1. From “Maximum Pressure” to “Economic Fury”: The IRGC’s Lifelines in the Crosshairs In recent months, the U.S. Department of the Treasury has escalated economic pressure through two new initiatives. First came what has been described as Operation Economic Fury, announced by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He stated explicitly ...
Comments
Post a Comment