Iran: Consistency and Transformation, Domestically and Externally

It might be the first time the Iranian regime has found itself confronting so many complex and difficult questions since it was established in 1979. These wide-ranging questions pertain to everything from the nature of the regime and to its future, which is intrinsically linked to external factors- that is, Iran’s ability to maintain its influence, which recent shifts have left in peril.
These questions are tied to the tools the regime could use to impose itself, and they open the door to a wide-ranging debate, regardless of the regime’s efforts to present itself as solid and stable to both domestic and international audiences. Can the regime keep behaving as it had for decades, remaining stable despite the upheaval in the region?
Domestically, Tehran seeks to guarantee stability and continuity for the first time since the Islamic regime was founded. Thus, it is pursuing two objectives: ensuring a smooth transitional phase, and safeguarding the regime's prestige and the revolution's influence. However, the fact that these two objectives are intertwined complicates things further.
Indeed, the first objective demands stability while the second requires strength and influence. Moreover, to maintain its strength and role, which it has translated into domestic rigidity and external influence, Tehran must avert infighting among the different wings of the regime. It is evident that President Masoud Pezeshkian was elected to that end. Protest movements, which usually start with demands but quickly turn political, are banned for the same reason.
Externally, the goal is to maintain its extensive sphere of influence after recent developments have threatened to shrink it or deprive Tehran of political and military control over segments of this sphere. Iranian decision-makers see these threats as almost existential, as they would allow Tehran’s "enemies" to shift from confronting it in regional countries that fall within its sphere of influence to striking the Iranian home front, directly challenging the regime and devastating its standing after undermining or disabling its influence.
In fact, major external shifts are upending Iran’s extensive geopolitical (political and strategic) map (its sphere of influence), undermining its domestic stability and its attempts at reconsolidating its regional standing for the first time in its history. Moreover, the shifts unfolding abroad could creep into Iran itself, thereby shifting the focus from defending the revolution externally to defending the regime domestically. That was evident in the recent speech that the Supreme Leader gave during the memorial service for Hezbollah’s late Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah.
It is obvious that the Iranian regime is now engaged in a battle of self-defense. It seems that a clash with Israel is inevitable. Thus, it chose to go from defense to offense, striking Israeli military assets directly with long-range missiles and reformulating the "unit of arenas" strategy to turn it into a front in defense of the regime itself.
The regime is aware that its current clashes with Tel Aviv are not just another round of tit-for-tat but a war that will transform the region. After this conflict, it may become difficult to maintain both the political integrity of the national geography, on the one hand, and its geopolitical and ideological influence on the other. Nonetheless, it faces a dilemma: if it sacrifices the latter through a diplomatic compromise or under military pressure, it cannot guarantee that the former will be maintained. The shifts unfolding outside its borders could find their way into the home front, leaving the revolution, the state, and the regime faced with significant challenges.
Faced with the prospect of a fully-fledged military confrontation or harsh diplomatic concessions, the regime has tied its survival to its influence, its geopolitical map, and the stability of the regime. That means that it would be difficult for the regime to disentangle its domestic legitimacy from its influence abroad. Thus, this potential clash could force Tehran to choose between maintaining relative domestic stability and confronting broad external shifts.