If you haven’t caught my Substack Live with Arash Azizi, here is the recording. I really enjoyed this conversation and I think you will too.
In Washington and much of the media, the war is framed through the lens of US decision-making: what President Trump wants, what he might accept, what comes next. That focus obscures something more fundamental — Iran is not simply reacting. It is making its own calculations, shaped as much by internal politics as by external pressure.
Right now, Iran is fighting a war while simultaneously trying to figure out what it is becoming. And that tension is shaping everything. Iran is not just resisting — it is regrouping. That distinction helps explain both the trajectory of the war and why it may not end as quickly or cleanly as some expect.
A system without a center
The death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei did not produce a clear succession. It produced diffusion.
Power is now spread across a range of actors — from the Revolutionary Guards to political figures like parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf — navigating a system that is more decentralized and uncertain than it has been in decades. Even if someone wanted to strike a deal with the United States - and it is far from clear anyone does - it is not certain they could bring the system with them.
Ending the war now, Arash argues, would mean turning inward at a moment of profound instability. The population is exhausted. The leadership is in transition. The economy is strained. A ceasefire would force all of those pressures to converge at once. Continuing the war, by contrast, buys time. It allows the regime to project resilience and to frame survival as success, while postponing harder internal questions about leadership and legitimacy.
This war, he notes, is not fundamentally about nuclear capability or territory. It is about the survival of the Islamic Republic as a system. In that context, enduring the conflict can be cast as victory.
The country behind the headlines
What often gets lost is how this looks from inside Iran.
Arash describes a population grappling with a stark contradiction: many fear the war, but they also fear what comes after it. There is a growing concern that a regime that survives this level of external pressure could emerge more entrenched and more willing to turn inward.
At the same time, early hopes that outside pressure might produce change have faded. The war has not created a clear path to transformation, and the idea that external actors will drive political change inside Iran now feels increasingly unrealistic. Iranians currently feel a mix of fear, resignation, and cautious hope for something gradual rather than sudden.
The narratives most commonly predicted assume either imminent regime collapse or decisive transformation. Neither is likely. The opposition remains fragmented, without the leadership or organization needed to translate dissatisfaction into a political alternative. The security apparatus remains intact. There is no obvious force waiting to step in.
Iran in transition
For all the uncertainty, Arash sees this moment as part of a larger shift.
Iran, he argues, is in a transitional phase — a period between what was and what comes next. The system shaped under Khamenei is already changing, even if its successor is not yet clear.
That does not mean Iran is on the verge of democracy. Far from it. Arash believes the more likely outcome, at least in the near term, is a system that remains authoritarian but becomes less ideologically rigid and more pragmatic — particularly in how it engages the region. In time, that could open the door to a more normalized role for Iran, even potentially a different relationship with the United States.
What stands out in Arash’s analysis is not just the structural argument, but the human one. His view of Iran is grounded in the lives of Iranians navigating this moment with fear, fatigue, and determination.
He speaks not only about democracy, but about dignity — about the possibility of a more stable, more livable future. He wants Iran to be free, democratic and prosperous.
Arash does not expect that future to come quickly. But he believes this moment — as violent and uncertain as it is — may be part of a longer process moving the country in that direction.
For now, the war continues. But it is unfolding inside a system already in transition, shaped as much by internal change as by external pressure. And that is the part of the story that is too often overlooked: Iran is not just the target of this war. It is an actor in it — and a country in the midst of becoming something new.
Danielle Pletka and I hope to see you TODAY at 5:30 for Hot Takes Happy Hour.
Thank you David Galinsky, Linda Jean, Endicott Mongoloid, Assa Brown, Brent Maier, and many others for tuning into my live video with Arash Azizi! Join me for my next live video in the app.
