Will Iran sacrifice its ideology to preserve its theology?

The future of a theological project that has defined Iran for over four decades is at stake as the regime tries to ward off US strikes that could possibly lead to the collapse of the regime

Will Iran sacrifice its ideology to preserve its theology?

As soon as the Iranian Revolution deposed the Shah and took control of the country, its leaders sought to establish a project of profound ideological and historical weight. And it was anchored in a distinct theological and political framework: the principle of Wilayat al-Faqih, or the Guardianship of the Jurist. It was not just a political arrangement, but a metaphysical imperative rooted in Twelver Shi'ism, the largest branch of Shiite Islam.

The doctrine is central to Iranian political philosophy, particularly the awaited return of the Hidden Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi—the 12th and final Imam. It was constructed to resolve a longstanding theological dilemma: how to reconcile spiritual leadership with corporal political authority until the return of "the mahdi".

Iran went on to develop a far-reaching political and ideological network of allies—both regionally and internationally— underpinned by loyalty to the mahdi, seen as the supreme jurist. This principle became the litmus test for allegiance among Tehran’s allies. As a position, it was publicly reinforced by figures such as Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s late secretary-general, in statements made over several decades.

The concept of “absolute guardianship” grants the jurist near-total authority over all aspects of public life, including the executive, judiciary, military, and foreign policy.

An existential imperative

Today, Iran worries that a powerful US strike on its nuclear infrastructure could potentially bring about the collapse of the regime, especially if domestic anti-government protests erupt over the country's deteriorating socio-economic conditions. Powerful voices within Iran continue to view the preservation of the regime as an existential imperative—one that trumps all other concerns.

Iran may be prepared to sacrifice longstanding allies if that means the survival of the regime and the preservation of the Guardianship.

Those who view the latest US–Iranian negotiations as part of a broader strategy to ensure the regime's survival are not mistaken. Iran's leadership could be prepared to sacrifice longstanding allies and recalibrate its foreign policy if that means the survival of the regime and the preservation of the Guardianship. At stake is the future of a political-theological project that has defined Iran for over four decades.

Whether the regime can adapt without losing its ideological soul—or whether it will be forced to confront the contradictions at the heart of its dual identity, as both a religious vanguard and a nation-state—remains one of the most consequential questions facing the Middle East today.

Strategic miscalculation

But regardless of whether it is attacked and its enemies succeed in toppling the regime, Iran will continue to be a significant regional and international player. Its vast population, strategic geography, and deep historical roots put it in a class of nations whose influence cannot be erased by regime change alone. Much like Türkiye, China, India, Germany, and Egypt, Iran is destined to play a leading role in regional affairs, shaped by its intrinsic characteristics rather than the ideology of its rulers.

The belief that Iran's regional influence will cease if the regime falls is a strategic miscalculation. History has shown that Iran—whether governed from Tehran or Isfahan—cannot be relegated to the margins of Middle Eastern politics.

font change