Pegah Banihashemi: What possibility is there for true reform in Iran?

Chicago Tribune

2 days ago

A few weeks after the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, several published statements have called for a referendum and a transition beyond the Islamic Republic.
One of these, signed by 800 domestic and international activists, was issued by Mir Hossein Mousavi, formerly the prime minister during the Iran-Iraq war. Mousavi was also the leader of the Green Movement, running as a presidential candidate in 2009 against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. After alleging electoral fraud, he was placed under house arrest along with his wife, Zahra Rahnavard, where they remain to this day.
Once close to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Mousavi later became politically aligned with Iran's reformist camp — and now, he is calling for a complete transition away from the Islamic Republic, explicitly demanding a referendum.
At the same time, prominent activists — all either imprisoned or under security surveillance outside prison — have issued a statement. Signatories such as Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi and human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh are longtime fighters who have spent years moving between prison and freedom.
Both statements express worry and a fear of worsening conditions.
Meanwhile, some political officials have told the state-owned Press TV: 'Our intelligence indicates Washington seeks talks to prepare for war, not peace. If so, we see no reason to waste time and would rather focus on preparing for conflict.'
One member of the Iranian parliament claimed on national television that the United States and Israel had already suffered heavy blows from Iran's military and insisted it is America — not Iran — that stands on the brink of collapse. He went on to mock the performance of the U.S. B-2 bomber and ridicule its military capabilities.
On the other hand, ordinary Iranians — still in shock from the outbreak of war — believe the conflict may not be over and that the risk of the ceasefire collapsing is high.
Tehran, a megacity of nearly 10 million people, faces daily crises such as electricity and water cuts. The dams around Tehran are running dry, and many residents in recent weeks have gone days without water or adequate water pressure. This situation is echoed in many other parts of Iran.The yearslong energy crisis, worsened by government mismanagement, has led the government spokesperson to urge Tehran residents to travel out of the city; to ease the crisis, the government has even announced an extra holiday to encourage people to leave Tehran.
In the midst of all these hardships, the issuing of these statements seeks to provide people with a sliver of hope for change.
Former professor Hatam Ghaderi says that while he does not support a referendum — since, in his view, demanding a referendum is unrealistic when the regime remains firmly in power — he sees such calls as a means to apply pressure on the government, signal that public discontent exists and open up political thinking among the public.
However, the majority of Iranians look at any prospect of political change with skepticism and doubt. The reality is that some are so stunned by the war and fearful of foreign domination over Iran that they avoid any political movement. Others, on social media, openly say they wish Israel had finished the job — that the war should have continued until at least it led to the removal of the regime's leaders.
Meanwhile, some are staunch supporters of the current regime, participating in state-organized rallies to demonstrate their full backing of the government. Abroad, supporters of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran, are also active.
Yet none of the political parties or groups, inside or outside Iran, seem to have enough weight to attract the majority needed to drive major and fundamental political change, as happened in the 1979 revolution that toppled the monarchy and established the Islamic Republic.
The Iranian regime, at every political juncture, has brutally suppressed peaceful protests, killing, imprisoning or executing thousands.
Yet the core of Iran's civil society continues to show its presence through these statements, signaling that there is still a faint flame to be kindled, still an invitation to converge and unify.
Although various media outlets have covered these statements, there has been no tangible movement from the public beyond that. Still, while continuing along the path of past civil society efforts, it is also necessary to seek new solutions.
Over the past decades, the political faction known as the 'Reformists' — those loyal to the Islamic Republic but critical from within — have been part of the system and at times have held government positions. Figures such as Mousavi and many of the signatories of both statements come from this reformist camp. Although people have voted for reformist candidates to prevent hard-line loyalists to the supreme leader from gaining power, today, there is little optimism even toward the reformists. In fact, the civil society seems to prefer complete silence over any political reaction.
Contrary to some predictions that Israel's attacks would spark political protests, no demonstrations have taken place. So what might awaken this silence into movement?
In my view as a scholar of democracy and constitutional law, the answer lies in forging a new coalition — one that unites seasoned reformist insiders, well versed in the mechanics of power, with independent, battle-tested figures who have risked and sacrificed in pursuit of genuine change.
This New Reformists movement must ambitiously seek to draw in academics, intellectuals, professionals and independent entrepreneurs — and, crucially, extend its reach to a broad spectrum of elite voices. Should it succeed in forging even a tentative alliance with monarchist factions, the political momentum it could unleash could prove formidable.
Such a coalition has the potential to galvanize the public, revitalize civic engagement and chart a path toward profound transformation in the Islamic Republic — a transformation not born of war or foreign interference, but of domestic resolve and reimagined purpose.
In such a moment, the long-silent majority may rediscover its agency, restoring fragile public trust and reigniting a spirit of collective action, under the banner of the New Reformists, untethered from the burdens and betrayals of the past.