Internal instability in Iran and noises of regime change

In January 2026, protests erupted in Tehran’s historic Grand Bazaar, quickly spreading to other cities across Iran. What might have seemed, at first glance, like another episode of unrest was in fact a historic signal: for the first time since the 1979 revolution, one of the regime’s most loyal institutions openly challenged the state. This was not merely an economic protest; it was a striking expression of frustration with a government that many Iranians feel has long prioritised regional ambitions over domestic welfare, and coercion over reform.

The Grand Bazaar has traditionally been a pillar of Iranian economic and political life. Its merchants have long supported the state, providing stability and reinforcing the Islamic Republic’s authority. That this community became a catalyst for nationwide protests reveals a deepening crisis of legitimacy within the government. Unlike previous waves of dissent, driven primarily by students or urban professionals, the 2026 protests united diverse social groups—from merchants and young people to public sector employees—signalling a broad-based challenge to state authority.

Underlying this unrest are enduring domestic pressures. Iran’s economy has struggled under decades of mismanagement, compounded by international sanctions and structural inefficiencies. Inflation and unemployment remain persistently high, while many Iranians, particularly younger generations, see little hope of socio-economic mobility. These economic pressures are amplified by widespread perceptions of corruption, elite privilege, and governance failures, leaving many citizens feeling both excluded from political life and powerless to influence it.

READ: Iran plans to hold joint naval drills with China, Russia in northern Indian Ocean region: Report

Political repression has only deepened these frustrations. Mass arrests, restrictions on freedom of expression, and systemic human rights abuses have created a climate of fear and resentment. While coercive measures can suppress dissent temporarily, they often fuel long-term instability by eroding trust between citizens and the state. In this context, protests in January were as much a statement of disillusionment as a demand for specific reforms.

Iran’s foreign policy has also contributed to domestic dissatisfaction. Many Iranians feel that resources are diverted to regional proxy campaigns, such as support for Hezbollah and Hamas, rather than addressing pressing domestic needs. While the government frames these policies as essential for national security, ordinary citizens increasingly perceive them as costly ventures that exacerbate economic hardship at home. This tension underscores a central paradox: Iran pursues regional influence even as domestic legitimacy falters.

In analysing the government’s priorities, several themes emerge. National security remains central, with investment in military capabilities and regional deterrence against perceived external threats. Economic stability and growth are also critical, as inflation, unemployment, and slow development can rapidly undermine legitimacy. Law and order, including efforts to combat organised crime, remains a fundamental responsibility. At the same time, public financial management is increasingly important; corruption erodes both economic performance and social trust, undermining any efforts at political stabilisation.

Addressing these challenges will require a combination of short-term and mid-term strategies. Economically, stabilising the currency and controlling inflation is urgent. A strong monetary policy framework could help reduce price volatility and protect household incomes, especially for vulnerable populations. Greater transparency in public sector finances is also critical. Fiscal reforms aimed at reducing deficits, enhancing accountability, and improving oversight could help rebuild public trust while limiting opportunities for corruption.

Support for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is another key lever. SMEs generate employment, stimulate innovation, and promote economic resilience. Targeted credit schemes, regulatory simplification, and technical support could help create jobs and ease poverty pressures. Beyond economics, the government should explore measured political reforms. Expanding civic space, enhancing judicial independence, and permitting controlled political participation could help reduce social tensions without destabilising the regime immediately.

READ: Trump says ‘larger number of ships’ heading toward Iran, signals hope for deal

While Iran has historically demonstrated resilience against regime change, this should not obscure the structural challenges it faces. The Islamic Republic has survived past crises through a combination of ideological legitimacy, coercive capacity, and institutional complexity. Yet persistent unrest signals a growing disconnection between state priorities and citizen expectations. Abrupt collapse is unlikely; more probable is a prolonged cycle of protest, repression, and incremental reform. For genuine transformation, the government must address root causes—economic inequality, political exclusion, and institutional inefficiency.

The January 2026 protests also highlight a broader lesson for policymakers and analysts: stability is not simply the absence of rebellion. It requires institutional capacity to respond effectively to societal grievances. One of Iran’s persistent weaknesses lies in limited policy accountability and a lack of measurable performance objectives. Without addressing these gaps, the state risks recurring cycles of unrest that will undermine both domestic stability and international credibility.

In conclusion, the Grand Bazaar protests were more than a disruption of commercial activity; they were a warning that the Islamic Republic’s legitimacy is under strain. Internal instability in Iran is shaped by economic hardship, political repression, and public disillusionment. Addressing these challenges requires both immediate action—such as economic stabilisation and transparency reforms—and longer-term institutional adjustments that restore trust between the state and society. Ultimately, Iran’s future stability depends not on force alone, but on the government’s ability to align policy with citizens’ needs, address governance deficits, and respond constructively to public concerns.

The January 2026 protests demonstrate that when society speaks, it can no longer be ignored. For Iran, the question is no longer whether change will occur, but whether it will be guided by policy foresight and institutional accountability—or by cycles of unrest and coercion. How the government responds will determine whether the Islamic Republic can navigate these challenges peacefully, or whether instability becomes a defining feature of Iran’s political landscape for years to come.

READ: Israeli report says Trump is threatening Iran publicly but pursuing negotiations

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.