3 Key Takeaways:<\/p>\n
Iran\u2019s internal struggle is widely misunderstood. The conflict is not simply between states, but between a regime and its own people.<\/p>\n
International institutions and major media outlets have consistently downplayed or ignored the scale of repression inside Iran.<\/p>\n
A ceasefire with the Islamic Republic does not mean peace. As long as the regime refuses to recognize Israel, the conflict remains unresolved at its core.<\/p>\n
For months, Iran\u2019s internal crisis was treated as a side story.<\/p>\n
The regime cracked down on protesters. Iranians were cut off from the internet. Dissidents warned that the Islamic Republic was slaughtering its own people. And still, much of the world looked elsewhere.<\/p>\n
Then, when Israel and the United States struck the regime, the coverage finally arrived. But too often, it missed the central point: this was never simply a conflict between countries. It was a struggle between the Islamic Republic and the Iranian people it has brutalized for 47 years.<\/p>\n
That was the argument Jonathan Harounoff made on The Honest Take. As he put it, \u201cThere is a massive, massive, massive gulf that exists between the 93 million people of Iran and the 47-year-old Islamic Republic.\u201d<\/p>\n
War, Diplomacy, and a Population That Sees the Difference<\/p>\n
As a spokesperson for the Israeli mission at the UN, Harounoff has been watching the dichotomy play out from the inside, one in which the global body remains silent when it comes to internal Iranian\u00a0affairs, but rushes to make condemnations when the state is attacked.<\/p>\n
He pointed to the violence that unfolded in late 2025 and early 2026, when mass protests were met with brutal crackdowns. \u201cWe saw tens of thousands of Iranians slaughtered inside Iran. That wasn\u2019t being discussed at all at the United Nations.\u201d<\/p>\n
In contrast, when the U.S. and Israel launched\u00a0their joint operation against the Islamic Republic, the UN and its Secretary-General rushed to issue a condemnation. \u00a0\u201cInstead of praising a targeted strike to eliminate an immediate risk, there was condemnation.\u201d He described the reaction as \u201cdistorted,\u201d particularly given the scale of the threat posed by the regime.<\/p>\n
Harounoff pointed to the fact that the Security Council met on a weekend to discuss, a highly unusual event demonstrating the urgency, whereas it took Secretary General Antonio Guterres two weeks to express \u201cshock\u201d at the reports of the massacre of Iranian protesters.<\/p>\n
Why Change in Iran Is So Difficult<\/p>\n
As military action escalated, Harounoff described a dynamic that is often counterintuitive to outside observers: many Iranians understood \u2014 and in some cases supported \u2014 efforts targeting the regime, even when those actions took place inside their own country.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt was quite eye-opening\u2026 how supportive the vast majority of the Iranian people were,\u201d he said, based on conversations with contacts and diaspora communities. That distinction, he argued, was frequently missed. \u201cThey recognize that it\u2019s not really them or the country that is being attacked. It\u2019s the Islamic Republic that is being targeted.\u201d<\/p>\n
Despite widespread dissatisfaction, Harounoff did not present regime change as inevitable. \u201cIt\u2019s very hard to poll the extent to which people inside Iran are dissatisfied,\u201d he said, even while referencing reports suggesting overwhelming opposition to the regime.<\/p>\n
He outlined three conditions required for meaningful change: sustained internal protests, real international backing, and fractures within the regime itself. \u201cWhen those three components come together, that\u2019s really when you\u2019re going to start to see change.\u201d<\/p>\n
Until then, repeated protest movements \u2014 from 1999 to the \u201cWoman, Life, Freedom\u201d uprising of 2022 \u2014 had failed to fully dislodge the system due to ongoing repression.<\/p>\n
A Media Blind Spot<\/p>\n
Harounoff was equally critical of media coverage, particularly during periods when events inside Iran intensified but received limited attention. \u201cI was so disturbed by the complete absence\u2026 of news coverage surrounding Iran before the operation.\u201d<\/p>\n
He pointed to a period of widespread unrest and government repression that coincided with minimal international reporting. \u201cThere was not only a blackout in Iran, but there was also a news coverage blackout in the world.\u201d<\/p>\n
Even when coverage did appear, he argued, it often overstated how close the regime was to collapse \u2014 creating a false sense that outside intervention was unnecessary. \u201cIt can create a sense of complacency\u2026 why do they need to get involved if the regime is already finished?\u201d<\/p>\n
A Global Threat Beyond the Region<\/p>\n
He framed the reluctance to go to war with the regime as the result of years of failed alternatives. \u201cThere were attempts at diplomacy, but the Islamic Republic wasn\u2019t there to negotiate in good faith. It was there to stall.\u201d In his view, the regime used negotiations to buy time while continuing to expand its military capabilities and global operations.<\/p>\n
While much of the focus remained on nuclear capabilities and regional proxies, Harounoff emphasized a broader dimension: the regime\u2019s global reach. \u201cThere\u2019s not as much focus on its terror cells all over the world.\u201d<\/p>\n
He cited incidents and plots across multiple countries, including attacks and assassination attempts in Europe and the United States. \u201cThe problem has unfortunately arrived at our shores as well.\u201d This, he argued, underscored that the Iranian regime\u2019s activities were not confined to the Middle East but represented a wider international threat.<\/p>\n
Ceasefire Is Not Peace<\/p>\n
As discussions turned to potential de-escalation, Harounoff drew a clear distinction between temporary calm and lasting resolution. \u201cA ceasefire is certainly different to lasting peace.\u201d<\/p>\n
He pointed to the fundamental issue underlying the conflict: the regime\u2019s refusal to recognize Israel. \u201cHow can it have peace with a place that it doesn\u2019t even recognize?\u201d<\/p>\n
In his view, any pause in fighting would likely be used by the regime to regroup and continue its long-term strategy.<\/p>\n
The UN and the Limits of International Response<\/p>\n
Harounoff\u2019s experience at the UN has also highlighted what he considers\u00a0a disconnect between institutional priorities and reality on the ground.<\/p>\n
When his book on Iranian women\u2019s protests was submitted to the UN bookstore, it was rejected. \u201cThey said it doesn\u2019t align with UN global priorities.\u201d<\/p>\n
For Harounoff, the decision reflected a broader pattern. Even as the UN maintained committees focused on human rights and women\u2019s issues, he said critical developments in Iran were often ignored or delayed in receiving attention.<\/p>\n
Despite the challenges, Harounoff emphasized the importance of understanding Iran beyond its government. He encouraged audiences to engage directly with Iranian voices, particularly within the diaspora. \u201cThey are the best window into what is really going on.\u201d<\/p>\n
For him, the future of Iran ultimately depended on its people \u2014 not external actors \u2014 but that future would require sustained attention and support. \u201cThe desire of the Iranian people hasn\u2019t wavered at all.\u201d<\/p>\n
Found this video interesting? Follow the HonestReporting<\/a> page on Facebook to catch more videos, and read articles debunking news bias and smears, as well as others explaining Israel\u2019s history, politics, and international affairs. Click here<\/a>\u00a0to learn more!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"3 Key Takeaways: Iran\u2019s internal struggle is widely misunderstood. The conflict is not simply between states, but between…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":85505,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[3065,34,196,11363,707,16376],"class_list":{"0":"post-85504","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-iran","8":"tag-ceasefire","9":"tag-iran","10":"tag-iran-war","11":"tag-iranian-protests","12":"tag-islamic-regime","13":"tag-islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps-irgc"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@iran\/116476076579984781","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85504","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=85504"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85504\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/85505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}