Iran-Israel Conflict, Global Stability, and the Imperative for Peaceful Democratic Transition in Iran

Written by ACI in 19 June 25

Issued by: Association des Chercheurs Iraniens (ACI)
Date: June 18, 2025

Executive Summary

For almost half a century, the Islamic Republic has held the Iranian people hostage under the weight of religious dictatorship. Through its reckless and adventurist foreign policy, it has now endangered not only the people of Iran but also the future of its youth and the country’s ability to recover and rebuild. This war now serves the strategic interests of Israel and the United States on one side, and the Islamic Republic on the other—focused solely on the regime’s survival. No party in this war is fighting for the rights and interests of the Iranian people, who find themselves alone, exposed, and unprotected.

The recent escalation of hostilities between Iran and Israel has pushed the region to the brink of humanitarian and environmental catastrophe. Airstrikes targeting Iran’s nuclear and energy infrastructure, including enrichment facilities and refineries, have heightened global fears of radiological disaster and destabilised already fragile energy markets. Over 200 Iranians and dozens of Israelis have lost their lives, and the threat of a nuclear incident remains alarmingly real.

ACI firmly warns against any attempt to exploit this moment to impose regime change through force. Lasting peace and democratic stability in Iran cannot be manufactured externally. Only a transition led by the Iranian people, rooted in equity, justice, and transitional accountability, can deliver sustainable outcomes. The cost of rebuilding Iran is rising exponentially with every passing day of war. The path to regional stability lies not in bombs but in building a democratic and prosperous Iran shaped by its own citizens.

Part I: The Dangers of Imposed Regime Change

Historical evidence consistently shows that externally imposed regime change—especially through military force—fails to create democratic or stable societies. Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan stand as cautionary examples where foreign intervention dismantled existing state structures without establishing legitimate alternatives. In each case, the aftermath included prolonged violence, authoritarian relapse, and deepened societal fractures.

Scholarly research confirms that forced democratisation leads to fragile and externally dependent political systems. “Pacted transitions”—where internal actors negotiate a peaceful power shift—have been far more successful in building inclusive and resilient democracies.

Part II: A Viable Alternative – Peaceful, People-Led Democratic Transition

Iran possesses the core societal elements required for such a transition. As a highly literate and digitally connected society, with a legacy of peaceful civic protest movements (notably the Green Movement and “Woman, Life, Freedom”), Iran has demonstrated a homegrown commitment to democratic change. ACI’s 2024 nationwide survey, Woman Life Freedom – An Assessment of Identity Trends and Today and Tomorrow of Iran, revealed:

  • A sharp decline in religious identification, with a parallel rise in national and ethnic identities.
  • Widespread public disillusionment with the political system and perceptions of oligarchic rule.
  • Deep concerns about economic insecurity and gender discrimination.

The survey clearly showed the Iranian public’s aspiration for a just, democratic, and inclusive future. The Sorbonne conference of February 2025 further reinforced the necessity of rebuilding Iran on foundations of equality and pluralism, free from sectarianism and systemic exclusion.

Yet this movement toward democratic transition has been severely disrupted by the current war. The longer the conflict persists, the more the foundations for democracy in Iran are damaged—from the loss of life and destruction of infrastructure, to the erosion of hope among a population that had already endured decades of repression. The direct and indirect costs—including healthcare collapse, elderly deaths due to lack of access, and the potential for a flow of refugees—threaten to turn Iran into a failed state, repeating the mistakes seen in Iraq and Libya.

Part III: The Consequences of the Current Conflict

  1. Nuclear Risk: Israeli strikes on facilities at Natanz and Isfahan, as confirmed by the IAEA, constitute a direct violation of international legal norms (Geneva Protocol I, Article 56). Though no radiological release has been confirmed, the risk of catastrophic fallout is real and transboundary. Lessons from Chernobyl and Fukushima underscore the grave consequences of nuclear contamination for health, environment, and human rights.
  2. Energy Market Disruption: Oil prices surged up to 13% following attacks on Iranian refineries and the South Pars gas field. Iran’s role in global energy markets, particularly through the Strait of Hormuz, remains critical. Continued instability threatens to inflate prices further, impacting global inflation and food security.
  3. Humanitarian Emergency: Over 220 civilians have been killed in Iran, with over 1,000 wounded. Missile strikes have led to internal displacement and severe fuel shortages. In Israel, over 20 people have died, with hundreds more injured. The conflict risks triggering a wider regional displacement crisis.
  4. Regional and Geopolitical Fallout: With Iran’s internal institutions under attack and no consensus among oppositional forces, the risk of post-conflict fragmentation is high. In such a vacuum, actors like Russia may step in to protect strategic interests, interfering with any future rebuilding process and undermining the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people.

Part IV: Strategic Recommendations

  1. Immediate Ceasefire and Nuclear Non-Attack Commitment
    The EU, UN, and major powers must demand an immediate ceasefire and secure public reaffirmation from all sides of the absolute prohibition on attacks against nuclear infrastructure, in line with IAEA resolutions and international law on humanitarian and environmental grounds.
  2. Diplomatic Off-Ramps
    Encourage quiet diplomacy involving neutral third parties (e.g. Switzerland, UN envoy, IAEA Director General) to reduce tensions, set red lines, and build a negotiation framework.
  3. Support for Internally-Led Democratic Transition
    Publicly reject any military solution or externally imposed leadership. Support Iranian civil society efforts to build a peaceful, inclusive political future. Amplify findings from the 2024 ACI survey and the Sorbonne conference in international forums.
  4. Maritime and Civilian Protection
    Increase real-time monitoring of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Deconflict civilian airspace to avoid accidental casualties. Provide protection guarantees for humanitarian actors.
  5. Humanitarian Aid and Accountability Mechanisms
    Deploy ICRC and UN agencies with safe humanitarian corridors. Ensure independent investigations into potential violations of international humanitarian law, including civilian targeting and infrastructure destruction.

Conclusion

Peace in Iran cannot be dropped from drones or built through bombs. It must be cultivated by the people of Iran, supported by international law, and underpinned by a commitment to justice, equity, and democratic renewal. The cost of this war is not only in lives lost today, but in opportunities destroyed for tomorrow. Every day it continues, it inflicts damage not just on infrastructure but on the possibility of a democratic Iran. The international community must act not only to de-escalate the present crisis, but to preserve the vision of a free and fair future for all Iranians.

Contact: Association des Chercheurs Iraniens (ACI) | aci@aciiran.com