This was the first time since the 1979 revolution that the Bazaar (The traditional merchant class) played the key role of the initiator for the wide spread unrest. The main reason was the severe economic crisis and devalue of Iran currency.In December 2025 the Iranian rial fell to extreme low against US dollar, as reported about 1.4 million rials per dollar that was collapse of public patience. Bazaar is the most conservative and religiously traditional sector of Iranian society and played key role in overthrow of monarchy. Bazaar has always relied with the ruling system. Government officials of President Masoud met trade association leaders and made promises, however the protests spread across Iran in 400 cities as well as 100 locations. The Iranian government responded harshly to the present protest due to the decline of proxy forces such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and fall of Asad regime in Syria, compounded by 12 day war last June in which Israel and US attacked Iran’s nuclear and other military sites. However this is an Iranian issue, and the US should not assume it can direct events on the ground. This all was to effect regime change that did not happen. Iran has earlier faced pressure from 2019 to 2022 that was mostly covert faced sanctions, cyber operations, proxy conflicts, media and economic pressure and indirect support to protesters.But in recent protests is open threat about regime change that usually happens when diplomacy has stalled, sanctions failed to produce desired results, internal pressure and disorder did not break the state and military containment no longer works .So the rhetoric itself is a pressure tool, not yet a final decision.It’s psychological warfare more than a declaration of war.UN looks toothless, that is nothing new.It was established after WWII when power was western oriented and veto power protected major states.When a superpower wants action, the UN is used. When it doesn’t, the UN is ignored.So yes the UN cannot stop a US-Iran conflict, only manage the aftermath. Under these circumstances Iran US war not likely but very high risk of limited war does exist.
Question arises why war is not likely.US cannot afford another Middle East ground war and Iran is not Iraq or Libya it’s a regional power. Secondly Iran has asymmetric retaliation capability (Hormuz, proxies, cyber, missiles). This may result in exploding oil markets. China and Russia shall gain much by exploiting chaos.
All said and done conflict is still possible just one miscalculation in Gulf, Iraq and Syria, any accidental casualties of Americans, so the danger is not planned war, but uncontrolled escalation. Israel PM Natanyahu opposes a US attack on Iran but prefers US pressure without US war for which Iran is fully prepared. A US strike would unite Iranians the small packet of resistance would side with the government, it would justify nuclear breakout and push Israel in to retaliation therefore Israel prefers Iran under pressure, not Iran at war.Under the circumstances there is 70 % probability that US shall not prefer direct war, may create high tension, covert attacks, cyberwar and proxy hits. But at the same time may engage in talks through intermediaries like Qatar and Oman. But at the same time limited strikes, short conflict and quick escalation cannot be ruled out. Chances of start of Regional wars that would be the worst case. It will involve Israel, Hezbollah, Iran and US, nobody shall win everyone loses. Iran is not trying to defeat the US and US is not trying to invade Iran as it would turn in to WW III. Both are trying to avoid looking weak and deter without triggering war. US has started show of force by moving its war ships, that’s why talks are never ruled out even at peak hostility. We are closer to dangerous instability, not full war. The real risk is accidental escalation, not strategy.US President faces opposition from within its own Democratic party and Republican Senators may create problems for Trump, secondly Donald Trump has reportedly been told by his aides and Gulf allies that even a large scale attack on Iran would not topple the regime. Let us wait and see which way the wind blows. All options on both sides are still on the table. In sum, the current Iran-US confrontation is less about an imminent full scale war and more about deterrence, signaling, and psychological pressure. Neither side seeks total conflict, yet both operate in an environment where miscalculations could trigger rapid escalation. The situation reflects dangerous instability rather than deliberate war planning, making accidental conflict the greatest threat. For, now , pressure, proxy actions, and back channel diplomacy remain the preferred tools but all options remain open, and the margin of error is dangerously thin at the same time dramatic change is also expected
