The regime in Iran is cornered. Despite its crackdown, the protests are not calming down and the international pressure is increasing. So, how can the Iranian regime diffuse the anger? A foreign adventure could be an option, but this would likely lead to the destruction of the country and the demise of the regime. Another option would be to appease its neighbors and the US; however, Iran’s neighbors have little confidence in the mullahs’ regime. The best option would be to seek a face-saving exit, in which the people’s anger is absorbed and not confronted, while their demands are co-opted and not rebuffed. People who know the regime well know that it is not a monolith. Some people are dogmatic. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is definitely dogmatic, but not everyone is. Some are nationalistic and pragmatic. They definitely do not want to see the regime crash, as they know a collapse will translate into an internal conflict and would lead to chaos. Their main objective is to preserve the state and the cohesion of the country. In order to achieve that, the regime must make concessions. Though this might mean the beginning of the end of the regime, it could also mean the survival of the state and its institutions. As much as countries in the region hate the Iranian regime, they would not want a fragmented Iran. The nightmare scenario would be if the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps broke up into 10 or 20 militias, with no one knowing who is doing what and where the proxies no longer have a reference. At least at the moment with Iran’s proxies — Hezbollah, the Houthis and Al-Hashd Al-Shaabi — there is a reference, which is the regime in Tehran. Iran has the power to pressure and coerce them, but if there is no interlocutor what will happen to those proxies? They might be weakened and willing to negotiate, but it is very unlikely they will change their predatory behavior. They will probably turn to organized crime to fund themselves and keep their power, which will make the situation even more problematic. Up to now, Iran has refrained from targeting the Gulf directly. If the regime breaks down into several groups, will that remain the same? There are many unidentifiable risks, unknown unknowns, as former US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once put it when describing the situation in Iraq. And Iraq is the main example showing how the collapse of a state resulted in internal fighting and sectarianism and created an incubator for terrorism. Also, we have to remember that Iran has an important arsenal of missiles. Would the Gulf, Israel and the US see this arsenal move from the hands of a central state to several nonstate actors that they probably do not know and cannot detect? They definitely do not want to see the regime crash, as they know a collapse will translate into an internal conflict and would lead to chaos. Dr. Dania Kolielat Khatib Hence the best solution would be a face-saving exit for the regime. Khamenei is in very poor health and much talk has been circulating about his succession. If he diminishes his presence from the public sphere and President Ebrahim Raisi resigns, making way for a moderate figure to lead a transitional government and conduct reforms, that could offer a face-saving exit. For now, there is no real alternative to the current regime. A revolutionary underground group under the name United Youth of Iran published its manifesto this month and announced its intent to change the regime. Though its declaration included 43 articles focusing on a “democratic and inclusive government,” no one really knows who these people are, what their plan is and whether they can co-opt the different factions of society or if they will just create divisions. The Iranian people, as much as they hate the regime, do not want their country to turn into Iraq. Hence, this is the time for the leadership in Iran to take mature and responsible decisions. It cannot let the country collapse and plunge into chaos. Raisi should publicly admit that the regime has failed to cater to the people’s need for dignified living. He should resign and call for a transitional government that will conduct reforms and arrange elections. The most suitable person to lead this transition would be former Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. To start with, he represents hope. After signing the nuclear deal in 2015, he came back and was received as a hero in his country. He is someone who successfully managed to negotiate with the West, so the Iranian people trust his capabilities. He is also seen as a moderate figure and an advocate for the opening up of Iran. Zarif could lead the transition and conduct the reforms the country needs, starting with allowing women the right to choose whether or not to wear the hijab. That is one of the many reforms Iran needs. After such reforms are conducted, elections can be held. Of course, elections should only be called after the election law is changed. Although there are competitive presidential elections in Iran, the supreme leader currently has the upper hand. Through the Guardian Council, he can disqualify whoever he wants. The law needs to be changed to remove the authority of the supreme leader over elections. This is a scenario that could spare Iran division and internal fighting, while the region would avoid chaos. However, we are yet to see whether the pragmatic camp or the dogmatic camp will prevail in Iran. • Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is an affiliated scholar at the Hoover Institution, Stanford, and is president of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building, a Lebanese nongovernmental organization focused on Track II.