The chilling images of overcrowded morgues in Iran, smuggled to the outside world, have struck a rare blow, silencing many of the Islamic Republic's longstanding defenders. As the regime faces unprecedented internal pressure and external condemnation, the shockwaves are set to hit a seemingly unlikely institution first: the United Nations.
The Global Calculus: Who Benefits from a Pariah Iran?
While Donald Trump considers military options and NATO allies denounce Tehran's brutality, Western censure is far from universal. For key global players, a weakened and isolated Iran serves a distinct purpose. China reaps significant economic benefit, purchasing a quarter of its oil needs at a discount from Tehran, a crucial supply since the Venezuelan crisis. For Russia's Vladimir Putin, a repressive Iran helps contain other energy-rich authoritarian states in the region, like Kazakhstan, limiting their access to world markets.
Paradoxically, the weakening of Iran's international position—with its proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah diminished and the Assad regime in Syria collapsed—has reduced the incentive for Arab monarchies to support American action. Trump's intervention in the 12 Day War in June 2025 alleviated Saudi and Emirati fears of Iranian-sponsored Shia insurrection. Now, these monarchies fear a democratic Iran could prove more subversive to their own rule than the discredited Ayatollahs.
Regional Fears: Kurdish Aspirations and Cross-Border Unrest
The anxiety extends to Iran's neighbours. Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, while vocal on Palestine, is hostile to Kurdish ambitions. With Iran's large Kurdish minority active in protests, Ankara fears that autonomy in Iran could ignite its own Kurdish population. Similarly, Pakistan worries that successful dissent in Iran could energise shared Balochi minorities across their border.
While direct military intervention to prop up the regime is unlikely, these states are using diplomatic influence to protect it. This complex web of interests partly explains the conspicuous silence of the United Nations on the Iranian crisis.
The UN's Dirty Secret and a Possible Deal
As Trump withdraws from UN bodies, Secretary-General António Guterres faces a grim reality: the organisation's financial and operational survival relies on authoritarian states, including Iran and its allies, as well as the Arab monarchies. This dependency comes at the expense of the UN's stated humanitarian principles.
In this high-stakes environment, a deal remains possible. Iran may seek an agreement with Trump to avoid airstrikes, potentially following a Venezuelan model of superficial change under American oversight. For the regime, survival, even at the cost of abandoning nuclear ambitions and terrorist proxies, could be the priority. This outcome is preferable for a broad coalition—from Trump and Arab rulers to China and Russia—who view a dictatorial but predictable Tehran as less risky than an unknown, democratic Iran.
The tragedy, as noted by Mark Almond, director of the Crisis Research Institute in Oxford, is that international pressure might solidify the mullahs' control at home, dashing hopes for fundamental change. While a destructive revolution must be avoided, cutting a deal that legitimises the current regime could store up profound resentment, with consequences that may reverberate for years to come.
