Iran in the Mirror of Afghanistan: Will the History of an Ideological Government Repeat itself?

Elaine Jones warned about the future of Iran, which will turn into Afghanistan under the ideological pressures of the Iranian government.

While Iran's political developments have increasingly come under the spotlight of global attention, some analysts, looking to the experience of Afghanistan under Taliban rule, warn of a similar future for Iran; a future in which external pressures, internal obstruction, and the ruling ideology can fundamentally change the course of a country.

Elaine Jones is also one of the analysts who has provided an analysis on Iran. She has worked in the US diplomatic structure in the Middle East and the Muslim world for more than two decades. She has been involved in various responsibilities, including managing political and economic sectors in Saudi Arabia, pursuing the issue of religious freedom in Egypt, and overseeing development programs in Lebanon. She has also worked in the policy field in Washington, in positions related to counterterrorism and supporting women's initiatives in Afghanistan.

His long experience of living and working in Islamic societies has led him to focus particularly on examining the ideological and social dimensions of these societies, a subject that is now reflected in his analyses for audiences, particularly in Christian circles.

Elaine Jones, a former American diplomat and Middle East analyst, has examined this scenario in an analytical note and attempted to present a picture of the consequences of the continuation of the current situation in Iran. In part of her analysis, she writes, citing human rights reports on Afghanistan: “Last March, the Taliban publicly flogged 124 men and 17 women. With this figure, the total number of victims of public punishments since the resumption of this practice in November 2022 has reached 2,470, 380 of whom were women.”

This picture is only part of a reality that analysts say could be replicated in other countries if rigid ideological structures persist. The widespread educational restrictions in Afghanistan are another example of this trend. Jones points out: “The new school year began in Afghanistan while girls above the sixth grade are still denied the right to education. Moreover, in 2024, the Taliban even banned women from training in midwifery. This decision, according to World Bank statistics, will completely destroy the achievements of the past two decades in reducing maternal mortality (from 2,232 cases per 100,000 births in 2000 to 521 cases in 2023).”

Reports from international institutions, including human rights organizations, also confirm this trend and report the intensification of social restrictions, especially against women, in Afghanistan; a situation that some see as an example of the consequences of establishing an ideological government without accountability.

The analysis continues by examining Iran as a country with different circumstances but similar challenges. Referring to recent military and economic pressures, Jones writes: “Donald Trump can now easily declare victory in the Iran case and walk away. The United States and Israel have heavily targeted Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, navy, and air force. Yet Trump’s threats to bomb power plants and bridges have not stopped the ruling clerics from continuing their martyrdom-seeking rhetoric.”

He also points to the potential consequences of an economic blockade, warning: “By imposing a naval blockade, the regime’s ability to finance proxy groups, rebuild the military structure, and prevent the collapse of the national currency (a factor that brought citizens to the streets in January) will be severely eroded. The fundamental question is: If the Islamic Republic can maintain power despite these crises, how much will Afghanistan look like today in five years?”

Meanwhile, the issue of domestic capacity for change is also raised. Referring to developments after the 1979 revolution, Jones says: “Shortly after the victory of the revolution in 1979, the regime undertook general disarmament. In these circumstances, do the people have the ability to rise up and overthrow their rulers?”

He also points to geopolitical complexities and considers the role of external actors important, including the possibility of regional powers entering or the influence of countries like China, which buys a large portion of Iranian oil.

Alongside these developments, the reaction of Iranians abroad has also been significant. According to media reports, rallies have been held in dozens of countries around the world, in which protesters have called for increased international pressure on the Iranian government.

In this context, Pastor Ramin Parsa, a Christian activist, said in a message to the US President: "Please strike them. The only language these Islamic terrorists understand is the language of fire and power. They consider tolerance a sign of weakness."

Jones concludes his analysis with a worrying picture of the future: “The Iranian people are suffering, and it is feared that more difficult days lie ahead. If the regime survives this crisis, it will be like a wounded snake trapped in a corner. Let us pray for freedom and a bright future for the Iranian people.”

Jones' analysis of Iran's future comes at a time when, in the past few months, the Iranian ambassador to Kabul had stated: "Tehran sees no obstacle to recognizing the Afghan government, and it is likely that this step will be taken in the near future."

This view, although analytical and based on possible scenarios, reminds many of this fundamental question: Can the experience of countries like Afghanistan be considered a serious warning for Iran's future?