“I Want Iran to Remain”: Hossein Lajvardi on Iran’s
Identity Crisis, Social Fragmentation, and the Search for a New National
Contract
A deep conversation on state-society collapse, environmental
insecurity, decentralization, generational transformation, and whether Iran can
survive as a unified nation in the 21st century.
May 28, 2026
In a wide-ranging and intellectually provocative interview,
Iranian sociologist and researcher Dr. Hossein Lajvardi argued that Iran is no
longer facing merely a political crisis or a crisis of governance, but a far
deeper structural rupture involving identity, trust, environment, institutions,
and the very survival of the Iranian nation-state.
Lajvardi — founder and president of the Association of
Iranian Researchers in Paris and author of the newly released book I
Want Iran to Remain — presented what may be one of the most
comprehensive sociological frameworks currently emerging from the Iranian
diaspora regarding the future of Iran after the Islamic Republic.
Rather than focusing on familiar regime-change rhetoric,
Lajvardi insists the central question is more fundamental:
“What kind of social contract can preserve Iran itself?”
Beyond Regime Change
One of the most striking aspects of the conversation was
Lajvardi’s insistence that replacing the current government, by itself, will
not solve Iran’s underlying crises.
According to him, Iranian society has undergone nearly five
decades of cumulative distrust, institutional decay, psychological exhaustion,
and social fragmentation. The rupture between state and society has reached a
level where political transition alone cannot restore national cohesion.
He describes modern Iran as suffering simultaneously from:
- a
crisis of trust,
- a
crisis of national identity,
- a
crisis of governance,
- an
environmental crisis,
- a
demographic transformation,
- and
a crisis of collective belonging.
In his view, the danger today is not simply authoritarianism
— but the possibility that Iran may gradually lose the internal foundations
necessary to remain a coherent nation-state.
“Smart Decentralization” Without Disintegration
Lajvardi repeatedly emphasized a concept he calls “smart
decentralization” — a model inspired not by separatism or ethnic fragmentation,
but by functional governance systems found in countries such as France.
He argues that many Iranian ethnic minorities — Kurds, بلوچ,
Arabs, Turkmen and others — are not primarily seeking secession, contrary to
alarmist narratives often repeated in both regime and opposition discourse.
Instead, he says, they seek dignity, participation, equal
development, and recognition within Iran.
The failure to address these demands, however, creates
fertile ground for instability.
Lajvardi believes Iran requires a new territorial and
administrative philosophy capable of balancing national unity with local
autonomy, equal access to resources, and cultural recognition.
Environmental Collapse as a National Security Threat
Perhaps the most original and consequential part of the
interview was Lajvardi’s argument linking environmental degradation directly to
national security.
He warned that Iran may face massive internal displacement,
economic breakdown, and irreversible social instability if water shortages,
land subsidence, desertification, and ecological collapse continue unchecked.
For Lajvardi, Lake Urmia was never merely an environmental
story — it was an early warning signal for the possible breakdown of Iran’s
internal stability.
“Iran may collapse environmentally before it collapses
politically.”
This framing places environmental policy at the center of
future Iranian statecraft rather than treating it as a secondary technical
issue.
The New Generation: Crisis or Historic Opportunity?
Lajvardi also devoted significant attention to Iran’s
younger generations.
He described them as fundamentally different from the
revolutionary generation of 1979 — more globally connected, more
technologically capable, less ideological, and far less willing to accept
simplistic political narratives.
At the same time, he warned that the continued emigration of
Iranian talent represents an immeasurable national loss.
According to him, Iran’s greatest untapped resource is not
oil, gas, or even geopolitics — but its human capital.
He pointed to the vast scientific and technical capabilities
developed inside Iran despite sanctions and repression, arguing that these
capacities will outlive any particular government.
The “Parliament of Ideas”
One of the interview’s most compelling concepts was
Lajvardi’s proposal for a long-term “Parliament of Ideas” — a permanent
intellectual institution designed to preserve collective national experience
beyond political cycles.
His argument is that Iranian political movements repeatedly
rise and collapse without preserving their accumulated knowledge.
Whether reformism, the Green Movement, or the Woman, Life,
Freedom uprising, each wave generates important social experience, yet little
institutional memory survives afterward.
A “Parliament of Ideas,” in his vision, would function as a
strategic intellectual infrastructure for the nation — independent from
temporary governments, factions, or personalities.
Its purpose would not be to seize power, but to create
continuity of national thinking.
“Woman, Life, Freedom” as a Foundational Principle
Lajvardi argued that the Woman, Life, Freedom movement
should eventually become more than a protest slogan.
In his view, it could evolve into a foundational
philosophical principle for a future Iranian constitutional order — much like
“Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” in post-revolutionary France.
But he criticized both the regime and parts of the
opposition for failing to seriously analyze the movement sociologically rather
than emotionally.
According to him, Iran urgently needs rigorous intellectual
work, data-driven analysis, and long-term institutional thinking instead of
purely reactive politics.
A Rare Conversation About Iran’s Long-Term Survival
At a time when much of Iranian political discourse revolves
around immediate crises, military escalation, sanctions, factional conflicts,
and regime change scenarios, this interview stood out for its attempt to think
several decades ahead.
Whether one agrees with Lajvardi’s conclusions or not, his
framework forces an uncomfortable but necessary question:
Can Iran survive the 21st century without fundamentally
redefining the relationship between identity, governance, territory, equality,
and trust?
For Lajvardi, the answer depends on whether Iranians can build a new social contract before fragmentation overtakes the state itself.
