The following is an interview InsideIRAN.org conducted with Dr. Davoud Hermidas-Bavand, a renowned political scientist in Tehran who is a retired professor from Tehran University.

Q: How do you view the state of the opposition now? Who are the demonstrators and how are they mobilizing?

A: There is some sort of leadership that stemmed from the results of the election. This is not a unified leadership. The people are walking faster than their leaders. Their slogans and demands are beyond what their leaders have voiced so far. The leaders want to move within the framework of the Iranian constitution. Slogans and demands of the people are actually a protest of the very structure of the government.

There are two rifts: one within the system and another between the people and the government. People are after human rights and basic rights, such as democracy and the rule of law.

Q: What is the political establishment’s strategy for trying to curtail the opposition? Do you believe the high degree of repression will continue in order to try to crush the opposition?

A: People are determined to be peaceful, calm, and law abiding. When harsh measures are used, it is possible to push some of the protestors into radicalism. If coercive reactions become harsher and lead to bloodier outcomes, then a segment of protestors and the people may go toward radicalism, and this will have negative consequences for society.

Q; Will the opposition continue to take advantage of state-run rallies and use them as opportunities to protest against the government?

A: These are new opportunities. These opportunities, which have public legitimacy, are used to express their [the people’s] objections. When people ask for permits to have demonstrations and these permits are not issued [by the Ministry of Interior], then people take advantage of these opportunities to express their protest.

Q: In your view, is there a relationship between political instability in Iran and how the leadership will respond to the Vienna deal?

A: Well, the public wants this matter to be resolved peacefully. Beyond that, there are those who believe that we will continue having challenges in the arena of foreign policy so long as we don’t solve our problems with the United States. Issues such as political isolation and sanctions . . . well, in order to deal with the sanctions, we have to make concessions to other powers and pay a great price. Therefore, experience shows that, for instance, foreign companies face increased sanctions. When the French TOTAL invests in Iran’s oil sector, we are then forced to make extra concessions to TOTAL.

We put all our eggs in one basket with Russia. Russia is after her own interests. United States’ opposition to transferring Caspian Sea gas through Iran cost Iran dearly. This would have increased Iran’s geopolitical and geo-economical profile.

Q: Are there differences in opinion among conservative leaders on talking to the United States?

A: There is no consensus among the conservatives on the issue of talking to the United States. Some believe that if they face problems domestically and run the risk of losing legitimacy at home, [they can make up for it] by making gains in the foreign policy arena. Some, on the other hand, want to continue the crisis and see their existence in perpetuating this fight with the “enemy.” Despite signs and symptoms that appear signaling an agreement or a relative understanding, this gets torpedoed midway and faces opposition. If a step forward is taken, two steps backward are also taken!

Q: Has the state been seriously discredited to the point of no return?

The government had been considered legitimate by the Iranian people, for whatever reason. At least it appeared that way. These events are inescapable. It will reach a point that may lead to a bad internal paradox, which may not be in the best interests of the country. If you look at the status of minorities in Iran who are now asking for their rights, this is another example of the government not responding to the demands of the people. The leadership should come to terms with the demands of people. They should adhere to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. The majority of the Iranian people, or at least the Iranian people who are aware, demand these things.