Security-Centered Economy, Regional Policy, and Command Responsibility within the Structure of Governance (1989–2026)

1. Security over Welfare; The Framework of “Preservation of the Regime”

Over the past three decades, official state discourse has repeatedly emphasized the primacy of “preserving the regime” over other considerations. Ali Khamenei has described security and the survival of the political structure as the “highest of obligations,” stressing the necessity of resisting “foreign enemies” and preventing “infiltration.” This conceptual framework has underpinned numerous major security, judicial, and economic decisions.

At the same time, Iran’s economic indicators across multiple periods have reflected sustained double-digit inflation, currency depreciation, rising poverty rates, and unemployment. While precise figures require source-based examination, official domestic data and international reporting indicate that economic pressure on households intensified in the final years of this period.

Within this context, a central question emerges regarding the relationship between security-military policies and the deteriorating socio-economic conditions experienced by large segments of society.

2. “Resistance Economy” and Budgetary Priorities

Beginning in the early 2010s, Ali Khamenei formally advanced the concept of a “Resistance Economy” as the framework for national economic policy. This approach emphasized resilience against sanctions and reliance on domestic capacity.

Concurrently, the budgets of military and security institutions either increased or were protected from significant reduction in comparison with certain social sectors.

Analysis of annual budgets indicates that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and affiliated entities have maintained a substantial presence not only in military affairs but also in major economic sectors, including energy, infrastructure, and telecommunications. This overlap between security and economic authority has blurred the boundaries between military decision-making and the allocation of public resources.

In official speeches, Khamenei has repeatedly underscored the necessity of strengthening defensive and missile capabilities, presenting them as guarantees of national security; this emphasis has persisted even amid domestic economic strain.

3. The IRGC; Pillar of Security and Economic Influence

During Khamenei’s leadership, the IRGC evolved from a military force into a supra-governmental actor.

In addition to its security role in confronting protests, the IRGC expanded into major economic projects and acquired access to extensive financial networks. Simultaneously, the Intelligence Organization of the IRGC operated alongside the Ministry of Intelligence, broadening the scope of surveillance and internal security control.

In the nationwide uprisings of 2009, 2019, 2022, and 2025–2026, multiple reports documented the involvement of IRGC and Basij forces in suppression operations.

This convergence of military, security, and economic power constitutes one of the defining features of Khamenei’s period of leadership.

4. Regional Policy and the Concept of “Strategic Depth”

In foreign policy, the concept of “strategic depth” and support for what has been termed the “Axis of Resistance” have occupied a central place in official positions articulated by Ali Khamenei.

Political, financial, and military support for armed actors in the region has been presented as part of this doctrine. In numerous speeches, he has characterized regional engagement not as a cost but as a “security investment.”

At the same time, this policy has coincided with extensive international sanctions and diplomatic tensions; sanctions that have had direct economic repercussions domestically.

The linkage between regional policy, sanctions, and internal economic pressure has surfaced in protest movements in recent years, where demonstrators have explicitly questioned the prioritization of external expenditures over domestic needs.

5. The Nuclear Program and Its Consequences

Iran’s nuclear program during Khamenei’s leadership became one of the most contested aspects of the country’s foreign policy. In official statements, he has denied the pursuit of nuclear weapons while affirming Iran’s right to develop nuclear technology and strengthen defensive capabilities.

Across different periods, advancements in the nuclear program have been accompanied by either intensification or partial relief of sanctions. The reimposition of extensive sanctions, particularly following the United States’ withdrawal from the nuclear agreement in 2018, imposed significant economic strain on the country.

From a structural perspective, strategic decisions in nuclear and military domains fall within the sphere of direct or indirect responsibility of the Leader, given his position as the highest authority in strategic policymaking.

6. The Link Between External Threat Narratives and Internal Repression

One observable pattern over three decades has been the simultaneity of heightened external tensions and intensified internal control.

At critical junctures, official rhetoric regarding “enemy plots,” “hybrid warfare,” or “infiltration” has coincided with increased media restrictions, arrests of activists, and security crackdowns.

During the 2019, 2022, and 2025–2026 protests, demonstrators were officially attributed to “foreign hands.” This analytical framing has served to justify coercive measures as acts of national defense.

Such a linkage between externally oriented confrontation and internally securitized governance has contributed to a sustained narrowing of civic space.

7. Command Responsibility under International Law

Under the doctrine of command responsibility in international law, a superior official may be held responsible when:

• They exercised effective control over subordinate forces;
• They knew or should have known of serious violations;
• They failed to take necessary measures to prevent or punish those responsible.

In a structure where the Leader serves as Commander-in-Chief, appoints the heads of the Judiciary and key security institutions, and publicly endorses decisive responses during protest periods, the question of command responsibility arises with particular gravity.

Repeated reports by international bodies concerning lethal force against protesters, widespread executions, torture, and denial of medical care reinforce scrutiny regarding awareness and decision-making at the highest level of governance.

Final Synthesis of the Report

A review of three decades of Ali Khamenei’s leadership indicates that:

• Unrivaled concentration of power at the apex of the state;
• Recurrent reliance on security instruments in response to public protest;
• Persistently high rates of capital punishment;
• Continuous reports of torture and inhuman treatment;
• The interconnection between regional-security policies and domestic economic pressure;

have all emerged within a centralized power structure characterized by limited independent accountability mechanisms.

This report presents a condensed analytical overview of part of this record. The scale of events, the number of victims, and the complexity of political and security decisions during this period warrant further in-depth and independent examination.

What stands out, however, is the persistence of a governance model in which overarching security and judicial decisions, in the absence of independent oversight, have profoundly affected the rights to life, liberty, and human dignity of citizens.