Shahrzad Mojab: Women’s alternative in Iran is a third path

2026-03-11 11:46:17


	 

	ISTANBUL – As war policies and authoritarian regimes in the Middle East expose people—especially women—to multidimensional destruction, feminist scholar Prof. Dr. Shahrzad Mojab emphasizes that the ongoing war in Iran cannot trap women between imperialism and fundamentalism, saying: “The Jin, Jiyan, Azadî movement represents a third democratic path.”

	 

	Evaluating the situation of peoples caught between the attacks by the United States and Israel on Iran, authoritarian regimes in the region and rising fundamentalism, feminist scholar Prof. Dr. Shahrzad Mojab stated that women cannot be forced to take sides between these two powers. Mojab said: “The Jin, Jiyan, Azadî movement represents a third line of freedom.”

	 

	How do the United States and Israel’s attacks on Iran affect political balances in the region and social opposition movements?

	 

	As you know, Iran—and in fact the entire region—is currently in a deep crisis. This crisis is not only political; it is also social, cultural and economic. And on top of all this, we are now experiencing a very brutal and devastating war. What we are witnessing is the systematic destruction of life. There are massacres in Iran, genocide continues in Gaza, and the Kurdish people across the region face forced displacement and exile.

	 

	The important point to understand is this: the people of Iran are not only subjected to the authoritarian rule of the theocratic regime inside the country. They are also positioned as casualties of imperial power struggles over the reconfiguration of the global order.

	 

	This situation concerns not only the region but the whole world. There is the hegemony of the United States in the region. At the same time, rivalries with Russia and China and the alliance between the United States and Israel shape this political landscape. As a result, the people of Iran today are caught between internal repression and the destruction caused by war.

	 

	Does the threat of foreign intervention become a tool to legitimize the Iranian state’s repression policies?

	 

	Yes, absolutely. This has always been the case. Whenever there is a threat of foreign intervention, authoritarian regimes present themselves as defenders of the nation.

	Nationalist sentiment is strengthened, which makes the situation worse for people. That is why people are now afraid to go out into the streets and protest this war. The government has intensified the atmosphere of fear and repression.

	 

	The destruction caused by war is also worsening the economic situation. Poverty and suffering are increasing. The people of Iran are being drained both by state repression and by the aggression of the United States and Israel.

	 

	How does the tension between imperial intervention and authoritarian state structures affect democratic struggles from below?

	 

	At the moment there is almost no such space. People cannot organize, protest or gather. This is the environment created by war. In addition, opposition political forces in Iran are highly fragmented. Because of this, a common ground for organization cannot be formed. Universities are closed, schools are closed and many workplaces are not functioning. Under an atmosphere of fear and repression, organizing from below becomes extremely difficult.

	However, some Kurdish political parties have called for neighborhood organizing in Kurdish regions. They suggested that people come together to provide care and services for one another. But this is more of a temporary response to the urgent needs created by the war.

	 

	Is regime change in Iran a realistic possibility?

	 

	Regime change cannot occur through foreign intervention. History has repeatedly shown this. External powers may change the form of the state or the individuals in power, but this does not create the kind of transformation that people want. The people of Iran want to move away from a theocratic state. What they seek is a secular, democratic and republican system. Bombings or the removal of leaders do not change the core structure of the state. In fact, they only prolong the process of democratic transformation.

	 

	How do the attacks and sanctions by the United States and Israel affect women and children?

	 

	Sanctions, economic siege and military threats primarily harm ordinary people. The sanctions led by the United States against Iran were explicitly designed to impose maximum economic pain on society. Interestingly, this did not weaken the regime. Instead, it enabled the regime to strengthen certain economic mechanisms. The cost was paid by the people.

	War and sanctions deepen the catastrophic conditions for women. Militarization strengthens authoritarian regimes and expands their instruments of repression.

	 

	Under such conditions, societies retreat into traditional structures. Women are pushed into extended household arrangements to ensure family safety. They become caregivers for the wounded and carry the emotional burdens of families. At the same time, patriarchal relations become stronger. Poverty, fear and trauma increase. For these reasons, war conditions are extremely destructive for women.

	 

	Do war conditions strengthen patriarchal state structures or create new forms of resistance?

	 

	Yes, they strengthen patriarchal relations. And under these conditions, organizing resistance becomes extremely difficult. For example, in January 2026 millions of people were in the streets in Iran protesting the regime. But when the war began, people withdrew from the streets. Now they protest not against the regime but against the war. At the same time, when a country is under bombardment, a reflex to defend the nation emerges. This strengthens nationalism.

	 

	How do you evaluate the political impact of the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” movement in Iran?

	 

	Today, within Iran’s political landscape, those who use the slogan “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” represent a demand for a secular, democratic and republican state.

	This slogan also stands in opposition to the slogan “Long live the king,” which represents the return of the monarchy to Iran. Therefore it creates a very important political distinction.

	“Jin, Jiyan, Azadî” is no longer just a slogan. It has become a movement. It has become a central ethos within Iran’s resistance culture.

	 

	Is a new path possible in Iran?

	 

	The political scene in Iran is very dynamic. There is not only one “third path”; there are multiple possible paths. One of these paths is represented by the Jin, Jiyan, Azadî movement, which embodies secularism, democracy and freedom. On the other side there is also a monarchical force tied to the United States and Israel, and this is quite dangerous.

	 

	Are women in the world being forced to choose between two anti-democratic powers?

	 

	Today there are essentially two violent forces confronting each other. On one side there are imperial powers and their military wing, Israel. On the other side there are religious fundamentalist forces. This is not limited to Islamic fundamentalism; it also includes the rise of Christian fundamentalism in the United States.

	 

	These two forces actually oppose the aspirations of peoples for equality, justice and democracy. That is why global women’s solidarity is extremely important. Women must stand together against militarization, imperial aggression and all forms of fundamentalism.

	 

	Should women be forced to choose between these two powers?

	 

	No. This is not our choice. If we support either side, we only strengthen them.

	Women’s choice must be freedom, democracy, ecology, participatory society and equality. This war is not our war.

	 

	Do women still have power?

	 

	Of course they do. That is exactly where hope lies. There are women’s resistance movements across Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and many other parts of the world. We also see this in Türkiye and within the Kurdish women’s movement.

	These are very important nodes of resistance.