Exclusive Interview by Amr Gohar for YourNews

As tensions surrounding Iran continue to reshape politics and security across the Middle East, debate is intensifying in Washington and among U.S. allies over what comes next. While some policymakers continue searching for diplomatic solutions, others argue that the Iranian regime itself remains the core source of instability in the region — from political repression inside Iran to military escalation across the Gulf.

At the center of that debate is the growing question of cost: the human cost paid daily by the Iranian people, the economic cost affecting global markets and energy supplies, and the political cost facing governments hesitant to fully support regime change efforts.

In an exclusive interview with YourNews, Majid Sadeghpour, Political Director of the Organization of Iranian-American Communities (OIAC), argued that the real conflict is not simply between Iran and the West, but between the Iranian regime and the Iranian people themselves.

Speaking during an Iranian opposition rally in Washington, Dr. Sadeghpour discussed the growing pressure on U.S. policymakers, the role of Congress, divisions among Gulf allies, and why he believes political support from the United States and allied governments is essential for the future of the Iranian opposition movement.

He also emphasized that while military pressure and sanctions may weaken Tehran, lasting change can only come through organized resistance inside Iran supported politically by the international community.

Exclusive Interview

Amr Gohar:

At the very beginning there was hope that the regime could be taken down quickly, but now things are becoming much more complicated, especially with the Iranian regime threatening the Strait of Hormuz, which affects the entire world. How do you see this situation moving forward?

Dr. Majid Sadeghpour:

Iran is a vast country with significant resources, and the Ayatollahs have shown no shortage of brutality.

But the only real way to address the threat from Iran is to focus on the enormous potential within Iran itself — the Iranian people. Unfortunately, the people of Iran have been in constant conflict with this regime for decades.

The key war was and still is the war that the regime has waged against its own people. That conflict needs recognition and political support from the international community.

The executions taking place in Iran are signs of this ongoing war. What we are here to do today is highlight that struggle and ask for America’s support.

We want policymakers in the United States and across the West to condemn political executions in Iran and recognize that the Iranian people have an organized resistance led by the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

They have a provisional government vision announced by Maryam Rajavi, and they also have resistance units operating underground inside Iran.

But their cause — regime change — needs global political endorsement.

Amr Gohar:

You are very active inside Congress and regularly meet with lawmakers. How do you think members of Congress currently see the situation? At first, the discussion was about bringing the regime down, but now many seem focused on finding a deal that could work for everyone because the costs are affecting the entire world economically.

Dr. Majid Sadeghpour:

I believe the majority of people in Congress want this regime gone. I also believe much of the international community wants this threat addressed.

The problem is that removing this regime is costly and demanding. It requires sacrifice politically, economically, financially, and logistically.

Unfortunately, the Iranian people themselves are already paying that price every day.

What you are seeing in Congress through House Resolution 166 and other measures is support for Maryam Rajavi and her 10-point plan for the future of Iran.

But political support from governments is still necessary. The Iranian people are willing to sacrifice to overthrow this regime, but their cause must be politically supported internationally.

Amr Gohar:

The Iranian opposition has historically received emotional and political support from Gulf countries. But now countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are experiencing tensions between each other, especially over Yemen and regional influence. How could these divisions affect the Iranian opposition movement?

Dr. Majid Sadeghpour:

The recent conflict proved that war alone cannot overthrow this regime.

The responsibility for addressing this issue ultimately belongs to the Iranian people themselves. However, political and moral support from the free world — including Arab countries — remains extremely important.

What the regime has tried to do is increase the political cost for other countries that support the Iranian resistance.

That fear needs to disappear because this regime is incapable of sustaining itself if meaningful political support is provided to the Iranian resistance.

America has a major leadership role to play, which is why we are here today. Political support from the United States for the Iranian people and their resistance movement can have a major impact on those inside Iran who are fighting the regime and the IRGC.

That support has consequences far beyond politics. It influences the people on the ground who are risking their lives to confront the regime.

I understand why some Arab nations are concerned, and the regime has attempted to create divisions among them. But America’s leadership can still play a significant role moving forward.

The most important step is direct condemnation of political executions in Iran and political support for the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Conclusion

Dr. Majid Sadeghpour’s remarks reflect the increasingly difficult political debate taking place in Washington and among U.S. allies over how to confront Iran while avoiding a broader regional collapse.

While many governments remain concerned about the economic consequences of escalation — including instability in energy markets, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, and rising regional insecurity — Sadeghpour argued that delaying decisive political action only increases the long-term cost of the crisis.

Throughout the interview, he repeatedly emphasized that the Iranian people themselves are already paying the highest price through executions, repression, and political violence inside the country. In his view, the central issue is no longer whether the Iranian regime represents a threat, but whether the international community is willing to politically support those inside Iran seeking change.

He also suggested that divisions among regional powers, including Gulf allies, could complicate efforts to counter Tehran’s influence. However, he maintained that stronger American leadership and open political backing for the Iranian resistance could eventually shift the balance both inside Iran and across the broader Middle East.

As debate continues in Washington over diplomacy, sanctions, and military pressure, the interview highlights a growing argument among Iranian opposition figures: that the future of Iran may ultimately depend less on foreign military intervention and more on whether the Iranian resistance movement receives meaningful international political support.