The science of international relations observes and predicts the course and fate of relations between countries that move from one system to another whenever an emergency arises.

The emergency arises if the main objectives of the units of the international system change or there is a change in the pattern of conflict between the units of the international system.

The zero-group theory of Bremer's legacy says that chaos, the absence of global leadership, and the possibility of a zero-sum clash are one of the emergencies afflicting the international system.

Another emergency is talked about by the theory of the end of power and the inability to control by Moises Naim, when the power is slowly and steadily shifting from armies to gangs.

Hence, the Iranian regime may represent one of the emergency situations that afflicted the international system, at a time when the international system has lost collective leadership on the one hand, and the power in it on the other hand has shifted from the state to parallel and hostile factors to the international system.

With its philosophy, strategy and revolutionary system represented by armed non-state religious factors across borders, Iran has destroyed the bilateral relations between the Gulf, Arab, Islamic and international states.

With the fragmentation of international relations, Iran succeeded in expanding between countries, and in making each international party look at it and deal with it differently from the other party.

Because of this fragmentation and expansion, countries were unable to unite against Iran, and Iran prevented the establishment of a collective international leadership against it, until ISIS appeared and the international coalition was formed in response to the double emergency that threatens it with fragmentation and expansion.

In the definition of the mission published on the website of the International Coalition, the International Coalition against ISIS was formed in September 2014, with 79 members, committed to “confronting the organization on all fronts, working to destroy its networks and standing in front of its ambitions for global expansion.”

Iran has benefited from its geopolitical position, its religious revolution, its imperial legacy, the absence of a Middle Eastern security system, and an international comma, so it made a presence for itself in most international files.

Iran was seeking and was still seeking a plan of three stages, green from Jakarta to white, red by dropping eastern projects, and black by invading Europe and overthrowing America and establishing the global state of the Guardian Jurist.

America has tolerated Iran's revolutionary non-state regime, which says, according to Muhammad Javad Larijani, that Iran is ready for dialogue with the Great Satan at the bottom of Hell, to achieve Iran's interest (in fragmentation and expansion).

And if the international system dealt with Iran the revolution in 1979, as it dealt with ISIS in 2014, by forming an international alliance, the revolution would have been in Iran.

International alliances against the cross-border religious and nationalist armed factors are one of the rules of international relations to protect international and regional security.

If the need for international alliances with al-Qaeda, ISIS, and al-Houthi is obligatory, then the need for an international alliance with the largest terrorist regime in the world is necessitated, rather it is an international emergency.

The international coalition came as an international collective leadership with local and regional allies, to declare an international emergency against the state of international fragmentation and Iranian expansion in the voids between states and their components, and to unify the international view of the Iranian regime.

The international alliance came as a radical solution after all international containment plans from Carter to Obama had failed against Iran, and Iran's internal movement against the regime with revolution or reform also failed.

The only plan that worked with Iran was when the US Navy fought a 16-hour battle with the Revolutionary Guard Navy in the Persian Gulf in April 1988 during Reagan's presidency.

It was what Khomeini called “the cup of poison.” Rafsanjani persuaded Khomeini to unconditionally accept Security Council Resolution 598 and said in a text, “Time is no longer on Iran’s side; Because the arrogant anti-Islam forces decided to do their best to handcuff us.”

Perhaps the reason for the failure of all plans to contain Iran is that the Western powers did not realize the philosophy and strategy of Iran's system of revolution internally and externally, which succeeded after forty years of having several international axes.

This is a regional axis of resistance, and that is an axis with the Brotherhood, and the third is a hybrid axis from the base, Boko Haram, the Somali youth movement, the Christians of March 8 and others, and a fourth with Russia, China and South America.

Without re-forming the Iranian state with an international alliance and local allies, any similar plans to contain Iranian expansion and international fragmentation will be vain.

After the end of ISIS, and in light of Trump’s nuclear withdrawal, Pompeo’s conditions and sanctions packages, and the Brian Hook Group, the essential stage of the international emergency may require the international coalition to prepare the Iranian arena, to open the file of restructuring the Iranian state.

The latest news from the Iranian arena says that hundreds of Iranian opponents have called on Trump to establish a financial fund under the supervision of the United States to finance and support the opposition.

Also, the Iranian Minister of Intelligence, Mahmoud Alavi, warned against intensifying efforts, consultations, and moves undertaken by the Iranian nationalist parties and the opposition in order to unite their ranks to overthrow the Wilayat al-Faqih regime.

And the Iranian activist, Karim Abdian Bani Saeed, says that there is a serious and wide movement in Washington by important parties of the Iranian opposition to convince the Trump administration of the need to take serious steps to support the process of change in Iran by supporting democratic forces to find a real and comprehensive alternative to the Wilayat al-Faqih regime.

The double dilemma facing the international alliance with the Iranian regime is that the velayat-e faqih regime has managed, after forty years, to overrule Iran, the state that existed before 1979, and that the Iranian opposition parties have not yet agreed on the alternative.

But Amir Taheri says that the Iran of the revolution has not yet been able to eliminate the state of Iran. After it conquered, dominated and ruled, it was not able to create the state, and at the same time was unable to destroy the mother Iranian state, within the idea of ​​the five stages of the emergence of the state according to Iranian historians..

Therefore, Taheri proposes the idea of ​​dismantling the parallel agencies and providing the opportunity for the official state agencies again, but how can this be, when the parallel agencies consider the state an enemy that it fights and refuses to return, unless this is part of the idea of ​​an international alliance and local allies?

Non-state actors (the parallel Iranian revolution apparatus, for example) are organized entities that possess a leadership structure that is parallel and hostile to states and enjoy independence from the countries to which they belong, and possess the power that enables them to achieve their goals.

Therefore, according to this approach, Iran (parallel apparatuses) eventually found themselves on the side as they express the (global terrorism system) and America, which represents the international system on the other side.

The supposed new Iranian state model, which the international coalition seeks to open its file, may not only lead to a coup, revolution, reform or containment, but rather an international alliance and local allies.

But the problem with the local Iranian allies is that they have not yet agreed on an alternative to the velayat-e faqih system, and this may extend the life of the system.

And their failure to agree on an alternative, may make the regime devote itself to confronting the scenario of change by exploding the internal situation, if it does not submit to Pompeo’s conditions, or the scenario of rotation by submitting to the conditions in order to ensure the survival of the regime.

Writer Dr. Omar Abdel Sattar Mahmoud