“Don’t leave us, the people of Iran, standing alone.” This plea, delivered from inside Iran through a friend on a panel of the JNS International Policy Summit on Tuesday, became the defining moment of an emotional panel on the conference’s third and final day.
The all-women discussion, titled “Freedom for the Iranian People,” shifted the focus from geopolitics and diplomatic negotiations toward the experiences of ordinary Iranians living under the Islamic Republic.
Moderated by Ella Rosenberg, a senior counter-terrorist financing (CTF) and Iran expert at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA), the panel featured Emily Schrader, an Israeli journalist, Iran expert and co-host of The Squad at JNS.org; Victoria Coates, vice president of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy; and Sogand Fakheri, head of the Persian Media Desk at JCFA and an actress known for her role in the Israeli television series Tehran.
Opening the discussion, Rosenberg noted that the rights and aspirations of the Iranian people remain a critical issue at a time when the United States has signaled that regime change is not part of its broader strategic objectives. Panelists argued that such policies risk sidelining the concerns of ordinary Iranians while international attention remains focused on diplomacy, security and economics.
‘The Iranian people are missing from the conversation’
Rosenberg asked Schrader how current international media coverage reflects the realities unfolding inside Iran. Schrader argued that while negotiations between Washington and Tehran continue, the well-being of the Iranian people has largely disappeared from the discussion.
“We speak about the price of oil. We speak about economics. But where are the Iranian people on the agenda?” she asked.
She pointed to what she described as the violent suppression of protests in January, when widespread internet blackouts limited communication with the outside world and reduced international coverage of events inside the country.
According to Schrader, the international community has focused heavily on diplomatic engagement while paying insufficient attention to the consequences for ordinary citizens.
She also criticized the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran, that commits Washington to non-interference in Iran’s internal affairs.
“It’s a moral and strategic mistake,” she said, arguing that such policies can embolden the regime while leading to increased arrests, executions and political repression.
Coates suggested that the regime’s current hold on power may be less secure than it appears.
“Iran, with its strategic location and natural resources, should be the most beautiful, wealthy country,” she said.
Instead, she argued, decades of mismanagement have left the country struggling with a severe energy crisis that serves both as a symptom of government failure and a catalyst for public unrest.
While the authorities may have succeeded in suppressing recent demonstrations, Coates noted that the underlying problems remain unresolved.
“They may have repressed the uprisings for the moment, but they didn’t solve the problem,” she said.
The human cost of repression
The discussion took a deeply personal turn when Rosenberg asked Fakheri, who left Iran for Israel at the age of six, about the messages she has received from contacts inside the country since internet access was partially restored.
Fakheri, who closely follows developments inside Iran through a network of friends and activists, became visibly emotional as she described the impact the protests have had on her.
“Since the protests in January, I couldn’t eat and sleep,” she said. “I felt I needed to be in touch with the people in Iran.”
She spoke about a close online friend, a 23-year-old Iranian who closely follows Israeli culture and is even learning Hebrew. When her messages to him suddenly stopped going through, she feared he might have been arrested.
Fighting back tears, Fakheri described the burden of encouraging people inside Iran to continue a dangerous struggle while she watches from afar.
“I carry the guilt that I am in touch with them so that I can help them,” she said. “I tell them, if you guys hear me, know that I’ll be your voice.”
Many in the audience appeared moved by her remarks. Fakheri also spoke of her longing to return to the country she left as a child.
“I dream about experiencing just one more time in my life walking down the streets of Tehran,” she said. “To dance in the streets, to visit my grandparents’ graves, to enjoy the taste of saffron ice cream.”
She then read a message from another friend inside Iran who had been watching the summit’s live broadcast.
“Don’t leave us, the people of Iran, standing alone,” the message read. “This is the only message for our greatest ally, the people of Israel.”
Debating support for change
The appeal prompted a discussion about what role, if any, outside powers should play in supporting political change inside Iran.
Asked whether Iranians should be left to determine their own future, Coates acknowledged that a large majority of Iranians appear to want change while cautioning against direct foreign-led efforts to engineer regime change.
“The United States has not been great in external regime changes in the past,” she said.
Instead, she suggested that regional countries could support democratic aspirations while the United States provides other forms of assistance, including material support.
Schrader took a more forceful position.
“I may be saying something very controversial now, but maybe someone has to help arm the Iranian people against the regime,” she said.
At a minimum, she argued, Western governments should avoid policies that strengthen Tehran economically.
“We shouldn’t be rewarding the regime,” she said. “We shouldn’t give concessions such as sanctions relief. This brings strength to the regime. It comes at a cost for the people on the ground.”
During the question-and-answer session, Mordechai Kedar of Bar-Ilan University asked who was advocating for the rights of Iran’s more than 40 minority groups.
Fakheri responded that while her network includes people from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds, the regime’s actions have united much of the population around a common goal.
Today, she said, many protesters rally behind Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, whom she described as a figure dedicated to the future of the Iranian people.
Schrader agreed that emphasizing divisions among Iran’s various communities risks playing into the hands of the regime.
“I don’t think that this separation is a good approach to ending the regime,” she said. “The regime uses it as a tool.”
Despite differing views on how far the international community should go in supporting change, the panelists agreed on one central point: discussions about Iran too often focus on the regime while overlooking the people living under it. Whether through diplomacy, sanctions or public advocacy, they argued, the aspirations of ordinary Iranians must remain at the center of the conversation.
