On 28 February 2026, a major joint US–Israeli strike campaign hit Iran, and Iranian state media confirmed the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. His death may mark the beginning of the end for the regime. Hours after news of the attack broke, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) announced a Provisional Government for the Transfer of Sovereignty to the People of Iran and the Establishment of a Democratic Republic based on Maryam Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan.
In practical terms, this framework is presented as a road map for a post-Khamenei order: a republic based on universal suffrage and political pluralism; the separation of religion and state; gender equality; the abolition of the death penalty; a non-nuclear Iran; the dismantling of the IRGC and other repressive organs; and autonomy and the removal of double injustices against Iranian nationalities and ethnicities.
Iranians must determine their own future
Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the NCRI has issued two key messages to Iranians amid the attacks, calling for the protection of civilians and stating that only the Iranian people have the legitimacy to determine their own future. She said: “I reiterate that the ultimate solution is the overthrow of this regime and the determination of Iran’s destiny by the Iranian people and the organised Resistance.” She warned that the democratic revolution can be ‘stolen’ by the “remnants of monarchical fascism”, and added that: “Our path leads toward the future and the establishment of a democratic republic, not a return to the buried dictatorship of the past.”
That warning is not abstract. It speaks directly to the most persistent obstacle to a broad, rights-based coalition against dictatorship: the attempt to re-centre Iranian politics around a single ‘saviour’ figure, while treating pluralism – especially the rights of marginalised nationalities – as a security problem. Reza Pahlavi’s conduct in the days immediately before the strikes shows why this matters now.
A new political alliance
On 22 February 2026, several Kurdish parties in Iranian Kurdistan announced a new political alliance, The Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan, explicitly committing to overthrowing the Islamic Republic and establishing a democratic and secular system that guarantees rights for Iran’s diverse nations and faiths. Instead of responding with dialogue or coalition-building, Pahlavi accused “separatist groups” of making baseless” claims, declared Iran’s “territorial integrity” an “ultimate red line,” and warned that those who cross it would face a “decisive response,” invoking the army’s “national and patriotic duty” against them.
For many Iranians, especially among historically marginalised nationalities, this rhetoric revives the oldest threat in Iranian politics: submit or be crushed. In Kurdistan, the memory is vivid and painful. Under his grandfather Reza Shah and his father Mohammad Reza Shah, Kurdish demands were repeatedly met with force, crackdowns, and suppression. Against that backdrop, talk of the army’s “duty” and “decisive responses” is a clear warning – and a promise that the same coercive playbook will return.
Rajavi’s insistence that the revolution must not be stolen by monarchist forces connects directly to this moment. Iran does not need to replace one authoritarian ruler with another. It does not need a new face to repeat the old reflexes: centralise power, securitise dissent, and threaten communities that demand rights.
Kurdish coalition condemns Pahlavi’s words
Reactions to Reza Pahlavi were swift. The coalition of Kurdish parties rejected his accusations and condemned his fascistic viewpoints. They defended their platform as democratic and anti-dictatorial and emphasised that Pahlavi’s positions pave the way for civil war in Iran and only benefit the regime.
In part, they said that Pahlavi’s,“repeated threats to use the army against the political demands of Iran’s peoples indicate that, in his envisioned future Iran, civilian and democratic demands would be met with the same militarised oppression”.
They also said that, “democratic aspirations enshrined in the United Nations Human Rights Charter would still be security-oriented and militarised. There would be no structural difference between his ideal political regime and the repressive regimes of Iran’s past and present.”
They believe that Pahlavi, “with the accompaniment of his suspicious surrounding circle, has played an undeniable role in creating division and fragmentation among the ranks of the people and opponents of the regime, and the only political current to which he has remained committed and shown sympathy during this period has been the regime’s repressive and terrorist armed and security forces.” [as translated from the original Persian statement].
Iran risks true leadership being ‘stolen’
Mohammad Mohaddessin, Chair of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the NCRI made the following statement on X:
Iran’s path out of dictatorship requires a clear break with every form of despotism, whether it wears a turban or a crown. In the aftermath of Khamenei’s death, Iran’s revolution faces a second danger: being stolen. It can be stolen by those who promise ‘order’ while drawing red lines against nationalities, and by those who treat diversity as a threat to be subdued.
A mechanism for a democractic future
A democratic future cannot be built on intimidation – especially not the kind implied in Pahlavi’s response to Kurdish parties. The only credible antidote to both clerical despotism and monarchical revival is a transition that is time-bound, accountable, and ends in free elections. Rajavi’s message sets out that mechanism plainly:
“Based on NCRI resolutions, once the provisional government is established on Iranian territory, it is obligated to hold free and fair elections within six months for a National Legislative and Constituent Assembly.
The duties of this Assembly are to draft the constitution, determine the new republican system of the country, legislate for the administration of current affairs until the formation of the first National Assembly under the new constitution, and designate a government which, following the resignation of the six-month provisional government, will assume responsibility for the country’s affairs under the supervision of the Constituent Assembly.
I emphasise once again that the NCRI and the Provisional Government are not seeking power, but rather the transfer of power to the sovereignty of the Iranian people.”
Bylines Network Gazette is out!
The latest Bylines Network Gazette is out now. Become a Friend of Bylines Network or upgrade to a paid Substack subscription, and you will get access to a vital collection of citizen articles and stories.
Journalism by the people, for the people.
