이란, 전쟁 생존 후 경제 부활과 내부의 갈등
Iran’s regime survived the war. Can it make peace with its own people? - The Guardian
이란의 경제적 구원 가능성은 지opolitical 리스크를 상쇄하지만, 핵 협상의 불확실성은 시장을 중립적으로 유지하고 있습니다.
핵심 요약
이란 전쟁으로 200만 명 실직, 평화 협상으로 경제 회복 전망이지만 핵 협상 필요.
핵심요약
- 전쟁으로 200만 명이 실직
- 인플레이션 77% 기록
- 미국과의 평화 협상 체결
- 핵 프로그램 협상이 경제 회복의 핵심
- 전쟁으로 국민 통합이 momentarily 이뤄짐
도입
이란의 전쟁 생존은 투자자들에게 중요한 교훈을 제공합니다. 전쟁으로 인한 경제적 피해와 정치적 갈등이 어떻게 장기적인 경제 회복에 영향을 미칠지 분석하는 것은 필수적입니다. 특히 미국과의 평화 협상이 이란 경제에 어떤 영향을 미칠지 예측하는 것이 중요합니다.
본문 1: 경제적 피해와 회복 전망
전쟁으로 200만 명이 실직하고 인플레이션이 77%에 달하는 피해를 입었습니다. 이는 이란 경제가 심각한 타격을 입었다는 것을 의미합니다. 그러나 미국과의 평화 협상이 체결되면서 경제적 구제 수단이 제공될 수 있는 가능성이 있습니다. 특히 핵 프로그램 협상이 성공적으로 진행된다면, 이란 경제는 장기적인 회복을 기대할 수 있을 것입니다. 이는 투자자들에게 새로운 기회를 제공할 수 있습니다.
본문 2: 정치적 갈등과 국민 통합
전쟁은 국민 통합을 momentarily 이끌었지만, 내부 갈등은 여전히 지속되고 있습니다. 특히 경제적 어려움과 정치적 압박이 결합되어 국민들의 불만은 계속 증가하고 있습니다. 이는 정치적 불안정이 장기적으로 이어질 가능성을 의미합니다. 따라서 투자자들은 정치적 안정성이 경제 회복에 미치는 영향을 고려해야 합니다.
본문 3: 장기적인 경제 전망
이란 경제의 장기적인 전망은 핵 프로그램 협상의 결과에 크게 의존할 것입니다. 만약 협상이 성공적으로 진행된다면, 이란 경제는 빠르게 회복할 수 있을 것입니다. 그러나 협상이 실패한다면, 경제적 어려움은 지속될 가능성이 있습니다. 따라서 투자자들은 협상의 진행 상황을 주의 깊게 모니터링해야 합니다.
결론
이란의 전쟁 생존과 경제 회복은 복잡한 정치적 및 경제적 요인에 의해 결정됩니다. 미국과의 평화 협상이 성공적으로 진행된다면, 이란 경제는 새로운 기회를 얻을 수 있을 것입니다. 그러나 정치적 불안정이 지속된다면, 경제 회복은 어렵게 될 것입니다. 따라서 투자자들은 정치적 안정성과 경제적 회복 가능성을 동시에 고려해야 합니다.
Original Article
Iran’s regime survived the war. Can it make peace with its own people? - The Guardian
If war triggered a rare moment of solidarity in the divided country, many doubt it will be used for reform
The Islamic Republic regime in Iran may have survived the war , but it now faces an even greater challenge: making peace with its own population.
Iranians are reeling not just from the shock of the war but also the killing of thousands of protesters by the authorities at the start of the year, and an economy in free fall. Instead of removing the regime, an initial declared aim of Donald Trump and Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu , the war showcased the Islamic Republic’s durability after its leader and layers of other top officials were killed.
Now that the war appears to be over, the new generation of leadership confronts competing demands , from hardliners to stick to rigid principles of the Islamic revolution and a population exhausted by economic hardship and repression.
The war caused significant destruction and, the authorities estimate, pushed two million people out of work. Inflation hit 77% last month. Iranians’ living standards had already crashed over the last decade as a result of international sanctions and mismanagement at home, with economic anger triggering the demonstrations that snowballed in January into an attempt to topple the government .
There are glimmers of hope. The framework peace deal , signed by Iran and the US last week, offers economic reprieve, potentially unlocking hundreds of billions of dollars for Iran, with some of that windfall immediate. The longer-term economic benefits of sanctions lifting and money for reconstruction depend, however, on thorny further negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme.
The attack on Iran , and the bombing of civilians and civilian infrastructure, triggered a wave of nationalism – a rare moment of solidarity in the deeply divided country. There is a widespread belief that Iran won the war, analysts said.
“Trump and Netanyahu have managed to unite Iranians more than any Iranian politician could,” said Foad Izadi, an associate professor at the University of Tehran. “Even people who didn’t like the government, don’t want to send their children to school and not see them again, and they don’t want their local hospital to be bombed.”
Elham, an artist in Iran who describes herself as a leftist, said that the war and the bloodshed in January had forced a re-examination of beliefs about the west and protests. “The plan was to do to Iran what they did to Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan: a collapse and occupation,” she said. “There’s now an understanding that the idea that the US can save us is a lie.”
She said that the authorities ought to allow protests but “regime change” uprisings are taken over by outside interests and lead to violent crackdowns, like in January. Instead, she said, there should be grassroots movements, which could win freedoms more gradually.
“The state may not collapse, but society will collapse if we see a repeat of January every year,” said Elham. “We have to build new coalitions. Whether you are a reformer or hardliner, everyone has to take a step forward towards each other. We have to imagine our future differently.”
Even the categories of conservatives, hardliners and reformers were scrambled by the war. The peace negotiations split, at least for now, more pragmatic conservatives from ultra-hardliners who opposed any agreement with the US.
The idea of striking a bargain with the west had been associated with reformers. But the negotiations with the US were led by someone from the conservative camp, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of parliament. The deal received public support from the Revolutionary Guards, the military force often considered to be a vanguard for hardliners. Ghalibaf said last week that there must now be a focus on economic recovery.
Zeinab Ghasemi Tari, an associate professor at the University of Tehran, said the big nightly gatherings in public squares in towns and cities, which started during the war and still continue, represented something deeper than nationalism: a form of collective resilience and defiance. She said that while economic grievances remain, protests of the sort seen in January were tied to a now discredited pro-western outlook.
“We are seeing fewer reformists openly advocating for engagement (with the west), and more either recalibrating their positions or remaining silent,” said Tari. “The war has reshaped public consciousness in ways that are still unfolding.”
Even with more pragmatic figures in ascendancy, many are doubtful that the regime would be willing to use this moment of unity for reform. The new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei , believed to have been wounded in the war, is yet to appear in public or set out a domestic agenda.
Mehran Haghirian, director of research and programmes at Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, a London-based thinktank focused on West Asia, said that the Islamic Republic was not capable of change, as that required being open to the outside world.
“With the current system in place, it is impossible for it to alleviate the economic situation of the country,” said Haghirian. “It is a country ruled by a minority, so it will always have domestic opposition as its main consideration.”
Alex Vatanka, senior fellow at the Washington-based Middle East Institute, said that the Islamic Republic needs sanctions relief and economic recovery, or wartime solidarity would curdle back into the old conflict between state and society.
“The real challenge now isn’t deterring Washington; it’s whether Tehran can convert a moment of forced cohesion into a durable compact with its own citizens,” said Vatanka. “That is the harder and more existential test.”