Iranian officials have rejected the idea that Bashar al-Assad’s fall represents a defeat for Tehran, instead emphasizing their continued influence and assigning blame to the deposed Syrian president.
Schools, universities, government offices, and banks have been shuttered in regions stretching from Tehran to West Azarbaijan, with worse winter months still to come.
Authorities say the measures are necessary to conserve resources. However, energy experts warn of a far more critical issue: a deepening infrastructure crisis.
Mehdi Arab Sadegh, an energy diplomacy analyst, has predicted severe repercussions if current conditions persist.
“Iran is on the brink of a 40% blackout in just 18 days,” he said in a statement on X. According to him, the nation’s strained infrastructure, limited liquid fuel reserves, and overburdened gas-to-electricity systems are driving the closures.
In Tehran, schools, offices, and universities were closed Sunday due to concerns over falling temperatures and air pollution. The northern provinces of Mazandaran and Golestan have taken similar steps, shutting down institutions and non-emergency offices in a bid to conserve energy.
In South Khorasan, local task forces ordered all government facilities to close, while West Azarbaijan announced closures aimed at saving gas and electricity.
The scale of the shutdowns echoes this summer’s electricity blackouts when Iran’s power grid collapsed under peak demand during soaring heat.
Iran’s energy sector has long struggled with systemic failures stemming from decades of underinvestment. Despite being home to some of the world’s largest natural gas reserves, the country faces a staggering $250 billion investment shortfall in its oil and gas sector and an additional $19 billion gap in its electricity infrastructure.
These failures have led to recurring blackouts, affecting Iranians during both the intense heat of summer and the cold of winter.
Recent policy shifts have only deepened the strain on households. In November, higher gas tariffs were introduced to increase state revenue. Although officials have blamed citizens for excessive consumption, energy analysts argue the real problem lies in outdated infrastructure and insufficient capacity to meet growing demand.
Arab Sadegh outlined the dire state of the grid, explaining that the South-to-North gas exchange corridor is overstretched and unable to meet the needs of power plants. “If we manage to supply 150 million cubic meters of gas daily, it would be a significant achievement,” he added.
The economic backdrop is equally dire. On Saturday, the Tehran currency market saw the value of the dollar surge past 750,000 rials, driven by rising geopolitical tensions and speculation about renewed US pressure. With inflation already squeezing Iranian households, critics argue the closures reflect the government’s inability to address the crisis comprehensively.
The government’s handling of energy issues is further complicated by its financial priorities abroad. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently said that the Islamic Republic has spent over $20 billion to support Hezbollah, while Iranian officials have acknowledged spending $30 billion in aid to Syria. Critics contend that these expenditures have exacerbated domestic crises, diverting funds from critical infrastructure investment.
Meanwhile, Iran has turned to petrochemical units to produce naphtha as a substitute for gasoline. While cheaper, naphtha is more polluting and less efficient.
As closures and energy shortages disrupt daily life, the government has sought to shift responsibility onto citizens. In a recent video appeal, President Masoud Pezeshkian urged Iranians to reduce consumption to help address shortages in the energy system. Yet, the crisis appears far from resolved. Tehran's air pollution remains severe, and experts warn that the current measures are insufficient to prevent further disruptions.
Iran’s ability to navigate the coming months will depend on whether it can balance domestic demands with its geopolitical ambitions. For now, the country remains trapped in a cycle of shortages, shutdowns, and makeshift solutions, as millions brace for what could be a harsh and uncertain winter.
Senior figures, including IRGC Commander Hossein Salami and Rasoul Sanaei-Rad from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s ideological office, have painted a picture of steadfast Iranian commitment while pointing to strategic failures within Assad’s leadership as the root cause of Syria’s collapse.
On Sunday, Hossein Salami described Iran’s intervention in Syria as a moral and strategic necessity. “Everyone saw that as long as we were there, the Syrian people lived [easily], because we were seeking their dignity,” he said.
Rejecting any ambitions of territorial expansion, Salami said, “We did not go to annex part of Syria’s land to our own; we went to ensure the dignity of Muslims would not be destroyed.”
Since 2011 alone, the Syrian Network for Human Rights estimates at least 23,000 Syrians have been killed, 87 percent by Syrian military and Iranian security forces.
In contrast, Rasoul Sanaei-Rad, a political affairs official at Ali Khamenei's office, adopted a more critical tone, focusing on Assad’s leadership failings. He called Assad’s fall disastrous and laid blame on “the deception of a portion of the Syrian people who supported the armed groups in taking control of their country’s fate.”
Sanaei-Rad said the events were caused by a “strategic mistake on Assad’s part,” a rare acknowledgment from Iranian officials of the limits of their allies’ effectiveness.
Bashar al-Assad’s fall marked a seismic shift in the region. The conflict began in 2011 amid widespread protests against corruption and authoritarian rule. Escalating violence by the government turned those protests into a full-scale war, with opposition groups such as the Free Syrian Army and Islamist factions like Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) exploiting Assad’s military losses. Even with extensive support from Iran and its Lebanese militia, Hezbollah, the government’s fragmentation and economic collapse proved insurmountable.
Iran’s involvement in the conflict was extensive. The IRGC, led by Qassem Soleimani, played a central role in organizing pro-Assad forces, while Tehran also mobilized Shia militias from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. These forces provided critical support in key battles but could not prevent Assad’s ultimate downfall.
Iran deflects defeat, reaffirms regional role
Iranian officials have been quick to frame Assad’s fall not as a failure but as part of a larger struggle in the region. Esmail Kowsari, a member of Iran’s parliament and former IRGC commander, acknowledged on Sunday the difficulties in supporting Assad’s government.
“Until the very last moment, the Islamic Republic maintained its connection with Bashar al-Assad, but his inner circle, including the prime minister and some army commanders, were creating obstacles,” he said.
Similarly, the Society of Seminary Teachers of Qom emphasized the enduring strength of the so-called Resistance Front, made up of anti-Israel and anti-US militias around the region such as the Houthis in Yemen and Hamas in Gaza, which Iran sees as central to its geopolitical strategy.
In a statement, the group said, “The Resistance Front remains active in the unified struggle against Israel, under the shadow of divine support and assistance, and will not be rendered passive by the losses and costs of the Syrian government’s fall.”
Yemen's Houthis are still blockading global shipping in the Red Sea region and firing projectiles at Israel while Israel remains at war with Hamas in Gaza. A fragile 60-day ceasefire is underway between Israel and Hezbollah but militias in Iraq remain active.
The messaging from Iranian officials underscores the divide in the legacy left by Iran's interference in Syria, a key base militarily and economically for Tehran.
While figures like Salami insist that Iran’s involvement in Syria was a success, others such as Sanaei-Rad’s criticism of Assad’s leadership faults signals a willingness to distance Tehran from the perceived failures of its ally.
While Iranian leaders reject the notion of defeat, Assad’s fall has undeniably strained Tehran’s resources and credibility. The intervention came at great financial and human cost, and its ultimate inability to sustain Assad’s government highlights the limitations of Iran’s influence.
In addition to being a corridor to fund and arm Iran's allies, Syria was also a critical trade route for the likes of Iranian oil amidst global sanctions.
By shifting blame to Assad’s errors, Iranian officials are now desperately trying to reframe a drastic landscape change.
