Over two weeks of protests mark the most serious challenge in years to Iran's theocratic leadership in their scale and nature but it is too early to predict the immediate demise of the Islamic Republic, analysts say.

The demonstrations moved from protesting economic grievances to demanding a wholesale change from the clerical system that has ruled Iran since the 1979 revolution that ousted the shah.

The authorities have unleashed a crackdown that, according to rights groups, has left hundreds dead while the rule of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, now 86, remains intact.

"These protests arguably represent the most serious challenge to the Islamic Republic in years, both in scale and in their increasingly explicit political demands," Nicole Grajewski, professor at the Sciences Po Centre for International Studies in Paris, told AFP.

She said it was unclear if the protests would unseat the leadership, pointing to "the sheer depth and resilience of Iran's repressive apparatus".

The Iranian authorities have called their own counter-rallies, with thousands attending on Monday (Jan 12).

Thomas Juneau, professor at the University of Ottawa, said: "At this point, I still don't assess that the fall of the regime is imminent. That said, I am less confident in this assessment than in the past."

These are the key factors seen by analysts as determining whether the Islamic Republic's leadership will hold on to power.

SUSTAINED PROTESTS

A key factor is "simply the size of protests; they are growing, but have not reached the critical mass that would represent a point of no return", said Juneau.

The protest movement began with strikes at the Tehran bazaar on Dec 28 but erupted into a full-scale challenge with mass rallies in the capital and other cities from Thursday.

The last major protests were the 2022-2023 demonstrations sparked by the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who had been arrested for allegedly violating the Islamic dress code for women. In 2009, mass rallies took place after disputed elections.

But a multi-day internet shutdown imposed by Iranian authorities has hampered the ability to determine the magnitude of the current demonstrations, with fewer videos emerging.

Arash Azizi, a lecturer at Yale University, said "the protesters still suffer from not having durable organised networks that can withstand oppression".

He said one option would be to "organise strikes in a strategic sector" but this required leadership that was still lacking.

COHESION IN THE ELITE

While the situation on the streets is of paramount importance, analysts say there is little chance of a change without cracks and defections in the security forces and leadership.

So far, there has been no sign of this, with all the pillars of the Islamic Republic, from parliament to the president to the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), lining up behind Khamenei's defiant line expressed in a speech on Friday.

"At present, there are no clear signs of military defections or high-level elite splits within the regime. Historically, those are critical indicators of whether a protest movement can translate into regime collapse," said Sciences Po's Grajewski.

Jason Brodsky, policy director at US-based group United Against Nuclear Iran, said the protests were "historic".

But he added: "It's going to take a few different ingredients for the regime to fall," including "defections in the security services and cracks in the Islamic Republic's political elite".

ISRAELI OR US MILITARY INTERVENTION

US President Donald Trump, who has threatened military retaliation over the crackdown, announced 25 per cent tariffs on Monday against Iran's trading partners.

The White House said Trump was prioritising a diplomatic response, and has not ruled out strikes, after having briefly joined Israel's 12-day war against Iran in June.

That war resulted in the killing of several top Iranian security officials, forced Khamenei to go into hiding and revealed Israel's deep intelligence penetration of the Islamic Republic.

US strikes would upend the situation, analysts say.

The Iranian foreign ministry said on Monday it has channels of communication open with Washington despite the lack of diplomatic relations.

"A direct US military intervention would fundamentally alter the trajectory of the crisis," said Grajewski.

Juneau added: "The regime is more vulnerable than it has been, domestically and geopolitically, since the worst years of the Iran-Iraq war" that lasted from 1980 to 1988.

ORGANISED OPPOSITION

The US-based son of the ousted shah, Reza Pahlavi, has taken a major role in calling for protests and pro-monarchy slogans have been common chants.

But with no real political opposition remaining inside Iran, the diaspora remains critically divided between political factions known for fighting each other as much as the Islamic Republic.

"There needs to be a leadership coalition that truly represents a broad swathe of Iranians and not just one political faction," said Azizi.

KHAMENEI'S HEALTH

Khamenei has now been in power since 1989, when he became supreme leader, a post for life, following the death of revolutionary founder Ruhollah Khomeini.

He survived the war with Israel and appeared in public on Friday to denounce the protests in a typically defiant style.

But uncertainty has long reigned over who could succeed him, with options including his shadowy but powerful son Mojtaba or power gravitating to a committee rather than an individual.

Such a scenario between the status quo and a complete change could see "a more or less formal takeover by the Revolutionary Guards", said Juneau.

SYDNEY: The director of a leading Australian writers' festival resigned in protest on Tuesday (Jan 13) after the board cancelled an appearance by a Palestinian-Australian author.

Scores of participants, including former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, have boycotted the Adelaide Festival over a decision to exclude Randa Abdel-Fattah.

Writers' Week director Louise Adler joined the exodus, blaming the "extreme and repressive efforts of pro-Israel lobbyists".

"The arts have allegedly become 'unsafe' and artists are a danger to the community's psycho-social wellbeing," she wrote in an open letter published by The Guardian newspaper.

"But let's be clear, the routine invocation of 'safety' is code for 'I don't want to hear your opinion'.

"In this instance, it appears to apply only to a Palestinian invitee."

Australia's premier annual cultural event, which lures artists from around the world, unleashed the storm last week when it told Abdel-Fattah it did not "wish to proceed" with her appearance.

Adler said the board had made this decision despite her "strongest opposition".

Abdel-Fattah has faced criticism over some statements, including a post on X in October 2024 saying: "The goal is decolonisation and the end of this murderous Zionist colony."

The festival board said it was "shocked and saddened" by the Dec 14 mass shooting at a Jewish festival on Bondi Beach, which killed 15 people, and its decision to exclude Abdel-Fattah was not taken lightly.

But the shunned author and academic said it was a "blatant and shameless act of anti-Palestinian racism".

It was a "despicable attempt to associate me with the Bondi massacre", she said in a statement.

New Zealand's Ardern on Monday joined some 180 artists and participants who have pulled out, a festival spokesperson told local media.

SYDNEY: Australia will hold a national day of mourning on Jan 22 for the 15 people killed in a mass shooting at Bondi Beach, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Tuesday (Jan 13).

"This will have a theme of: 'Light will win'," Albanese told reporters, with flags to fly at half mast across Australia.

Sajid Akram and his son Naveed allegedly targeted a Jewish Hanukkah celebration at the famous beach on Dec 14, the nation's worst mass shooting for 30 years.

The attack has sparked national soul-searching about antisemitism, anger over the failure to shield Jewish Australians from harm, and promises to stiffen gun laws.

Albanese said the "gathering of unity and remembrance" had been decided in consultation with Jewish community leaders.

"This gathering creates space to honour those who were lost, acknowledge those who were injured, and stand with their families and loved ones," said the Chabad of Bondi, which organised the Dec 14 festival.

"It is a moment to pause together, express care and solidarity, and reaffirm the values of compassion and faith that carry us forward."

Albanese last week bowed to public pressure to hold a high-powered commission inquiry into the attack.

The federal royal commission - the highest level of government inquiry - will probe everything from intelligence failures to the prevalence of antisemitism in Australia.

Victims' families penned an open letter in December urging Albanese to hold a royal commission.

"WE DEMAND ANSWERS"

"We demand answers and solutions," they wrote.

"We need to know why clear warning signs were ignored, how antisemitic hatred and Islamic extremism were allowed to dangerously grow unchecked, and what changes must be made to protect all Australians going forward."

Gunman Sajid Akram, 50, was shot and killed by police during the assault.

An Indian national, he entered Australia on a visa in 1998.

His 24-year-old son Naveed, an Australian-born citizen who remains in prison, has been charged with terrorism and 15 murders.

Police and intelligence agencies are facing difficult questions about whether they could have acted earlier.

Naveed Akram was flagged by Australia's intelligence agency in 2019 but he slipped off the radar after it decided that he posed no imminent threat.

Australia is cracking down on gun ownership and hate speech in the wake of the attack.

The government in December announced a sweeping buyback scheme to "get guns off our streets".

It is the largest gun buyback since 1996, when Australia tightened firearms laws in the wake of a mass shooting that killed 35 people at Port Arthur.

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev said Greenlanders could vote to join Russia if US President Donald Trump did not move quickly to secure the Arctic island, Interfax reported on Monday (Jan 12).

“Trump needs to hurry. According to unverified information, in a few days there could be a sudden referendum, at which the entire 55,000-strong Greenland could vote to join Russia," Interfax reported, quoting Medvedev, a former Russian president.

"And then that’s it. No new little stars on the (US) flag."

Trump has revived his push for the United States to take control of Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, arguing Washington needs to own it to deter Russia. The US president has said its location and resources make Greenland vital for national security, prompting firm objections from Denmark and Greenland.

While Russia makes no claim to Greenland, it has long monitored the island’s strategic role in Arctic security, given its position on North Atlantic routes and the presence there of a major US military and space surveillance facility.

The Kremlin has not commented on Trump's renewed push, but calling the Arctic a zone of Russia’s national and strategic interests, it said last year that it was watching the “rather dramatic” debate around Greenland closely.

Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine fractured much Arctic cooperation. As climate change opens new routes and resource prospects, the region has become more contested.

The Trump administration's decision to open a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell drew condemnation from former Fed chiefs and a chorus of criticism from key members of Trump's Republican ⁠Party on Monday (Jan 12), following an unusually sharp public rebuke from Powell calling the move a "pretext" to win presidential influence over interest rates.

The investigation, revealed late on Sunday when Powell said the Fed had received subpoenas from the US Justice Department, was approved and started by Jeanine Pirro, the US Attorney in Washington and an ally of President Donald Trump, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation.

Neither Attorney General Pam Bondi nor Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche was briefed about the decision to subpoena the Fed last week, one of the sources added.

Pirro, in a statement Monday evening, said the Justice Department took legal action because the Fed had ignored requests to discuss cost overruns in a project to renovate two historical buildings at its headquarters.

"This office makes decisions based on the merits, nothing more and nothing less," Pirro added on X.

The threat of indictment, ostensibly focused on comments Powell made to Congress about a building renovation project, sent rates on longer-term US Treasury bonds up, as investors parsed what a less independent Fed could mean for inflation and monetary policy.

If amplified, such a market reaction could constrain Trump's efforts to reshape the Fed, considered the most influential central bank in the world and ‍a cornerstone of the world financial system. A rise in long-term borrowing costs ⁠could ‍also backfire against Trump's efforts to address broad concerns about "affordability".

The independence of central banks, at least in setting rates in order to control inflation, is considered a central tenet of robust economic policy, insulating monetary policymakers from short-term political considerations and allowing them to focus on longer-term efforts to keep prices relatively stable.

On Monday, former Fed chairs Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan joined with former government economic policy leaders from both ⁠political parties in raising the alarm. 

"This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions, with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly," they wrote. 

Global central bankers, including the chiefs of the French and Canadian central banks, publicly ‍offered solidarity.

US Republican Senator Thom Tillis, a member of the Senate Banking Committee that vets presidential nominees for the Fed, called the move a "huge mistake" on Sunday and said he would oppose any Trump nominees to the Fed, including whoever is named to succeed Powell as central bank chief, "until this legal matter is fully resolved".

He was joined on Monday in condemning the development by fellow Banking Committee member Kevin Cramer and Senator Lisa Murkowski, who wrote on X that "the stakes are too high to look the other way: If the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer".

Senator Cynthia Lummis, one of Powell's more strident critics usually, on Monday said the Justice Department's use of a criminal statute looked like a "heavy lift" and that she did not see any criminal intent.

"We need this like we need a hole in the head," quipped Senator John Kennedy, also on the banking committee.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Trump on Sunday that the investigation "made a mess" and could be bad for financial markets, Axios reported on Monday, citing two sources.

The rise in longer-term ‌rates notwithstanding, market reaction was relatively muted. Gold hit a record high, and the dollar fell. Major US stock indexes notched record closing highs after gains from artificial intelligence stocks and Walmart.

"The market looks to be taking substantial reassurance from the fact that Powell’s decision to call out the attack on Fed independence has triggered a backlash in the Senate that will be reinforced by public support from ‍former Fed ‌chairs and Treasury Secretaries," wrote Evercore ISI's Krishna Guha.

Powell - who was nominated by Trump to lead the Fed in late 2017 and confirmed by the Senate to the position in early 2018 - will complete his term as Fed chief in May, but he is not obligated to leave the Washington-based Board of Governors until 2028. A number of analysts saw the latest move by the administration as adding to the chances that he will defiantly remain at the central bank.

The criminal indictment threat emerged about two weeks before Trump's effort to fire another Fed official, Governor Lisa Cook, will be argued before the Supreme Court.

Until now, Powell had avoided public disagreement with the Trump administration, Republican lawmakers had been largely silent and investors had been warily watching as the sparring match between the White House and the Fed played out during Trump's second term.

Powell's pointed response and signs of congressional pushback appear to open a new and more highly charged chapter ‌in that row, even as House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters he'd let the process "play out".

"THREATS AND ONGOING PRESSURE"

The subpoenas from the US Justice Department last week pertained to remarks Powell made to Congress last summer over cost overruns for a US$2.5 billion building renovation project at the Fed's headquarters complex in Washington, and threatened a criminal indictment.

"I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one - certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve - is above the law," Powell said.

"But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure" for lower interest rates and more broadly for greater say over the Fed, he said.

"This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress' oversight role ... Those are pretexts. The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President."

Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had no knowledge of the Justice Department's actions. "I don't know anything about it, but he's certainly not very good at the Fed, and he's not very good at building buildings," Trump said.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment on the case but added: "The Attorney General has instructed her ‌US Attorneys to prioritise investigating any abuse of taxpayer dollars."

Bill Stone, chief investment officer at wealth adviser Glenview Trust Company, described the situation as largely political theatre, noting that pressure on the Federal Reserve has a long history.

While competing political narratives are playing out, he told CNA's Asia First programme that the US legal system typically delivers the right outcome.

"We have a very good rule of law, so I expect it to be sorted, and I suspect most investors probably feel the same way," he added. 
 

SINGAPORE: At a coffee shop in Toa Payoh, a yong tau foo stall is counting down its final days. Soon, the metal shutters will come down and the broth pots drained for the last time.

What should have been a quiet, bittersweet farewell for Hup Chong Yong Tau Foo, however, became a public skirmish over words. Stomp published a critical review of the stall, finding fault in the pricing, ingredients and portion sizes. The review prompted online backlash and the family who runs the business wrote on Facebook that they were “deeply hurt”.

Had the review been of a restaurant or cafe, it might have passed with little notice. Instead, it struck a nerve precisely because it involved a hawker-run business – and one that has been operating for decades.

In Singapore, hawkers are not just food vendors. They are custodians of an everyday culture that cuts across class and generations, formally recognised by UNESCO as intangible cultural heritage.

The hawker industry is also widely understood to be hanging by a thread, sustained by long hours, gruelling labour and razor-thin profit margins. So when a review lands with the force of a takedown, it no longer reads as merely ungenerous – to some, it may feel unethical. 

The debate sparked by the Stomp article raises uncomfortable but necessary questions: Are hawkers being shielded from scrutiny that applies to every other business? Or are Singaporeans so protective of hawkers that any form of criticism feels like betrayal? Should hawker food be fair game for negative reviews – and if so, under what principles?

THE HAWKER ENTREPRENEUR PARADOX

Last year, food vlogger Lucas Neo drew criticism for a TikTok series in which he “exposed” Michelin-rated hawker stalls, questioning whether the accolades were deserved. Neo has described his approach as a corrective to a review culture where “everything is good”.

“I wanted to post something more raw, but not at the expense of the hawker going out of business,” he said in an interview.

Amid a backdrop of rising living costs, that argument has force. If people are spending hard-earned money, why shouldn’t they want frank assessments? Why should hawker stalls be exempt from the critique that applies to restaurants?

Yet, treating hawkers as ordinary entrepreneurs sits uneasily with how Singaporean society regards hawker food.

In a 2012 interview, Ravi Menon, then managing director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore, described hawker centres as offering “good quality meals at almost Third World prices”, a form of broad-based subsidy that benefits rich and poor alike. Hawkers are expected to function simultaneously as entrepreneurs and as providers of affordable social infrastructure, and those who keep prices low even as costs rise are celebrated. 

This contradiction matters. If hawkers function purely as businesses, like a typical restaurant, then criticism should be dispassionate and transactional. However, if they are also part of a shared cultural legacy, then critique carries a different weight.

This tension is keenly felt by those behind the stalls; after all, in such a fragile ecosystem, a negative review can feel less like constructive feedback and more like a hammer blow to an already weakened structure.

Reacting to Neo’s videos on Facebook, Jean Lim of Ah Hua Teochew Fishball Noodle captured the sentiment shared by many hawkers: “One careless post, one ‘honest review’ with our signboard shown, can easily crush the heart and effort we pour into this business… We hawkers don’t need pity. We just ask for fairness, respect and a little empathy.”

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT

None of this is to argue that hawkers should be immune from criticism. Bad hawker food exists. Corners are sometimes cut. Accolades are sometimes undeserved.

Honest feedback can be valuable, especially as rising costs push prices upward and expectations follow. Even a 20-cent increase can feel “exorbitant” relative to the low prices Singaporeans have long associated with hawker food. Any price hike, however modest, naturally raises expectations for quality, portion size and consistency.

But the question is not whether criticism should be allowed. It is how it is exercised and through what channels.

If feedback is genuinely offered in the spirit of improvement, the most constructive place for it may be the hawker stall itself. As with restaurants, respectfully raising an issue in the moment gives hawkers the opportunity to explain or correct a lapse without the stigma of public shaming. A disappointing meal may simply be the product of a bad day, rushed service or circumstances invisible to the diner.

Public criticism, by contrast, is often less about resolution than record. A one-star Google review or viral negative reel fixes a fleeting experience into a lasting public record that may be disproportionate to the lapse itself.

To be clear, online reviews are not without value. For hawkers operating in a competitive environment, positive reviews on platforms such as Google Maps or social media can be crucial, helping new customers discover stalls and sustaining businesses that might otherwise struggle. In that sense, reviews can, and often do, serve a public good.

EXERCISING RESTRAINT

The problem arises when the same mechanisms that amplify praise are used to broadcast disappointment with little regard for consequence. More troubling still is the erosion of accountability in today’s media landscape.

Food criticism was once the domain of professional reviewers, who brought experience, expertise, editorial oversight and journalistic integrity to their work. Today, beyond traditional media, criticism circulates across online platforms that may publish content with minimal fact-checking or editorial review.

Social media has further collapsed the distance between private opinion and public scrutiny. Anyone can broadcast their opinion – instantly, permanently and often without context.

This does not mean lowering standards or insisting that “everything is good”. It means recognising that not every disappointment requires amplification. After all, a bowl of overcooked wonton mee or a lacklustre plate of nasi lemak is rarely catastrophic. Restraint here is not cowardly withdrawal from criticism, but an awareness of one’s power over an industry already under strain.

Holding one’s pen – or tongue – is a responsibility and, in the case of hawkers, one that should be wielded with grace.

Pamelia Chia is the author of the cookbooks Wet Market to Table and PlantAsia, and writer of the Singapore Noodles newsletter.

LONDON: Play experts were dismayed this week when Lego launched Smart Bricks - blocks that play sound, light up and react to movement - at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES).

Their worry: Kids won’t use their imaginations. But the real risk is that Lego misses an opportunity to teach children robotics.

Let’s first address the question of imagination and play, which links to Lego’s trajectory as a business.

The company was founded in Denmark in 1932 as a manufacturer of wooden toys, its name derived from the Danish phrase “leg godt” or “play well”. Its interconnecting plastic blocks successfully drove sales until the early 2000s, when it faced US$800 million in debt and almost went out of business.

Lego’s saving grace came from CEO Jorgen Vig Knudstorp, who doubled down on strategic licensing partnerships with franchises like Star Wars and Harry Potter. By 2015, it had overtaken Mattel to become the world’s largest toy company and its brand partnerships became a profitable moat as copycats proliferated.

The act of play arguably paid a price, as Lego increasingly focused on complicated sets that could be displayed as a part of a collection, and were often aimed at adults.

Once upon a time, playing with Lego primarily meant raking through a tub of random rectangles, wheels and mini-figure heads to cobble together a peculiar looking house or rocket ship. Today, it also means following step-by-step instructions to complete a set, before leaving it to gather dust and picking up an iPad. Not great for stoking the imagination.

GETTING KIDS TO PLAY WITH LEGO

Any effort to get kids to actually play with their completed Lego sets is a good thing, especially when competition for their attention from screens is so fierce. And the Smart Bricks seem to work intuitively, based on the demo videos being posted from CES. 

Attach one to a US$100 Star Wars X-wing fighter and it will make whooshing sounds when you glide the toy around the room, shooting noises when you press a button and can sense when it’s been “hit” by a similarly decked out craft. The Smart Bricks include a tiny, custom-made chip, an accelerometer, light and sound sensor, LED light and miniature speaker that can play the sound of craft be fatally struck, then exploding.

Sure, these low resolution sounds will replace the pew-pew-pew’s that kids make, but in an age where screens are luring them away from imaginative play already, that’s probably more of an incentive than a hindrance to pretending.

But it would be a shame for Lego to miss the obvious opportunity it has with Smart Bricks. What if they could teach kids how to programme their own sequences of lights and sounds, and not just play Darth Vader noises? What if you could take on the role of Dr Frankenstein and build mechanical creatures that respond to touch, light and movement?

LEGO AND ROBOTICS

Lego actually made a big foray into robotics in the late 1990s with the introduction of its Mindstorms line of robot kits, which also included programmable “smart bricks”, motors and sensors for building and coding robots. The EV3, introduced in 2013, could be programmed to navigate a maze or sort objects by colour and you could get it as a blocky, humanoid figure or something more like a snake or scorpion, with a small screen and visible motors and wires.

But Mindstorms was shuttered in 2022 as Lego faced challenges from cheaper alternatives like open source favorites Raspberry Pi and Arduino. 

The company ought to revive the educational ambitions it cultivated in the late 90s by bringing back a simplified, more affordable version of the Mindstorms line, perhaps with Smart Bricks that can be modified: a version for play like the kind launched this week, and one that can be programmed through a software interface.

On top of Lego’s successful partnerships with Hollywood, how about some tie-ups with coding platforms that are being used in schools, like Scratch or Code.org? A spokesperson for Lego declined to answer questions about potential robotics efforts, and said the new line would “continue to expand and grow into the future”.

It’s encouraging to see Lego use technology to innovate on its standard bricks, which I doubt will harm kids’ imaginations. But as they grow up in an age of artificial intelligence (AI), the company could also encourage mastery over technology, a stronger familiarity with systems thinking and an ability to figure out how complex processes work from the inside out. 

They are going to need it. CES, the tech trade show where Lego announced Smart Bricks, was also dominated by humanoid robots from China that could play tennis and do Kung Fu kicks. Robots and AI will undoubtedly shape the future that today’s youngest Lego users grow up in. The company could prepare them if it decides an educational ambition is worth pursuing again - which it almost certainly is.