In a letter published this month by Kalema, a website close to Iranian reformists, the leader of Iran’s Green Movement, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, raised two critical questions that have preoccupied the minds of a large number of Iranians. The first question posed by Mousavi, who has been under house arrest for more than a decade, concerned Iran’s interventions in regional countries. Perhaps no one from among Iran’s elite has raised this question with a high degree of criticism, analysis and examination. The second question was related to the possible identity of Ali Khamenei’s successor, with Mousavi indicating that the supreme leader’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, is being groomed to succeed his father. The letter also effectively thwarted the regime’s narrative about popular protests in the Arab world. Mousavi believes that the so-called Arab Spring was a continuation of the 2009 Green Movement protests in Iran. The arrests of Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi were motivated by the regime’s fear that the Arab Spring would spread to Iran, threatening its legitimacy. This assertion is diametrically opposed to the narrative of the Iranian regime, which claims that the Arab Spring was a continuation of the so-called Islamic Awakening that began in Iran in 1979. Mousavi believes that, by spreading this narrative, the regime hoped to stop the Arab Spring from spilling over into Iran, divert its internal crises outwards and achieve extraterritorial objectives. Mousavi’s questioning is in line with Iranian dissatisfaction with the regime’s regional policies. This is reflected in the slogans chanted by Iranian protesters against Iran’s support for armed proxies in the Arab world, while the Iranian people suffer from deteriorating socioeconomic conditions. In his letter, Mousavi called for the mounting popular anger to be taken advantage of in an attempt to change the direction of the revolution’s compass. His letter came at a time when Iran faces major challenges both at home and abroad. It appears that Mousavi is aware of the critical juncture facing the Iranian regime and is attempting to reunite the Iranian street behind the Green Movement. The former prime minister has attempted to reflect the aspirations of the Iranian people, as well as of the other peoples in the region. He also distances himself from Iran’s confessional and sectarian affiliations by reiterating that the people have the right to choose the political system that best serves their interests. Mousavi also presents a radically different approach to Iranian foreign policy, one based on respecting national autonomy, sovereignty and the will of the people. He also warned against appointing Mojtaba Khamenei as his father’s successor. Mousavi noted that “news about a succession conspiracy has been circulating in Iran for the past 13 years.” If the Khamenei family is not interested in succession, he asked, then why don’t they come out and deny such reports even once? Of course, the issue of the supreme leader’s successor is complicated and may be linked to influential apparatuses such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Assembly of Experts. Mousavi’s warning suggests that the issue is being discussed within Khamenei’s inner circle. Mojtaba harbors ambitions of replacing his father, especially given his extensive clout within the regime’s most powerful decision-making circles. Concerning Iran’s subversive role in the region, Mousavi provided a very important high-level acknowledgement that Iran is responsible for the current abysmal situation in parts of the Arab world, especially where uprisings have occurred, such as in Syria and Yemen. In Mousavi’s view, Iran’s regime sought to deprive the revolutionary Arab movement — seeking freedom and justice — of its essence. He said the results are a tragedy: War in Syria; millions of displaced people; hundreds of thousands of casualties; infamy for the Lebanese Hezbollah; the emergence of Daesh; a war in Yemen; and Arab countries building strong ties with Israel. He asserts that Iran used religious justifications, such as defending “holy shrines,” to deploy fighters to Syria. These fighters went on to commit the most heinous crimes. They butchered children and other innocent people to consolidate Bashar Assad’s regime. The Tehran regime used the same approach at home, naming notorious thugs it used to attack young protesters with lethal weapons as “basira” (vision). The term “shrine defender” — used to describe the militias deployed at some religious shrines in Syria — bears military connotations centered on extraterritorial insurgency and strong Shiite sectarian symbolism. The IRGC’s Imam Hossein HQ is the most important center for coordinating and providing training for the so-called shrine defenders. In addition, it directs the wars in Syria and Iraq.