Over the last few years, diaspora activism has increasingly been framed as a moral and political obligation, often through appeals to "be the voice" of those inside Iran 1. People living in Iran are better positioned to determine their political future than Iranians in diaspora. Self-determination requires witnessing and living the consequences of your actions. In some cases, the self-appointed leader of a future Iran has been portrayed as the indispensable leader who should liberate Iranians living under economic hardship and repressive political conditions 2. This framework is deeply troubling and comes with a cost. This process is partly rooted in the paradoxical state of living at a distance.
The paradoxical situation of the diaspora community
People in the diaspora live with a strange contradiction. They may have left Iran for many different reasons: prosperity, political freedom, and most importantly, personal growth. However, they may long for their hometown and feel the urge to act for their loved ones and compatriots in Iran. This contradiction does not stop here.
Diaspora communities, in many cases, have the freedom to organize to some extent and influence policymakers. However, they will not live with the consequences of those policies. The people inside Iran do. But this does not stop them from taking political action.
Action matters since it brings people material gain, enables them to express their identity, and allows them to feel a sense of autonomy and agency. A worker may join unions to raise the minimum wage and have more time off. A woman may protest to have access to abortion or free childcare. A person in the diaspora acts for different reasons. Some live with a strong moral discomfort and find political activism to be a refuge from that feeling.
Living outside Iran for several years comes with contradictory feelings. For the most part, a person may carry a lingering sense of responsibility toward the people they left behind. Here lies a contradiction between self-growth and care for others. How does a person in the diaspora care? Some solely focus on their family. They may transfer money to their loved ones who are struggling under inhumane sanctions and financial strain. They may dream of bringing their immediate family members together and pursuing the American dream as a family.
There is another group that goes beyond caring for their families, as if their friends, neighbors, and hometown seek their attention as well. They cannot uplift the economic situation of an entire city or even their childhood neighborhood. There is one solution left: collective actions.
Does diaspora politics bring democracy?
Over the past decade, particularly after the implementation of the maximum pressure campaign by the U.S. government 3, Iran has faced multiple nationwide uprisings with extensive material and psychological impacts on people's lives. The protests have usually diffused beyond Iran's borders, from Berlin and Paris to Toronto and LA. Furious Iranians in diaspora with deep grievances did their best to bring a better future for us. It was their best, but was it helpful?
Things have not significantly progressed since then. Those protests have not delivered or even come close to achieving their political goals. It instead gave some Iranians in diaspora an opportunity to ease their moral discomfort and believe that their actions were consequential in bringing freedom and prosperity for their homeland, as if we, the residents of Iran, cannot do the same for ourselves, as if they are the only able bodies left with agency and have the mission to envision and deliver a better future for Iranians inside Iran. Diaspora voices often displaced voices inside Iran.
The problem emerges when emotional responsibility transforms into political representation; when diaspora actors begin speaking not only alongside people inside Iran, but on their behalf. As a result, in the past decade, some grievances expressed by diaspora actors were appropriated by right-wing U.S. politicians and policy advocates in Washington to reinforce existing arguments for maximum pressure and regime change 4.
I am in no place to judge the intentions of the diaspora communities as they are a huge diverse group of people coming from different backgrounds. Those who were collectively chanting for a better future and rooting for self-proclaimed leaders might be innocent from deep heart, but their actions had real consequences for civilians of Iran.
Careless collective actions may bring more harm than political indifference
Instead of supporting and enabling the voices from the ground, a segment of the diaspora amplified a few of its most influential figures who advocated for policies—including intensified sanctions and military actions—that were ultimately borne by people living inside Iran 5. So how can a person in diaspora have meaningful and moral political action?
Here is my advice to those who have not had the opportunity in recent years to return and witness what life looks like in Iran today: take a step back, listen, read, and engage seriously with the experiences of those who remain. Political solidarity cannot be built only on distance, assumptions, or the voices of those who speak on behalf of others.
The diaspora can contribute to a democratic future not by leading from a distance, but by becoming a genuine ally: supporting, amplifying, and standing alongside those who live with the consequences of the choices being made.
Mojtaba Kashani is a researcher working on social movements, war, and diaspora politics. Having lived in the United States and Canada for several years, he holds master’s degrees in Sociology and Global Affairs. His work examines how diaspora communities engage in political action and influence U.S. foreign policy.