Ayatollah Khomeini argued that the Islamic Republic was the living embodiment of Prophet Muhammad’s earthly mission, and so its preservation had to be prioritized above all else. Otherwise, Islam itself would disappear.

During the controversial 2009 presidential election, for example, where vote rigging gave Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term, it was reported that Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, a prominent, hard-line cleric, issued a fatwa permitting the faithful to miscount votes. Given this guiding theological-political principle, virtually any abuse can be justified for reasons of the state.

Third-world nationalism, rooted in a strong anti-imperialist framework, has also been an enduring feature of the Islamic Republic. This theme has been elevated in recent years because of continuing tensions with the United States and Europe and a growing crisis of legitimacy, as Iranian society becomes more secular. Iran deflects criticism of its egregious human rights record by leveling the charge of hypocrisy at its chief critics in the United States and Europe. Western double standards in the Israel-Palestine conflict, President Trump’s embrace of Middle East tyrants and Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, feature prominently in this narrative.

And then there is the regime’s model of neo-Stalinist repression, replete with imprisonment of dissidents, assassinations, torture, forced television confessions, censorship and state propaganda. During the recent protests, for example, the family of a slain protester was informed that if they spoke to the media, the authorities would “dig up his body and take it away.” At its core, Iran remains a police state.

Nevertheless, nonviolent civil resistance comes from many quarters. Religious reformers and dissident clerics — their authority stemming from the 1990s, when a widely popular, modernist reading of Islam was suppressed — have led part of the resistance to Iran’s human rights crisis.

They have been joined by women, labor activists, teachers, students, artists, lawyers — all those who have not been cowed by arguments that the only form of injustice facing Iranians derives from American foreign policy. Four decades of clerical rule in Iran have shaped an authoritarian reality that cannot be whitewashed any longer.

There is also the international context to consider. President Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement and the sanctions against Iran have deeply exacerbated the human rights crisis. The sanctions have strengthened the hard-liners, disproportionately affected the average citizen and undermined the work of human rights and democracy activists.

The response by those outside of Iran who support human rights should be twofold: Keep the spotlight on Iran, while also restraining the predatory impulses of the Trump administration and its regional allies who seek a military conflict. While internal repression has reached new heights, further deterioration is possible, notwithstanding the bloody days of November.

Nader Hashemi is the director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.