This imbalance has become a growing concern for those who believe that stronger support should be directed toward groups actively resisting the Iranian regime.
There is increasing frustration among observers that assistance has not reached Iranian opposition groups who are willing to challenge the regime directly.
While Kurdish forces in different regions have received backing over the years, many argue that groups opposing the regime inside or near Iran are left without the resources they need.
For critics, this raises a key question: why are those actively standing against the regime not receiving the same level of support?
In an interview reported by Israel Press, Rebaz Alizadeh—a member of the Kurdistan Future Movement—described the reality on the ground near the border between Iran and Iraq.
According to Rebaz, many of the fighters operate with extremely limited and outdated equipment. In some cases, he described weapons that are unreliable—so old or poorly maintained that they do not even function properly.
This creates a stark contrast: individuals willing to take serious risks are doing so with minimal means.
Fighting With Almost Nothing
Rebaz highlighted that members of the Kurdistan Future Movement continue to resist despite these limitations. According to him, they have engaged in guerrilla-style operations targeting regime-linked military assets, including vehicles.
What stands out is not just the resistance itself, but the imbalance:
On one side, a heavily equipped state
On the other, small groups relying on outdated tools. Their actions reflect determination—but also underline how difficult their situation is. Another challenge mentioned by Rebaz is the difficulty of obtaining supplies.
He pointed to political dynamics in the region, claiming that certain groups or actors have aligned themselves in ways that make it harder for opposition movements to access resources. This adds another layer of complexity, where politics—not just logistics—limits support.
For those following the situation, this raises an uncomfortable issue. There are individuals and groups willing to stand up against the Iranian regime, yet they lack even basic support. At the same time, assistance is being directed elsewhere, leading to questions about priorities and strategy.
The situation described by Rebaz Alizadeh reflects a deeper imbalance. It is not only about weapons or resources—it is about recognition and support for those who are already risking everything.
Whether one agrees with their methods or not, their existence highlights a reality: opposition to the Iranian regime is active, but unevenly supported.
For policymakers, this presents a difficult but important question—how to balance strategy, ethics, and long-term stability in a region where every decision carries consequences.
