Within the past couple of days there has been a mini-storm regarding an interview given by Robert Malley to French TV station TV5 Monde in November 2019. The entire panel discussion (in French, available in Europe) can be seen here: https://newsvideo.su/video/14097833 

Much of the criticism of Malley's remarks has come from the playing of a very small snippet of the almost 20-minute roundtable. To be clear: Malley did not defend Iran's response to the protests, as claimed by some. I'm posting a recapitulation of his remarks:

Programme first addresses the situation in Iraq. Malley comments that situation can be read as revolt against Iran, but also says that Iraqis are protesting against system that was imposed by the US.

From IR perspective, there are offensive and defensive reasons for presence in Iraq. Mentions war with Iraq under Saddam, need to ensure that Iraq not a threat, economic factors and need to ensure that Iran is not isolated in the context of maximum pressure. Same true of Lebanon.

Then asked by presenter whether Iran's SL is correct that the US has been behind efforts to destabilise Iran. Malley remarks that situation in Iran considerably worsened after sanctions imposed by (former) President Trump after the US' exit from the JCPOA.

Malley then describes already very-tense relationship between the US and Iran. Combination of all sources of tension could lead to military confrontation between the two countries. Iran has already reacted to pressure within the region (attack against KSA oil facilities in July).

Asked by presenter about his assessment of IR state of mind: What is happening only confirms Iran's paranoia - and remarks that sometimes paranoid people are right. Iran is convinced that there is a plot where the US, KSA and Israel are doing everything possible to weaken it.

This is their reading of the situation and they are willing to react brutally (referring to protests). Iran's power in the region has always been based on the weakness of their adversaries. (Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria).

Now that Iran or its allies are in command in these countries, the weakness of their adversaries doesn't play the same role, and they are confronted with discontent that they don't know how to address.

Asked whether the US exit from the JCPOA was a turning point? Malley: key moment in history of the region, US under Obama wanted to de-escalate in the region, current US Administration thinks that Obama was wrong.

On the contrary, Trump Administration wants to asphyxiate Iran and prevent it from having enough money to pursue its regional strategy and so that Iran is faced with discontent in the countries (like Iraq) where it has influence. But this is a dangerous game.

Presenter asks whether following protests, survival of Iranian regime itself is put into question? Malley - don't think it is likely - authorities have many more means of repression than protestors have ability to protest. Iran responded to protests very quickly and harshly.

Is regime less stable than it appears? Less stable, and at all costs wants to prevent that protests re-occur, because it knows that Iran is in a weak economic state and because it thinks there is a plot lead by the US President for regime change in Iran.

Finally asked whether developments in the region could leave Iran as the loser: Responds that people need to see everything in its proper perspective: Iran continues to have very important sources of power in Lebanon and Iraq.

The risk is that Iran could grow to believe that if it is to suffer as a result of the current obstacles it faces as a result of US policy, other countries in the region should also suffer.