A government that shoots peaceful protesters cannot claim moral authority
In the opening days of 2026, the streets of Tehran became a theater of defiance and dread, as Iranians who had endured economic collapse found themselves facing the full machinery of state repression. At least 65 lives had already been lost since protests erupted in late December, and Supreme Leader Khamenei — framing the uprising as a foreign conspiracy — authorized a crackdown that his own judiciary promised would be merciless. Into this volatile moment stepped Donald Trump with threats of military strikes, and Crown Prince Pahlavi with calls for Western intervention, transforming a domestic crisis of legitimacy into a flashpoint with the gravity of international war.
- With the internet severed and phone lines cut, Iran's government moved to erase the protests from the world's sight even as thousands gathered around bonfires in Tehran's neighborhoods, their chants audible but their faces hidden from global cameras.
- The judiciary's vow of 'decisive, maximum' punishment and state media's labeling of protesters as 'terrorists' signaled that the regime was preparing to escalate from detention to mass lethal force against its own citizens.
- Supreme Leader Khamenei dismissed the uprising as a performance staged for an American president, while Trump countered with threats of military strikes — two aging men trading ultimatums over the bodies of young Iranians in the streets.
- Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, heir to the dynasty the Revolution erased, called Iranians to the streets at a precise hour and then appealed to Washington to intervene, injecting the specter of monarchy and foreign military action into an already combustible moment.
- Germany, Britain, and France issued a joint condemnation, Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi challenged the regime's moral authority, but the information blackout meant the true scale of the killing remained unknown — and likely by design.
- Despite security forces warning families to keep children indoors, the demonstrations resumed Friday night, fires burning in northern Tehran, voices cutting through the darkness — a people cut off from the world but not from their own resolve.
On a Friday night in early January, Tehran's streets filled with bonfires and chanting even as the government had severed the nation's internet and cut international phone lines. Videos smuggled out by activists showed thousands gathering across the capital, their demands simple and radical: the theocracy must go. What had begun weeks earlier as protests over economic collapse had grown into the most serious challenge to Iran's government in years — and it was now unfolding under an explicit threat of lethal force.
At least 65 people had died since the demonstrations erupted in late December, and more than 2,300 had been detained. Iran's judiciary chief promised punishment that would be 'decisive, maximum and without any legal leniency,' while state media began calling the protesters 'terrorists' — a designation that has historically preceded the worst violence. Standing before supporters at his compound, 86-year-old Supreme Leader Khamenei accused the demonstrators of destroying their own cities to please an American president, as the crowd responded with chants of 'Death to America.'
Trump made his position equally stark: he would strike Iran militarily if the government killed more protesters, promising action that would hit Iran 'very, very hard where it hurts' but stop short of ground troops. The threat carried unusual weight given the US military's recent seizure of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela. Meanwhile, Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi — son of the shah who fled before the 1979 Revolution — called Iranians to the streets at a specific hour on Thursday night, and neighborhoods erupted on cue. People chanted 'Death to the dictator' and, remarkably, words of support for the shah that had once carried a death sentence. Pahlavi then called on Trump to intervene directly, saying Khamenei intended to use the blackout to 'murder these young heroes.'
Western governments condemned the crackdown in a joint statement, and Iranian Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi challenged what she called the regime's false claim to moral authority. But the internet shutdown made it nearly impossible to know the full scale of the violence — which, as analysts noted, was precisely the point. 'This is exactly why the internet was shut down: to prevent the world from seeing the protests,' said Holly Dagres of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. 'Unfortunately, it also likely provided cover for security forces to kill protesters.'
On Friday night, despite warnings from security services that families should keep their children home, the demonstrations restarted. Fires burned in the streets of northern Tehran. A man's voice cut through the darkness: 'Death to Khamenei.' The government had drawn its line. The protesters had drawn theirs. And the distance between them was measured, now, in lives.
The streets of Tehran filled with fire and chanting on a Friday night in early January, even as Iran's government had severed the nation from the internet and cut off international phone lines. Videos smuggled out by activists showed thousands gathering around bonfires in neighborhoods across the capital, their voices carrying demands that the theocracy step down. The demonstrations had begun weeks earlier over economic collapse, but they had become something larger—the most serious challenge to Iran's government in years, and now they were happening under a threat of lethal force.
At least 65 people had already died since the protests erupted in late December. More than 2,300 had been detained. On Friday, Iran's judiciary chief promised that punishment for the demonstrators would be "decisive, maximum and without any legal leniency." The state media had begun calling the protesters "terrorists," a designation that historically preceded the worst violence. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, 86 years old, stood before supporters at his compound in Tehran and accused the demonstrators of destroying their own cities to please an American president. "He should pay attention to the state of his own country instead," Khamenei said of Donald Trump, whose name drew chants of "Death to America!" from the crowd.
Trump had made his position clear: he would strike Iran militarily if the government killed more protesters. "I tell the Iranian leaders you better not start shooting because we'll start shooting too," he said, adding that any American action would hit Iran "very, very hard where it hurts" but would not involve ground troops. The threat carried weight given that the US military had recently seized Venezuela's former president, Nicolás Maduro, in a raid that had shocked the region. Trump claimed that Iranians were already taking control of cities that had seemed impossible to challenge weeks before. "Iran's in big trouble," he said.
The protests had found a new focal point in Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, whose father had fled Iran just before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. On Thursday night at 8 p.m., Pahlavi called for Iranians to take to the streets. When the hour came, neighborhoods erupted. People chanted "Death to the dictator!" and "Death to the Islamic Republic!" Some shouted in support of the shah—a remarkable shift in a country where such words had once carried a death sentence. Pahlavi then called on Trump to intervene, saying Khamenei "wants to use this blackout to murder these young heroes." Whether the protesters were genuinely calling for a return to monarchy or simply expressing rage at the current system remained unclear, but the symbolism was unmistakable: the Islamic Republic faced a legitimacy crisis.
Western governments moved to distance themselves from the crackdown. Germany's chancellor, Britain's prime minister, and France's president issued a joint statement condemning the reported killings and urging Iran to allow its citizens to speak freely. Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate, called on more Western nations to denounce the theocracy. "A government that shoots peaceful protesters at home cannot claim moral authority anywhere," she said, challenging what she called romantic myths about the regime's role as a defender of the oppressed abroad.
Yet the internet blackout made it nearly impossible to know the full scale of what was happening. State television claimed the Thursday night protests had been violent and caused casualties, reporting deaths in the city of Hamedan and among security forces in Qom, but offered no nationwide figures. Activists said the shutdown was designed to hide the violence from the world and to prevent the coordination that social media had enabled. "This is exactly why the internet was shut down: to prevent the world from seeing the protests," said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "Unfortunately, it also likely provided cover for security forces to kill protesters."
On Friday night, despite the warnings from security services that families should keep their children home, the demonstrations restarted. Videos showed fires burning in streets, thousands gathering in the Saadat Abad area of northern Tehran. A man's voice cut through the darkness: "Death to Khamenei!" The government had drawn a line. The judiciary had promised punishment without mercy. Trump had promised military strikes. And the Iranian people, cut off from the world but not from each other, continued to pour into the streets.
Citações Notáveis
A government that shoots peaceful protesters at home cannot claim moral authority anywhere.— Shirin Ebadi, Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate
I tell the Iranian leaders you better not start shooting because we'll start shooting too.— President Donald Trump
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did the internet shutdown matter so much if people were still protesting anyway?
Because it prevented the world from seeing what was happening, and it gave security forces cover to act without documentation. The videos that did escape came from activists risking their lives to share them. Without the internet, there's no coordination, no real-time awareness of where the danger is.
The Supreme Leader blamed Trump for the protests. Do you think that's accurate?
It's a convenient narrative for him. The protests started over Iran's economy, which has been failing for years. But Trump's public pledges to intervene militarily—that did give the protesters something they didn't have before: the possibility of external support. Whether that actually changed people's calculations is harder to say.
Crown Prince Pahlavi is calling for intervention. Does he have real support among the protesters, or is he just inserting himself?
That's the question no one can answer right now. Some protesters are chanting for the shah, but whether that's genuine nostalgia for monarchy or just a symbol of "anything but this" is unclear. Pahlavi is positioning himself as a leader, but the internet blackout means we can't see how much of the movement actually follows him.
What happens if Trump actually does strike Iran?
That's the real danger. It would transform a domestic uprising into an international conflict. It would likely rally Iranians around their government out of national defense, even if they hate the regime. It would also destabilize the entire region in ways that are hard to predict.
Is there any precedent for how this ends?
Iran has crushed protests before, sometimes brutally. But the scale of this one, the involvement of a foreign power making military threats, the internet shutdown itself—these are all signs that the government feels genuinely threatened. That's when things become unpredictable.