In an Iran threatened by Trump, protests are spreading and challenging the regime.

BeirutIran has faced this Friday The fourteenth consecutive day of protests in a context of an almost total internet and mobile phone blackoutwhich has become the regime's main instrument for containing a mobilization that, despite repression, shows no signs of waning. Informationally isolated from the outside world, the country is experiencing one of the most tense phases of social unrest in recent years.

On Thursday night, the regime reinforced its information control strategy with a widespread communications blackout that reduced connectivity to historic lows, according to international monitors. The official objective is to curb the "coordination of disturbances," but the blackout prevents the documentation of abuses and weakens the protests.

A few hours later, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei hardened his tone. In a speech broadcast by state media, he accused the protesters of acting in the service of foreign powers, with explicit references to the United States and President Donald Trump, and asserted that the state "will not back down." The Supreme National Security Council defended the use of "exceptional" measures, thus consolidating a response based on force and control.

The protests continue

On the ground, however, containment is incomplete. Protests persist in Tehran, Mashhad, Isfahan, Shiraz, Zahedan, and several predominantly Kurdish areas in the west. The demonstrations, often held at night, combine anti-regime slogans, the burning of official symbols, business closures, and clashes with security forces. Universities and outlying neighborhoods remain key focal points, despite the deployment of police and units linked to the Revolutionary Guard.

The human toll remains uncertain. Human rights organizations and independent monitoring networks estimate between 40 and 45 deaths since the protests began, including minors, and more than 2,000 arrests. The use of live ammunition, rubber bullets, and tear gas has been documented, as well as arrests in hospitals and pressure on medical personnel to identify injured protesters. The lack of official data and the information blackout prevent full verification.

The immediate trigger for the crisis has been economic. The rapid depreciation of the rial, persistent inflation, and the erosion of purchasing power drove thousands of Iranians—from all sectors of society—into the streets in late December. However, as in previous cycles of protests, the material discontent has evolved into a broader political response, with slogans that directly challenge the ruling elites and the political system. Among the opposition in exile, Prince Reza Pahlavi, the Shah's grandson, has called for continued mobilization and civil disobedience. In a message published this Friday on X, he warned of repression and a communications blackout and asked President Trump to intervene to protect the protesters; he asserted that international pressure has temporarily contained the violence, but that "time is critical" to prevent further deaths. Unlike previous episodes, the current movement is notable for its territorial and social reach. It's not limited to large urban centers or a single generational group. Students, shopkeepers, precarious workers, and impoverished sectors participate simultaneously, without a hierarchical structure or visible leadership.

The US and Israel are watching closely.

On the international stage, the crisis is being closely followed by Washington and Jerusalem, albeit with differing interpretations. For the United States, the protests reopen the dilemma between rhetorical pressure and non-intervention. The Trump administration condemned the repression and defended the right to demonstrate, but is avoiding any gesture that could reinforce the Iranian narrative of foreign interference, aware that more visible involvement could legitimize an escalation of repression. However, Trump stated that he would take action against the regime if it excessively repressed the protesters. For Israel, the internal instability in Iran introduces an additional variable at a time of high regional tension. While Israeli authorities are refraining from direct pronouncements on the protests, they are closely observing any weakening of the Iranian regime that could affect their regional policy, particularly Tehran's support for armed actors in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza. At the same time, a more aggressive reaction from the Iranian regime, internally or externally, could translate into a hardening of its strategic stance toward Israel.

Fourteen days later, the standoff continues. The regime is betting on isolation, deterrence, and force, while the protesters maintain a capacity for resistance that challenges traditional mechanisms of control. Beyond its duration, the mobilization raises the question of to what extent a political system strengthened by its apparatus of control can withstand a social challenge that goes beyond economic issues and calls into question its legitimacy.