Shafaq News
Political pressure in Iran has
traditionally emerged from street demonstrations, but the current protest wave
began at Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, the country’s main commercial center, where
traders, shop owners, and business figures took to the streets over a collapsing
currency and rapidly shifting prices.
The protests, in more than 20 provinces,
began in the heart of the economy, rather than on university campuses, driven
by frustration over the sharp decline of the Iranian rial and rising living
costs that consumers can no longer keep pace with. While the movement remains
largely focused on economic grievances, with some political slogans emerging,
it has seen localized clashes and limited violence, with reports so far of six
casualties in several areas, including Ali Azizi, a member of the security
forces. However, it has not developed into a broader confrontation with the
authorities, unlike the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests, during which human rights
groups reported more than 500 deaths.
The crisis also took on an international
dimension after US President Donald Trump warned of possible intervention if
peaceful protesters were killed, shifting the debate from bread and exchange
rates to questions of power, legitimacy, and deterrence.
Iran’s economy has played a central role
rather than serving as a backdrop. The country of about 92 million people has
seen its currency lose nearly half its value in 2025. Inflation reached around
42.5 percent in December, reducing salaries to figures that lag far behind
market reality.
The rial slid to successive record levels
and subsequent reports indicated deeper declines, with panic-driven trading
pushing the rate to around 145,000 per dollar, the weakest level in modern
Iranian history.
The impact has extended beyond poorer households.
Importers, wholesalers, retailers, and business owners require exchange rates
they can anticipate, even for a short period. In a system where economic
continuity depends on access to dollars, the bazaar has become an immediate
reflection of politics, sanctions, and conflict.
Read more: Iran’s post-war strategy: Dual voices, unified deterrence
Sanctions and Prolonged Pressure
Many Iranians connect the current moment
to decisions taken years earlier. The currency traded around 55,000 per US
dollar in 2018, the year the United States reinstated wide-ranging sanctions
following its withdrawal from the nuclear agreement, limiting oil exports and
access to foreign currency.
Tensions later intensified following
military escalation between Iran and Israel, often referred to as the 12-day
war. Since June 2025, international reports have pointed to tighter internal
security measures, including arrests and heightened controls in border regions,
particularly Kurdish areas.
The consequences went beyond security.
Prices rose, trade activity slowed, and local investors grew increasingly
concerned that renewed conflict could disrupt supply chains or close additional
financial channels.
Washington Catalyzes the Crisis
Against this backdrop, Washington became a
prominent external voice. Trump warned, and Iranian officials firmly rejected
his remarks.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said
protesters’ economic demands were legitimate, but added that violent elements
should be stopped. He accused “agitators and mercenaries linked to hostile
forces of operating behind traders and chanting slogans hostile to Islam and
Iran.”
We will bring the enemy to its knees.
— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) January 3, 2026
Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme
National Security Council, warned that any US intervention would destabilize
the region.
Iranian police said protests were
expanding and becoming more violent, warning of the risk of an armed uprising,
according to the Fars News Agency.
Inside the leadership, two tones emerged.
President Masoud Pezeshkian acknowledged government failures and called for
dialogue on the economic crisis. Other officials focused on threats, warnings,
and claims of foreign interference.
Mark Kimmitt, a former assistant secretary
at the US Departments of Defense and State, told Shafaq News that President
Donald Trump’s remarks should be read “as an expression of moral support rather
than a signal of readiness to use force.”
From a partisan perspective, Republican
figure Rob Arlett, who previously managed Trump’s campaign in Delaware,
described the statements as rooted in values, “presenting freedom of expression
in contrast to state repression.”
At the academic level, Todd Belt of George
Washington University warned that the comments could instead justify Iranian
authorities to depict protesters as aligned with Western interests, noting that
demonstrators have historically placed little trust in US backing.
Focusing on the internal dynamics of
power, the Associate Dean of the College of Public Affairs at the University of
Baltimore, Ivan Sascha Sheehan, said the message was directed more toward
Iran’s ruling elite than toward protesters themselves, suggesting that
Washington no longer treats the survival of the religious system as inevitable
or open to reform.
He emphasized that the unrest remains
domestically driven, shaped by deprivation, repression, and unfulfilled
promises, and cautioned that foreign agendas risk distorting its core message.
From a strategic policy standpoint, Paolo
von Schirach, president of the Global Policy Institute, questioned the logic of
intervention without defined goals, arguing that “military force offers no
clear answer to a crisis rooted in prices, livelihoods, and daily economic
pressures rather than military infrastructure.”
Inside Iran, analyst Saeed Shawardi
described Trump’s remarks as overt interference and hollow threats. He said
Trump is widely unpopular among Iranians due to the US withdrawal from the
nuclear deal and the sanctions that followed, warning that “acting on such
threats could trigger broad regional escalation and attacks on US interests.”
Regional Signals and Uncertain Path
During the unrest, reports emerged about
the detention of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a close ally of Iran in
Latin America, by US forces. The move was widely interpreted as a message to
Washington’s adversaries, including Iran, and was viewed similarly in Israel.
Posting on X, Israeli opposition leader
Yair Lapid warned Iran’s leadership “to pay close attention to developments in
Venezuela.”
The regime in Iran should pay close attention to what is happening in Venezuela
— יאיר לפיד – Yair Lapid (@yairlapid) January 3, 2026
Amichai Chikli, the Diaspora Minister,
said that the deposing and indicting of Maduro delivered a blow to the “global
axis of evil” and sent a “clear message” to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei.
These statements came after reports from
late December 2025 and early January 2026 indicated that Prime Minister
Netanyahu discussed a “round two” of strikes on Iran with Trump to
prevent Tehran from rebuilding nuclear and missile capabilities destroyed in
previous conflicts.
Iran now faces a protest wave unfolding
under exceptional conditions, following five major protest movements since
2009. Whether the convergence of events is viewed as chance or design, the
country now moves into a new trajectory marked by difficulties comparable to
its past crises.
Read more: Zero-sum game: Can the Iran-Israel conflict push Iraq toward frontline?
Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.
