**
As protests erupt across Iran, sparked by economic despair and political oppression, a significant discourse has emerged regarding the potential for US intervention. Iranian citizens, both within the country and abroad, are grappling with the implications of foreign involvement in their struggle for freedom and dignity. Amidst the chaos, personal narratives reveal a multifaceted view of what intervention could mean for a nation in turmoil.
Protests and Personal Stories
In early January, a couple from Washington, DC, Mojdeh and her husband, found themselves caught in the turbulence of Tehran’s unrest. Initially intended as a brief family visit, their trip transformed into a harrowing experience as protests intensified and flights were grounded. “Life was on pause,” Mojdeh noted, recalling nights when the internet and phone networks fell silent. Despite their intentions to avoid involvement, they were drawn into the upheaval, witnessing firsthand the streets filled with demonstrators and security forces seemingly overwhelmed by the crowds. The couple’s experience encapsulates the desperation felt by many Iranians as calls for regime change echoed throughout the nation.
The protests, ignited by economic instability and a plummeting currency, quickly morphed into a broader demand for the end of the Islamic Republic. The Iranian government’s response has been brutal, with reports of fatalities difficult to verify due to a near-total internet blackout and restricted independent journalism. Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) has reported over 6,000 deaths, while Norway-based Iran Human Rights estimates the figure could exceed 25,000. In stark contrast, Iranian authorities claim around 3,117 fatalities, predominantly among security forces and bystanders, attributing the violence to “rioters.”
Diverging Perspectives on Foreign Intervention
The question of US intervention divides the Iranian diaspora. Shirin, an Iranian-American from California, advocates for international action, arguing that without intervention, the cycle of violence will persist. “When the head of the snake is not cut off, the venom spreads,” she asserted, highlighting the broader implications of inaction. However, this sentiment is not universally shared; many express concern over the potential repercussions of foreign military involvement.
Roozbeh Farahanipour, a former political prisoner and current restaurant owner in Los Angeles, voiced trepidation regarding US intervention. He emphasised that while global support is essential, the change must originate from within Iran. “The greatest power relies in unity and mass public mobilisation,” he stated, advocating for an internal collapse of the regime rather than reliance on external forces.
A Call for Targeted Action
Ali, another Iranian expatriate, has shifted his views over the years. Once hopeful for reform within the Iranian political landscape, he now believes that significant change cannot occur without external pressure. While he does not endorse an outright invasion, he advocates for targeted strikes against key regime infrastructure, stressing that such actions could be justified if requested by the Iranian people themselves. “Many of my contacts in Iran want some form of US intervention,” he explained. This sentiment reflects a growing frustration with the regime’s brutality and a belief that without intervention, the status quo will remain unaltered.
Hemad Nazari, an activist and photographer who fled Iran in 2015, echoes this urgency. He has developed a network to share accounts from Iran amidst ongoing protests and internet restrictions. “They say, ‘we went to the streets. We got killed. There is no other way,’” he recounted, underscoring the stark reality faced by many.
Ongoing Repression and Human Rights Concerns
Despite a reduction in visible protests, repression persists in Iran. Human Rights (IHRNGO) estimates that over 40,000 individuals have been arrested since the protests began, with many subjected to harsh conditions and denied legal representation. Reports indicate that security forces are targeting medical facilities, detaining staff who assisted injured demonstrators. Although Iranian officials deny these claims, the atmosphere of fear and suspicion continues to overshadow the nation.
As the situation remains precarious, the debate surrounding US intervention has shifted from a theoretical discussion to a matter of profound emotional weight for many. Shirin encapsulated the sentiment felt by countless Iranians, stating, “It’s painful—not just for our family, but for 90 million people we’re worried about.”
Why it Matters
The discourse surrounding US intervention in Iran highlights the complex interplay of hope, fear, and the desire for change among Iranians. As protests continue, the international community faces the challenge of balancing support for the Iranian people’s aspirations with the potential consequences of intervention. The stakes are high, not only for Iran but for global stability, as the outcome of this struggle could reverberate far beyond its borders. With every passing day, the urgency for a resolution grows, underscoring the necessity for a thoughtful and strategic approach to the crisis at hand.
