Grief, rage, solidarity: Iranians under fire, out of sight
The war may have begun as a clash between Israel and the Islamic Republic, but for many Iranians now caught in the crossfire, it has become an intimate reality, marked by both grief and rare solidarity.
Iranians across social media are offering shelter, food, and medical help. Families far from the strikes are hosting refugees, doctors are providing free virtual consultations, and volunteers are caring for the elderly, infirm, and even abandoned pets.
Israeli airstrikes have hit Tehran and other cities with little or no notice, drawing criticism from many Iranians and some international observers.
The war may have begun as a clash between Israel and the Islamic Republic, but for many Iranians now caught in the crossfire, it has become an intimate reality, marked by both grief and rare solidarity.
In the wake of mass evacuations from Tehran and other cities, a wave of grassroots support has emerged.
Iranians across social media are offering shelter, food, and medical help. Families far from the strikes are hosting refugees, doctors are providing free virtual consultations, and volunteers are caring for the elderly, infirm, and even abandoned pets.
“This is the least I can do now,” wrote Yasser Saiedy, an Iranian cardiologist based in Germany, offering remote consultations on X.
Others share stories of restraint—people letting others buy bread first, rationing water, making sure no one is left behind. Acts of solidarity, unfolding in the shadow of devastation.
A war without warning
Israeli airstrikes have hit Tehran and other cities with little or no notice, drawing criticism from many Iranians and some international observers.
One strike on Tehran’s District 18, near Mehrabad Airport, came just over an hour after a 2:00 AM warning. Activists noted the area’s high population of child laborers and street children.
“Under no circumstances is the death of children justifiable,” wrote Hamed Farmand of the International Coalition for Children with Incarcerated Parents. “Just as the death and starvation of Palestinian children has no name other than murder and genocide.”
Some of the over 320 civilian casualties of Israel's attacks
Iranian authorities have also faced criticism for failing to sound sirens, issue warnings or war-time guidelines through state media.
“It still hasn’t occurred to anyone to sound a siren or even issue a radio warning,” Tehran resident Sahar Karimi posted on X. “Ordinary people are dying, nobody cares?”
The government has released no official death toll, but rights groups report over 320 civilian deaths, including dozens of children.
Outrage and despair
The Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) condemned the violence on Wednesday, denouncing “the deliberate targeting of civilians” and calling for an immediate ceasefire and a path to diplomacy.
London-based human rights lawyer Shadi Sadr called Israel’s evacuation warnings a form of forced displacement.
“The forcible displacement of a civilian population is a crime against humanity under international law. Full stop,” she wrote.
Frustration deepened after US President Donald Trump urged people to evacuate Tehran—a suggestion many called detached from reality.
Nobel Peace Laureate Narges Mohammadi responded promptly, reminding those ordering people to flee that Tehran is not only home to millions of people, but thousands of schools, hospitals, and businesses.
“Which of them are we meant to carry on our shoulders to save from death and devastation,” she asked in an Instagram post. “Do not destroy my city. End this war.”
No side feels like home
As the war drags on, many Iranians—at home and in exile—say they can’t side with either party to the conflict.
“This was not our war,” Sadr wrote, “but it is increasingly becoming ours, as our loved ones are being taken hostage by two criminal states.”
“You know what is the worst nightmare of every Iranian now,” an exiled activist posted on X, “that US and Israel, having started this destruction, do not finish it, leaving the people of Iran to the hard and brutal days that the Islamic Republic will unleash upon us once it is over.”
In Tehran—in the midst of it all—perspective and tone is slightly different.
“They thought it would end with (supreme leader Ali) Khamenei’s death and the regime collapsing,” Abbas, a 46-year-old office worker in Tehran, says in a message on an encrypted app. “But as war drags on, they’ll realize that that was never a priority for Israel.”
"The contrast between the defiance projected on X by Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his appearance in two recent video addresses—broadcast from what appears to be a bunker—could hardly be starker."
Since Israeli strikes began on June 13, Khamenei has appeared diminished: a man seated under dim lights, speaking slowly beneath a loosely worn black turban, behind him a photo of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini clumsily clipped to a curtain.
His words aim to project resolve. But his faltering speech and visible frailty suggest something closer to strain.
In this setting, it is hard to reconcile the figure onscreen with the one who just days ago promised “an imminent conquest” and warned that “life will definitely become bitter for the Zionists.”
From defiance to disconnect
That gap—between rhetoric and reality—mirrors a broader disconnect.
While his social media account issues bold threats and AI-generated images of missile strikes, the scenes unfolding in Iranian cities tell a more uncertain story: smoke over Tehran, civilians fleeing, supplies dwindling, and a propaganda machine scrambling after its own headquarters was reduced to rubble.
Very few know the Supreme Leader’s location.
As of June 17, officials have been instructed not to use electronic devices to avoid detection. Some believe Khamenei has already been moved—perhaps through tunnels to a station outside the capital, then to Mashhad, his stronghold.
On Tuesday, Trump claimed he knows Khamenei’s exact location but said he has not decided to kill him—“for now.”
Even among insiders, communication is limited. Those managing his online posts may be working from past speeches or assumptions, unable to consult him directly.
“The Islamic Republic’s Armed Forces will deal heavy blows to the evil Zionist enemy,” read a June 14 post, as drone strikes and salvos filled Iranian skies.
A nation fractured, a reckoning in sight
But for many Iranians—whatever their politics—these slogans ring hollow.
The violence has not unified the country. Instead, it has laid bare deep divisions. Online, ideological arguments rage.
In official media, unity is scripted. Reformist figures—including former Presidents Mohammad Khatami and Hassan Rouhani, and ex-Majles Speaker Mehdi Karroubi—have been pressured into voicing support.
Yet even some longtime critics of the Islamic Republic are emotionally torn. Patriotism runs deep, and the sight of foreign attacks on Iranian cities—especially when cheered abroad—has stirred feelings of alienation.
Many who despise Khamenei feel repulsed by those who appear to welcome the war.
On June 13, Khamenei’s account wrote, “The Zionist regime will not escape safely from the heinous crime they’ve committed,” making no distinction between military and civilian targets.
Some fear Israeli responses may blur the same lines.
Phone calls between Tehranis and relatives abroad oscillate between cautious hope and grim resignation. Some believe this crisis may trigger change. Others, like London-based journalist Amir Soltanzadeh, lament the world's indifference.
“Iran came under military attack, Trump ordered the evacuation of Tehran, and yet no one in the world protested,” he posted on X. “There were no demonstrations, not a single line written in Arab or Western media. That’s how hated the Islamic Republic is.”
But many Iranians don’t experience that hatred in the abstract. They live its consequences—trapped between a regime that claims to speak for them and a world that often struggles to see them at all.
The arrest of a top cleric’s family members has done little to convince many Iranians that the judiciary’s anti-corruption drive is more than symbolic, despite praise from conservatives and some reformists.
The IRGC-affiliated Fars News Agency reported Sunday that the Revolutionary Guard’s Intelligence Organization had detained two sons of Tehran’s Friday imam, Kazem Sedighi, two weeks earlier.
The report said they were arrested on charges of misconduct and collusion, without further details. On Monday, the outlet issued a correction, saying the detainees were Sedighi’s son and daughter-in-law.
Sedighi responded soon after, saying he would submit to the law if wrongdoing were proven.
Appointed by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in 2009, Sedighi previously chaired the Supreme Disciplinary Court for Judges.
He now heads a state body promoting behavior deemed Islamic—the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice—which includes Iran’s police chief and the ministers of intelligence and interior.
Serious or symbolic?
While some conservatives argue the arrests show corruption is being addressed, many others see them as symbolic.
"Some actions have been taken against corruption, but don’t talk about 'decisive measures'—because the people have not seen any truly decisive action in the fight against economic corruption so far," a popular comment on the conservative Alef website read.
“Even in systemic corruption, some cases are (occasionally) dealt with on a case-by-case, symbolic basis,” reformist journalist and politician Mohammad Sahafi posted on X.
The post echoed a widely held belief that crackdowns lack seriousness.
“(This was) a kind of belated, superficial surgical removal of the countless tumors of corruption within the circle of power,” psychoanalyst Mohammad Reza Ebrahimi wrote on X.
Chief judge wins praise
Since his 2021 appointment, judiciary head Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei has made anti-corruption central to his image.
Conservatives framed the move as a sign of resolve and an attempt to restore public trust.
Hardliner lawmaker Mojtaba Zarei thanked Mohseni-Ejei on X for “revitalizing the judicial system to combat corruption.”
“The fight against corruption is not a stage for theatrical exposés; the judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is itself at the forefront of the battle against corruption,” he wrote.
Former reformist vice president Mohammad-Ali Abtahi echoed the praise:“Mr. Ejei’s transparency, integrity, persistence, and courage can promote a model of worthy governance.”
“The head of the judiciary, by the nature of his job, is generally not expected to be respected and trusted—but Ejei is. He deserves praise for his impartial fight against the corruption of officials and their relatives,” he added.
Calls for Sedighi to step down
Unlike Ejei, Sedighi faces mounting pressure over the revelations, with many conservatives and some ultra-hardliners urging him to resign.
“Resign from all responsibilities and seek forgiveness for the rest of your life; perhaps you can save your hereafter,” conservative journalist Ahmadreza Danesh posted on X.
Sedighi claimed his signature had been forged. After this proved false, he apologized to Khamenei and the Iranian people in a Friday sermon, calling it negligence.
He was neither prosecuted nor formally investigated.
“Resign unconditionally now if you believe in even a fraction of what you have preached,” conservative politician Seyed Ali Hashemi wrote on X.
“Not because of proven guilt, but out of respect for the people, to preserve the clergy’s reputation, and to prevent the collapse of social trust,” he added.
People in Iran are often accused of contributing to the country’s economic woes through wasteful habits—not just by officials, but by one another. But how much truth is there to these claims?
People in Iran are often accused of contributing to the country’s economic woes through wasteful habits—not just by officials, but by one another. But how much truth is there to these claims?
One common claim is that Iranians use far more electricity than other nations. But data from Iran’s Energy Ministry shows that per capita household electricity consumption is about 1,100 kilowatt-hours per year—40% lower than the EU average, and well below usage in the US, Canada, Japan, or even many neighboring countries.
It’s the same story with food.
Iran’s agriculture minister recently criticized Iranians for “excessive consumption” of sugar and cooking oil, asserting that government subsidies are being squandered.
But that assertion appears to contradict data from the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which shows that Iran’s per capita consumption of both items is below the global average and significantly lower than in nearby countries like Turkey.
Last year, Iranians consumed 2.3 million tons of cooking oil, compared to 3.5 million tons in Turkey, which has a similar population. On a per capita basis, Iranian consumption is 30% lower than the global average.
The minister also claimed that 90% of Iran’s cooking oil is imported at subsidized rates, yet FAO data puts the figure closer to 56%, with imports steadily declining over the past three years.
Sugar tells a similar story. Iranians consume about 10% less than the global average, and nearly half as much as Turks. Far from being excessive, these levels reflect increasing constraints on household consumption.
Chasing the basics
These accusations also overlook a crucial fact: food inflation in Iran is out of control. The price of cooking oil surged 20% in just three months, according to a report by economic outlet Tejarat News on Monday.
Iran’s Statistical Center reports annual inflation of 31% for cooking oil and 41% for sugar.
Such price spikes make basic goods increasingly unaffordable for most households. And the toll is visible in declining food security.
FAO data shows that per capita meat consumption in Iran has fallen by 40% over the past decade, while dairy consumption has dropped by 30%.
A senior food industry official said last week that the average Iranian now consumes 7–10 kilograms of meat per year—consistent with FAO’s estimate of just over 8 kilograms, down from 12 kg just a few years ago.
“Meat consumption in Iran is deeply unequal—some eat nothing, while others manage 20 kilograms a year,” said Masoud Rasouli, secretary of the Meat Production and Packaging Association, adding that the global average is 32 kilograms.
The figures don’t lie: Iranians are not consuming too much—they’re getting by with less.
Contrary to the official line—and even public opinion—excess is not a national trait. It’s an alien concept to the majority chasing the basics.
Tehran’s response to Washington’s proposal to halt uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief has been marked by deep distrust and combative rhetoric—but not a complete break from diplomacy.
The proposal has yet to be revealed officially, but it is said to include a halt-for-sanctions-relief clause and an enrichment consortium involving the United States and some of Iran’s Arab neighbors.
“Why do you interfere in whether Iran enriches uranium or not—what business is it of yours?” Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Wednesday, dismissing US objections to domestic enrichment by Iran.
Khamenei delivered one of his harshest speeches in recent memory, denouncing the proposal and pouring cold water on hopes of an immediate resolution to the nuclear standoff.
Minutes later, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated that no deal excluding enrichment would be accepted, and Nuclear Chief Mohammad Eslami declared that Iran’s program would continue “with full force.”
Strategic ambiguity
Despite the sharpness of his remarks, Khamenei stopped short of ending negotiations—a nuance not lost on Iranian analysts, many of whom saw room for continued backchannel diplomacy.
His tone of suspicion echoed deeper cultural themes. Some commentators likened it to the writings of novelist Sadeq Hedayat, whose characters in Alaviyeh Khanom and Haji Aghaview the world as a web of deception and distrust, responding with preemptive cynicism.
Even before Khamenei’s speech, Iranian outlets had rallied against any framework that excluded enrichment. The official news agency IRNA published two sharply worded pieces on Tuesday.
One called Washington’s position “a gamble doomed to fail,” while the other warned the talks were headed for deadlock unless Tehran’s right to enrich was preserved.
State broadcaster IRIB maintained its usual pessimism.
In a symbolic moment following Khamenei’s address, it abruptly cut a weather update to broadcast a Moscow street interview, where Russian citizens praised Iran’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and his prophecy of communism’s fall—blending nostalgia with present-day complexity.
Press looking ahead
Wednesday marked the anniversary of Khomeini’s death in 1989, a national holiday with no newspapers in circulation. Even online publications were dominated by reverential pieces about the former Supreme Leader.
But Tuesday’s press and foreign-based Persian outlets struck a more somber tone. The reformist site Rouydad24 warned that what it called the achievements of five rounds of talks remained fragile, and that issues like zero enrichment could trigger collapse.
Though few in Iran or abroad believe war is imminent, some exiled Iranian analysts suggested the impasse could embolden Israel, long bent on dismantling Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure.
Meanwhile, U.S. media reported that a new round of indirect talks—possibly in Oman—could take place as early as next week.
