Tehran on Monday escalated its public warnings to Washington, mooting retaliation for any attack while dismissing US president Donald Trump's pledges to protect protestors even as reports emerged of quiet diplomatic outreach intended to avert war.
Senior Iranian officials used coordinated statements to signal resolve against any US attack amid Tehran's deadly crackdown on nationwide protests, portraying Trump’s warnings as both dangerous and unserious.
Parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said that any American attack would prompt a sweeping response across the region.
“We have heard that you have threatened Iran,” Ghalibaf told a state-sponsored rally in Tehran on Monday, addressing Trump directly. “The defenders of Iran will teach you an unforgettable lesson.”
“All American centers and forces throughout the region will be our legitimate targets in response to any potential adventurism,” he added. “Come and see how all your capabilities in the region will be wiped out.”
The warnings were echoed by security chief Ali Larijani, who downplayed Trump’s recent remarks linking possible US action to Tehran’s handling of the protests.
“Trump says things like this a lot. Do not take him seriously,” Larijani was quoted as saying by state-affiliated media. “The Iranian nation has shown that it intends to settle accounts with the United States and Israel.”
'Under control'
Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi told a group of foreign ambassadors in Tehran on Monday that the situation in the country is “completely under control” but that Iran was ready for war if the United States did not engage in what it called fair talks.
Referring to Trump's warning about a possible attack on Iran if the killing of protesters continues, Araghchi said: “The Islamic Republic is not seeking war, but it is fully prepared for war.”
“The Islamic Republic is also ready for negotiations, but these talks must be fair, based on equal rights, and founded on mutual respect,” he added.
But the remarks came as Axios reported that Araghchi had reached out over the weekend to US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, citing two sources with knowledge of the matter.
According to the report, the outreach appeared aimed at de-escalating tensions or buying time amid growing concern in Tehran over potential US moves. One source said Araghchi and Witkoff discussed the possibility of holding a meeting in the coming days.
The contrasting signals reflect the bind facing Tehran as protests continue across the country, and Washington as it gauges various courses of action and their possible consequences.
An array of witness reports and videos reviewed by Iran International points to widespread use of lethal weapons to control dissenting crowds, killing at least 2,000 people across Iran since the protests began.
The aim is not necessarily to convince skeptics, but to project an image of control and popular backing at a moment of visible strain.
After days of sustained demonstrations calling for the overthrow of the system, authorities organized counter-rallies in several cities on Monday, presenting them as popular condemnations of the protests themselves.
State television depicted the gatherings as mass denunciations of unrest, echoing official claims that the uprising was driven by “armed terrorists” and foreign adversaries.
A familiar mobilization
The mechanics of the rallies followed a script many Iranians recognize. State bodies drew participants to central locations in Tehran and other major cities, relying on administrative pressure and access to public resources.
Coverage was then amplified by state television and media outlets affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
In recent broadcasts, state outlets released a mix of ground-level footage and aerial images intended to convey scale. Some of the images show visible crowds, underscoring that the authorities retain a base of support.
It is difficult to determine precise numbers, the duration of the gatherings, or whether all images reflect live events from the same day. Similar visual techniques — including the reuse of footage or the circulation of undated aerial shots — have been employed during previous protest cycles.
Even taken at face value, the rallies appeared limited in duration and geographic spread.
By contrast, demonstrations opposing the government have persisted for weeks, erupting across hundreds of locations according to tallies compiled by activists and researchers, despite the risks involved.
The contrast is sharpened by the conditions under which each takes place: pro-government gatherings proceed under heavy security, while protesters have faced gunfire, mass arrests and lethal force.
Information control as context
This round of rallies unfolded amid unusually severe restrictions on communication. For several consecutive days, internet connectivity across much of Iran has been sharply curtailed, according to digital rights groups and user reports, leaving millions unable to communicate freely or share information.
State and Guards-linked outlets, by contrast, have continued to publish without interruption. Agencies such as Tasnim, Fars and Mehr have maintained full access, flooding television and online platforms with official narratives.
The result is a highly asymmetric information environment. While ordinary citizens struggle to document events or verify developments, state-aligned media dominate the public space with curated imagery.
Under such conditions, rallies are presented largely on the authorities’ terms, with limited independent means to corroborate scale, timing or participation.
A recurring sequence
Similar state-organized rallies followed major protest movements in 2009, 2019 and 2022, each time presented as demonstrations of enduring legitimacy. In each case, they coincided with intensified security measures and tighter controls on dissent.
Evidence of the human toll has continued to surface despite efforts to restrict documentation.
Videos circulating online in recent days, which could not be independently verified, appeared to show bodies in a morgue in Kahrizak, with grieving relatives gathered nearby—imagery that contrasted sharply with official broadcasts of unity and resolve.
In a message released Sunday night, Reza Pahlavi described the moment as a new phase in what he called a national uprising, urging supporters to challenge the state’s control over information and public space.
What the competing images ultimately underscore is a question that spectacle alone cannot answer: how Iranian cities would look if opposing sides were able to assemble under comparable conditions.
The return to this familiar choreography comes as protests continue despite severe limits on communication, widespread arrests and the high personal cost of participation.
The repeated staging of loyalty rallies suggests not confidence, but the absence of other tools for demonstrating consent. Carefully framed images may circulate for a time, but they cannot indefinitely substitute for credibility rooted in broad public trust.
In the end, theater may delay recognition of a crisis, but it does not resolve one.
