Khamenei blames protest casualties on Trump, calls him a criminal

Among Iranians inside the country and across the diaspora, the pause is increasingly interpreted not as restraint but as a dangerous limbo.

Calls for decisive military action are now openly framed as a necessary step to halt executions and mass violence, while hesitation is seen as compounding an already unbearable strain.

In Persian-language commentary circulating widely online, Trump’s posture is described as calculated ambiguity rather than caution.

Trump’s public gestures, including a post thanking Iran’s leadership and authorities for not executing detained protesters, are dismissed by critics as deliberate misdirection. They say the aim is to buy time while the United States strengthens its offensive and defensive military position in the Persian Gulf.

“The shadow of a Trump attack on Iran has not disappeared. He uses his intelligence for deception more than for anything else. His post thanking Khamenei and the authorities is also deceptive. He is buying time to reach a strong offensive and defensive military position in the Persian Gulf and to decide on a surprise strike at the optimal moment,” wrote a user.

For many, the conclusion is blunt: military confrontation is inevitable.

“A military attack on the clerics is inevitable. You shouldn’t get too caught up in daily noise. The same fluctuations existed before the 12-day war. The only course is to keep documenting the clerics’ crimes and to keep demanding and applying pressure on the United States and Israel for a maximal attack,” wrote another one.

Trump remarks fuel disbelief and anger

Trump’s own comments have inflamed skepticism. "We have been told that the killing in Iran is stopping, it has stopped, it's stopping," he told reporters in the Oval Office Wednesday afternoon. "And there's no plan for executions or an execution or executions. So, I've been told that on good authority. We'll find out about it."

He also said on Friday: "Nobody convinced me, I convinced myself. You had yesterday scheduled over 800 hangings. They didn't hang anyone. They cancelled the hangings. That had a big impact."

Public reaction to Trump’s remarks was colored by memories of past crises and government narratives that later unraveled.

“Sure, Mr. Trump,” one user wrote, “they also told us they didn’t shoot down the Ukrainian plane.”

The post referenced Flight PS752, which Iranian authorities denied downing in 2020 for several days before acknowledging it was downed by Iranian missiles, hardening skepticism.

Ambiguity seen as tactic to preserve leverage

A recurring theme was Trump’s communication style. “This is Trump’s usual way,” one post read. “Maybe they called me, maybe I’ll negotiate, maybe I’ll attack, maybe I’ll attack first then negotiate. He uses this tactic to confuse his audience.”

Others argued the statements were designed to establish a record. “Politics is complex,” one user wrote. “He said that so if an attack happens tomorrow, the world won’t grab him asking why you struck. He can say, ‘I warned them and they didn’t listen.’”

Debate over patience, pressure and timing

Social media has also become a forum for strategic debate among Iranians about the role of time, restraint and foreign intervention. “This movement didn’t begin with hope for an American attack,” one wrote. “It shouldn’t end with despair over not getting one.”

Others emphasized endurance. “As long as people remain in the streets, we won’t lose hope,” another post said, arguing that internal pressure, not foreign strikes, would determine outcomes – even if outside action could shorten the path.

A more tactical strand of discussion focused on military logistics. Users pointed to reports of aircraft carrier movements, troop redeployments and regional preparations as signs that delay does not equal abandonment. “All these movements mean money, cost,” one post read. “Even if Trump orders it today, it takes weeks – equipment, transport, doctors, food.”

One argued that an immediate strike could trigger indiscriminate retaliation across the region – from Iraq and the Persian Gulf to Israel – and even false-flag attacks blamed on outside powers, invoking the PS752 precedent. In that view, delay allows for planning aimed at minimizing civilian casualties.

Some took a more psychological angle. “The fact that Trump hasn’t attacked yet has frayed your nerves,” one user wrote, “imagine what it’s doing to the nerves of the security forces.” The argument suggests waiting itself can function as pressure, exhausting those tasked with maintaining control.

Some also expressed relief that no strike had occurred, arguing that a rushed or limited attack could be politically symbolic rather than decisive, allowing leaders to disengage without addressing deeper risks. “Trump isn’t looking for a battle he can’t win,” one post said, suggesting preparation signals calculation rather than retreat.

For a society already accustomed to crisis, the waiting has become its own ordeal. Each day without action brings more frustration. As one user put it, half-joking and half-resigned, “Until news of an attack on Iran comes directly from Trump’s account, I won’t believe anything anymore.”

In the absence of certainty, Iranians continue to debate, wait and endure at one of the most sensitive moments in the country’s modern history where thousands have been killed.

Families stood in long lines outside, he added, waiting to be allowed in to look for loved ones among the dead.

Kiarash, whose last name Iran International is withholding for his safety, described the sprawling morgue as a "warehouse of bodies."

He was there to find the body of the woman, Nasim Pouaghai, after she was shot in the neck and died after a night in hospital.

Kiarash found himself face to face with what he believed to be up to 2,000 bodies brought in during a span of just a few hours on Saturday amid a nationwide internet blackout that sealed Iran off from the outside world.

“People were waiting to go inside of these warehouses to find their beloved and their killed body," Kiarash told Eye for Iran. "I saw two or three trucks that were in the queue … to unload the bodies."

His testimony is one of the few ground-level accounts of the mass killings in the worst crackdown on dissent in the country in decades as that shutdown persists.

At least 12,000 people were killed in just two days as the Islamic Republic unleashed a sweeping crackdown, according to tallies from medics and senior Iranian officials obtained by Iran International.

Kiarash said security forces were stationed at the entrance of Tehran's main cemetery, the Behesht-e Zahra. Inside, families were directed toward the main hall for washing corpses per Islamic practices, where he noticed the warehouses for the first time.

Through the open doors, he says, bodies were visible in stacked rows. Based on what he personally saw, he estimates that each warehouse held between 1,500 and 2,000 bodies by early afternoon. Trucks continued arriving, unloading more.

"I saw small bags," Kiarash added. "I found it out that there are children. There were many, many children."

'Holocaust' scenes

Phones were useless. There was no signal. When he tried to document what he was seeing but was stopped by security personnel. Around him, families broke down in tears as they searched through layers of bodies, sometimes forced to move one body aside to look for another beneath it.

He recalls one mother finding her son and begging others not to touch him, even as other families desperately searched beneath stacked bodies for their own loved ones.

Later that same day, during the blackout, Kiarash says he witnessed indiscriminate shooting at close range in Sa’adat Abad, a wealthy residential neighborhood in northwestern Tehran.

He says a shooter dressed in a black chador, traditional women's clothes in Iran, opened fire on a crowd. Bodies began hitting the ground.

“I heard bang, bang, pop, pop. Six times ... and I saw three people, they collapsed just near me. Two girls and one boy.”

Kiarash says he joined others in dragging the wounded into side streets as the shooter fled.

“We can’t stop this regime from killing the people. They’re not talking with us. They’re just killing," Kiarash said. “I just saw when they were throwing out the bodies in the cemetery. It was the same picture which we have here in Germany from the Holocaust.”

You can listen to Eye for Iran on any podcast platform of your choosing or watch on YouTube.

The report said the executions were carried out between January 5 and January 14 in at least 42 prisons across multiple provinces.

Those executed had previously been sentenced to death on charges including murder and drug-related offences, which HRANA said were non-political and non-security related.

The executions were reported during a time of severe restrictions on access to information, with a total internet blackout limiting public scrutiny and independent monitoring of judicial proceedings and the implementation of death sentences.

“At least 37 prisoners were executed between January 5 and January 12. Additional executions were reported in the days that followed, including a wave of executions between January 13 and January 14 in several prisons across the country,” the report said.

The group said prison authorities and relevant institutions had not officially announced the executions at the time of reporting.

Human rights organizations raised concerns about the continued use of the death penalty in Iran, particularly during periods of heightened security and restricted information flows.

“The continuation of executions amid internet shutdowns has intensified concerns over a lack of judicial transparency, access to fair trials and the increased risk of violations of the right to life,” HRANA said.

US President Donald Trump said on Friday authorities in Iran stopped what he called planned executions of more than 800 protestors.

The scale of the violence—put at 12,000 by Iran International and as high as 20,000 by CBS—has shocked many Iranians.

As images and accounts continue to emerge despite a near-total internet shutdown, attention has focused on who was responsible for the bloodshed.

Tehran maintains that the violence was the result of armed infiltrators backed by Israel and the United States who attacked civilians and police and damaged state property, which it says triggered their forceful response.

Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence said on Friday that it had arrested 3,000 people it described as members of “terrorist groups.”

The Guards

Witness reports suggest that the primary force deployed on the streets was the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

One video that circulated despite the internet shutdown appears to show a pickup truck mounted with a DShK heavy machine gun in western Tehran that resembles those used by the IRGC’s Imam Ali Security Unit, which is tasked with security operations in the capital.

Iran International has obtained new details indicating that the Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force and its allied proxy forces in the region played a central role in the killing of Iranian protesters on January 8 and 9.

According to the information, a significant portion of the killings was carried out by the Fatemiyoun Brigade of Afghan fighters, Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, and the Zainabiyoun Brigade, an IRGC proxy group made of Pakistani nationals which is officially designated by Islamabad as a banned terrorist organization.

The Quds Force has extensive experience in urban warfare from the Syrian conflict, where it supported Bashar al-Assad’s government against both protesters and armed opposition groups.

Reports of foreign fighter deployment

Shortly after demonstrations began, social media users reported the presence of Iraqi pro-Iran militias in Iran’s Khuzestan province.

Their potential involvement drew closer scrutiny after a series of reports and images circulated in Iraqi and international media. The reports remain unconfirmed.

On January 11, videos showed large groups of fighters from Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) holding rallies in the southern Iraqi port city of Basra publicly declaring support for the Islamic Republic.

Iran’s Press TV later aired footage of a pro-government gathering near the Iranian embassy in Iraq, where participants carried flags associated with Iraqi militias such as Hashd al-Shaabi and Kataib Hezbollah, as well as Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

Other reports alleged more direct involvement. Iraqi television channel Al-Sumaria reported on Thursday that around 3,000 Iraqi fighters had crossed into Iran in a convoy of buses through the Shalamcheh border, disguised as religious pilgrims, to join IRGC bases in cities including Ahvaz.

CNN reported the same day that a military source said thousands of Iraqi militiamen had entered Iran through two border points, while an Iraqi security source cited the entry of hundreds more under the guise of pilgrims.

An image circulating online appears to show a dark armored vehicle believed by analysts to be used by Iraqi militias alongside Iranian police and IRGC units in Tehran. One man standing atop the vehicle is wearing a green headband commonly associated with Hashd al-Shaabi. The image has not been independently verified.

Some social media users have also alleged the involvement of other Quds Force-linked groups, such as the Fatemiyoun and Zeynabiyoun brigades, composed of Afghan and Pakistani Shiites previously deployed in Syria. Those claims also remain unconfirmed.

Use of criminal networks

There is no confirmed evidence that professional criminal networks were used in the latest crackdown. However, precedent exists.

During the 2009 protests, the IRGC released or recruited criminals from prison to suppress demonstrations. IRGC commander Hossein Hamedani—who was later killed in Syria—confirmed that 5,000 such individuals had been organized into three battalions.

“These three battalions showed that if we want to train fighters, we must bring in those who are used to knives and blades,” Hamedani told state-media reporters.

In subsequent years, images have surfaced showing some notorious Iranian convicts alongside IRGC forces in Syria, reinforcing long-standing claims that irregular actors have at times been incorporated into security operations.

Claims of drug use

Officials and critics have also offered competing explanations for some of the deaths, neither supported by verifiable evidence.

Iran’s Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh asserted on Thursday that some protesters had died from overdoses of industrial drugs rather than violence, saying they showed “no other injuries.”

Dissident activists, by contrast, have raised the possibility that Captagon—an amphetamine-type stimulant—was used to increase aggressiveness among forces deployed to suppress protests.

The UN Office on Drugs and Crime has identified Syria as a major producer of Captagon, with large seizures of Syrian-origin pills documented in Iraq.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Fox News on Wednesday that Tehran had “no plan to execute protesters.” President Donald Trump told reporters he had it “on good authority” that the killing of protesters had stopped.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday that Tehran had halted 800 executions slated for the previous day following warnings by Trump.

Taken at face value, such statements by Iranian officialdom appear to mark official restraint. A closer look at the Islamic Republic’s record suggests otherwise.

Tehran has rarely—perhaps never—executed individuals under the formal charge of participating in an illegal gathering. Under Iran’s Islamic Penal Code, that offense does not carry the death penalty and is typically punishable by imprisonment.

In that narrow, technical sense, officials can plausibly claim that the state does not execute people for protesting. The distinction, however, lies in how protesters are subsequently defined.

Renaming protesters

Across successive protest movements, Iranian authorities have routinely reframed demonstrations by dividing participants into shifting categories: first “peaceful protesters” and “rioters,” and more recently “vandals,” “saboteurs” and “terrorists.”

These labels are not merely rhetorical. Each carries specific legal consequences.

“Security forces and the judiciary will show no tolerance whatsoever toward saboteurs," Iran's Supreme National Security Council said in a statement on Jan. 9.

The stark warning came a day after Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said Tehran would accept legitimate economic protests but stop "rioters."

Once a detainee is removed from the category of protester, prosecutors gain access to a separate set of charges—including moharebeh (warring against God), efsad-fel-arz (corruption on earth), terrorism, armed action or collaboration with hostile states—all of which can carry the death penalty.

The underlying conduct may remain the same, but its legal classification changes.

In this way, the state’s claim that it does not execute protesters is technically consistent with its practice. Executions occur only after protest-related activity has been reclassified as a more serious offense.

The real danger

This approach is also reflected in the government’s longstanding assertion that it “recognizes the right to protest” while opposing only “chaos” or “violence.” In practice, independent demonstrations have not been permitted for decades.

Pro-government rallies, often organized by state institutions, proceed without restriction, while applications for lawful protests by independent political groups, civil organizations and even officially registered parties are routinely denied, regardless of legal compliance.

The result is a system in which the boundary between lawful protest and criminal conduct is not defined in advance, but determined after the fact. Legal terminology becomes flexible, allowing prosecutors to retrofit charges once arrests have been made.

This history helps explain why assurances based on terminology alone offer little protection.

In the absence of an independent judiciary, transparent trials or due process safeguards, commitments not to execute “protesters” leave ample room for coercive confessions, security-driven indictments and capital charges under different names.

The danger, then, is not that the Islamic Republic will execute people for protesting. It is that those who protest may still face execution once they have been renamed.