Trump says hopes for no 'further action' on Iran

US Senator Lindsey Graham pushed back against suggestions that Iran’s leadership could change course and be engaged diplomatically.

“Anyone who believes that the ayatollah is remotely interested in changing his ways does not understand the history of the ayatollah and the murderous regime,” Graham posted on X. “You cannot do a deal with evil. You have to confront it. In this case, that means standing behind the people of Iran.”

“I was unnerved by statements being made by people involved in the Iran file suggesting that if the ayatollah could change his ways, we might be able to reach an agreement with the regime,” he added.

Graham comments came after US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff told Bloomberg in Davos that Washington believes the standoff with Tehran could be “diplomatically settled” if Iran signals a willingness to change, without elaborating.

The large-scale killing of protesters may look like a panicked security response, but it is better understood as a calculated effort to destroy protest both on the streets and in people’s minds.

By deploying overwhelming force, the state is seeking to reframe protest as an act that guarantees death—so dangerous that it becomes irrational to attempt.

This logic has been reinforced by the nationwide internet shutdown. Cutting communication is not simply about hiding abuses from the outside world; it is about isolating protesters from one another, breaking networks of trust, and leaving individuals to face fear alone.

When information collapses, collective will fractures. The aim is to ensure that even before a demonstration forms, the decision to join it feels like a solitary, suicidal gamble.

The state has effectively pushed society into an impossible position, where enduring daily life is as unpleasant—and as unimaginable—as any attempt to change it. This paralysis is not accidental. It is Tehran’s endgame, and increasingly its only means of survival.

'Us against them'

The violence of January 9 and 10 served another purpose as well: consolidating power from within.

By tying the survival of the political system to the actions of those carrying out repression, the state has produced what might be called forced loyalty. Security forces and affiliated actors are drawn into violence so severe that there is no path back.

Once hands are stained with blood, survival becomes inseparable from the survival of the system itself. This creates a hardened core of enforcers whose only perceived option is to push forward, no matter the cost.

This dynamic encourages a “scorched earth” approach. The conflict is no longer managed or contained; it is framed as a total struggle between “us” and “them,” with protesters cast as enemies rather than citizens.

In such a framework, compromise is not weakness—it is betrayal. Mediation disappears. Violence becomes the only remaining language.

Murky repression

By ignoring collective demands and stripping the public of political relevance, the Islamic Republic has effectively dismantled politics itself. What remains is not governance, but a permanent security posture.

The use of plainclothes forces and paramilitary units fits squarely within this logic. By blurring the boundary between state and society, the authorities have sought to reframe repression as “people against people.”

Protesters are portrayed as violent elements within society, already dehumanized through labels such as “rioters” or “terrorists.” This allows the state to deflect responsibility while deepening social fragmentation.

Slain senior Revolutionary Guard commander Hossein Hamedani once boasted about mobilizing convicts and thugs to suppress protests. “They are not afraid of blood,” he said.

Their role is not only physical repression but also narrative production: muddying responsibility, normalizing brutality, and casting doubt on the moral legitimacy of protest itself. Their unofficial status also provides the state with plausible deniability.

Burned bridges

At the same time, the machinery of repression has become increasingly bureaucratic. Killings are absorbed into routine procedure; violence is carried out as a duty—lawful, necessary, even sacred.

Statements from military and security institutions during this period make clear that the deaths of protesters are not seen as a national loss, but as a means of preserving the political order.

This moment also exposes a deeper vulnerability. A system that securitizes everything produces nothing but control and coercion. Maintaining such a structure requires constant expenditure—of resources, manpower, and legitimacy—both at home and abroad.

A crisis in the domestic security sphere cannot remain contained indefinitely; it will eventually spill outward, generating external pressure and international consequences.

What is unfolding in Iran is therefore not a temporary crackdown. It is the outcome of a long shift from governing society to confronting it as an enemy.

It is almost impossible to predict where Iran is headed, but its rulers appear to have bet on the iron fist—suspending politics for a permanent emergency and burning all bridges back to mediation and consent.

Israel’s defense establishment has raised its level of alert in recent days amid concerns that US President Donald Trump may have decided to strike Iran possibly within days, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported on Wednesday citing security officials.

The officials said that while there have been no public indications from Washington of such a decision, Israel’s defense authorities are taking seriously the possibility that an attack could be imminent and are preparing both the home front and military forces for a range of scenarios.

Senior military officials were quoted as saying they recognize that Trump’s decision-making is unpredictable and that even if he opts to carry out an attack, he could reverse course at the last moment.

Security officials said cooperation with US counterparts is close, adding that they do not rule out a scenario in which the Israel Air Force would strike targets in Iran in response to missile fire at Israel.

According to the report, the defense establishment increasingly assesses that if there is a US strike on Iran, Iran’s leadership would weigh whether and how to respond, including the possibility of drawing Israel into the confrontation through missile launches.

However, senior Israel Defense Forces officials stressed there is no certainty that Iran would choose Israel as its initial target. They said the likelihood that Iran would escalate and involve Israel directly would rise only if a US attack were prolonged or if Iran perceived a genuine threat to the stability of its leadership.

Iran Human Rights Documentation Center said it received an account describing how a wounded protester remained motionless inside a plastic body bag for three days out of fear that security forces would kill him, before his family found him alive.

The group said the family searched for the man for three days before going to Kahrizak, where they looked among bodies for him. They instead found him alive but in critical condition, with severe gunshot wounds.

According to the account, the man survived without food or water while staying still to avoid being detected. His family later managed to take him out and transfer him to a hospital for treatment, the group said.

Iran Human Rights Documentation Center said the account, which it has not been able to independently verify because of widespread internet restrictions, offered a stark picture of the crackdown on protests, the treatment of the wounded and the uncertainty faced by families.

A 19-year-old Iranian protester, Shahab Fallahpour, was killed by security forces during demonstrations in the southwestern city of Andimeshk, people familiar with the matter told Iran International.

The sources said Fallahpour, a wrestler and a resident of the Shohada neighbourhood in Andimeshk, was shot during protests on Parto Street on Friday, January 9. They said he was targeted by sniper fire from a rooftop and that the shooting was carried out without warning.

According to the sources, Fallahpour’s body was buried three days later, in the early hours of January 12, at around 4 a.m., in the presence of his parents, without a funeral ceremony and under the supervision of government forces.

The sources said the family has been pressured and threatened not to speak to the media.

100%