Iran’s Revolutionary Guards say monitoring US military movements
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said the force is monitoring US military movements in the region and has plans in place for all possible scenarios.
“We have plans of action for all enemy scenarios,” IRGC spokesman Brigadier General Naeini said.
“We have experience in defeating the enemy in modern wars, on a large scale, and in the most dangerous and complex arenas,” he added.
Naeini dismissed what he described as US attempts to intimidate Iran through military deployments to the region as an old tactic and accused Washington of seeking to spread fear through psychological warfare.
"They are trying to negatively influence the feelings and thinking of the Iranian people through psychological warfare," he said.
“France will support adding the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to the European list of terrorist organizations,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said.
In a statement posted on X, Barrot said France and its European partners would impose sanctions in Brussels on Thursday against those responsible for what he described as abuses during the repression of protests in Iran. He said those targeted would be banned from entering the EU and have their assets frozen.
Barrot said the crackdown on what he described as the peaceful uprising of the Iranian people could not go unanswered, adding that there must be no impunity.
He also called on Iran’s authorities to release prisoners, halt executions, lift internet restrictions, and allow a UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission to investigate crimes committed in Iran.
"Our brave Armed Forces are prepared—with their fingers on the trigger—to immediately and powerfully respond to ANY aggression against our beloved land, air, and sea," Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said in a post on X on Wednesday.
"The valuable lessons learned from the 12-Day War have enabled us to respond even more strongly, rapidly, and profoundly."
However, Araghchi said, "Iran has always welcomed a mutually beneficial, fair and equitable NUCLEAR DEAL—on equal footing, and free from coercion, threats, and intimidation—which ensures Iran's rights to PEACEFUL nuclear technology, and guarantees NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS."
"Such weapons have no place in our security calculations and we have NEVER sought to acquire them."
A group of Iranian activists, lawyers, and cultural figures said Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei bears primary responsibility for what they described as a period of mass killings and repression, accusing Iran’s ruling system of committing crimes against humanity.
In a joint statement a statement posted on the Instagram page of jailed Nobel Peace laureate Narges Mohammadi on Wednesday, the signatories said the killing of protesters demanding political change amounted to an “organized state crime against humanity,” citing the use of live ammunition, mass arrests, attacks on the wounded, and the denial of medical treatment.
“The principal responsibility for this horrific situation lies with the Leader of the Islamic Republic himself and the repressive structure of the ruling system,” the statement said, accusing the authorities of betraying the nation to ensure the system’s survival.
"The bitter repetition of experiences over recent decades has shown that the main obstacle to rescuing Iran from the present catastrophe is Ali Khamenei himself," the statement added.
They called for accountability for those responsible for the crackdown, the release of all political prisoners, and the formation of a broad national front to hold a referendum and establish a constituent assembly to allow Iranians to decide their political future.
The statement was signed by filmmaker Jafar Panahi, activist Ghorban Behzadian-Nejad, lawyer Amirsalar Davoudi, journalist Vida Rabbani, filmmaker Mohammad Rasoulof, activist Hossein Razzagh, rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, political activist Abolfazl Ghadyani, academic Hatam Ghaderi, activist Abbas Sadeghi, activist Manzar Zarabi, the Narges Foundation, journalist Mehdi Mahmoudian, sociologist Saeed Madani, activist Abdollah Momeni, lawyer Mohammad Najafi, and religious scholar Sedigheh Vasmaghi.
Iranians’ chants against the Islamic Republic—muted for now by brute force—are viewed in Turkey not as a struggle for freedom but as a geopolitical risk from migration and militancy.
Iran, in this view, is a buffer—a state whose continued cohesion has helped secure Turkey’s eastern borders for decades, whatever its internal circumstances.
The prospect of that buffer weakening alarms Ankara far more than the nature of the demands driving Iran’s unrest.
That approach was underscored on Thursday, when President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan told Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian in a phone call that Turkey opposed any foreign intervention in Iran and valued peace and stability in the country.
The message echoed a broader pattern in Ankara’s response: caution, restraint, and a clear preference for preserving the status quo over endorsing political change.
Since the protests began, Turkish officials have framed developments in Iran as the erosion of central authority driven by outside forces.
Senior figures, including Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, have described the unrest as a “scripted scenario” and warned against what they portray as foreign efforts to push the region toward chaos.
At the core of this stance lies a long-standing fear that instability in Iran could open space for militant groups along Turkey’s eastern and southern frontiers, even as a peace process with Kurdish militants has made historic progress after decades of combat.
The Syrian precedent
This security-first reading of events reflects a fear expressed from corners of Turkey’s media and academic establishment that if the Islamic Republic were to collapse, Turkey could be next.
As a result, Iran’s protests are often explained away through the language of conspiracy—foreign plots rather than expressions of domestic discontent—making meaningful democratic solidarity between the two societies more difficult at a moment of profound crisis.
Years of economic strain at home and unresolved entanglements in Syria have further heightened Ankara’s sensitivity to instability beyond its borders.
Few Turkish policymakers are eager to risk a scenario that could trigger new refugee flows after the epic out-migration of Syrians fleeing that country's civil war strained Turkey's domestic cohesion and stoked bitter arguments with Europe.
Support for armed insurgents in that war did not render the hosting of millions of Syrian people on Turkish soil any easier, and Turkey has shown no such fondness for any anti-state elements in Iran.
Ankara’s caution has also been shaped by its regional calculations since the war in Gaza. Turkish officials are acutely wary of being seen as aligned with Israel, particularly as Israeli leaders have spoken openly in favor of regime change in Iran.
In Ankara’s reading, Western rhetoric about democracy masks a broader realignment that would ultimately strengthen Israel’s regional position at Turkey’s expense. Weakening Iran, they fear, could expand Israeli influence in ways that leave Turkey strategically exposed.
Some Turkish analysts have warned in recent days that the government should be less concerned about Iran losing a conventional conflict than about what might follow. A weakened Iranian state, they argue, could rely on proxy forces and non-state actors to drag the region into a prolonged, asymmetric struggle.
Fear of what may come next
From this perspective, preventing war in Iran is a strategic necessity. A collapse of authority inside Iran could empower Kurdish groups such as the PKK or its Iranian affiliate, PJAK, and test Turkey’s security more severely than the Syrian civil war ever did.
The fragmentation of Syria remains a vivid reference point: a power vacuum, the emergence of armed enclaves, and a long-term security burden that Ankara is still struggling to manage.
These fears help explain why the refrain “if Iran falls, Turkey is next” has gained traction in Turkish media.
Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party, has largely aligned with the government’s cautious approach. Even media outlets critical of Erdoğan have, at times, reinforced narratives that external actors are driving the violence in Iran.
The relative absence of support from Turkey’s secular movements for protesters in Iran also reflects the limited reach of Iranian opposition groups in neighboring countries.
Turkish officials often say they would prefer an Iran that is more developed and better integrated into the international system. But the uncertainty surrounding Iran’s political trajectory—and the perceived costs of a turbulent transition—continue to outweigh that aspiration.
For now, Ankara’s overriding objective remains stability: not because it approves of Iran’s system, but because it fears what might come after it.
"We have 30 to 40,000 American troops stationed across eight or nine facilities in that region," US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a congressional hearing on Wednesday. "All are within the reach of an array of thousands of Iranian one-way UAVs and Iranian short term ballistic missiles."
"We have to have enough force and power in the region just on a baseline to defend against that possibility that at some point, as a result of something, the Iranian regime decides to strike at our troop presence in the region, the President always reserves the pre-emptive defensive option," he added.
Rubio said the outlook for any transition following the rule of Iran's 86-year-old Supreme Leader remained unclear.
"I don't think anyone can give you a simple answer as to what happens next in Iran if the Supreme Leader and the regime were to fall, other than the hope that there would be some ability to have somebody within their systems that you could work towards a similar transition," he said.
"I would imagine it would be even far more complex than the one we're describing now, because you're talking about a regime that's in place for a very long time."
