Tehran braces for war while testing the limits of diplomacy

“I think it’s only a matter of time before the US will conduct strikes against the Islamic Republic,” Lt Col Jonathan Conricus said in an interview with Iran International's English podcast Eye for Iran.

President Donald Trump said this week that the United States was prepared to act with “speed and violence, if necessary,” while Iranian officials have threatened immediate retaliation.

Trump also suggested Friday that Tehran may ultimately seek negotiations rather than face American military action.

“I can say this, they do want to make a deal,” confirming that he had given Iran a deadline to enter talks without specifying what it was. “We have a large armada, flotilla, call it whatever you want, heading toward Iran right now,” he added.

'Almost everything is in place'

Conricus, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), argued that the military tools required for meaningful action are already positioned.

“I think most of those capabilities and assets are in place and are ready to be deployed,” he said, adding: “Judging by the way things look now, almost everything is in place.”

He said the remaining question is timing—“the tactical operational opportunity” and political considerations around when to strike.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio also told lawmakers this week that the Islamic Republic is “probably weaker than it’s ever been."

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Friday that Tehran was ready for talks only “on an equal footing,” but stressed that Iran’s missile and defence capabilities would “never be subject to negotiation.”

What would strikes target?

Conricus told Iran International any US strikes would likely prioritize crippling the regime’s internal control and ability to sustain repression.

He suggested an initial focus on “command and control” and the Islamic Republic's capacity “to exercise power domestically,” including “specifically targeting IRGC and Basij, but not limited to that.”

He also flagged cyber and communications disruption, saying he would “assume cyber and communications warfare against the networks and the communications infrastructure of the regime.”

In addition, he said missile infrastructure would be central—“related to Iran’s ballistic missiles,” including launch sites, silos and supply chains.

Nuclear-related facilities could also be targeted if the conflict escalates, particularly amid renewed American demands that Iran halt uranium enrichment and curb its missile program.

Israel watching, bracing and waiting

The Trump administration is also hosting senior Israeli and Saudi defense and intelligence officials in Washington this week amid discussions of possible strike scenarios and regional fallout.

From an Israeli perspective, Conricus described a mood focused less on whether action will happen, and more on when—and what retaliation might follow.

“People are waiting for when will it happen? What will the consequences be for Israel?” he said, adding that Israeli forces remain at “elevated readiness.”

He argued that a weakened Islamic Republic would also undercut Tehran’s regional proxy network, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

“Getting rid of this horrible, terror-supporting, destabilizing regime would be very beneficial,” Conricus said.

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

Following the bloodshed of January 8 and 9, Iranian authorities imposed the harshest media restrictions in decades, shutting down newspapers and severely limiting internet access in an effort to conceal the scale of repression.

After about a week, officials appeared to conclude that a total blackout was counterproductive: the absence of newspapers made it harder to project an image of normal life. Editors were summoned back to newsrooms, even though most journalists still lacked internet access.

With little they could do, many reporters went home, a journalist at the moderate daily Shargh later recalled in an Instagram post. Hours later, they were called back. “You must publish a newspaper tomorrow morning,” authorities told editors, “even if it is only one page.”

The papers that followed were thin and tightly controlled. Many carried only a handful of short items drawn from state-approved agencies, alongside recycled material from months or even years earlier.

At the same time, the government shifted its internet controls from broad blacklisting to a strict whitelisting system, allowing access only to approved users and outlets.

For nearly two weeks, outlets affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards — primarily Tasnim and Fars — dominated the limited online output, carrying statements from commanders and hardline officials and promoting the narrative that the unrest was “foreign-backed terrorism.”

When Fars opened its comment sections earlier this week, readers flooded the site with angry and often derogatory remarks aimed at the government. Moderators removed posts and blocked users, but commenters returned under new identities.

Critical comments often remained visible for minutes before deletion. Within days, Fars shut down comments entirely.

Khabar Online, one of the first websites permitted to resume limited updates as part of efforts to “normalize” the situation, encountered a similar problem. Reader comments quickly overwhelmed official narratives, prompting tighter controls.

By January 27, several newspapers and websites had cautiously resumed publication, avoiding any reference to the true death toll.

One exception was Etemad, whose managing editor, Elias Hazrati—also head of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s advisory public-relations board—published casualty figures approved by authorities, widely seen as a fraction of the real numbers.

Internet access has since been partially restored, but remains unpredictable. Some businesses are granted just 30 minutes of access per day at designated government offices after signing pledges not to cross official “red lines.” Their online activity is monitored.

Messaging platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram function intermittently through VPNs. Even when messages are sent, replies often fail to arrive. Platforms commonly used for political communication, especially X, remain largely inaccessible.

Authorities say YouTube access has been restored at universities, and some pre-protest interviews have reappeared online.

The YouTube-based news program Hasht-e Shab (8 PM) resumed after a three-week suspension. In its first broadcast, it reported that the brother of one staff member had been shot dead during the protests.

With senior officials avoiding public appearances, the program interviewed its own managing editor, Ali Mazinani, who said internet access had become “critical” even for media outlets, particularly as Iran faces heightened external threats.

He said journalists are now barred from government offices they once covered and criticized the lack of transparency surrounding the crackdown and casualty figures.

The restrictions appear to have achieved their aim, narrowing what can be reported and publicly discussed about the crackdown—for now.

“We do not have any plan or programme to meet or discuss with any US officials,” Araghchi told a joint news conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan.

“Negotiation cannot be dictated,” he said. “If one party is threatening and setting preconditions, that is no longer a negotiation.”

“While they are threatening us, they say they want to negotiate,” Araghchi added.

Araghchi said Iran would only consider what he described as “just, fair and equitable” talks, but said the basic framework for such negotiations had not been established.

“We need to see the preconditions and the agenda first,” he said.

He warned that Iran was prepared for escalation if attacked. “We are ready for negotiations, but we are also ready for warfare,” Araghchi said. “We are even more ready than in June last year.”

He said any direct US intervention would change the situation fundamentally and could push the conflict beyond a bilateral confrontation, with wider regional consequences.

Araghchi described his talks with Fidan in Istanbul as “good and useful,” saying they covered bilateral, regional and international issues.

Fidan said Turkey was in contact with both Tehran and Washington as tensions rise, adding that he had held talks with US special envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff.

“Yesterday I had long talks with Steve Witkoff,” Fidan said, adding that Ankara would continue contacts with the United States and other regional actors.

Turkey opposes any new conflict in the region and views continued fighting as a driver of instability, terrorism and migration, Fidan said.

Iran is now enduring the country’s longest and most comprehensive internet disruption on record. Its impact has stretched far beyond blocked platforms and loading screens, pushing many businesses to a point of no return.

Economists estimate Iran’s digital economy generates roughly 30 trillion rials (about $42 million) a day. While modest on paper, that figure represents the livelihoods of small and medium-sized enterprises that operate almost entirely online.

The Tehran Chamber of Commerce estimates that at least 500,000 Instagram-based shops operate in Iran, supporting around one million jobs whose sales effectively drop to zero without internet access.

The collapse began when the signal died

Industry data reviewed by trade groups show daily losses running into billions of rials, with the Chamber reporting revenue declines of 50% to 90%. But some analysts say even those figures understate the damage.

“Where does this figure even come from?” IT expert Amin Sabeti told Iran International. “These businesses operate on Instagram. When people have no access to Instagram, one hundred percent of their sales are gone.”

Sabeti said the lack of precise data had itself become part of the crisis. “What we do know is that Instagram and WhatsApp are widely used by small businesses, and many have now lost customers completely,” he added. “For some people, their entire livelihood depended on these platforms.”

In Iran, platforms such as Instagram, Telegram and WhatsApp function not only as messaging tools but as storefronts, marketing channels and payment gateways.

Analysts estimate more than 40 million active users rely on them, making social media the backbone of e-commerce, especially for home-based businesses, informal retailers and women-led ventures.

“In many cases, people have gone bankrupt because they had issued cheques that can no longer be covered,” Sabeti said. “The reality is that a large portion of online businesses that relied heavily on Instagram have been wiped out.”

One Tehran-based online clothing seller told the news site Dideban Iran that her sales collapsed. After just one week of disruption, she laid off all her workers, shut down her workshop and sold her sewing machines. “I’m bankrupt,” she said.

Another online seller said most digital businesses lack the reserves to survive even days without revenue. “When the internet goes,” the seller said, “whatever tiny capital we have disappears.”

• 

  Iranian Online Shop Building Sealed As Hijab Tensions Rise

Silence from businesses

Iran International contacted several large and small online businesses to ask about the impact of the blackout. None replied. Messages were not even seen — an absence that spoke louder than any quote.

A few voices surfaced briefly on X. One user wrote that a friend who teaches languages online could no longer earn enough to cover monthly expenses. “Online business is not just online shops,” the post said. “Thousands of jobs depend on the internet, and they’ve been destroyed.”

Another described producers already weakened by months of economic pressure. “In our industrial area, someone with 15 years of production experience is renting out his workshop as a spare-parts warehouse,” the post read. “Last year we had 13 workers. Now we have three.”

Economists warn the damage will outlast restored connections. Prolonged shutdowns erode trust, deter investment and stall technological development. Many business owners say they have lost not only their capital but the will and the means to start again.

Women, who make up a significant share of Iran’s home-based digital workforce, are among the most exposed. For many, online trade was the only viable entry into the economy. With that channel severed, unemployment follows quietly.

“If this situation continues, it can really push the digital economy toward destruction,” said Reza Olfatnasab, head of the union of virtual businesses.

• 

  Crackdown On Online Businesses Intensifies In Iran

Numbers collide, blame follows

As businesses slipped into silence, the argument over numbers intensified.

Communications Minister Sattar Hashemi said recent outages were inflicting about 5,000 billion rials a day in direct losses on the core digital economy and nearly 50 trillion rials across the wider economy. Around 10 million people depend directly or indirectly on the sector, he said, adding that the average resilience of internet-based businesses is just 20 days.

The hardline daily Kayhan dismissed those estimates as “fabricated figures,” accusing the communications ministry of deflecting responsibility and arguing that officials who failed to build a “secure and lawful” network should be held accountable.

Industry bodies offered competing assessments. Analysts say the gap exposes a deeper problem than the shutdown itself: Iran lacks any transparent, standardized system to measure its digital economy.

For many business owners, however, the debate over billions has already arrived too late. Their screens are dark, their messages unread and their income, whatever the final number, already gone.

Iran’s currency plunge in late December 2025 sparked nationwide protests that quickly escalated from economic grievances into calls for an end to the Islamic Republic. The crackdown that followed was unusually violent, killing thousands under a sweeping internet blackout.

Trump’s response was neither a formal call for regime change nor an immediate move toward military conflict. Instead, it combined public threats, diplomatic suspension, and economic pressure with visible military signaling designed to raise the cost of repression while preserving strategic flexibility.

“A massive Armada is heading to Iran,” Trump wrote on Truth Social last week, describing the fleet—led by the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln—as “ready, willing, and able to rapidly fulfill its mission, with speed and violence, if necessary.”

The signalling grew more explicit on Wednesday, when the US president urged Iran to “quickly ‘Come to the Table’” and negotiate a deal. He warned that “the next attack will be far worse” than last June’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites if an agreement was not reached.

The military centerpiece of Trump’s strategy is the redeployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, restoring credible strike capacity at a moment when Iran’s leadership is consumed by internal unrest.

Escorted by multiple destroyers and carrying nearly 90 aircraft, including F-35s, the Lincoln gives Washington a flexible range of options—from limited strikes on Revolutionary Guard assets to broader operations.

Additional US combat aircraft, armored units, and air-defense systems have been repositioned across regional bases, underscoring the signaling intent. The objective appears to be readiness without commitment.

Trump’s apparent aim is to exploit Iran’s weakened position to coerce strategic concessions—not only on the nuclear and missile programs, but also on Tehran’s regional proxy activity. That pressure has been reinforced by a proposed 25 percent tariff on countries trading with Iran, announced on January 12.

Washington’s approach appears calibrated to push for negotiations while Tehran is at its most vulnerable, stopping short of an explicit commitment to military action or regime change.

The ambiguity looks deliberate—and strategic. It may work, but it is not risk-free. US credibility could erode if threats are not followed through. External pressure may also strengthen hardliners in Tehran by reinforcing narratives of foreign orchestration, potentially unifying a fractured elite.

Iran’s armed allies in the region retain some capacity to retaliate against US interests or Israel. Whether they choose to do so is unclear, but the risk of escalation into a broader conflict cannot be dismissed.

Tehran, for its part, has hardened its rhetoric, warning of an “unrestrained” and “unprecedented” response to any US military operation, while simultaneously expressing openness to what it calls “fair” negotiations.

Pressure on Iran is also building beyond Washington. On Thursday, the European Union took what its foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, described as a “decisive step” toward designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organisation—its strongest signal yet that patience with the Islamic Republic is wearing thin.

At the same time, Kallas cautioned that the region “doesn’t need another war,” underscoring Europe’s own balancing act between pressure and restraint.

Iran’s streets are quiet after a bloody crackdown. But the economy is in free fall, and another round of widespread protests appears increasingly likely.

The key question now is whether Trump’s gunboat diplomacy can extract strategic gains without igniting the very conflict it seeks to avoid—or whether it merely postpones a more dangerous reckoning.