A tightening security atmosphere inside schools across several Iranian cities has prompted a new wave of student absences, according to messages sent to Iran International, with families saying classrooms no longer feel like safe spaces for their children.
In recent weeks, parents and students from Mashhad, Gorgan, Tehran and other cities across Iran have described schools shifting from educational environments to spaces marked by heightened monitoring and questioning.
A student in the religious city of Mashhad said school officials and affiliated forces had searched students’ mobile phones and, in some cases, searched schoolbags.
After this started, a few of my classmates stopped coming to school, the student added.
Similar accounts have emerged from girls’ schools in Gorgan, northern Iran. Several students told Iran International that inspections were accompanied by what they described as an atmosphere of intimidation, leading some families to temporarily withdraw their children from classes.
Rising absenteeism amid safety fears
No official figures have been released on attendance rates, but interviews with teachers in Tehran and Alborz province suggest that classroom numbers have dropped in some schools.
“In a class of 25, some days fewer than half are present,” a high school teacher in Tehran said, requesting anonymity due to the sensitivity of the issue. “Parents say they do not consider the situation safe.”
The latest US-Iran diplomacy may reflect coordinated pressure rather than compromise, analysts told Iran International’s Eye for Iran podcast, describing Washington and Jerusalem as playing a potential “good cop, bad cop” strategy.
Middle East analyst Dr. Eric Mandel said the contrasting public tones adopted by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should not necessarily be read as disagreement.
“This could be a giant ruse — Netanyahu and Trump playing bad cop, good cop,” Mandel said, arguing that diplomacy may be designed to demonstrate that all political options were exhausted before stronger measures are considered.
Former US ambassador John Craig echoed that assessment.
“The pressure is deliberate,” Craig said, adding that talks could represent “a prequel… to military action,” as Washington increases its force posture in the region.
Military buildup alongside diplomacy
That military posture has become increasingly visible. President Donald Trump has said he is considering sending a second US aircraft carrier to the Middle East as tensions with Tehran escalate, describing an expanding naval deployment intended to reinforce American leverage.
“We have an armada that is heading there and another one might be going,” Trump said in an interview with Axios, signaling that additional forces could be deployed if diplomacy fails.
The United States has already positioned the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, accompanied by destroyers armed with long-range Tomahawk missiles, within the US Central Command area covering the Middle East.
The Pentagon has also moved additional fighter jets, air defense systems and other military assets into the region.
Defense planners are weighing further options should Trump authorize a broader buildup, including the possible deployment of additional carrier groups.
The military movements come as Washington pursues indirect talks with Iranian officials over Tehran’s nuclear program — the first such discussions since US strikes targeted three major Iranian nuclear facilities last June was held in Oman last week. A second meeting is set to continue this week in Geneva.
At the same time, the Trump administration has warned US commercial vessels to avoid parts of the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman.
Netanyahu struck a notably cautious tone following his meeting with Trump in Washington, the seventh between the two leaders since the US president returned to office.
Speaking before departing the United States, the Israeli prime minister said Trump believes Iran could still be pushed into accepting what he called “a good deal,” but made clear he remains doubtful.
“I do not hide my general skepticism about the possibility of reaching any agreement with Iran,” Netanyahu said, stressing that any deal must address ballistic missiles and Tehran’s regional proxy network in addition to its nuclear program.
Trump, meanwhile, warned that failure to reach an agreement would be “very traumatic for Iran,” while urging Tehran to move quickly toward accepting US conditions.
Pressure grows as unrest inside Iran deepens
The diplomacy is unfolding against the backdrop of one of the deadliest crackdowns in the Islamic Republic’s history. Iranian security forces opened fire on nationwide protests on January 8-9 with at least 36 thousand killed in a matter of days as demonstrations spread across multiple cities.
Voices connected to people inside Iran, shared on Eye for Iran, suggest that the internal crisis is shaping how many Iranians now view international negotiations.
Mina, an Iranian speaking on the program whose friends were killed or imprisoned during the protests, described a level of desperation.
“There are people in Iran who watch the air traffic every night to see if there are fewer airplanes in the sky,” she said. “Maybe tonight intervention will come.”
Her account reflects a growing sentiment among some protesters who, after years of failed reform movements and escalating repression, say they no longer believe internal change alone is possible.
Many, she said, now see outside pressure — including potential military action — as the only remaining path to ending the rule of the Islamic Republic.
Analysts say that reality adds urgency to the current diplomatic moment. Washington emphasizes negotiations, while Israel highlights the risks of delay, creating what Mandel described as a coordinated messaging strategy rather than a clear policy divide.
“The president wants to show he has gone to the nth degree diplomatically,” Mandel said.
“But that doesn’t mean other options disappear.”
Craig argued the visible military buildup is intended to shape Iranian calculations during talks, warning Tehran may attempt to prolong negotiations to buy time — a pattern seen in previous nuclear negotiations.
Netanyahu’s skepticism mirrors longstanding Israeli concerns that agreements focused narrowly on nuclear restrictions fail to address broader threats posed by Iran’s missile program and proxy forces operating across the region.
The Israeli leader also announced he would not return to Washington next week for a planned Board of Peace gathering and will instead address the AIPAC conference virtually, a move that has fueled speculation about the urgency surrounding current Iran discussions.
“If you told me tonight something dramatic happened,” Mandel said, “I wouldn’t be surprised.”
Over one million Iranians rallied across Europe, North America and Australia on Saturday in response to a call by exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi, while nighttime chants echoed from rooftops and apartment blocks inside Iran in a coordinated show of solidarity.
The largest gatherings took place in Toronto, Los Angeles and Munich, the three cities highlighted in the exiled prince's calls for solidarity rallies, where almost one million demonstrated.
In Munich, the local police estimated the crowd at around 250,000 people. Protesters filled the Theresienwiese grounds, waving lion-and-sun flags and chanting slogans in support of the national uprising in Iran.
In a speech delivered to the massive crowd in Munich, Pahlavi called the current moment “our final battle.”
The Toronto and Los Angeles rallies of Iranians also each drew 350,000 people, according to the two cities’ police.
In Toronto, Canadian officials including Ontario Premier Doug Ford and provincial ministers addressed demonstrators, voicing support for the Iranian people and condemning Tehran’s crackdown.
In Los Angeles which is home to the biggest population of Iranian diaspora, speakers and cultural figures joined the rally, framing the turnout as a message to Western governments to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic.
The global demonstrations coincided with renewed nighttime protests across Iranian cities following a call by the exiled prince.
Videos sent to Iran International showed residents in Tehran, Karaj, Shiraz, Isfahan, Rasht, and Kermanshah chanting “Death to the dictator” and other anti-government slogans from rooftops and windows. In some neighborhoods, chants referenced Pahlavi directly, echoing slogans heard at overseas rallies.
Political developments unfolded in parallel. Canada announced sanctions against seven individuals accused of involvement in repression and transnational intimidation.
In Washington, two US officials told Reuters the military is preparing contingency plans for a possible multi-week operation against Iran if ordered by President Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, Axios reported that US negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner consider the prospects of a comprehensive agreement with Tehran “difficult, if not impossible,” ahead of expected talks in Geneva hosted by Oman.
Iran’s exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi called for tighter sanctions, potential military action and rapid political transition to topple Iran’s ruling system, warning that negotiations and delay would cost more lives.
Addressing journalists on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, Pahlavi argued that failure to confront the authorities decisively would embolden authoritarian actors beyond Iran.
Diplomatic pressure alone, he added, was insufficient. “It is time to end the Islamic Republic,” he said.
His remarks came at a time when Iran, nuclear negotiations, regional tensions and domestic crackdowns have been among the key issues discussed at the Munich Security Conference.
Protests persist despite crackdown
Resistance inside Iran, Pahlavi said, continues despite arrests and executions of the people.
“When they came to the streets, they were only met with this brutal genocidal level, industrial level massacre,” he said, adding that many were forced to retreat but “people are still out there chanting.”
He warned that delay could cost lives. “Every day that goes by, more people could die,” he said, arguing that negotiations would not yield meaningful results.
The 2026 Munich Security Conference has become one of the most outspoken platforms for presenting international perspectives on the future of the Islamic Republic, with Prince Reza Pahlavi, US Senator Lindsey Graham, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky each addressing the issue from different angles – including Iran’s protests, the role of the Revolutionary Guards, international pressure and possible future scenarios.
Sanctions and revenue pressure
Pahlavi urged stronger enforcement of sanctions to weaken the government’s ability to sustain its security forces.
“One way to weaken the regime even further is to impose more restrictions so that their source of revenue is cut off so they can no longer sustain their own elements,” he said.
“Any source of revenue to the regime will contribute to its ability to sustain itself a little bit longer, but at the end it will fall,” he added, describing financial pressure as a way to accelerate collapse.
Earlier, Pahlavi designated February 14 as a global day of action and called on Iranians abroad to rally in Munich, Los Angeles and Toronto, as well as in other cities worldwide, to demonstrate their support for the “Lion and Sun Revolution” and their compatriots inside the country.
Regional instability and Europe’s stakes
Instability across the Middle East is rooted in radical Islamist movements, including forces linked to Tehran, Pahlavi noted.
“This regime has only one purpose which is to export this ideology. It is a threat to its own people.”
He said political change would benefit neighboring countries and Europe alike.
“We have now a possibility of even more migration to Europe as a result of any continuation of the status quo.”
“A free Iran that would be able to supply Europe with its energy needs would certainly be an alternative to the only source that you have right now,” he added, referring to Europe’s reliance on Russia.
He described a post-Islamic Republic transition as a “win-win” outcome that would open trade and investment while strengthening stability.
Ready to lead transition
The exiled prince said calls for his leadership inside Iran carry both weight and responsibility.
“Millions of Iranians chanted my name and called for my return. That humbles me and gives me a lot of responsibility at the same time to answer their call and to be the leader of this transition as they have asked for,” he said.
He emphasized that participation in the movement is broad-based.
“Anybody who agrees with those four core principles, irrespective of their political affiliation or viewpoints, can be part of this national struggle for freedom,” he said.
First 100 days and institutional continuity
Stabilizing the country would be the priority immediately after a collapse, Pahlavi added.
The first phase would be to “stabilize the country, stabilize the economy” and ensure security, he said, arguing that encouraging “maximum defections” would prevent chaos similar to Iraq after Saddam Hussein.
Those “criminally responsible” with “the blood of people on their hands” would face courts, he added.
He also outlined a phased constitutional process culminating in elections.
“At the end of this process, once the constitution is approved and the nation votes in a referendum to adopt it, we will have the election of the first new parliament and the first new government of that future democracy.”
Monarchy, republic and inclusion
Asked about the future political system, Pahlavi said voters – not factions – should decide.
“Democracy is not about exclusion, it’s about inclusion, unless you are not in conformity with democratic principles,” he noted.
“My position is neutral towards the outcome,” he said, arguing that Iranians should decide “by the ballot box.”
He rejected criticism that he seeks power for himself.
“I’m not running for office. I’m not running for a job. I’m not seeking a power or a title,” he said.
“The day that happens, I consider that the end of my political mission in life.”
Iran’s Fajr Film Festival went ahead this year as planned. But it did so in a country still reeling from bloodshed, and the red carpets beneath its guests carried a symbolic weight that many in the film community found difficult to ignore.
Some chose not to attend. Others did, and the result was a festival that felt unusually detached from the public mood—less a national cultural event than a carefully managed display of continuity.
Now in its 44th year, the festival took place less than forty days after tens of thousands of protesters were killed during the government’s crackdown. Under those circumstances, the decision to proceed on schedule was bound to draw scrutiny.
The nature of the festival itself has evolved over time, with an increasing share of films produced by state institutions or affiliated organizations. This year, too, such bodies as municipal authorities and even the judiciary appeared among the producers.
This has contributed to a growing perception, particularly among independent filmmakers, that the festival increasingly reflects official priorities rather than the diversity of Iranian cinema.
That perception was reinforced by a number of high-profile absences. Some directors and actors announced they would not attend.
The actor Elnaz Shakerdoost, one of Iran’s most recognizable performers, publicly questioned the timing of the festival and announced she would step away from acting. “Which festival? Which celebration?” she wrote. “I will not attend any celebration, nor will I ever again play a role in this land that smells of blood.”
Other films were screened without their directors or cast present. In several cases, producers appeared alone at press conferences. The director Soroush Sehat and the cast of his widely discussed film declined to attend altogether, leading organizers to cancel its press session.
These absences altered the character of the festival’s public discussions. Press conferences often featured only those filmmakers who had chosen to participate, some of whom criticized colleagues who had stayed away.
Mohammad Hossein Mahdavian, a director known for films focusing on Iran’s security institutions, described actors who declined to attend as “cowards.”
Many film critics and journalists opted not to cover the event. Even Film Emrooz, a long-established cinema magazine known for its cautious editorial line, did not publish its customary festival issue.
Public turnout appeared subdued as well. Organizers sought to maintain the appearance of normal activity, but attendance remained visibly lower than in previous years.
The closing ceremony reflected similar tensions. Several winners did not appear to accept their Simorgh awards. President Massoud Pezeshkian attended and praised those who had participated, signaling the government’s continued investment in the festival’s symbolic importance.
One award recipient attempted to acknowledge the broader context, alluding to the recent violence while accepting his prize. His remarks, however cautiously phrased, underscored the gap between the official narrative of continuity and the unresolved trauma still shaping public life.
Iran’s film industry has long occupied a complex position—both an instrument of national identity and a space for independent artistic expression. This year’s festival highlighted how difficult it has become to sustain that balance.
Freelancers across Iran lost foreign contracts and saw income dry up during January’s internet shutdown, digital workers told Iran International, as weeks offline cut their access to projects and payments in an economy already hit by global isolation.
Iran’s internet, throttled for 20 days during January’s mass killing of protesters, has been restored since earlier this month, but remains unstable, with VPNs and other censorship-bypassing tools now far harder to access than before the shutdown.
“The internet is not stable enough for me to confidently take on projects, and transferring money has become so complicated that the losses outweigh the income,” one electrical engineer working as a freelancer told Iran International, speaking on condition of anonymity for security reasons.
Iranian entrepreneurs and freelancers are mostly shut out of global platforms and payment systems due to US sanctions, forcing them to depend on expensive workarounds that put their businesses at risk.
The engineer said that before the shutdown, earnings depended on the size and complexity of each contract.
A group of Iranian entrepreneurs and businesspeople were granted 30 minutes of supervised internet access at the Chamber of Commerce in the final days of the internet shutdown in January 2026
Schoolgirls in Iran raise fists in protest; a handwritten sign reads, “This is the final battle, Pahlavi will return.”
A mother of an eighth-grade student in eastern Tehran said she had allowed her child to stay home for several days. “School should be the safest place for a child,” she said. “When I hear about inspections and questioning, it is natural to hesitate.”
The latest reports follow earlier accounts of security forces and Basij members entering schools in cities including Abadan in the south, Arak and parts of Mazandaran province, north of Iran.
Families previously reported that students were asked to sign written pledges without their parents present. In Bandar Abbas, Malayer and Gorgan, students were questioned about their families and protest-related activities. In Arak and Sari, some educational facilities were said to have been used as bases for security forces.
‘A deep rupture between families and schools’
Saba Alaleh, a Paris-based clinical psychologist and socio-political psychoanalyst, told Iran International’s English service that the developments point to a structural break in trust.
“We are witnessing a profound psychological and social rupture between families and schools,” she said.
“This rupture is not limited to recent events; it is the result of years of accumulated distrust.”
Experiences during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests in 2022, when schools were described as spaces of fear and pressure, intensified that mistrust, Alaleh said.
“A school should provide a sense of security. When it becomes associated with surveillance and threat, it transforms into a source of anxiety,” she added.
She warned that exposure to inspections and questioning could have lasting consequences for children. “When students experience constant monitoring, education can lose its meaning,” she argued.
“This can lead to declining motivation, deeper distrust and even identity confusion.”
Healthy psychological development, Alaleh explained, depends on a functional partnership between family and school.
“When that bond collapses, children may find themselves caught between conflicting value systems, complicating their social and identity development,” she added.
Long-term consequences for education
Nahid Hosseini, a London-based researcher on women’s affairs and education, said the recent developments reflect a broader crisis within the education system.
“When an educational environment is perceived as unsafe, it is natural for parents to withhold their children,” she told Iran International English. “But the result is the deprivation of millions of students from their right to education.”
With Iran’s student population estimated at more than 15 million, Hosseini said sustained absenteeism and declining trust in schools could have far-reaching social and economic consequences.
“Schools should be spaces of stability and growth. When they become associated with fear, the cost is borne not only by students but by society as a whole.”
A sanctuary no longer certain
For many families, the issue is no longer limited to temporary absences but to a broader shift in how they view the institution of schooling.
“In the past, even if there were problems, we still believed school was fundamentally safe,” a mother in Tehran said. “Now I feel my child is under pressure there.”
In the absence of transparent communication about the scope and purpose of security measures inside schools, distrust appears to be widening. Experts warn that once a school loses its standing as a safe haven, rebuilding that trust may prove far more difficult – with implications that could shape a generation’s relationship with formal education for years to come.