Iran’s new school year begins in the shadow of protest and war

I have been hearing versions of this story with disturbing frequency lately, from a doctor, a software engineer, an artist, a journalist and others, men and women ranging from their early twenties to their mid-forties.

Some are politically active, others barely so. What many appear to have in common is that at some point they said something online that somebody in authority did not like.

One woman in her thirties described discovering that the mobile line registered in her name had been blocked. When she tried to buy another SIM card, she learned that her national ID had also been restricted, preventing her from simply starting again with a new number.

It sounds like an inconvenience until you begin listing everything in Iran that now requires a phone number registered in your own name. Government portals routinely require text-message verification. So do university and banking services, even ride-hailing and food-delivery apps.

This is what makes the punishment so effective. The mobile phone is one of the keys to modern life here, and someone can apparently take that key away without ever coming to your door.

Life in Iran is difficult enough without inventing new ways to make it harder. People are still recovering from a brutal crackdown and war while living with the possibility of another round. Prices rise between visits to the supermarket, rent eats into salaries that were inadequate to begin with, power cuts are frequent and the internet remains unreliable.

Most people spend an extraordinary amount of mental energy simply working out how to get through another month. Now imagine trying to do all that without a functioning phone number.

A journalist in her late twenties told me she was preparing a report on SIM blocking when her own number suddenly stopped working. She knew immediately that it was not a technical glitch or an administrative accident.

"It feels as though I've ceased to exist administratively in my own country," she told me.

Others disappear even more quietly. They are not prominent activists whose names people will recognise. They are doctors, programmers, students and artists, or simply people with a few hundred followers who wrote something angry or shared something at the wrong moment.

Their phone goes dead and perhaps a handful of friends know. There is no campaign for them, and often nobody beyond their immediate circle even knows that they have been punished.

One software engineer told me that after his SIM was blocked, he began looking online for people in the same position. In about a week, he says, he came across almost 100 accounts that appeared similar to his own.

There is something particularly cruel about a punishment with no clear beginning or end. If you are charged with an offence, at least there is an accusation to confront. Here, most people are not told about the red line they crossed or how long they should suffer for it.

One person I spoke to had their SIM blocked for months after intervention by Revolutionary Guards intelligence. To have it restored, they say, they were required to delete their Twitter account and promise not to get themselves into further trouble online.

Many watching Iran from afar look at the social changes visible on Tehran's streets and conclude that the state has loosened its grip. Women now walk around without hijab in numbers that would have been difficult to imagine only a few years ago. Young men and women mix openly, and the cafés are full of people who can afford them.

None of this happened because the authorities graciously granted people more freedom of course. They fought these changes and continue to fight them, but society pushed ahead anyway and, on some fronts at least, the state appears for now to have lost.

But political dissent is a different story. There seems to be far less willingness to retreat when people challenge power itself, and the methods do not always have to be spectacular.

Repression can be something as mundane as discovering that the little device in your hand, around which so much of your life has been organised, no longer connects you to anything.

This is the latest version of the Islamic Republic: punishment hidden in plain sight, no dramatic image for the outside world to share, no prison gate for relatives to gather outside and often no official decision that can be challenged.

You can see a young woman walking down a Tehran street with her hair uncovered. What you cannot see is whether her phone still works.

Washington has threatened sanctions against airports and companies that provide services to Iranian carriers as international travel options are already narrowing.

Mahan Air has suspended flights to Turkey and Oman, while Georgia has announced a halt to flights by all Iranian airlines.

Iran International asked its Instagram audience what they thought about the growing restrictions. Responses ranged from support for measures seen as increasing pressure on the state to concern about their consequences for medicine, essential goods and family travel.

“At last, the water has reached the upper decks,” one respondent wrote.

The phrase captured a recurring argument among those who welcomed the restrictions: hardships that have long affected ordinary Iranians may now be reaching wealthier or better-connected sections of society.

Others argued that air travel had already become unaffordable for much of the population and said they were prepared to tolerate further restrictions if they increased the economic and political cost for the authorities or made it more difficult for officials and those close to them to travel abroad.

The responses do not constitute a representative survey of Iranian public opinion, but they point to a revealing tension over who bears the cost of external pressure.

‘The issue isn't just travel’

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Iranian airlines would effectively be shut out of international operations from September 23, warning that airports and companies providing them with services could themselves face US sanctions.

The restrictions do not amount to the closure of Iranian airspace or automatically prohibit foreign airlines from flying to Iran. But the threat of sanctions could make it increasingly difficult for Iranian carriers to operate abroad.

For some respondents, that raised concerns extending well beyond passenger travel to medicine, raw materials, spare parts and other goods entering Iran by air.

“Everyone is thinking about passenger flights, but the real problem that will emerge is cargo flights,” one wrote.

“The issue isn't just travel,” another respondent wrote. “A lot of goods reached Iran by air, such as medicine … what is supposed to happen to patients now?”

Others pointed to higher ticket prices, longer journeys involving indirect routes and increasing difficulties visiting relatives abroad. Some feared higher import costs would feed into inflation, further squeezing household finances.

“In the war and confrontation between the government and America, it is the people who are being crushed,” one respondent wrote.

Some also pointed to congestion at land crossings such as Bazargan and Razi, fearing that further disruption to air travel would push more passengers onto already strained overland routes.

Where does tolerance for pressure end?

The responses also revealed differing interpretations of what Washington is trying to achieve.

Some saw the aviation restrictions as another sign of escalating confrontation, while others interpreted them as an attempt to increase pressure on Tehran to reach an agreement.

Several said years of sanctions and economic crisis had left society increasingly accustomed, or even numb, to new restrictions.

Measures perceived as restricting officials, state institutions or wealthier Iranians attracted support from many of those who responded to Iran International.

But that support became less straightforward when people contemplated medicine and essential goods becoming harder to obtain, more expensive travel, separation from relatives or further increases in household costs.

The responses suggest tolerance for outside pressure can be easier to sustain when its costs appear concentrated on the state. Once those costs become tangible in everyday life, the calculation becomes more complicated—even among Iranians who want greater pressure on Tehran.

The statements came within hours of each other, from MPs, a Tehran city council official and military figures, and they map the mood in the hardline camp on the eve of the president's departure.

It came as Donald Trump said he was willing to meet Pezeshkian in New York while warning that "something big" could happen to Iran.

Kamran Ghazanfari, a hardline MP, told Didban Iran that if the existence of the Islamic Republic came under serious threat, the new supreme leader could reconsider the question of nuclear weapons. Some MPs favor a nuclear deterrent to end the recurring threats against Iran, he said, though any decision would rest with senior officials and the Supreme National Security Council.

Parviz Sarvari, deputy chairman of Tehran city council, said he would welcome news that Iran had moved toward building nuclear weapons for deterrence. Membership of the Non-Proliferation Treaty had brought Iran no benefit, he said, while its adversaries threatened it from a position of nuclear superiority.

The push has gone beyond words. Hossein-Ali Haji-Deligani, an MP, submitted a triple-urgency bill for Iran's withdrawal from the NPT, arguing that membership had become more costly since the IAEA Board of Governors referred Iran to the UN Security Council. Similar proposals have circulated for months and the leadership of parliament has kept them off the floor. Haji-Deligani said the presidium has now acknowledged receipt of this one.

Military figures spoke the same day. Army commander Amir Hatami said the armed forces were at full readiness. Esmail Kowsari, of parliament's national security committee, said Iran's growing capabilities would eventually push American forces out of the region.

Revolutionary Guards spokesman Hossein Mohebbi said the war with the United States and Israel was not over and that the Guards had prepared for a long one, citing assessments that Washington may be considering fresh strikes.

What the day was for

Three things were happening at once.

The first is the argument about the last war. The ceasefire that ended the 12-day conflict left hardliners needing it not to look like a defeat at home, and insisting the war is unfinished keeps the account open.

The second is pressure on Pezeshkian. The NPT bill and the nuclear talk arrived alongside renewed parliamentary criticism of his government for allowing IAEA inspectors access, in a dispute over how far Iran should engage Washington and the monitors.

The third is the IAEA referral and the threat of snapback sanctions, which is the immediate cause of the NPT bill and the reason the timing is not a coincidence.

The language stayed inside limits. Ghazanfari attached any reconsideration of weapons to an existential threat. Sarvari's endorsement was of a hypothetical. Neither said Iran should build a bomb now, and neither Mojtaba Khamenei nor the Supreme National Security Council has said anything on the question.

The risk is how it reads elsewhere. Open parliamentary discussion of leaving the NPT and of nuclear contingencies is the kind of material Washington and Israel have previously cited as evidence that Iran is moving toward a weapon, and the United States struck Iranian nuclear sites during the last war. On the same day, the Guards said they expected it to happen again.

Students and language teachers described cancelled exams, disrupted preparation and growing reliance on overseas testing in interviews with Iranian newspaper Etemad.

TOEFL and GRE testing inside Iran stopped after the US Treasury Department suspended an authorization covering certain educational services involving Iran on August 24. Applicants have also faced restrictions affecting PTE and Duolingo, although the rules differ between providers.

“The morning she arrived at the center, they told her the test would not be held because of sanctions,” Homa, a language teacher identified only by her first name, said of a student who travelled from Gilan province in northern Iran. “That Saturday, all I could hear was students crying, some of whom had only a few weeks until their test date.”

• 

  Iranians tell of shrinking paths to study abroad

Some candidates had already paid for transportation and accommodation before learning their exams would not take place. Others were approaching university deadlines with little time to find alternatives.

Exam trips become a new expense

Applicants are increasingly looking to Armenia, Turkey and other nearby countries, feeding an informal business offering what Homa described as “exam tours.”

Intermediaries arrange appointments, foreign-currency payments, transportation and accommodation, sometimes allowing applicants to leave Iran, sit an exam and return within 24 or 48 hours.

Applicants travelling overland and sharing accommodation can spend around 300 million rials, about $130 at an open-market rate of roughly 2.3 million rials to the dollar. More expensive trips can reach 1 billion to 1.5 billion rials, or about $435 to $650, Homa estimated.

Those sums compare with a government-set minimum base wage of about 166 million rials, or $72, a month. With standard allowances, the minimum monthly package for a single worker is around 218 million rials, or $95.

Telegram groups have become information hubs for testing centers, accommodation and foreign payments. Homa said some operators also offer to manipulate internet or computer settings to make applicants inside Iran appear to be abroad, potentially exposing them to cancelled scores or blocked accounts.

Few alternatives without travel

Switching exams can mean losing months of specialized preparation and does not necessarily eliminate the need to travel.

IELTS is in a different position because it is jointly owned by the British Council, Australia's IDP and Cambridge University Press & Assessment rather than a US testing organization. The suspension of General License G therefore does not directly apply to it.

IELTS testing inside Iran, however, had already ended on January 31, 2026, after IDP cited separate “financial and regulatory factors” outside its control. Iranian applicants seeking the test must therefore also travel abroad.

Tabassom, identified only by her first name, had spent nine months preparing for PTE as part of plans to obtain an Australian work visa. She now expects to switch to IELTS.

100%

“I spent an average of 150 million rials ($65) a month on language training,” Tabassom said. “Over nine months, I spent nearly one billion rials ($435) just on classes and training. I had reached the point where I was going to take the exam in another month and a half, but now I have to switch to IELTS and start preparing again.”

Domestic problems compound the disruption

The testing restrictions have landed on applicants already dealing with economic and infrastructure problems inside Iran.

Tabassom said internet outages had already disrupted contact with her immigration lawyer before the problems surrounding PTE forced her to change plans.

• 

  Iran sanctions reach education: Duolingo blocked, TOEFL and GRE in doubt

Applicants with sufficient resources can respond by travelling abroad or paying for additional preparation. Others may have to borrow money or delay their plans. Homa said some students had sold gold or household belongings or taken loans to continue pursuing testing and migration.

For Iranians seeking to study or work abroad, the challenge is no longer only achieving the required score, but finding an affordable way to reach the examination room.

The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran said the Islamic Republic’s response to protests that began in December 2025 amounted to a widespread and systematic attack on civilians involving unlawful killings, torture, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances and severe restrictions on freedom of expression.

“The Iranian Government’s repression of the recent protests has led the Mission to find Iran responsible for gross human rights violations,” mission chair Sara Hossain told the council in Geneva, saying many amounted to crimes against humanity, including murder, imprisonment, torture and other inhumane acts.

The mission said the crackdown marked a significant escalation from previous patterns of repression, citing the scale of killings and violence, internet shutdowns, mass arrests and the use of the death penalty. It said it could not independently verify the overall toll but believed the number of people killed and injured was likely far higher than the government’s figures of 3,038 deaths and 25,000 injuries.

Classified government documents, field reports and accounts from medical workers, witnesses and victims’ families reviewed by Iran International’s Editorial Board showed that more than 36,500 people were killed by security forces on January 8 and 9 alone.

However, independent verification has been impossible amid communications restrictions and government pressure.

The unrest began on December 28 with protests over worsening economic conditions before spreading nationwide and turning into a broader challenge to the Islamic Republic.

In her Monday speech, Hossain said Iranians were now confronting both continued domestic repression and the large-scale US-Israeli military campaign that began on February 28.

She said Iranian authorities had also used the war to intensify persecution of protesters, describing the conflict as “a pretext for and accelerator of repression.”

Iran rejected the mission’s findings about its own conduct. Ambassador Ali Bahreini argued that economic pressure against Iran, combined with what Tehran describes as foreign manipulation and militarization of domestic unrest, amounted to crimes against humanity and accused the mission of ignoring those issues.

US war crime

The mission then turned to two US strikes carried out on the opening day of the war.

The United States and Israel launched attacks across Iran on February 28 in an operation Washington said was intended to severely weaken Iran’s military and prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. President Donald Trump said at the outset that US forces would destroy Iran’s missile industry and navy, while Tehran denies seeking nuclear weapons. The attacks triggered Iranian retaliation against Israel and US-linked targets across the region.

Against that wider military campaign, the mission examined a US strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, Hormozgan Province.

Hossain said two cruise missiles hit the school, killing 157 people, including 123 boys and girls, according to sources the mission considered credible. She described it as a readily identifiable civilian building and said investigators found reasonable grounds to believe the strike amounted to the war crime of making a civilian object the object of an attack.

The school was adjacent to an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps naval complex, but investigators found no evidence that the building itself was being used for military purposes. The mission said the United States had failed to update information about the school in its targeting databases or adequately establish that it was a military objective, conduct it said amounted to more than mere negligence.

The mission reached a separate war-crimes finding over a US strike on a sports center in a residential area of Lamerd, Fars Province. Local authorities said 22 people — 10 women and 12 men — were killed. Investigators concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe the strike constituted an indiscriminate attack resulting in civilian deaths or damage to civilian property.

Hossain said repeated airstrikes and threats of further attacks continued to endanger civilians, destroy homes and livelihoods and disrupt access to education and healthcare. She called on all sides to conduct independent investigations into alleged violations of international humanitarian law, specifically urging Washington to investigate the two strikes and provide accountability and reparations where warranted.

Washington’s reaction

Washington rejected the conclusions. The Pentagon said its own investigation remained underway and that it had nothing further to announce, while White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly dismissed the Human Rights Council’s work and said Iran was the only party in the conflict to have committed war crimes.

US officials have maintained that American military operations comply with the law of armed conflict.

US Ambassador to the UN Mike Waltz also said Trump was expected to challenge the findings when he addresses the UN General Assembly on Tuesday, saying the president would continue to “call out the ridiculous.”