The recent wave of organized unrest and violence in Iran has onceb again exposed a harsh reality of global politics: interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states is often justified in the name of power and strategic interests. The events that unfolded in early January in Iran were neither spontaneous nor merely an emotional public reaction. Rather, they appeared to be part of a calculated plan aimed at diverting legitimate economic protests toward chaos and terrorism.

According to Iranian authorities, the violent incidents that occurred between January 8 and 10 clearly demonstrate how a protest environment was deliberately hijacked. Attacks on civilians, security forces, and public infrastructure cannot, by any definition, be categorized as peaceful protest. This is the point at which the line between protest and terrorism becomes unmistakably clear, and international law treats such actions as serious crimes.

The broader context of these events is equally significant. Fresh threats of military action against Iran by the US president acted as fuel on an already burning fire. Tehran maintains that these statements constituted a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter, and that in this hostile climate, US- and Israeli-backed elements sought to transform protests into widespread disorder. According to Iranian officials and the foreign minister, the objective was evident: to create internal instability and pave the way for external pressure and aggression.

As a result of the unrest, mosques, educational institutions, hospitals, banks, power facilities, and other public assets were damaged. Precious lives of civilians and security personnel were lost. Destruction on such a scale cannot be attributed to momentary anger; it points instead to an organized strategy designed to spread fear and weaken state authority.

Trump, the “Donroe Doctrine,” and the Illusion of a Liberal World Order

Iran links these developments to what it describes as the double standards of the United States and its Western allies. On one hand, they claim to oppose terrorism, while on the other, they provide political and moral space to groups such as the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MKO), whose hands, according to Iran, are stained with the blood of thousands of Iranian citizens. Similarly, the actions of the Israeli state in the region are often kept beyond accountability, even escaping meaningful scrutiny at the United Nations.

Iranian authorities insist that they respect the right to peaceful protest. The demonstrations that began in December 2025 were rooted in economic hardships and concerns over reform measures. However, Tehran argues that the roots of these hardships lie in unilateral US sanctions. These sanctions not only violate international law but also directly impact the daily lives of ordinary citizens, thereby fueling instability.

Iran further warns that these events should serve as a lesson for other countries as well. Unilateral economic sanctions do not destabilize only one nation; they undermine the entire global order. If Iran is targeted today, another country could face the same fate tomorrow. Unless the international community adopts a collective stance against such practices, no state can truly consider itself safe.

This raises a fundamental question: when will the global conscience awaken? When will international law be freed from the grip of powerful states’ interests and made a genuine guarantor of sovereignty and justice? Iran maintains that it reserves the right to hold the United States and Israel accountable under international law and will continue this struggle in all relevant legal forums.

Ultimately, this struggle is a test of a core principle: does the world truly believe in the rule of law, or not? The coming days will reveal whether the international community is willing to stand with Iran against what it sees as American intransigence, or whether a continued pattern of intervention in other countries will further destabilize the region, pushing it toward even greater uncertainty.