The world watched in stunned silence as Iran plunged into darkness. A week-long internet blackout, silencing over 90 million people, has been imposed by Iranian authorities, coinciding with the largest anti-government protests the country has seen in years. This information blackout has made it incredibly difficult to get reliable information.
On Wednesday, US time, President Donald Trump stated that his administration had been informed by "important sources" within the Islamic Republic that the brutal crackdown on demonstrators had ceased. However, the US-based HRANA rights group reported 2,615 confirmed deaths and 18,470 detentions since the protests began last month. Amnesty International's head, Agnès Callamard, highlighted the unprecedented severity of the killings and repression.
But here's where it gets controversial... While President Trump claimed the killing had stopped, reports from the BBC and the human rights group Hengaw indicated that a 26-year-old detainee, Erfan Soltani, was scheduled for execution. The family was reportedly granted a brief final visit.
Mr. Trump's comments followed his previous warnings that the US would come to the "rescue" of protesters and that the Iranian regime would "pay hell" if protesters were harmed.
Is it calming down? HRANA noted that the lack of new reports of street protests could be due to a decline in demonstrations or the severe communication restrictions. NetBlocks, a UK-based internet watchdog, confirmed that the near-total communications blackout had entered its seventh day. Alam Saleh from the Australian National University's Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies shared that people inside Iran had told him the situation was becoming quieter, but security forces remained omnipresent.
Dr. Saleh suggested that Mr. Trump's declaration was influenced by a desire to avoid immediate military action. He also pointed out that regional powers, even Iran's adversaries, opposed US military intervention, fearing it would destabilize the region.
What's at stake? US or Israeli military strikes against Iran could bolster the regime's narrative that the protesters were foreign agents.
The diaspora is desperate for information. With few videos on social media and information verification made difficult by the regime's communications blackout, NetBlocks director Alp Toker noted this was one of the longest internet blackouts recorded. He suggested that the regime's motivation was to conceal killings and repression. Iranian authorities have also cut conventional phone lines.
Sahar Gholizadeh, a Melbourne-based Iranian community leader, stated that history would remember who spoke when an entire nation was pushed into darkness. Sporadic messages from contacts in Iran confirmed that her immediate family was alive, but her cousin had been detained. Some Iranians have been able to access satellite internet connections via Starlink, and those near borders could get some mobile reception from neighboring countries.
Could intervention be the only way? Many diaspora Iranians have called for the Islamic Republic to be replaced by an interim government led by Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the Shah of Iran. Supporters believe he could lead a transition to secular democracy.
An Iranian-Australian based in Brisbane, who requested anonymity, stated that they saw US military action as the only solution, despite not generally supporting foreign military intervention.
However, Dr. Saleh noted that while most Iranians were disenchanted with the Islamic Republic, many remained fearful of the possible consequences of US military action.
What do you think? Do you believe the US should intervene? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
