The protest actions that began in Iran on December 28–29, initially driven by the sharp depreciation of the national currency and rising prices, quickly took on a broader political tone and spread across various parts of the country.
According to regional affairs expert Armen Petrosyan, these developments were to some extent unexpected, as large-scale protest waves had not been considered likely in Iran in recent years, despite accumulated socio-economic problems.
“After the military actions carried out by Israel against Iran in June 2025, external pressure actually led to an opposite trend inside society — internal consolidation in the face of external aggression. During that period, even serious social issues such as water supply disruptions, electricity shortages, and air pollution did not trigger mass protests,” Petrosyan notes.
A spontaneous start and attempts at steering the protests
In the expert’s assessment, the protests that erupted in late December were initially spontaneous and had a clear economic basis. However, as they expanded and deepened, attempts at direction and manipulation became visible, particularly by Iran’s external adversaries.
“Economically driven protests quickly spread across around 26 provinces, covering hundreds of localities. At the same time, it became evident that certain forces were trying to shift this discontent toward an agenda of regime change,” Petrosyan emphasizes.
He adds that protest activity has been especially pronounced in regions populated by non-Persian ethnic groups — particularly Kurdish and Baluchi areas — which are traditionally viewed as more vulnerable to external influence.
A cautious response from the authorities
Unlike previous protest waves, the response of the Iranian authorities this time has been relatively restrained and constructive. According to Petrosyan, messages at both the presidential level and from the country’s supreme religious leadership have emphasized the need to listen to economic grievances and address them within the state system.
“The replacement of the Central Bank governor and the resignations of senior officials indicate that the authorities are attempting to partially ease tensions and avoid a harsh crackdown,” the expert says.
Why the logic of force has changed
Petrosyan recalls that in similar situations in the past — during the 2019 protests over fuel price hikes and the 2022 protests related to women’s rights — the authorities acted far more harshly, resorting to widespread use of force.
This time, he argues, the shift in approach is driven by two main factors. The first is the real risk of external intervention, which became particularly acute after developments in Venezuela. The second is the direct and indirect threats voiced by the United States and Israel.
“Donald Trump has repeatedly commented publicly on events in Iran, hinting at possible U.S. intervention if brute force is used against protesters. Israel has also openly expressed support for the protesters,” Petrosyan notes.
He also stresses that, according to various analytical sources, the protests have been accompanied by activity from foreign intelligence agents, which could lead to escalation and unpredictable developments.
A risky outlook
According to Petrosyan, casualties and hundreds of injuries have already been recorded over the past eight days, indicating that the situation remains far from stable.
“At this stage, the protest wave shows signs of expansion, and developments may enter a more dangerous phase if socio-economic grievances become fully politicized or are turned into a tool of external interference,” the expert concludes.