Not Acting In Iran Could Ruin Trump's Rep, Even Bring On Civil War

Latest stories US, China once had rare-earth aces in the hole but the US folded Trump unveils his new 'Board of Peace' with no big hitters so far The winners and losers so far from Trump's tariffs

Together, these events profoundly shaped a public perception in Tehran, Shiraz, Mashhad and across cities and provinces in Iran that Trump's words were backed by action, reinforcing the belief that his warnings regarding Iran should be taken seriously.

Beyond these promised outcomes, events such as the killing of ISIL (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in 2019 and the assassination of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in 2020 further lent credence to the perception that Trump meant business rather than simply indulging in rhetoric, at least in most cases.

Trump's record profoundly impacted the protests

This track record paved the way for a growing perception that external intervention was credible and that the international environment could directly impact the outcome of the protests or, at the very least, influence the regime's domestic decisions.

The idea that a major world power was watching, was issuing red-line warnings that could translate into pressure or consequences, emboldened segments of society that had previously hesitated to participate in large numbers. This same perception influenced protesters' calculations about when, and how forcefully, to push back.

Indeed, the timeline of the protests' expansion, from commercial districts in Tehran to provincial cities and university campuses across the country, coincided with Trump's explicit warnings to the Iranian regime against using lethal force on demonstrators. Citizens and activists who had previously hesitated now perceived an opportunity to challenge the state without assuming immediate existential risk.

In the days that followed, participation surged. The protests drew not only traditional activists and students but also previously disengaged citizens, workers and members of the middle class who had long tolerated economic mismanagement and political repression out of caution.

Trump's influence operated through perception as much as policy. His credibility, demonstrated through prior actions, shaped how protesters evaluated the risks of escalation. The belief that external actors might constrain the regime's response emboldened citizens to act collectively, lowering the psychological barrier that had previously kept many off the streets.

At the same time, the regime intensified its crackdown, creating a cycle in which both sides became increasingly entrenched in confrontation. By mid-January, the deadly crackdown ultimately quelled the protests across the country.

Trump's record and Its impact on the regime's repression

Trump's impact on the regime was evident both during the protests and after they were contained. Trump's track record and repeated willingness to act on public threats led the regime to treat his warnings as credible constraints rather than symbolic rhetoric. This perception shaped how the regime assessed the risks of both restraint and escalation.

When the protests were still ongoing, Iranian judges and prosecutors, through state media and news agencies, attempted to frame the demonstrations as foreign-inspired sabotage. Meanwhile, Tehran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, publicly blamed external influence for the unrest and even suggested that protesters were acting to“please Trump.” Although this framing functioned as propaganda, it underscored how seriously the regime took Trump's statements.

There is also an indication that the regime responded to Trump's pressure even after the protests were quelled. Iran has halted planned executions of detained protesters amid warnings of US action, a development that underscores how seriously the regime takes such threats, particularly given Trump's track record of following through on them.

Trump's reputation at stake

While economic hardship and political repression motivated the protests, Trump's repeated warnings and calls to action, when considered alongside his track record, gave protesters confidence that escalation could meaningfully alter outcomes. Many Iranians, like many observers across the world, interpreted this track record as signalling a determined external actor both capable of and willing to alter outcomes in real time.

Emboldened by perceived US support, protesters pushed confrontations that escalated violence faster than anticipated. At the same time, the regime, fearing foreign interference, reacted with maximal repression and ultimately succeeded in suppressing the protests.