On January 12, when riots and violent protests had been wreaking havoc across Iran for more than two weeks, US President Donald Trump posted a message on his social media platform, Truth Social. “Iranian patriots,” he wrote. “Keep protesting. Take over your institutions. I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian officials until the senseless killing of protesters stops. Help is on its way.”
This was not his first message of encouragement to the hundreds of thousands who had taken to the streets of Iran’s cities and towns protesting against the regime and the hardships it was inflicting on the people. In a Truth Social post in the early hours of Friday, January 2, he had already written that if Iran “violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue,” adding: “We are locked and loaded and ready to go.”
The nationwide insurrection can be dated back to December 28, when a sudden currency collapse, coming on top of already severe inflation and falling purchasing power, led to bazaar strikes and street demonstrations in Tehran.
The Iranian rial had plunged to a historic low of around 1.42 million per dollar, destroying price stability for import‑dependent traders, and making normal bazaar commerce impossible. Rapid exchange-rate swings and rising costs meant that shopkeepers could not set or honor prices. Facing possible bankruptcy, they closed their shops and struck in protest at what they saw as regime mismanagement of the economy.
The uprising moved quickly from economic dissatisfaction by the trading community to an open challenge to the entire Islamic Republic by large numbers of the public. By the first week of January, protests had expanded to cities and towns in nearly all 31 provinces. It is still in progress, and according to diplomatic and media estimates, the number of people participating nationwide could possibly be in the millions.
Iranians risk their lives on Trump's words
The many slogans chanted by protesters include calls for the overthrow of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, demands for an Iranian republic, and nostalgia for the deposed monarchy (“Reza Shah, may your soul be blessed,” which honored the founder of the Pahlavi dynasty). “This is the final battle; Pahlavi will return” is chanted in places, explicitly calling for Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi to lead a reborn Iran. These monarchist slogans do, however, coexist with strong anti‑monarchical and republican currents, and the insurrection’s center of gravity is essentially anti‑Islamic Republic.
In light of Trump’s own words, Iranians who are risking life and liberty by challenging their oppressive government might reasonably believe that the US president is preparing to intervene on their behalf and help them overthrow the regime. But that is not likely to happen.
From the American perspective, there are, in addition to the regime’s violent crackdown on protesters, three pressing issues in the Iran file: the nuclear program, the ballistic missile program, and Iran’s regional proxies. These seem to have taken precedence over any practical support for the popular uprising against the regime.
Return to negotiations
To justify Trump’s visible military buildup around Iran in late January, Washington did cite Tehran’s ruthless crackdown and soaring protester death toll, but also mentioned broader concerns about its regional and nuclear behavior. The marked increase in US air, naval, and missile-defense deployments across the Middle East, notably the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group and accompanying forces to the region, was explicitly framed as deterrence and preparation for possible strikes on Iran.
Preliminary US-Iran talks in the first week of February were fruitful enough for a further round to be tabled, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington to coordinate with Trump the line to be taken. Talks, not action, emerged as Trump’s priority.
Meanwhile, confused commentators are asking why Iran’s nuclear program is once again a central concern. Didn’t Trump himself say Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been “completely and fully obliterated” during the 12-day war in June?
Herb Keinon, writing in The Jerusalem Post, summarized the issue in a nutshell: “The return to negotiations – reviving the nuclear file while setting aside what has taken place on Iran’s streets – gives the impression that a moment of great regime vulnerability has been squandered. All of a sudden, the two sides are talking about centrifuges and enrichment levels, when many assumed the focus had shifted decisively to the awful nature of the regime and its violent suppression of its own people.”
As regards the nuclear issue, the current US position is a demand that Iran completely halt its nuclear program and ship its stock of enriched uranium, estimated at some 450 kg., out of the country – presumably to Russia. If serious negotiations actually start, several months of talks would probably be needed to finalize agreement on the nuclear issue, which is the only one the Iranians have so far agreed to consider.
The harsh truth
But there is no evading the harsh truth. Trump explicitly urged Iranians to “keep protesting” and “take over” institutions, telling them that “help is on its way.” He then held back from intervention while the regime’s crackdown on the protesters escalated, and now US policy has shifted toward nuclear talks and military deterrence, leaving Iranians facing mass killings, detentions, and collective punishment without the external backing they thought they had been promised.
According to Reza Pahlavi’s media office, the regime has killed at least 43,000 Iranians since the current protests began. On February 10, the family of 20-year-old Ali Heydari, arrested by regime forces on January 8, reported that he had been executed without facing trial.
For protesters, Trump’s combination of rhetorical encouragement and minimal practical support must be a bitter disappointment. Anger against the regime will doubtless persist, but what has happened may well be perceived by the people of Iran as a form of betrayal by Trump and the US.
The writer, a former senior civil servant, is the Middle East correspondent for Eurasia Review. Follow him at: www.a-mid-east-journal.blogspot.com