President Donald Trump said the United States is considering a range of strong responses to Iran’s violent crackdown on nationwide protests, including possible military action, while also signalling openness to negotiations with Tehran. The unrest, sparked by rising prices in late December, has evolved into one of the most serious challenges to Iran’s clerical leadership since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Trump said Iran had called to negotiate over its nuclear programme, months after Israel and the United States bombed Iranian nuclear sites during a brief but intense 12-day war in June. He warned Iran’s leaders that Washington would respond forcefully if security forces continued firing on protesters, framing the situation as both a human rights crisis and a strategic test of U.S. resolve.
A U.S.-based rights group, HRANA, said it had verified the deaths of 490 protesters and 48 security personnel, with more than 10,600 arrests, figures that could not be independently confirmed by Reuters. Iranian authorities have not released an official death toll, and an internet blackout has sharply limited the flow of information from inside the country.
U.S. Options and Signals
Trump said he was set to meet senior advisers to discuss Iran, as reports emerged that options under consideration include military strikes, cyber operations, expanded sanctions and support for anti-government voices online. “The military is looking at it, and we’re looking at some very strong options,” Trump said aboard Air Force One, underscoring that force remained on the table even as diplomatic channels appeared to reopen.
He also said he would speak to Elon Musk about restoring internet access in Iran via Starlink, highlighting the administration’s focus on information access as a tool of pressure. At the same time, Trump said the U.S. was in contact with Iranian opposition figures, a move likely to be interpreted by Tehran as direct interference.
Iran’s Response and Warnings
Iranian officials accused the United States and Israel of fomenting unrest and called for nationwide rallies to condemn what they described as U.S.- and Israeli-led “terrorist actions.” Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf warned Washington against “miscalculation,” saying any attack on Iran would make Israel, U.S. bases and American ships legitimate targets.
State television aired images of dozens of body bags at Tehran’s coroner’s office, blaming the deaths on “armed terrorists,” while showing families waiting to identify loved ones at forensic centres. Authorities declared three days of national mourning for those they called martyrs killed resisting the United States and Israel, signalling a continued hardline narrative.
Regional and Security Fallout
Israel has moved to a high-alert posture amid fears that U.S. intervention could trigger wider conflict. The latest crisis comes as Iran continues to recover from last year’s war and from setbacks to its regional allies, including Hezbollah, weakening Tehran’s strategic position even as it confronts unrest at home.
Analysts note that Iran’s leadership has survived repeated protest waves in the past, often through force and internal cohesion. Former U.S. diplomat Alan Eyre said it was unlikely the current protests would topple the system, but warned the state could emerge significantly weakened.
Analysis
Trump’s approach reflects a familiar dual-track strategy of coercion and engagement, but the stakes appear higher than in previous Iran crises. By openly floating military options while advertising negotiations and technological support for protesters, Washington is deliberately maximising pressure across multiple fronts. This may deter Tehran in the short term, but it also risks reinforcing the regime’s siege narrative and justifying harsher repression.
The critical question is not whether Iran’s leadership will fall, but how much legitimacy and capacity it will lose in suppressing dissent under intense external pressure. If the protests subside without meaningful concessions, Iran may emerge more brittle and isolated, yet still defiant. Conversely, any U.S. or Israeli military move, even limited, could quickly shift the focus from internal unrest to nationalist mobilisation, ultimately strengthening the very forces Washington hopes to weaken.
With information from Reuters.
