Speaking in a televised address, Pezeshkian said foreign leaders took advantage of public frustration caused by inflation and currency collapse, turning social grievances into what he described as an externally encouraged crisis.

The protests erupted in late December after sharp rises in food prices, housing costs, and unemployment placed heavy pressure on ordinary citizens

Demonstrations spread across multiple cities, drawing in thousands who voiced anger over economic mismanagement and declining living standards.

According to Iranian officials, the unrest lasted nearly two weeks before subsiding following a forceful security response by the authorities.

Human rights groups outside the country have reported very high casualty figures, while Iranian officials have provided lower but still significant numbers, highlighting the scale and intensity of the confrontation.

President Pezeshkian alleged that Washington, Tel Aviv, and European capitals provided encouragement and resources that pushed some protesters toward violence.

He claimed that foreign leaders were not motivated by concern for Iranian citizens but by a desire to weaken national unity and fracture society.

He argued that while the protests began as economic demonstrations, they were later transformed into something more dangerous.

In his words, the unrest was no longer just about livelihoods but had become a coordinated effort to sow hatred, division, and long term instability within Iran.

The Iranian president directly named U.S. President Donald Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and unnamed European leaders as key actors.

He said they publicly supported demonstrators while privately seeking to undermine Iran’s political system.

Trump has repeatedly expressed support for the protesters and warned Tehran against continued crackdowns.

U.S. officials have indicated that various options remain under review, including potential military measures, though no final decision has been announced.

Meanwhile, reports of increased U.S. naval activity in the region have heightened concerns about escalation.

Regional observers say such developments add to an already volatile security environment in the Middle East.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi echoed the president’s claims during interviews abroad, stating that thousands had been killed during the unrest, including security personnel.

He insisted that the protests were not a purely domestic phenomenon and accused foreign governments of interference.

Despite the sharp rhetoric, regional diplomacy has continued behind the scenes.

Countries such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have reportedly been working to ease tensions and prevent a direct military confrontation between Tehran and Washington.

At the center of the broader dispute remains Iran’s missile programme and nuclear related concerns.
The United States has demanded limits on missile development as a condition for renewed talks, a demand Iran has firmly rejected.

Araqchi stated that missiles would never be part of negotiations and warned that Iran was prepared for both dialogue and conflict if necessary.

He also dismissed talk of regime change, calling it an unrealistic fantasy promoted by Iran’s adversaries.

Iranian leaders maintain that the political system is resilient and deeply rooted, capable of withstanding both internal unrest and external pressure.

They argue that while economic reforms are needed, foreign intervention only worsens hardship and delays solutions.

The protests have faded for now, but analysts believe the underlying economic challenges remain unresolved.

Rising costs, sanctions, and regional tensions continue to shape daily life in Iran and influence its foreign policy posture.

As rhetoric intensifies between Tehran and Western capitals, the risk of miscalculation remains high.

Whether diplomacy can prevail over confrontation will likely depend on how both sides address security concerns and economic pressures in the months ahead.

“This is purely my own analysis,” Dean tweeted late Monday, “but I really believe that the initial Iranian strike on Qatar tonight was just a deception. I have a strong feeling the next wave may be aimed at US interests in Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia.”

Dean, who co-hosts the acclaimed Conflicted podcast and is the author of the bestselling memoir Nine Lives, says the tactic reflects Tehran’s attempt to mirror Western psychological warfare. He points to the pattern of mixed signals used historically by both the United States and Israel — “we might attack, we might not,” “diplomacy is still on the table” — as a playbook Iran may now be mimicking.

“I suspect Iran is now playing that same game of misdirection,” he said. “The attack on Qatar was just the opening decoy for something larger still to come.”

The remarks come after The New York Times confirmed that Iran had given advance notice to Qatari officials before the strike — a move aimed at minimizing casualties while making a show of force. That, Dean argues, proves the action was deliberately restrained, especially considering the scale of the provocation — the destruction of Iran’s $1 trillion, two-decade-long nuclear program.

“It was too small a retaliation,” Dean argued. “I believe the IRGC might soon deploy Soumar and Quds-1 cruise missiles against GCC bases, Israel, and U.S. Naval assets.”

The Soumar, derived from Russian technology, and the Quds-1, widely used by Houthi militants in Yemen, are capable of striking deep inside U.S. military installations in the region and even commercial infrastructure, should escalation occur.

Dean clarifies that his warning is not based on classified intelligence, but on strategic pattern recognition and years of experience watching Iran’s asymmetric warfare doctrine evolve.

“To be clear, this isn’t based on any specific intelligence — it’s just my personal speculation,” he noted.

Still, his analysis is consistent with growing concerns among Gulf and Western intelligence services that Tehran’s retaliation may be staggered, aiming to test U.S. red lines without provoking immediate war — all while maintaining plausible deniability and a psychological upper hand.

With 10,000 American troops stationed in Qatar, and major U.S. bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, any Iranian miscalculation could ignite a regional conflict with catastrophic consequences.

Dean’s comments have since gained wide traction across diplomatic and intelligence circles, many now bracing for a second wave of Iranian action — one that could determine whether the region steps back from the brink, or plunges into full-scale conflict