You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Iran’ tag.
Unrest in Iran has persisted into 2026, with recent protests triggered by economic challenges such as currency devaluation and inflation, building on longer-term grievances related to human rights and governance. Human rights organizations argue that the Islamic Republic’s policies since the 1979 revolution have contributed to discontent by prioritizing state security and ideological conformity, leading to restrictions on dissent and freedoms. The 2022–2023 “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in custody, highlighted these tensions but were suppressed, though underlying issues have continued to fuel sporadic demonstrations and broader dissatisfaction.
A significant point of criticism is Iran’s high rate of executions. According to monitoring groups such as Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) and Amnesty International, at least 1,500 executions occurred in 2025, with over 1,000 recorded by September—the highest levels in decades. A substantial portion involved drug-related offenses, which Iranian authorities justify as necessary to combat trafficking given the country’s position on major transit routes. International observers, however, criticize the use of capital punishment for non-violent crimes and raise concerns about trial fairness. Public executions and the disproportionate impact on ethnic minorities, including Baluchis and Kurds, have drawn particular scrutiny.
Women’s rights remain a focal point of contention. Laws mandating compulsory veiling are enforced through measures such as the Noor Plan, involving surveillance and penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment. Human rights reports document cases of violence during enforcement, alongside broader legal discrimination in areas such as marriage and inheritance. Iranian officials frame these policies as protecting cultural and religious values, while critics and protesters describe them as systemic sex-based restrictions contributing to ongoing resistance.
Minorities also face documented challenges. LGBTQ+ individuals are subject to criminal penalties under laws prohibiting same-sex relations, with reports of harsh punishments. The Baha’i community experiences restrictions on education, employment, and worship, described by organizations such as Human Rights Watch as persecution. Journalists, artists, and activists—including minors—have been detained for expression deemed critical of the state. Authorities maintain that such measures address security threats or moral standards.
The lack of avenues for systemic change is frequently cited as prolonging tensions. Human rights monitors note limited accountability for past events, such as the 1988 prison executions or the suppression of the 2019 fuel protests, alongside tightly controlled political processes. While international criticism and sanctions aim to pressure reforms, their effectiveness remains debated, with the government rejecting external interference. Recent economic-driven protests in late 2025 and early 2026 highlight the interaction between socioeconomic pressures and long-standing rights concerns.
Analytical Assessment (Non-Advocacy)
From an analytical perspective, Iran’s persistent unrest can be understood as the outcome of a closed political system absorbing repeated shocks without adaptive mechanisms. Economic stressors act as immediate triggers, but the durability of unrest reflects deeper structural conditions: punitive enforcement practices, limited legal accountability, and the absence of credible pathways for reform. High execution rates and visible enforcement of social controls may temporarily deter dissent, but they also raise the perceived cost of compliance for affected populations, particularly women and minorities. When governance frameworks prioritize ideological enforcement over responsiveness, public pressure tends to reappear cyclically rather than dissipate. In this sense, Iran’s unrest is less a series of isolated crises than a recurring response to unresolved institutional constraints.
Key References & Sources
- Human Rights Watch. World Report 2025: Iran
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2025/country-chapters/iran - Amnesty International. Iran: Over 1,000 people executed as authorities step up horrifying assault on the right to life (2025)
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/09/iran-over-1000-people-executed-as-authorities-step-up-horrifying-assault-on-right-to-life/ - Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO). Annual Reports on the Death Penalty in Iran (2025)
https://iranhr.net/en/
In the world of advocacy and human rights, consistency is more than just a virtue—it’s what gives our principles real meaning. Recently, a comment on social media highlighted a familiar pattern: certain voices who are vocal about one cause may fall silent when similar struggles appear in a different context. It’s a reminder that if we want justice to truly be just, it must be blind to who is involved—applying the same standards to all people, regardless of race, creed, or background.
This isn’t about slamming any particular group; it’s about encouraging all of us to reflect on the importance of consistency. When we advocate for human rights, it’s crucial that we do so across the board. If a group of protesters in one country deserves our solidarity, then those in another country risking their lives for similar ideals deserve it too.
In short, “justice” in quotes should indeed be blind. Not in the sense of ignoring the nuances of each situation, but in the sense of applying our moral standards fairly and universally. By doing so, we strengthen the credibility of our advocacy and remind the world that human rights aren’t selective—they’re for everyone.
Find that tweet inspiration for this post here.
A picture of typically dressed Iranian females before the Iranian Islamic revolution (pre-1979).
It was time to make women into non-people and become a crazed warmongering religious cult state. Exactly what the world needed! :/
TEHRAN, IRAN – FEBRUARY 21: Iranian women wait to cast their ballot for the 11th Parliamentary elections at a polling station in Shah Abdol-Azim Shrine in Tehran, Iran on February 21, 2020. Fatemeh Bahrami / Anadolu Agency
The US foreign policy regarding Iran is foolish. Noam Chomsky analyzes the situation:
“The most dangerous immediate foreign policy crisis is the conflict with Iran, which has been deemed the official source of all evil. Iran must end its “aggression” and become a “normal country” — like Saudi Arabia, which is making rapid progress in Trump’s fantasy world, even “a great job in Saudi Arabia from the standpoint of women,” he explained at G20.
The charges against Iran resonate through the media echo chamber with little effort to assess the validity of the accusations — which hardly withstand analysis. Whatever one thinks of Iranian international behavior, by the miserable standards of U.S. allies in the region — not to speak of the U.S. itself — it is not much of a competitor in the rogue state derby.
In the real world, the U.S. unilaterally decided to destroy the well-functioning nuclear agreement (JCPOA), with ludicrous charges accepted by virtually no one with the slightest credibility, and to impose extremely harsh sanctions designed to punish the Iranian people and undermine the economy. The [U.S. government] also uses its enormous economic power, including virtual control of the international financial system, to compel others to obey Washington’s dictates. None of this has even minimal legitimacy; the same is true of Cuba and other cases. The world may protest — last November, the UN General Assembly once again condemned the U.S. embargo on Cuba, 189-2 (only the U.S. and Israel voted against the resolution). But in vain. The weird idea of the founders that one might have “decent respect to the opinions of mankind” has long vanished, and the pained bleatings of the world pass in silence. On Iran as well.
This is not the place to pursue the matter, but there is a good deal more to say about the U.S. specialty of resorting to sanctions (with extraterritorial reach) to punish populations — a form of “American exceptionalism” that finds its place within what Nick Turse calls “the American system of suffering” in his harrowing expose of the U.S. assault on the civilian population of South Vietnam. The right to engage in this malicious practice is accepted as normal in the U.S. doctrinal system, with little effort to analyze the actual motives in individual cases, the legitimacy of such policies, or in fact even their legality. Matters of no slight significance.
With regard to Iran, within the government-media doctrinal system, the only question that arises is whether the victim will respond in some way, maybe by “violating” the agreement that the U.S. has demolished, maybe by some other act. And if it does, it obviously will be deemed to deserve brutal punishment.
In commentary made by U.S. officials and media, Iran “violates” agreements. The U.S. merely “withdraws” from them. The stance is reminiscent of a comment by the great anarchist writer and Wobbly activist T-Bone Slim: “Only the poor break laws — the rich evade them.”
Food for thought.
Let us not take lessons from the religiously addled with regards to running our justice system.
“An Iranian court has ruled that a man must lose his eye and part of an ear after he blinded and burnt an ear of another man in an acid attack . Judge Aziz Mohammadi gave the order against the man, who was only identified as Hamid, after convicting him of throwing acid on the victim, named as Davoud, hardline Kayhan newspaper reported on Wednesday.
The judge also ordered Hamid to pay blood-money for the burn injuries suffered by Davoud, who was 22 at the time of the attack, in a ruling issued under the Islamic Republic’s eye-for-an-eye justice code. Hamid told the court he had mistaken Davoud for a classmate who had bullied him in hfigh school, saying that even after moving, he remained tormented by the memory of the bullying.”
The Iranians will not be getting any bonus points for human rights any time soon if they continue with this sort of activity.
“The report, quoting other sources, including Iran’s Fars news agency, did not say whether the authorities would, in fact, carry out the punishment by using acid or via surgery.”
Wow. By surgery or by acid, so many wonderful options. How about imprisonment? How about monetary compensation? Or other options that do not involve maiming the individual in question.
This article from Al Jazeera is yet another exemplar of how societies, if they wish to have freedom and human rights as key features, must steer away from theocracy and toward rational, secular rule.
Religion: Persecuting and possibly executing human rights activists.
Shiva Nazar-Ahari charged with “warring against God” and having links to opposition groups as trial opens in Tehran.
A court in Tehran, the Iranian capital, has tried a female human rights activist and journalist on charges including “warring against God,” which has the potential punishment of death.
Shiva Nazar-Ahari, 26, went on trial on Saturday “on charges of Moharebeh [warring against God], conspiring and gathering to commit a crime, propaganda against the regime and harming public order,” Mohammad Sharif, her lawyer, said.
How lovely; and sadly, unsurprising as the corrosive effects of religion are clearly on display for the world to see. Where religion is a dominant force we can simply toss away rational thought and belief in reality. You can be put to death for creating war on fictive characters that most likely do not exist.
Consider, if god is omnipotent, does he really need to be defended by mere mortals? I would think that if he existed he could deal quite succinctly with anyone that brought war to his house. However, in context of a human based and perpetuated theocracy that will actually kill people who dare to question its bullshite beliefs the reasons are evident. Persecuting people for calling the deluded on their fatuous nonsense becomes a useful method for dealing with dissent and rational objections to state endorsed mythology.
“But the story here is not about a trial or seeking to get to the bottom of a crime. It is about trying to created a narrative that the authorities would like to portrary about justifying the continued clampdown that we are seeing in this country.
A sham trial that is propping up a vapid theocracy, nothing new here. Expect more to come soon as Tehran roots out more people who dare to make war on imaginary beings.
*Update: The situation is not improving.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…