‘Caesar’s’ Partner ‘Sami’: I Wept at First When I Saw Pictures, Then Became Emotionally Numb

Syrians gather outside a prison in Damascus the day after Assad’s fall, hoping to uncover the fate of their missing loved ones (AFP)
Syrians gather outside a prison in Damascus the day after Assad’s fall, hoping to uncover the fate of their missing loved ones (AFP)
TT

‘Caesar’s’ Partner ‘Sami’: I Wept at First When I Saw Pictures, Then Became Emotionally Numb

Syrians gather outside a prison in Damascus the day after Assad’s fall, hoping to uncover the fate of their missing loved ones (AFP)
Syrians gather outside a prison in Damascus the day after Assad’s fall, hoping to uncover the fate of their missing loved ones (AFP)

In the final installment of his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Osama Othman, the man who smuggled the “Caesar Files” documenting Syrian torture victims, described how the photos became a haunting part of his life.
“I lived with these images for years until the victims felt like friends,” he said.
Othman recalled his early emotional struggles.
“At first, I cried whenever I saw the photos,” he said.
“But over time, my feelings went numb. When I cried, I felt human. But when I started looking at the pictures coldly, just searching for specific ones, I felt like a stranger to myself. Bashar al-Assad disfigured the victims physically and destroyed us emotionally.”
For 11 years, Othman was known only by his codename “Sami” until he revealed his identity through Asharq Al-Awsat.
He shared one of the most heartbreaking moments: “Hearing a mother or wife recognize a loved one in the photos and say, ‘Thank God they’re dead. At least the waiting is over.’ It’s a pain that breaks your heart.”
Among the nearly 27,000 photos, some left a lasting impression on Othman. He mentioned victims with large tattoos of Assad on their chests and security officers smiling next to mutilated bodies, as if posing for a tourist photo.
The following is the text of the interview:
How did you handle seeing so many torture photos?
“The first images I got from ‘Caesar’ were devastating. You can’t imagine,” said Othman. “It’s one thing to see someone killed in a battle or a crime—you can understand it. But when you see photos of victims with burn marks all over their chests, it’s beyond comprehension.”
Othman shared how he coped.
“I saw these victims as my family—my brother, my father. That made it hurt even more. I felt their pain as if it was my own. What kind of person tortures someone like this? If they were going to die in prison, just kill them. Why subject them to such barbaric torture?”
“No regime in history has gone to such lengths to detain and torture its own people in ways no sane mind can comprehend. The cruelty is unimaginable,” he added.
Did you suffer from sleepless nights and tears?
“In the beginning, I couldn’t stop crying,” said Othman.
“These victims aren’t just numbers. They had mothers waiting for them, children, siblings, and lives. Assad turned them into photos with numbers. Even now, 10 years later, we have thousands of images with no names. We hoped to access records linking these numbers to identities when the regime fell, but that hasn’t happened.”
Othman and the Caesar Files for Justice organization are now working on a solution.
“We’re creating an app to match missing persons’ photos from families with our files, using forensic methods like skull measurements and other details beyond what the eye can see.”
Over time, Othman’s emotions changed.
“After looking at thousands of photos, certain details stick with you. For example, Branch 227 reminds me of victims with eyes gouged out, while Branch 215 committed over half of the recorded violations. These numbers and images are burned into my memory. I’ve seen so many that I can often tell which branch they came from at a glance.”
“These victims felt like my friends,” said Osama Othman.
“In some photos, you could see a victim screaming in their final moments, their mouth frozen open. That silent scream, heard only by God, reached us through the images. I felt as if they were entrusting me with a responsibility.”
Over time, Othman’s emotions dulled.
“At first, I cried and knew I was still human. But later, as I searched through the photos without feeling, I felt like a stranger to myself. Assad didn’t just destroy the victims physically—he broke us emotionally too.”
Were doctors involved in torture?
“There were reports of killings in hospitals,” confirmed Othman.
“We had photos of victims with medical tubes still in their arms and bandages on their bodies. It’s unclear what happened—were they arrested and taken to the hospital, or detained directly from there? I don’t know.”
Othman emphasized the lack of evidence.
“Without proof, I can’t confirm these claims. Some doctors have faced trials in Germany for alleged abuses against detainees, but many stories circulating publicly lack the legal backing to hold up in court.”
“Unfortunately,” he added, “any claims of torture or killings without solid evidence can’t withstand scrutiny in any court.”
The pictures uncovered the fate of some missing people, did the relatives of those missing contact you and how did you feel about them?
Othman frequently received photos from families of the missing, hoping to find their loved ones among the Caesar Files.
“Relatives would send me images, asking if their loved ones were in the files,” Othman said.
“I would compare these photos with thousands in the Caesar Files, searching for similarities.”
Othman explained that the process was slow and painstaking.
“It took a lot of time, but often I was able to find a match.”
Othman described the emotional toll of working with the Caesar Files.
“Often, when we send full-body images of victims to their families, it’s not their loved one. But sometimes, it is. What’s most heartbreaking is hearing them say ‘Thank God, thank God.’ Why? Because they’re relieved their loved one has died. A mother or wife says this in agony, grateful that their suffering has ended. This makes you wonder—how could a mother see her son tortured and dead, yet say ‘thank God’?”
Othman also recalled disturbing images.
“We have photos of victims who lost their eyes. One photo shows a man with a tattoo of Bashar al-Assad’s face, and the words ‘Syria, Assad’ under it. This man was tortured to death in the Air Force Intelligence branch in Damascus.”
One image, Othman said, still haunts him.
“In another, there are many bodies in a cart, from different branches, not just one. Some bodies are piled up outside a garage, decaying. What’s chilling is a soldier smiling in the background. It makes you question—why is he smiling? Is it happiness, or has he lost all sense of feeling in the face of such cruelty?”
Othman described a disturbing photo of hospital staff smiling, seemingly unaware of the horror around them.
“In the background, you can see bodies wrapped in plastic, others on tables, and some limbs visible. Hospital corridors were used to wrap up the bodies,” he said.
Othman also pointed to detailed images of victims’ eyes, which forensic experts can use to assess injuries and decay caused by insects.
He emphasized the pain of sharing these images.
“I don’t want to show more—it’s too painful for viewers and the victims’ families. But our message has reached the world. After 10 years, the Caesar Files exposed the regime’s crimes, and today, institutions and former prisoners are revealing even more about these atrocities.”
How did you feel about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s asylum offer to Assad?
Othman expressed his reaction to Russian President Vladimir Putin granting Assad asylum.
“Since Russia’s intervention in Syria in 2015, the Russian regime has been a partner in the Syrian regime’s crimes,” Othman said.
“We viewed the Russian officials as true partners in these atrocities, and they likely bear greater responsibility than the Syrian regime itself.”
Othman was not surprised by Assad seeking refuge in Russia.
“I don’t think this asylum will last long. We are committed to working tirelessly to bring Assad back to Syria, recover the stolen funds, and ensure he is prosecuted in Damascus.”
Othman shared his hopes for justice in Syria, expressing his desire to see Assad in the defendant’s cage.
“I pray I live long enough to witness that moment, just as I lived to hear the news of Assad's fall and the liberation of Damascus,” he said.
Asked whether Assad knew about the atrocities taking place in Syrian prisons, Othman was firm.
“In Syria, nothing happens without the president knowing. This is a repressive, security-driven regime led by Assad, or previously by his father, Hafez al-Assad. No security official under this regime would act without the president’s approval.”
Othman acknowledged that while they lack direct evidence linking Assad to specific crimes, the responsibility falls on the heads of the security agencies.
“Legally, the blame lies directly with the heads of security agencies, as the chain of command flows from them. But in Syria, everyone knows that even the smallest actions in any security branch or prison are part of a systematic plan known and approved by the regime's top leadership.”
On whether the victims in the Caesar Files were from specific regions or sects, Othman clarified, “The victims in the Caesar Files are Syrians, and we defend all Syrians. Since the victims are identified by numbers, not names, I can’t determine if they belong to a particular sect or group.”
However, he noted signs of certain affiliations.
“Some victims have tattoos on their bodies. You might be surprised to learn that several victims have a large tattoo of Bashar al-Assad on their chests. You could assume these men were Assad supporters. I don’t know their sects, but someone who tattoos Bashar al-Assad on their body surely has strong support for him.”
Othman pointed out that some tattoos found on victims might provide clues about their identity, but not with certainty.
“A tattoo of Palestine, for example, isn’t unique to Palestinians. We all support Palestine. But it’s likely this person was Palestinian, especially from the Palestinian community in Syria,” he said.
He emphasized that tattoos could hint at political beliefs or nationalities, but he wouldn't make assumptions.
“These tattoos may suggest political views or connections to certain countries, but I can't say for sure if the victims belonged to a specific sect or group.”
Othman added that once names are linked to numbers, he may be able to provide more concrete answers.
“When we can match names to numbers, I'll be able to say if many of these victims came from a particular sect.”
Do you believe that Syria is on its way to a rebirth?
Othman shared cautious hope for Syria’s future.
“God willing, a new Syria will be born,” he said, but added a note of caution.
“I don’t want to be pessimistic, but the real fight for Syria's rebuilding began on December 8, 2024, with Assad’s fall and Damascus’ liberation. Everything before that was just about toppling the regime and removing its leader.”
When will you return to Syria?
Othman said he is eager to return to Syria but faces administrative hurdles.
“I’m waiting for the right moment, but there are still many bureaucratic obstacles,” he explained.
“If it were possible, I would have gone back earlier.”
Regarding his fears due to his involvement in the Caesar Files, Othman admitted the risks remain.
“The fear is still there. We hid our identities to protect ourselves and our families, and that need still exists,” he said.
“The risks are greater now because we are pushing for accountability. This puts us in conflict with many people. I know the dangers, but I’m committed to this path and prepared for whatever comes. If I could do more from hiding, I would, but now it's important to be visible and move the case forward.”



How the US Could Take Over Greenland and the Potential Challenges

05 February 2025, Greenland, Nuuk: Greenlandic flags fly in front of the Inatsisartut parliament in the capital Nuuk. (dpa)
05 February 2025, Greenland, Nuuk: Greenlandic flags fly in front of the Inatsisartut parliament in the capital Nuuk. (dpa)
TT

How the US Could Take Over Greenland and the Potential Challenges

05 February 2025, Greenland, Nuuk: Greenlandic flags fly in front of the Inatsisartut parliament in the capital Nuuk. (dpa)
05 February 2025, Greenland, Nuuk: Greenlandic flags fly in front of the Inatsisartut parliament in the capital Nuuk. (dpa)

US President Donald Trump wants to own Greenland. He has repeatedly said the United States must take control of the strategically located and mineral-rich island, which is a semiautonomous region that's part of NATO ally Denmark.

Officials from Denmark, Greenland and the United States met Thursday in Washington and will meet again next week to discuss a renewed push by the White House, which is considering a range of options, including using military force, to acquire the island.

Trump said Friday he is going to do “something on Greenland, whether they like it or not.”

If it's not done “the easy way, we're going to do it the hard way," he said without elaborating what that could entail. In an interview Thursday, he told The New York Times that he wants to own Greenland because “ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.”

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that an American takeover of Greenland would mark the end of NATO, and Greenlanders say they don't want to become part of the US.

This is a look at some of the ways the US could take control of Greenland and the potential challenges.

Military action could alter global relations

Trump and his officials have indicated they want to control Greenland to enhance American security and explore business and mining deals. But Imran Bayoumi, an associate director at the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, said the sudden focus on Greenland is also the result of decades of neglect by several US presidents towards Washington's position in the Arctic.

The current fixation is partly down to “the realization we need to increase our presence in the Arctic, and we don’t yet have the right strategy or vision to do so,” he said.

If the US took control of Greenland by force, it would plunge NATO into a crisis, possibly an existential one.

While Greenland is the largest island in the world, it has a population of around 57,000 and doesn't have its own military. Defense is provided by Denmark, whose military is dwarfed by that of the US.

It's unclear how the remaining members of NATO would respond if the US decided to forcibly take control of the island or if they would come to Denmark's aid.

“If the United States chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops,” Frederiksen has said.

Trump said he needs control of the island to guarantee American security, citing the threat from Russian and Chinese ships in the region, but “it's not true” said Lin Mortensgaard, an expert on the international politics of the Arctic at the Danish Institute for International Studies, or DIIS.

While there are probably Russian submarines — as there are across the Arctic region — there are no surface vessels, Mortensgaard said. China has research vessels in the Central Arctic Ocean, and while the Chinese and Russian militaries have done joint military exercises in the Arctic, they have taken place closer to Alaska, she said.

Bayoumi, of the Atlantic Council, said he doubted Trump would take control of Greenland by force because it’s unpopular with both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, and would likely “fundamentally alter” US relationships with allies worldwide.

The US already has access to Greenland under a 1951 defense agreement, and Denmark and Greenland would be “quite happy” to accommodate a beefed-up American military presence, Mortensgaard said.

For that reason, “blowing up the NATO alliance” for something Trump has already, doesn’t make sense, said Ulrik Pram Gad, an expert on Greenland at DIIS.

Bilateral agreements may assist effort

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a select group of US lawmakers this week that it was the Republican administration’s intention to eventually purchase Greenland, as opposed to using military force. Danish and Greenlandic officials have previously said the island isn't for sale.

It's not clear how much buying the island could cost, or if the US would be buying it from Denmark or Greenland.

Washington also could boost its military presence in Greenland “through cooperation and diplomacy,” without taking it over, Bayoumi said.

One option could be for the US to get a veto over security decisions made by the Greenlandic government, as it has in islands in the Pacific Ocean, Gad said.

Palau, Micronesia and the Marshall Islands have a Compact of Free Association, or COFA, with the US.

That would give Washington the right to operate military bases and make decisions about the islands’ security in exchange for US security guarantees and around $7 billion of yearly economic assistance, according to the Congressional Research Service.

It's not clear how much that would improve upon Washington's current security strategy. The US already operates the remote Pituffik Space Base in northwestern Greenland and can bring as many troops as it wants under existing agreements.

Influence operations expected to fail

Greenlandic politician Aaja Chemnitz told The Associated Press that Greenlanders want more rights, including independence, but don't want to become part of the US.

Gad suggested influence operations to persuade Greenlanders to join the US would likely fail. He said that is because the community on the island is small and the language is “inaccessible.”

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen summoned the top US official in Denmark in August to complain that “foreign actors” were seeking to influence the country’s future. Danish media reported that at least three people with connections to Trump carried out covert influence operations in Greenland.

Even if the US managed to take control of Greenland, it would likely come with a large bill, Gad said. That’s because Greenlanders currently have Danish citizenship and access to the Danish welfare system, including free health care and schooling.

To match that, “Trump would have to build a welfare state for Greenlanders that he doesn’t want for his own citizens,” Gad said.

Disagreement unlikely to be resolved

Since 1945, the American military presence in Greenland has decreased from thousands of soldiers over 17 bases and installations to 200 at the remote Pituffik Space Base in the northwest of the island, Rasmussen said last year. The base supports missile warning, missile defense and space surveillance operations for the US and NATO.

US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Thursday that Denmark has neglected its missile defense obligations in Greenland, but Mortensgaard said that it makes “little sense to criticize Denmark,” because the main reason why the US operates the Pituffik base in the north of the island is to provide early detection of missiles.

The best outcome for Denmark would be to update the defense agreement, which allows the US to have a military presence on the island and have Trump sign it with a “gold-plated signature,” Gad said.

But he suggested that's unlikely because Greenland is “handy” to the US president.

When Trump wants to change the news agenda — including distracting from domestic political problems — “he can just say the word ‘Greenland’ and this starts all over again,” Gad said.


US Stance on Iran Protests Balances Threats, Caution

Crowds of Iranian protesters gather in Taleghani Square in Karaj, west of Tehran. (Telegram)
Crowds of Iranian protesters gather in Taleghani Square in Karaj, west of Tehran. (Telegram)
TT

US Stance on Iran Protests Balances Threats, Caution

Crowds of Iranian protesters gather in Taleghani Square in Karaj, west of Tehran. (Telegram)
Crowds of Iranian protesters gather in Taleghani Square in Karaj, west of Tehran. (Telegram)

It may still be premature to say Iran’s ruling system is nearing collapse. Yet the unrest that has gripped the country in recent weeks has pushed Tehran into its most severe internal crisis in years.

Protests triggered by economic freefall and the collapse of the national currency have rapidly spread across regions and social classes, shedding their purely economic character and evolving into a direct challenge to the foundations of the political system.

As strikes have expanded, particularly in the bazaar and the oil sector, popular anger has deepened into a political crisis with existential stakes.

At the heart of these developments, the United States factor stands out as one of the most sensitive and influential elements, not only because of the long history of conflict between Washington and Tehran, but also due to the unprecedented tone adopted by US President Donald Trump, and the political and media reaction within Congress, which has reflected a calibrated division over how to approach the Iranian crisis.

From the early days of the escalating protests, Trump opted to depart from traditional diplomatic language. In a series of interviews and statements, he said he was following events in Iran “very closely,” expressing his belief that the country was “on the verge of collapse.”

More significant than his assessment, however, were his public warnings to the Iranian leadership against continuing to suppress protesters.

Trump spoke bluntly of live fire against unarmed demonstrators, arrests, and executions, describing the situation as “brutal behavior,” and stressing that he had informed Tehran that any bloody escalation would be met with “very severe strikes” from the United States.

This language amounts to an attempt at political and psychological deterrence rather than a declaration of an imminent military plan.

It pressures Iran’s leadership and sends a message of moral support to protesters, while simultaneously preserving ambiguity over the nature of any potential US action.

Vice President JD Vance expressed a similar stance, writing on X that Washington supports anyone exercising their right to peaceful protest, noting that Iran’s system suffers from deep problems.

He reiterated Trump’s call for “real negotiations” over the nuclear program, while leaving future steps to the president’s judgment.

Despite Trump’s clear support for the protests, his administration has so far avoided going further on the question of “the day after.”

This hesitation has been evident in its position on Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s late shah, whose name has resurfaced as a figure of the exiled opposition.

While Trump described him as “a nice person,” he stopped short of holding an official meeting, saying it was still too early to determine who could genuinely represent the will of the Iranian people.

This caution reflects US awareness of the sensitivity of the Iranian scene, in light of past experiences in the region, from Iraq to Libya, where early bets on political alternatives led to disastrous outcomes.

Any overt US backing of a specific opposition figure could also give the Iranian authorities grounds to reinforce their narrative of a “foreign conspiracy,” a line already invoked by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and state media.

Alongside political rhetoric, the economic card occupies a central place in US calculations.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has described Iran’s economy as on the edge of collapse, pointing to high inflation and a sharp erosion in living standards due to sanctions and mismanagement.

These remarks were not merely technical assessments, but a political message that Washington sees the economic crisis as a pressure point that could accelerate the erosion of the system’s ability to endure.

The economy is not only the spark that ignited the protests, but also one of the keys to their future. Continued strikes, particularly in the oil sector, threaten the main artery of state revenues, compounding pressure and narrowing room for maneuver.

In this context, Washington appears convinced that time is working against Tehran and that allowing the crisis to play out internally may be more effective than any direct intervention.

Another factor closely watched by US decision-makers is the international stance, notably the silence of Russia and China.

These two countries, which have provided Iran with political and economic cover in recent years, appear unwilling or unable to intervene to rescue the system from its internal crisis.

Their silence gives Washington a wider scope to escalate its rhetoric without fear of a major international confrontation.

At the same time, the US administration is keen to avoid appearing as the driver of regime change in Iran. Its declared support remains confined to an ethical and humanitarian framework, protecting protesters and preventing massacres, rather than shaping an alternative system.

This approach seeks to strike a balance between exploiting an adversary’s weakness and avoiding a slide into chaos.

The US response has not been limited to the White House, extending into Congress, where positions have reflected a disciplined division of opinion. The House Foreign Affairs Committee attacked the Iranian system in a post on X, describing it as a dictator that has stood for decades on the bodies of Iranians demanding change.

Within the Republican camp, alignment behind Trump has been clear.

Senator Lindsey Graham wrote that the president was “absolutely right,” that he “stands with the Iranian people against tyranny,” and called to “make Iran great again.”

Senator Ted Cruz said the protests had exposed the system’s “fatally weakened” status and that Iranians were “not chanting for cosmetic reforms, but for an end to clerical rule.”

Democrats, by contrast, expressed solidarity with protesters in a more cautious tone.

Senator Chris Murphy said Iranians deserve their future in their own hands, not through American bombs, warning that military intervention could undermine the movement.

Bernie Sanders said the United States should stand with human rights, not repeat the mistakes of forcibly changing regimes.

In the House, Representative Yassamin Ansari sparked further debate by voicing support for the Iranian people while warning against empowering the Mujahideen-e-Khalq, which she described as “an extremist group lacking legitimacy.”

Republican lawmakers such as Claudia Tenney and Mario Diaz-Balart adopted a harsher tone, calling for clear support for Iranians, “who are bravely demanding freedom, dignity, and basic human rights.”

This divergence reflects a complex US picture. Republicans see the Iranian moment as an opportunity to validate Trump’s pressure and deterrence strategy, while Democrats fear that verbal support could slide into ill-considered entanglement.

Yet both sides converge on a core point: holding Iran’s system responsible for violence and economic collapse and viewing current events as an unprecedented challenge to its legitimacy.

This relative alignment grants Trump room to maneuver domestically without imposing consensus on intervention.

Washington, as reflected in White House rhetoric and congressional debate, prefers at this stage to watch the fractures within Iran deepen, while keeping all options on the table and awaiting what happens on the streets.


A Timeline of How the Protests in Iran Unfolded and Grew

A general view from a street in Tehran, Iran, 08 January 2026. (EPA)
A general view from a street in Tehran, Iran, 08 January 2026. (EPA)
TT

A Timeline of How the Protests in Iran Unfolded and Grew

A general view from a street in Tehran, Iran, 08 January 2026. (EPA)
A general view from a street in Tehran, Iran, 08 January 2026. (EPA)

Demonstrations broke out in Iran on Dec. 28 and have spread nationwide as protesters vent their increasing discontent over the country's faltering economy and the collapse of its currency.

Dozens of people have been killed and thousands arrested as the daily protests have grown and the government seeks to contain them.

While the initial focus had been on issues like spikes in the prices of food staples and the country's staggering annual inflation rate, protesters have now begun chanting anti-government statements as well.

Here is how the protests developed:

Dec. 28: Protests break out in two major markets in downtown Tehran, after the Iranian rial plunged to 1.42 million to the US dollar, a new record low, compounding inflationary pressure and pushing up the prices of food and other daily necessities. The government had raised prices for nationally subsidized gasoline in early December, increasing discontent.

Dec. 29: Central Bank head Mohammad Reza Farzin resigns as the protests in Tehran spread to other cities. Police fire tear gas to disperse protesters in the capital.

Dec. 30: As protests spread to include more cities, as well as several university campuses, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian meets with a group of business leaders to listen to their demands and pledges his administration will “not spare any effort for solving problems” with the economy.

Dec. 31: Iran appoints Abdolnasser Hemmati as the country's new central bank governor. Officials in southern Iran say that protests in the city of Fasa turned violent after crowds broke into the governor's office and injured police officers.

Jan. 1: The protests' first fatalities are officially reported, with authorities saying at least seven people have been killed. The most intense violence appears to be in Azna, a city in Iran’s Lorestan province, where videos posted online purport to show objects in the street ablaze and gunfire echoing as people shouted: “Shameless! Shameless!”

The semiofficial Fars news agency reports three people were killed. Other protesters are reported killed in Bakhtiari and Isfahan provinces while a 21-year-old volunteer in the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard’s Basij force was killed in Lorestan.

Jan. 2: US President Donald Trump raises the stakes, writing on his Truth Social platform that if Iran “violently kills peaceful protesters,” the United States “will come to their rescue.” The warning, only months after American forces bombed Iranian nuclear sites, includes the assertion, without elaboration, that: “We are locked and loaded and ready to go.”

Protests, meantime, expand to reach more than 100 locations in 22 of Iran's 31 provinces, according to the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency.

Jan. 3: Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei says “rioters must be put in their place,” in what is seen as a green light for security forces to begin more aggressively putting down the demonstrations. Protests expand to more than 170 locations in 25 provinces, with at least 15 people killed and 580 arrested, HRANA reports.

Jan. 6: Protesters conduct a sit-in at Tehran's Grand Bazaar until security forces disperse them using tear gas. The death toll rises to 36, including two members of Iranian security forces, according to HRANA. Demonstrations have reached over 280 locations in 27 of Iran’s 31 provinces.

Jan. 8 to 9: Following a call from Iran's exiled crown prince, a mass of people shout from their windows and take to the streets in an overnight protest. The government responds by blocking the internet and international telephone calls, in a bid to cut off the country of 85 million from outside influence. HRANA says violence around the demonstrations has killed at least 42 people while more than 2,270 others have been detained.