The 'Smuggler' of Syrian Torture Archives Reveals His True Identity

In a “Asharq Al-Awsat” exclusive, Caesar’s twin witness warns against ignoring accountability

Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
TT

The 'Smuggler' of Syrian Torture Archives Reveals His True Identity

Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman

For many years, the world only knew them by the aliases Caesar and Sami. Since 2014, these two names have been associated with documenting torture in Syrian prisons. The photos they smuggled out of Syria shook the world and prompted the United States to impose strict sanctions on the regime of former President Bashar al-Assad, under what became known as the “Caesar Act.”

These horrific photos documenting torture inflicted on detainees in Syrian prisons were used in courts in Western countries to convict Syrian officers on charges of torture and human rights violations.

But who is Sami, Ceasar’s “twin witness”?

In the first-ever interview he grants using his real name and photo, Sami revealed to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman, and that he is today head of the board of directors of the “Caesar Files Group Organization.”

He was working as a civil engineer when the Syrian revolution broke out in 2011, a revolution that began peacefully but quickly turned into a bloodbath after the forces of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime brutally suppressed it.

Sami lived in the Damascus countryside, which was divided between opposition factions and government forces. His area was under the control of factions that were part of what was known as the “Free Army,” but a person very close to him, who later became known as “Caesar,” was working in areas controlled by the regime forces. His job was not ordinary. His mission was to document deaths in Syrian security services departments. He documented them with photos: this body is missing a part of the head, this one is missing eyes, and that one has signs of severe torture. Some of the bodies showed signs of starvation.

He documented naked bodies with numbers. Thousands of photos. Women, men, and children. The crime of many of them was officially classified as “terrorism.” But how could a child’s crime be “terrorism”? The ugliness of the crimes prompted “Sami” and “Caesar” to work together to document what was happening in Syrian prisons and detention centers, specifically in Damascus, where “Caesar” worked and who sometimes documented the deaths of no less than 70 people a day. The two men began collaborating on collecting torture documents in May 2011. “Caesar” would smuggle the photos on a USB drive and give them to Sami in opposition areas.

“Dad... why are they sleeping without clothes?”

The “smuggler” of the Syrian torture archive is often reluctant to talk about himself and evades answering questions about his personal role in the story. However, after much persistence, he recounted a small portion of his experience. He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Even my children did not know that they were the children of the man who carries the secret alias (Sami)... Once, as I was watching and searching for a photo among the evidence on my computer at night, I was surprised that my young son came to me and asked: Dad, why do these people sleep without clothes? In his innocence, he thought they were asleep. It is difficult to make your son live through this pain, so it was necessary for us to protect our children by protecting ourselves.”

Recalling his feelings at the time, he added: “When you make a very serious decision, why make others bear the responsibility for this decision? People you would not have consulted when you left. People who were only a few years old and people who were very old, you would’ve burdened them with fear without asking their permission at a moment when you decided that your responsibility was greater than your love for your family”.

The efforts of “Sami” and “Caesar” resulted in smuggling tens of thousands of photos of the bodies of torture victims out of Syria. The photos were revealed for the first time in 2014 after they left Syria. Today, the photos they smuggled have become part of the “indictment” against the security services that were affiliated with President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, the crimes were not limited to one prison or another. Torture practices were widespread in a way that leaves no doubt that it was a systematic policy adopted by the ruling regime, most likely with cover from the highest levels.

Asharq Al-Awsat asked Sami why he decided to break his silence and reveal his real name. He replied: “The Syrians know the answer to this question. I think the answer is obvious for most Syrians who were inside Syria and those who were outside it. The nature of the work and the nature of the documents that we left Syria with, which went through complex stages and many steps until we reached this blessed day, was the reason I was keen to hide my identity and the identity of many of the team members.

He added: “Today, thank God, we are in a completely different situation. We are in another place. In a new Syria. I wanted the Syrians to know what happened, and I also addressed them and the authorities in Damascus with what we hope the situation will be regarding the legal issues related to documenting and archiving data and evidence that will lead us to a stage of accountability and transitional justice to achieve stability in Syrian society. I think this matter deserves that we come out to tell the world what information and ideas we have so that we do not fall into the same problem in future generations.”

Sami adds: “I did not think, in truth, that I would live to say this word. Congratulations to our people in Syria on the fall of Assad. Congratulations to all the honorable people in this world on the fall of Assad. Thanks to everyone who stood with our revolution and shame on everyone who stood against it. After 14 years of working in secret and facing fear and anxiety, the sun of long-awaited freedom is now shining on Syria, for which our people paid a heavy price. A team of unknown heroes led a complex work full of dangers, that were not solely emanating from the regime. Today, they pledge to Syria to continue defending the dignity of the Syrian human being wherever he may be.”

The importance of accountability

Sami stressed the importance of “accountability” in Syria today, after the overthrow of the former regime, and says: “In this critical moment that Syria is going through as it prepares to enter a new phase after more than five decades of the Assad family rule, we call on the (new) government to work hard to achieve justice, hold perpetrators accountable, and ensure the dignity of human rights as a basis for building a better future that all Syrians dream of.”

He added: “We have witnessed during the past few days, and the rapid events that preceded them, a noticeable increase in the possibility of chaos spreading as a result of the remnants of the Syrian regime. Citizens randomly entering prisons and detention centers have led to the destruction or loss of very important official documents and records that reveal violations dating back decades.” He stressed that “the full responsibility for the destruction of evidence and the loss of the rights of detainees and survivors lies with the security officials of the former regime who have left and those who are still carrying out their duties and responsibilities, in addition to the current forces that are preparing to take power in Damascus. Although what is happening now can be expected after the liberation of the country from the Syrian regime, swift intervention has become urgent in collecting evidence and documents from the previous archives of security institutions, ministries and other government institutions, and this is what raises our concern about the continued work of the regime’s employees, which enables them to obliterate and destroy files of importance in revealing the crimes of the defunct regime.”

Baath Party documents

Sami believes that “all the institutions of the former regime hold documents of extreme importance, whether security, civil or military, and we do not ignore our concern about the obliteration of documents in all the branches and annexes of the Baath Party, which all Syrians know were security institutions par excellence, and those in charge of them practiced all forms of physical and moral intimidation against our great people throughout the years of the revolution.”

He adds: “We hope that this step will be taken with the participation of human rights organizations concerned with following up on issues related to research and investigation into human rights violations. The delay in revealing the official and secret detention sites that may exist in the liberated areas or areas that the armed forces of the Syrian opposition did not reach, in addition to testimonies and information circulating about the transfer of detainees from different prisons to unknown places before the fall of the regime, and the failure to provide the necessary medical and humanitarian assistance to the survivors who were released in the past days, reflects a disregard for the lives of these individuals.”

Sami called on the current authorities to “take immediate and transparent steps to reveal the fate of detainees and victims who died under torture in Syrian prisons and to suspend all those responsible for managing and operating prisons to begin urgently and immediately providing documents that clarify the names and numbers of victims to ensure the families’ right to know the fate of their loved ones. The Syrian people's right to access the truth cannot be compromised and is a duty of all concerned parties. Tolerating perpetrators of crimes under any pretext constitutes a clear violation of humanitarian and legal standards, and gives the green light to reproduce the tools of repression and violations that were practiced by the security services and are still in place.”

The Syrian human rights activist stressed that “achieving justice requires holding accountable all those involved in the crimes committed against the Syrian people, and achieving peace and stability in Syria depends on transitional justice as a fundamental principle at this stage. We call for a national reconciliation based on the principles of justice and accountability that guarantees the rights of all components of the Syrian people in a safe and stable environment that respects their dignity and meets their needs while ensuring that there is no impunity under any name.”

Opposition “imposed” on the people

Sami criticized parties in the Syrian opposition without specifying them, speaking about “failures” they had experienced. He said: “In light of the previous political failures of the opposition that were imposed on the Syrian people, we stress the need to make immediate reassuring statements about the vision and how to involve the people in decision-making and begin the process of building society in a way that respects the will of the Syrian people and guarantees their right to self-determination.”

He called on the current authority to consolidate and facilitate the work of all civil society institutions operating inside and outside Syria. “We also call on all of them to support efforts to achieve transitional justice in Syria effectively and to involve the Syrian people in developments on a regular basis, and to contribute to providing humanitarian and medical support to survivors of arrest and enforced disappearance, and to ensure that all those involved in crimes are held accountable and that impunity is not allowed.”

Sami also called for publishing and disseminating the names of the officers responsible for crimes against the Syrian people, and to monitor official and unofficial crossings, “as well as call on the official Syrian media institutions that have always contributed to the oppression of Syrians by distorting facts and glorifying the killers, to return to their natural function as a tool that strengthens the citizen's confidence in state institutions and a source of correct information”.

He adds: “It pains us to see our people searching for the names of their missing loved ones on social media pages, while state media is absent from performing its mission for which it only exists as a non-politicized service institution."

Crimes without a statute of limitations

Sami stressed that "crimes against humanity and crimes of genocide do not expire with a statute of limitations and cannot be tolerated under any circumstances”. He continues: “The Syria we dream of is a free Syria based on justice and equality. Transitional justice that precedes comprehensive national reconciliation is the only way to build the Syria of the future. We are all hopeful that Syria will be fine now. The Syria that our team left 11 years ago with thousands of tortured faces and disfigured bodies. Hundreds of which were separated from their eyes, who dreamed of being among us today”.

“In one of those faces, I saw the image of my father, mother, brothers and friends. In the darkness of the long nights, I looked at those faces and promised them that we would win." He listed his comrades killed by the regime, Yahya Shorbaji (a human rights activist), Ghiath Matar, Abdullah Othman, Burhan Ghadhban, and Nour al-Din Zaatar, saying: "To all of them, those I knew and those I did not know, may God have mercy on you. We have won (...) and Assad has fallen. May God have mercy on you and may the curse of history be upon Assad."

Unknown Heroes Behind Caesar

Sami refused to provide information about how he and Caesar left Syria and reached Western countries. However, he simply said, in response to a question: “I am Osama Othman, a civil engineer from the Damascus countryside. Many people know me even though I hide under the name (Sami). I had to use it as a shield to protect me during the period of hard work on these complex files that many unknown heroes contributed to creating.”

He added: “I am not the only one. There are many unknown heroes who contributed to getting us to this stage. The Caesar files required tremendous efforts in Europe through the courts, and in the United States through Syrian organizations that made tremendous efforts until they were able to push the US administration to issue what is called the Caesar Act or the Civilian Protection Act.”



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.