What is happening in Iran? A peek behind the headlines

Leading radio and television media outlets and major daily newspapers in German-speaking countries are considered authorities on reporting. It is astonishing, however, that in their coverage of numerous crises and wars, they fail to adhere to their own and to international standards.
    The current reporting on events in Iran – which more closely resembles incitement against enemies – is not the only example of how media often fail to inform, and instead become mouthpieces for specific interests. This is evident when comparing our media outlets with those in other parts of the world, which utilise more available sources and think outside the box. They incorporate regional, Iranian, Asian, and international sources, giving a voice to Iranian government ministers and analysts, who draw connections that are absent from our local media.
    However, journalistic reporting in Germany is governed by rules, namely those of the Press Code. This code, comprising 16 articles, details the rules that apply to journalistic work. It is about “truthfulness and respect for human dignity” and “diligence,” about “protecting personal rights, honour, religion, and worldview,” about avoiding “sensationalist reporting,” about “discrimination,” and the “presumption of innocence.”
    The German Federal Agency for Civic Education (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung BpB) has published several booklets on media policy, which are freely available. One of these booklets deals with the “basic principles of media ethics,” which are defined as “truthfulness, privacy, non-discrimination, respect for human dignity, avoidance of sensationalism, source integrity, and transparency in cases of conflicts of interest.”
    In traditional journalism training, journalists learn that there are up to seven “W-questions” that should be answered in news reports and articles to establish credibility: who (did something); what (did they do); where (did they do it); when (did they do it); how (did they do it); why (did they do it); and where (is the information from)? Checking the source, i.e. where the information has come from, is of particular importance. Source verification serves to ensure the veracity and thus the quality of a news item or report. Generally, it is said that at least three sources should underlie a news item or report.
    Given the chaotic developments in the media landscape due to social media and artificial intelligence, which are leading to the news “business” moving at a rapid pace in new schools of thought advocate dispensing with the “W-questions”. This increasingly turns reporting into advertising for what is being conveyed – in short, into public relations.
    Added to this is a highly complex and often opaque international development, and background knowledge and time are required to communicate this to the public. In times of war and crisis, political and economic interests come into play, which are increasingly being strengthened – even in Europe – by suppressing dissenting perspectives. Media outlets from other parts of the world are banned, journalists are defamed, and for several months now, the EU Commission has been attempting to silence journalists and analysts with so-called “sanctions.”
    To explain this to the public – or justify it –, so-called “fact-checkers” are presented as particularly high-quality review bodies for distinguishing “falsifications” from “facts”. For example, the German public broadcaster ARD has established its own “fact-finder” department to lend credibility to its own reports. In Brussels, there is an “EU Disinfo Lab” where, among other things, a “fact-checking project” develops standards for “facts” for the EU. The “fact-checkers” work on behalf of their funders, which could indeed create a conflict of interest for them. Who checks them?
    In Germany and Europe, a new class of journalists appears to be emerging. Alongside the “fact-checkers,” there is a “privileged” journalism in which selected accredited journalists receive privileged information from the EU Commission, NATO, at the Munich Security Conference or other events, or while accompanying chancellors and ministers on their travels.
    Furthermore, television broadcasters and print media are establishing their own rules that apply to their editorial staff.
    For example, in October 2023, the German public broadcaster ARD published a “Glossary for Reporting on the Middle East Conflict” for “internal use,” which established a set of language guidelines for employees and correspondents. The 44-page glossary was published on 18 October 2023, ten days after the attack by Palestinian militias on Israeli villages east of the Gaza Strip. On the same day, Israel began a war of annihilation against the population of the Palestinian coastal strip, that would last more than two years.
    “Fact-checking”, prescribed language, and privileged journalism flourish most of all during times of war and crisis, because publicly available information is heavily influenced by the interests of governments, corporations, rulers, and ruling alliances. If media outlets and reporters do not clearly distance themselves from these dominant interests or supplement them with alternative perspectives, information becomes propaganda.
    Simply disseminating unverified death tolls and claiming that the figures cannot be verified in war zones and crisis areas is insufficient. What cannot be verified – and in the case of Iran, information from organisations based in Norway or the US cannot be verified – should according to journalistic principles not be adopted.
    So, what do we know about Iran and its society? What is known about the turbulent history of this country, which, due to its oil wealth and geostrategically significant location, has been in the sights of the US and Great Britain since the end of World War II?

Iran – Background

91.5 million inhabitants (source: World Bank), roughly half women and half men. Women have a high level of education, making up more than 60 per cent of university graduates. There is a significant urban-rural divide. The country possesses resources of coal, oil, gas, iron, chromium, manganese, lead, and zinc. Iran shares borders with 11 countries: Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. Iran borders three seas: the Caspian Sea to the north, the Persian Gulf to the west, and this is connected to the Gulf of Oman to the south via the Strait of Hormuz.
    Since the beginning of the US-led “War on Terror” in 2001, Iran has taken in 3.6 million refugees. The vast majority come from Afghanistan, fewer from Iraq. 20,000 Iraqis and approximately 2.6 million Afghans are officially registered as refugees in Iran. Around 1 million Afghans are unregistered.
    Iran is one of the 51 states invited by the “Big Four” – China, Great Britain, the USSR, and the USA – in 1945 to found the United Nations. Iran signed the UN Charter on 26 June and ratified it on 16 October 1945.
    Since 2024, Iran has been a member of BRICS, an alliance of countries of the Global South that united to collectively challenge political and economic pressure from the USA. Iran has been a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation since 2023. It has extensive agreements, including military ones, with Russia and China.
    Iran’s main trading partners are China, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey. According to the World Bank, Iran also has – less – trade with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Oman, India, Russia, and Turkmenistan.
    In 1953, Iranian Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh nationalised Iran’s oil reserves. The CIA (USA) and MI6 (Great Britain) orchestrated a coup, and Mossadegh was ousted. Oil was once again controlled by US companies. Under the leadership of Shah Reza Pahlavi, Iran was firmly allied with the USA, EU member states, and Israel.
    In January 1979, the Shah left Iran, having been overthrown by an Islamic Revolution. Its leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, returned to Iran from exile in France on 1 February 1979. In April 1979, the country’s constitution was amended, and Iran became an Islamic Republic. A turbulent history ensued.

A glimpse behind the headlines

The most recent unrest began on 28 December 2025. The trigger was the fall of the Iranian rial on the Dubai Stock Exchange, where it lost 30 percent of its value. Business owners at the bazaar, Tehran’s large market, protested the massive devaluation of the Iranian currency. The government had supported traders in buying and selling goods abroad with subsidised US dollars; this support could no longer be maintained due to the massive sudden loss in value.
    The government signalled understanding for the merchants’ discontent, stating that a solution would be found through talks and negotiations. And a solution was found; the merchants reopened their shops. However, ordinary demonstrators from all walks of life had joined the merchants’ protests. The economic situation is strained due to long-standing US and EU sanctions. Financial mismanagement only exacerbated the situation.
    What followed was an uprising orchestrated by intelligence agencies. The plan was most likely devised by the Israeli Mossad and the US CIA. Trump and Netanyahu may have reached an agreement at their meeting in Florida at the end of December 2025. In Israel, media outlets were certain that they had received the “green light” from Trump for an attack on Lebanon and Iran. The CIA monitors the entire region anyhow, and Mossad has two large bases in Erbil in northern Iraq and in Azerbaijan. From there is not far to Iran.
    Alastair Crooke, a long-serving British diplomat to the European Union and MI6 intelligence officer, outlines on his blog, Conflicts Forum, the individual steps that escalated the situation within a very short time and were to lead to an armed “regime change.” The call to “remove Khamenei” echoed through European think tanks and media outlets, shortly after a US special forces unit had abducted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in Caracas and taken them to the United States.
    While the Iranian protests were primarily directed against the poor economic situation, Western capitals and leading media outlets described the “fall of the regime” in Tehran as “imminent” if the US and Europe helped the demonstrators. US President Trump declared that they stood by their side with loaded weapons and that help was on the way. The demonstrators were urged to seize Iranian government buildings; shortly thereafter, government offices and banks were burning.
    The Turkish army informed Iran about armed insurgents advancing from Kurdish northern Iraq via Kermanshah in western Iran. Iran killed most of them but was overwhelmed by the insurgents, who mingled with demonstrators nationwide and used brutal force. Shaky video footage captured the destructive actions: shops, cars, fire trucks, and mosques went up in flames. Iranian security and police forces were fired upon from the rear or sides of the demonstrations. They returned fire, rarely hitting the actual shooters but rather mere demonstrators.
    German politicians like Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul and Chancellor Friedrich Merz rejoiced that the end of the “mullah regime” was imminent.
    Wadephul called the massive protests against the “ayatollah regime” a consequence of EU sanctions: “This means: sanctions are working, and we should continue along this path.” Meanwhile, former French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin warned against foreign intervention in Iran and, in an interview with Euronews, advocated talks.
    Chancellor Merz, however, declared on his trip to India that he assumed the “regime is effectively finished.” Germany was coordinating closely with the US and within the E3 format (Germany, France, and the UK), and the foreign ministers were in close contact. It could only be “a few more days or weeks,” Merz said. T-Online then asked: “What does Merz know?”
    Iran shut down the internet to cut off contact with the outside world. Israel and the US activated Starlink connections, but these were quickly and successfully blocked by Iran, using technology from China and equipment from Russia. Around 40,000 Starlink units were effectively shut down within a very short time, according to Alastair Crooke, who cited Iranian security firms. The Starlink units, equipped with a small solar panel, had been illegally brought into Iran and were confiscated from warehouses by Iranian security forces. This severed the connection between the violent groups and their instigators abroad. The demonstrations also subsided due to the enormous violence and destruction and the high number of fatalities.
    On 12 January, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Iran had intercepted audio messages originating from abroad. The callers had told the recipients to open fire while they were among the demonstrators. “If you can shoot at the police, do so. If you can’t, shoot at anyone. And if that doesn’t work, shoot the girl or boy who is directly in front of you.”

Official Figures

Alireza Zakani, the mayor of Tehran, estimated the damage in the capital at more than 20 million US-Dollars on Wednesday. He said the devastation was perpetrated by violent terrorists who had infiltrated the “peaceful protests against the dire economic situation”.
     Damage to infrastructure, including the public transportation network, amounts to almost 39 trillion rials. Eighty-nine buses were set on fire, 57 of which were so badly damaged that some had to be taken out of service. Two city administration buildings and eight newly purchased fire engines were destroyed. A complete list of the damaged property was being prepared. The administrative authorities would decide on the number of repairs and compensation that could be paid.
    The governor of Tehran province said that around 1,000 private and public vehicles had been destroyed or damaged, including 54 ambulances and 71 fire engines. Forty-four mosques, 26 government buildings, houses, and businesses had been destroyed or damaged in Tehran and the surrounding area. The Iranian news agency IRNA reported extensive damage to urban infrastructure in Rasht in the north, Mashhad in the east, and Kerman in the south.
    The Iranian government blamed Washington and Tel Aviv for the devastation, accusing them of exploiting public anger over Iran’s poor economic situation since the 12-day war of Israel and the United States against Iran. Foreign Minister Araghchi stated that the alleged summary executions by hanging would not take place.
    Last Wednesday, Iran filed an official complaint with UN Secretary-General António Guterres at the United Nations. Amir-Saeid Iravani, the Iranian ambassador to the UN, referred in the letter to statements by US President Donald Trump in which the latter openly called for violence in Iran and threatened military intervention. “Iranian patriots, keep protesting, take over your institutions! Help is on the way,” Trump had declared, explicitly urging people to politically destabilise and stoke up the situation and thus inciting to violence. This, the ambassador stated, constitutes a threat to Iran’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security.
    Rules exist not only for the media, but also for politicians and governments of all 193 United Nations member states: namely the UN Charter. In light of the experience of the two great wars (1914/18 and 1939/45), the preamble promises a commitment to peace and constitutes equality, sovereignty, respect for borders, and security for all people and all states, large and small. Iran adheres to this principle in its actions before the UN Security Council, while the US, Israel, and other states in the US sphere of influence have – based on their own interests – developed their own “rules-based order” that seeks to override the UN Charter and international agreements.

The dead are being buried

While German media still give much room to calls for “regime change” and new sanctions against Iran, funerals have begun in Iran. To gain an impression of the funeral procession in Isfahan, the author watches Iranian television footage. One should look closely at the images. Young and old walk in loose lines. Some women wear black abayas, some wear trousers and mid-length coats, with scarves loosely draped over their hair. The Iranian reporter approaches them; most speak proudly of their country, yet are deeply shaken. Young and old men march along in the funeral procession. Enlarged images of the dead are displayed on banners; the procession is interspersed with loudspeaker trucks showing large pictures of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and General Qasem Soleimani. The commander of the Quds Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was assassinated by the Trump administration in a drone strike at Baghdad airport almost exactly five years ago, in early January 2020.
    At the front of one of these trucks stands a young man holding up a picture the size of an A4 sheet of paper. He is dressed in black; the picture is in colour. It shows a little girl beneath a garland of colourful balloons. Her long black hair falls over her shoulders as she twirls, beaming, in a flowing white dress. The writing beneath the image is illegible to the viewer of the video footage. Her name will likely be inscribed in Farsi, the national language of Iran, along with details of what happened to her. The man is weeping.
    Among the dead whom Iranians are burying in cities across the country these days are children, teenagers, women, and men, members of the Iranian security forces, bus drivers, and merchants – they come from all walks of life. Even a police officer, trampled to death by provocateurs, will find his final resting place. The names of most will remain unknown to outsiders. All leave behind them families, loved ones, who do not know what their future holds.

And a current update

On Thursday evening – 15 January 2026 – the UN Security Council in New York addressed the situation in Iran. UN rapporteur and Assistant Secretary-General Martha Pobee summarised the known facts in a brief statement and warned against escalation. She reiterated the principles of the UN Charter and the obligation of member states to resolve conflicts peacefully. The threat or use of force is prohibited in international relations between states. “These principles are not abstract ideals,” the UN rapporteur stated. They are “the foundation of international peace and security. This is as true today as when the United Nations was founded.”
    The US-Iranian journalist Masih Alinejad expressed a completely different view. An internationally renowned and active opponent of the Iranian government, she has lived in exile in New York since 2009 and made no secret of her contempt for the Iranian government in a detailed indictment. The Islamic Republic behaved “like the Islamic State,” she declared, and demanded that Iran be treated like the Islamic State.
    US Ambassador Waltz echoed these demands, stating that “all options to stop the carnage are on the table in the White House.” President Donald Trump, he said, is a man of action, not of the useless rhetoric so common at the United Nations. The Russian representative called on the “hotheads” in Washington to come to their senses, and the Chinese representative declared that “US President Donald Trump’s direct threats against Iran” must be stopped. •

First published on globalbridge.ch on 16 January 2026. You will also find numerous links to sources and further reading there.

(Translation Current Concerns)

* Karin Leukefeld, born in 1954, is an ethnologist, Islamic and political scientist, and historian. She has been working as a freelance correspondent since 2000. Her main areas of focus are the Near and Middle East. Her most recent book is “Krieg in Nahost. Geopolitik, Verwüstung, Widerstand und Aufbruch einer Region” (War in the Middle East: Geopolitics, Devastation, Resistance and the Awakening of a Region) (Hintergrund Publishing House 2025).