In a significant move, Donald Trump has signaled a potential intervention in Iran, responding to the regime’s severe repression of citizens protesting against the government.
On Tuesday, Trump issued a stern warning, stating that the Iranian regime’s “killers and abusers” would face severe consequences. This statement comes amid reports that the government has detained thousands and allegedly killed up to 2,600 protesters since the demonstrations erupted in late December.
Trump has previously demonstrated his willingness to take punitive measures against Iran, notably initiating the so-called 12-Day War in June. During this conflict, U.S. and Israeli forces targeted military, nuclear, and civilian sites across Iran with drones and aircraft.
Despite his strong rhetoric, the President has so far only assured the Iranian populace that “help is on its way,” without providing concrete details about what form U.S. intervention might take.
He is reportedly weighing a variety of strategies, which experts suggest could range from targeted strikes to extensive military operations on the ground.
Analysts emphasize that before making any decisions, Trump needs to clarify his ultimate objectives regarding Iran.
The Americans will also need to properly assess the likelihood of their actions backfiring and playing in to the hands of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
And Trump also risks a major escalation in hostilities, with Iran warning that it will strike US military bases in those countries in case of a U.S. attack, a senior Iranian official told Reuters on Wednesday.
‘Tehran has told regional countries, from Saudi Arabia and UAE to Turkey, that U.S. bases in those countries will be attacked if U.S. targets Iran… asking these countries to prevent Washington from attacking Iran,’ the official told Reuters.
Among the strongest actions the Americans have put on the table is the possible assassination or abduction of the Ayatollah.
Iranians attend an anti-government protest in Tehran, Iran, Friday, January 9, 2026
Families and residents gather at the Kahrizak Coroner’s Office confronting rows of body bags as they search for relatives killed during the regime’s violent crackdown on nationwide protests
Last night, Donald Trump (pictured) gave his strongest indication that he was willing to intervene in Iran
Having been in power since 1989 and supported groups including Hezbollah, Hamas and the al-Assad regime in Syria, he has long been a thorn in the world’s side.
He has been particularly insistent that he will not ditch Iran’s nuclear programme, one of the US’ main sticking points that has stopped it from lifting crippling sanctions that have devastated the economy and gave rise to the ongoing protests.
On Monday, Trump announced he was placing a massive 25 tariff on goods from countries with commercial ties to Iran. CNN, meanwhile, reported he was considering additional sanctions on major sectors of Iran’s economy, like banking.
Khamenei’s insistence on keeping the nuclear programme is something that other leaders in Iran, including president Masoud Pezeshkian, massively disagree with.
Mathew Savill, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, told the Telegraph: ‘The way that Khamenei is talking in public is not a good indicator that he’s actually got that message’
‘And if Khamenei is seen as the blocker, would there be a pressure to remove the blocker?’
This would be incredibly tempting for the US, especially on the back of the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, which saw a smooth transition of power from the dictator to his lieutenants who appeared to be more than happy to take over in exchange for bending the knee.
But Danny Citrinowicz, an Israeli defence analyst who specialises in Iran, told the Telegraph that taking Khamenei out is incredibly risky and risks triggering an all-out war in the Middle East.
He said: ‘It’s not like you’re taking Maduro out, and that’s it. If you’re killing [Khamenei], then you have to open a Pandora’s box of relations with the Shia community for whom he is not only a political leader, but also a religious one’.
Protesters set fire to makeshift barricades near a religious centre on January 10, 2026
The US is also considering launching symbolic strikes against targets across Iran, designed to send a message of willingness to intervene further.
Iran has plenty of targets to choose from. During the so-called 12-Day War, the Israelis hit the country’s intelligence ministry, and Trump may also choose a similarly symbolic building to hit.
The US already has plenty of assets in the region it could use to hit high-value nuclear targets, which could be enough to persuade the regime to ease off its crackdown on demonstrators.
But if targets are too symbolic, they risk becoming a symbol of possibly American apathy and given Iranian authorities carte blanche to continue their brutal crackdown.
Stronger than this would be a sustained bombing campaign. Farzan Sabet, a managing researcher at the Global Governance Centre in Geneva, told the Telegraph: ‘The preponderance of [America’s] focus would have to be on the domestic repressive apparatus.
‘Key personnel, not only at the top level but one or two levels down; their communications nodes; the facilities they use. And then the main facilities of state media … and the judiciary and prosecution service.
‘Military planners might also feel compelled to hit some military targets so that the retaliation is limited.’
This would require significant time for the US to build up its military capabilities in the region, including the deployment of aircraft carriers and warplanes.
Protesters dancing and cheering around a bonfire in Tehran on January 9, 2026
The courtyard of the Forensic Diagnostic and Laboratory Centre of Tehran Province in Kahrizak on January 12, with dozens of bodies in bodybags laid out for family members
Iranian demonstrators gather in a street during a protest over the collapse of the currency’s value, in Tehran on January 8, 2026
And, as former British ambassador to Iran Nicholas Hopton warned: ‘You would need to put American boots on the ground, and he is not going to do that’.
He also risks a ‘rally-round-the-flag’ effect, where Iranians may flock back to their leader upon being attacked by the US.
So, if Trump wants to cause material damage to Iran while also avoiding the risk of escalating military tensions, what else can he do?
For one, the US has kept the cyber warfare option on the table. Using some of the most sophisticated software in the world, the US has a range of cyber options at its disposal.
It could, if it wanted to, break the regime’s communications blackout, allowing those inside to coordinate their actions against the state.
It could also cripple vital governmental infrastructure, an opportunity that could then be capitalised on by protesters.
But Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House, said the window of opportunity to use cyber warfare tactics may be long gone: ‘The US might have missed the window. If it was going to respond, it should have [done so] a few days ago.
‘At the moment it looks like the regime will survive this, unless there is something we are not seeing. It is important to remember that we do not have visibility of what has happened in Iran. But for now it looks like they are managing it – in the most bloody way’.
For now, though, Iran doesn’t appear to be backing down. Mohammad Ghalibaf, the speaker of Parliament, told a pro-government rally in Tehran on Monday: ‘Come and see how all your assets in the region will be destroyed… what will befall American bases, American ships and American forces’.
