Tehran: People at a protest against the regime.Image: UGC/AP / Uncredited
interview
A German-Iranian journalist about violence, forced loyalty – and why many Iranians now distrust negotiations and Trump.
Feb 21, 2026, 5:02 p.mFeb 21, 2026, 5:02 p.m
Anna Von Stefenelli / watson.de
If reporting on Iran becomes quieter, that doesn’t mean the situation has calmed down. On the contrary: Since the nationwide protests in January, many people have been living in a mixture of fear and the feeling that they can no longer bear the situation.
The German-Iranian journalist Navid Moshgbar formerly wrote for watson. He was born in Iran and grew up in Germany. Today he is in contact with people in Iran via social media. In an interview with Watson, Moshgbar describes why many in the shattered country are exhausted – and US President Donald Trump disappoints them.
Navid Moshgbar is a freelance journalist. That would be unthinkable in Iran.Image: zvg
Navid, you grew up in Germany, but still have contacts in Iran. What news hardly gets through here?
Navid Moshgbar: One sentence keeps coming up in messages to me: “Even if I wasn’t killed, I died inside. I’m just functioning.” This feeling describes very well what is happening in Iran.
This feeling has deepened since the mass protests at the beginning of the year. When did you have the feeling that things were tipping over?
There was no clear moment when everything tipped over, but on January 8th and 9th, many people across the country had the feeling: Now it could happen. In numerous cities, a large number of people took to the streets at the same time, also because the son of the last Shah, Reza Pahlavi, and other actors had called for exactly these days. Many thought: If there are so many of us, the regime can no longer control it.
The Iranian regime brutally suppressed the protests.Image: AP
But then there was shooting. Targeted.
Yes, and that while people gathered together through the streets. Some shots were fired from side streets, some from the crowd. That was a shock: you take to the streets with the feeling that you want to change something together – and suddenly those who you thought were on your side start shooting. Now there is constant uncertainty: If the regime shuts down the internet, many people will not know whether people they wrote to the day before are still alive today.
Many street images currently appear calmer. A false normal?
The silence just means that people are afraid of being massacred again. It does not mean that resistance against the regime has stopped. Things will never be the same again because people have seen that even such large protests are brutally suppressed. The regime is apparently prepared to do anything to stay in power.
Do you have any idea of the extent of the bloodshed in Iran since then?
This cannot yet be quantified precisely. According to reports, for example from the New York Times, there were at least 36,500 dead in two days of protests; last I read about 50,000 to 80,000 dead. What is important is less the exact number than the quality of the crime: demonstrators were targeted, their eyes, their faces, their chests, often in such a way that the injuries were deliberately mutilated. Doctors report that injured people sometimes received the “final shot” in the hospital. Many don’t even go there for fear of being arrested or killed. They postpone their injuries or try to treat them themselves via remote diagnosis.
At the same time, there is pressure on the families of the murdered. What do you know about it?
They find themselves in a double blackmail situation. There are reports that relatives have to pay large sums of money to get the bodies and have to sign that someone died from something else, such as an accident. During previous protests, young people said to their parents: “If I don’t come back, please don’t pay for my body.” So it’s not just about money, but about the fact that even grief is politically controlled.
Recently, footage of large pro-regime rallies has repeatedly been seen in Western media. How do such images emerge despite resistance?
The regime uses symbolic dates, such as the anniversary of the revolution, to stage mass loyalty. This year, the pressure on relatives of prisoners is particularly great: they are forced to take part in such events and have to take a photo to prove that they were there. Many hope that their relatives will be treated better in prison or even have a chance of being released – even if that is doubtful. When Western news reports: “Hundreds of thousands at pro-regime demonstration,” it hits many Iranians hard because they know the pressure under which many of these people are there. There is an impression of approval abroad that does not exist.
How does this affect trust in Western media?
This has led to a massive loss of trust in the exile community. One example is a large demonstration in Berlin by the People’s Mujahideen (MEK), a group that many Iranians see as a political sect and that has no roots in the country itself. In some reports they were barely classified. For example, how they are perceived in Iran and what their history is. For many, this confirms the impression that our reality is only understood superficially.
How is the West viewed overall, especially with regard to negotiations?
Many people believe that negotiations stabilize the regime because regional security and nuclear issues are almost always discussed, but not human rights. The people in the country don’t want negotiations, they want a system change.
How do people in the country currently view Donald Trump?
When the nuclear agreement was concluded, many people associated it with the hope of less risk of war and economic relief. However, the impression later emerged that the regime was primarily using the talks to gain time and continue working on the nuclear program. When Donald Trump canceled the agreement, some relied on the announced “maximum pressure”. Instead of upheaval, what arose was uncertainty: some expected support for the protests, others feared war. What remained was disillusionment. Human rights didn’t matter to Trump. The widespread feeling today is that both negotiations and threats can stabilize the regime – either by legitimizing it or by portraying it as a victim of an external enemy.
Trump’s reputation has cracked in Iran. Pictured: a pro-regime demonstrator.Image: iMAGO images / Foad Ashtari
Is there an idea in the country of how change can come about?
Some say: The regime will not disappear without military pressure from outside, especially since it has brought foreign militias into the country that it itself set up or supports, which shoot at demonstrators without any ties to the population. The others strictly reject a military strike, rely on tough sanctions and depriving the power apparatus of its financial basis. They hope that at some point security forces will no longer be paid and the structure will fall apart from the inside.
What is your hope for a post-regime Iran?
That the people of Iran can decide for themselves what their state should look like, not exile groups and not foreign governments. Specifically, this means: free elections under international observation, a constituent assembly and then a referendum on this constitution. Before the revolution there were referendums, but they were neither truly free nor fair.
Massacre in Iranian city of Rasht – Washington Post reconstructs events with eyewitness videos
Video: Watson/Lucas Zollinger