The nationwide uprising of January 2026, with its unprecedented geographic spread and structure-breaking slogans, placed the entire Iranian regime in the face of an existential challenge and a “survival situation.” The intensity of this popular uprising was such that it eroded and weakened the regime’s traditional apparatus of repression. Credible field reports and strategic analyses show that the authorities, fearing noncompliance by domestic forces and defections within the repressive ranks, resorted to an unprecedented and dangerous measure: summoning extraterritorial arms and proxy militias to confront the Iranian people directly.
Field evidence; traces of foreigners on Iran’s streets
An examination of data from credible news sources and eyewitness reports reveals a grim reality. Irrefutable evidence indicates that by early January 2026, at least 800 militia forces affiliated with groups such as “Kataib Hezbollah,” “Harakat al-Nujaba,” “Sayyid al-Shuhada Brigades,” and the “Badr Organization”—all Iraqi Iran-aligned armed groups—were deployed from Iraq into Iranian territory.
The deployment geography of these forces targeted the most volatile centers of the uprising: the provinces of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, Khuzestan (especially Abadan), Isfahan, Lorestan, and the city of Mashhad.
Iranian Regime Officials Committed Mass Massacres, Human Rights Body Reports #IranProtests #IranRevolution #FreeIran2026 #No2ShahNo2Mullahshttps://t.co/9wOXEemMum
— Iran Focus (@Iran_Focus) February 5, 2026
Eyewitness reports from Zand Boulevard in Shiraz and the streets of Abadan describe the presence of agents speaking with a strong Arabic accent—distinct from the dialect of Iranian Arabs in Khuzestan—who suppressed protesters with a level of brutality markedly different from that of local forces. In Mashhad, the presence of a 150-member unit wearing specialized combat gear has also been reported, indicating an organized plan to contain the uprising.
Strategic logic; why did the regime resort to “imported mercenaries”?
The use of proxy forces within national borders represents a fundamental shift in the regime’s repression model, based on three main pillars:
Emotional and national disconnect: The imported forces—whether Iraqi militias or units such as the Fatemiyoun Division—lack any national, historical, or emotional ties to the Iranian people. While the people of Iran and the region have long-standing fraternal bonds, the regime has deployed these elements, who have been indoctrinated with sectarian ideology for years, to ensure its survival. For these mercenaries, firing on rebellious Iranian youth is not the killing of compatriots but the elimination of a presumed enemy, pushing the brutality of repression to its peak.
Fear of internal defiance: By importing foreign forces, the regime sends a threatening message to its domestic security apparatus. This move serves as leverage to prevent any potential sympathy between local forces and the people and to block avenues for defection or disobedience within the repressive structure.
Expertise in urban warfare: These militias have spent years in the ruins of Syria and Iraq, learning guerrilla warfare tactics and neighborhood-clearing operations. The regime is now employing these grim experiences to confront uprising centers in Iranian cities.
Diplomacy in the service of crime
Investigations show that the infrastructure enabling the rapid transfer of these forces was not accidental but the result of years of planning. Handing over the regime’s embassies in the region to commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), such as Iraj Masjedi in Iraq, effectively turned these diplomatic missions into logistical and support hubs for organizing and deploying militias. This process proves that the regime’s foreign policy apparatus is an inseparable part of its military repression machine.
The Uncertain Fate of Detainees Following the Bloody Crackdown on Iran Protests #IranProtests #IranRevolution #FreeIran2026 #No2ShahNo2Mullahshttps://t.co/3d1gd4WcjC
— Iran Focus (@Iran_Focus) February 4, 2026
International reactions and the stance of the Resistance
In numerous statements, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, while exposing this sinister plan, has emphasized that the regime is now using forces it previously organized under the deceptive label of “defenders of the shrine” to defend the regime against the Iranian people.
On the international stage, recent statements by the European Parliament and positions taken by Kaja Kallas, stressing that repression cannot go unanswered, are reactions to this very genocide in digital darkness. The involvement of extraterritorial terrorist forces in suppressing the Iranian people is now being cited as a powerful legal document in the case for designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization in Europe.
Iran as an occupied land
The use of proxy forces in the January 2026 uprising delivered the final blow to the false claims of the regime’s armed forces being “popular” and “powerful.” This action proved that the clerical regime, to preserve its power, views Iran not as a homeland but as an “occupied land,” over which it will commit any crime— even seeking the help of foreigners to massacre the rightful owners of this country— to maintain its domination.
