Name: Iran unrest: Protester death toll jumps to 1,850, according to US-based rights group
Uploaded: 2026-01-13T17:30:50.000Z
Duration: 9 min 14 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Now in the face of this harsh government crackdown, a U.

S based rights group now says security forces have killed more than 1800 people.

That number of course, significantly higher than before.

CNN cannot independently confirm casualty figures, but we're closely monitoring what we can.

Nada Bashir joining us now this hour from London.

This Internet blackout, of course nada continues several days in.

At this point it is so tough to get information in and out.

It has absolutely been very difficult to get any real time updates on what is unfolding inside Iran.

Some Iranians have been able to use some landline phones to make calls outside of the country to give updates on what is happening.

We've been hearing from some on the ground who have said that the protests have died down somewhat as of Monday in comparison to previous nights.

I've been speaking to one contact who's told me that one relative was able to make a call out to the UK to give an update saying that they had heard warnings from their students that security forces were shooting relentlessly at protesters during these nightly demonstrations taking place in Tehran.

So a very troubling picture coming from just these snippets of information that we have been able to receive as a result of this total Internet and communications blackout that is still in place over Iran.

And of course we have seen some video emerging since that Internet communications blackout was in force.

We have seen videos, distressing videos showing body bags lined outside a medical complex giving an indication of the scale of the violence that we have seen at the hands of the Iranian security forces.

And as you mentioned now a U S based human rights organization which is tracking that death toll has given a staggering update in comparison to that death toll which was put at over 500 just yesterday.

Now this update, 1800 are believed to have been killed since protests began.

And this is a shocking jump in the figure.

Of course CNN cannot independently verify this data, but

that gives you a sense of the scale and that certainly reflects what we have been hearing from what little information is coming out of Iran.

We've been hearing that hospitals are overwhelmed, that protesters have been shot at, and

of course these are large scale protests that are not only taking place in the capital Tehran, but

they have touched every province of Iran, multiple towns and cities.

And of course, while there are reports that they have died down, there is still a concern that during this Internet and communications back out, we will continue to see that violence intensify and we will continue to see that death toll increasing.

We have heard from Iranian officials through state media suggesting that that Internet blackout will continue to remain in place in airwords until security is restored in Iran.

And of course, fears again around the international reaction and the potential for the US to take direct military action if indeed the violence continues.

some of those concerns are that nada that it could lead to in many ways a further crackdown despite the threats from Donald Trump.

Just real quickly too, in terms of these protests, is there a sense of how organized they are?

And by that I mean how much they are organized around a central rallying cry in terms of what the protesters want to see for change?

Well, look, this began very clearly as a protest over the economic crisis in Iran.

We saw business owners from Tehran's bazaars carrying out organized demonstrations alongside even university students over the soaring inflation rates, the plummeting currency and the fact that ordinary Iranians were simply unable to get by on a day to day basis, unable to pay their rent, unable to buy everyday goods such as food and essential medicine because things have become simply too expensive, expensive.

But this has really grown and evolved into so much more.

Of course, there are multiple wide ranging grievances with the Iranian regime beyond the economy, including political freedom, social freedoms, of course, as we have seen in the past, women taking to the streets in protest against the regime's strict rules and regulations on the way women dress, where they have access to, in terms of where they're able to be active openly.

And of course, this has really garnered support, support from a wide range of the Iranian population.

And this is potentially what makes this protest movement very different.

We are seeing Iranians from all ethnic backgrounds, religious, sex, age groups, women and men, the young and the old, taking part in these demonstrations.

And we are increasingly hearing calls for the regime to be toppled.

CNN senior political reporter Stephen Collinson, who's joining me live from Washington.

When we look at the way that this is all potentially or the way this could potentially play out, it's important to note, as you did in one of your recent column, Iran is not Venezuela.

And there are certainly some lessons to be learned in the way that the president, the administration went about removing Maduro and what has been left.

What is your takeaway in this moment when we look at these two particular situations which are in fact quite different?

I think the first one, as you heard from what Elena was saying, was this Iran situation is far more complex on the face of doesn't seem like the quick, sharp win that the president declared in Venezuela with the ousting of Maduro is necessarily going to be available to him in Iran.

I think the first question to ask is whether US Action, military action, attacks, will help the protesters and perhaps be a decisive push to nudge the regime over the edge, or will they hurt?

Could the US Simply end up getting rid of the clerical regime in Tehran and creating a new situation whereby some kind of domestic IGRC strongman takes over?

So I think there are a lot of things that the administration has to weigh here.

And, of course, the president has repeatedly established a red line.

He said he would act if Iran shot against the protesters.

So the bias here, from his point of view, I think, would be to take some kind of action.

But there are many questions and caveats about whether the US could be effective and what kind of circumstances it might unleash if it went back to hitting Iran militarily.

Not least, of course, he also has to weigh the domestic factors.

There's a great deal of concern about his actions in Venezuela.

There's a huge controversy about Trump's plan to create ownership of Greenland.

So all of this, I think, is going to be part of the White House deliberations.

It's also so interesting because a lot of the criticism following the capture of Maduro and his wife was over whether or not there was actually a plan for the day after.

And there are questions about what the ultimate goal would be in Iran.

To your point, could it potentially embolden the existing regime?

I mean, Trump has said repeatedly now, this is about the oil, really, in Venezuela.

It is not a democracy for first operation.

If that is potentially the goal in Iran, democracy, that is a massive undertaking.

And I think there is a tantalizing goal here for the administration, the possibility that it could rid the Middle east of the Iranian revolutionary regime, which has been a huge factor in supporting terrorism, in opposing Israel and US goals in the Middle east for 45 years.

That would be something, first of all, that would appeal to the administration geopolitically, but

Could he be the president who finally solves the Iran question for the United States?

We know that he's looking for legacy historical achievements that may well appeal to his sense of the dramatic.

And this idea that he's wielding unaccountable and vast American power across the globe, yet at the same time, is there that option that the United States has to create a quick, spectacular military clap and not get dragged into all sorts of other consequences that might flow from Iran?

We know that the whole US showdown with Iran started in the early 1950s with a US coup that was motivated by oil, somewhat similar to Trump's actions in Venezuela in recent weeks.

US Plans made in Washington that seem very logical on the face of it often end up leading down difficult, punishing ways for presidents in the Middle east, as we saw in the early years of this century as well.

So I think there's a lot for the administration to be concerned about, even in its current belligerent and bullish mood.