US Discusses 'Options' for Iran Protests, Not How It Funds Them
Axios breathlessly reports on Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi supposedly reaching out to Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff following 'Trump's threats' and 'protests.' The implication is Iran is de-escalating, while the U.S. is merely responding to internal unrest. What's missing from this convenient narrative? The extensive public record of US-funded operations aimed at destabilizing Iran, including
those detailed in reports by groups like the Quincy Institute and even leaked government documents outlining 'regime change' strategies. This isn't just about 'threats'—it's about a consistent, documented policy of interference that only occasionally bubbles into direct 'protests.' One might wonder if these 'options' Trump is discussing with his national security team include increasing the
already substantial budgets allocated to organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), which has openly funded groups in Iran, a practice often preceding these convenient 'protests.' The media frames this as diplomatic outreach and spontaneous unrest, while the same old destabilization playbook runs in the background. It's a classic American approach: feign concern over protests
while actively sowing the seeds of discontent, then act surprised when the 'other side' calls foul. How many times does this 'spontaneous revolution' have to appear, perfectly timed with U.S. pressure, before the media finally connects the dots?