Domestic brutality, external adventurism reinforce each other in Iran, Russia

Global Watch | 2026-04-13

In January 2026, economic hardship triggered protests across Iran, amid a collapsing currency and widening public anger over economic mismanagement, demonstrating once again showing how quickly social unrest can become a national security crisis for the regime.

Reports from human rights groups described a sweeping state response in provincial cities that was difficult to document fully because of telecommunications restrictions and limited outside access.

The state responded with a severe crackdown.

Security forces used lethal force in multiple provinces, imposed near-total internet blackouts, and carried out mass arrests and enforced disappearances, especially in smaller cities far from international attention, according to accounts compiled by rights monitors.

Human rights organizations stated that the repression was not only brutal but also coordinated.

The Center for Human Rights in Iran documented the use of military-grade weapons in provinces including Kerman, Lorestan, Khuzestan and Kurdistan.

Senior researcher Esfandiar Aban described the campaign as one carried out "where the world cannot see."

The scale of the violence has drawn widespread alarm.

Human Rights Watch reported that executions in Iran rose above 2,000 in 2025, the highest known level since the late 1980s

UN experts have called for transparency, the restoration of telecommunications access, disclosure of detainees' whereabouts and accountability for alleged abuses.

Shared survival strategy

Yet this repression does not exist in isolation. It is part of a broader governing strategy that ties survival at home to confrontation abroad.

In that sense, Iran's behavior increasingly mirrors that of its key partner, Russia. Both regimes rely on internal coercion while using external conflict to project strength, justify repression and distract from domestic failures.

That parallel is more than rhetorical.

Tehran has supplied Russia with Shahed drones and, according to U.S. and European statements, ballistic missiles used in Russia's war against Ukraine.

In return, the partnership gives Iran political cover, military technology and economic lifelines at a time of growing internal strain, while also feeding a broader regional and nuclear posture that European officials increasingly describe as a direct security concern.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy captured the nature of the relationship on March 17, 2026, when he described the two regimes as "brothers in hatred" and "brothers in weapons."

The relationship is mutually reinforcing. Iran gains battlefield testing for its weapons and a stronger place within an anti-Western axis, while Russia secures critical munitions to sustain its war.

Analysts say both governments benefit politically as well. External conflict helps them redirect public frustration, tighten internal control and frame dissent as part of a wider foreign threat.

Global security risks

That is why Iran's crackdown at home carries implications far beyond its borders.

The same regime using force against protesters in its provinces is also helping arm Russia's war in Europe. Iranian drones striking Ukrainian cities show how one authoritarian state's survival strategy can directly strengthen another's aggression.

The relationship also runs in the other direction. Russian oil revenues, diplomatic backing and military cooperation help sustain Iran's regional ambitions and support its broader strategic posture, including its nuclear program.

Left unchecked, this axis raises security risks across multiple theaters, from the Middle East to Europe.

Breaking that cycle will take more than condemnation. Sustained sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, stronger support for independent civil society and coordinated pressure on both regimes remain central tools for governments seeking to constrain both states’ capacities for repression and external aggression.

As Zelenskyy argued in March 2026, the protests in Iran should be seen not only as a domestic crisis, but as an opportunity to weaken a broader network of authoritarian cooperation.

What is unfolding in Iran's provinces, then, is not simply a local story of repression.

It is part of a larger pattern in which domestic brutality and external adventurism reinforce each other. For Western governments and their partners, recognizing that connection is the first step toward a more coherent and effective response.