The missile attack caused deep division among Iranians

Iranians have expressed pride, insecurity and fear since their country launched a massive ballistic missile attack on Israel on Tuesday night.

Just minutes after the attack began, Persian social media feeds were filled with shaky videos showing the flash of missiles flying overhead.

Iranian state television broadcast images of groups of people cheering in the streets, waving flags and chanting “Death to Israel.”

But the mood online was different, with not everyone expressing support for the attack.

Some shared tense scenes and heated debates about a possible war between the sworn enemies, after decades of keeping their conflict private.

The contrasting reactions have exposed deep divisions in Iran, where there is widespread discontent among clerics and frustration at the economic troubles caused by sanctions.

On one side of the debate are those who support the government’s actions with national pride, while on the other side are those who fear war, economic collapse and further repression of domestic reform movements.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said Tuesday’s missile attack successfully targeted Israeli military and intelligence bases and that it was revenge for recent killings of Israeli soldiers. leader of allies Hamas and Hezbollah.

The Israeli military described the attack as “indiscriminate” and said that although it was largely thwarted by air defenses, there were casualties and millions of Israelis had to flee to bomb shelters.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned that Iran will pay the price for its “big mistake”.

For many supporters of the Iranian government, the attack represented a proud moment of defiance.

“Acclaim [Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei! Hail to the Revolutionary Guard!” a young woman screams in a widely circulated clip.

Such sentiment frustrated other Iranians online.

“Distinguish between the people and the Revolutionary Guards; We are under great pressure,” a middle-aged man pleaded in a video shared on social networks.

Some Iranians felt the attack was an unnecessary provocation and would only make their lives worse.

“We have no choice but to defend our country, but we are the ones who have to bear the consequences,” said a concerned resident in the capital Tehran.

In the hours after the strike, there were rumors that Israel might respond by targeting Iran’s oil infrastructure, a key part of the country’s economy.

Videos quickly emerged showing gas stations flooded, with long lines of people rushing to fill up amid fears of future shortages.

The missile attack also dampened hopes for diplomatic progress with the West and other countries in the region.

The election of Masoud Pezeshkian as the new president in July sparked optimism among moderates. Some see him as a potential bridge in easing tensions in the region.

But one BBC Persian viewer lamented that “this attack is another step away from diplomacy and one step closer to conflict”.

“I’m worried this war could be used as an excuse to increase repression against us who are fighting for freedom,” a young activist said, referring to the “Women’s War” protests. Women, Life, Freedom” broke out nationwide two years ago.

Many worry that a new conflict could not only weaken calls for reform but also empower the government to further crack down on domestic dissent.

Unlike previous escalations, this time people are increasingly concerned about a strong retaliation from Israel.

And many believe that Israel’s advanced military capabilities could bring unprecedented destruction if a full-scale war broke out.

One social media commentator said: “No one wants war, not the people, not even the officials.”

This feeling of vulnerability has made the situation more precarious than ever.

Amid growing tensions, some are even calling for regime change.

Another Persian viewer of BBC News said: “The only way to save Iran is not through war but to overthrow the current regime,” and called on the West to support Iranians in their fight against Iran. back to the government.

However, many people believe that the country’s future should be decided internally, without foreign interference, to avoid the potential chaos that outside intervention could cause.