Iran’s security and military forces moved personnel, weapons and equipment into at least 70 civilian sites during the US-Israeli airstrikes, an Iran International investigation found, exposing what appears to be a nationwide pattern of using public spaces for military purposes.
The sites span 17 provinces, 28 cities and two villages. Nearly half of them – 34 in total – were primary or secondary schools. Other locations identified in eyewitness accounts and documents reviewed by Iran International included hospitals, stadiums, universities, mosques, parks and government offices.
The accounts were gathered over a 10-day period from March 2 to March 14, 2026, during a near-total internet shutdown that sharply restricted the flow of messages, photos and video from inside Iran.
While Iran International could not independently verify every account, it geolocated visual evidence from seven reported sites, all of them schools.
Civilian sites and battlefield risk
The deployment of military forces at civilian sites “shifts battlefield risks onto civilians,” a regional security source who requested anonymity said, adding that using such locations for military purposes is prohibited under international law.
“When security or paramilitary forces move into schools, hospitals or mosques, they endanger civilians physically, degrade protected civilian services and may turn those sites into military objectives,” the source said.
Under international humanitarian law, civilian sites can lose protected status if used for military purposes, though attacking forces must still comply with rules on distinction, proportionality and precaution.
The source said the legal implications vary depending on the type of site but warned that such practices can strip civilian locations of their protected status.
“Schools are civilian objects; using them as barracks, firing positions, detention sites, or weapons depots can make them lawful military targets, while still leaving the attacker bound by distinction, proportionality, and feasible precautions,” the source said, adding that this “amounts to human shielding.”
At least four hospitals were identified in eyewitness accounts as having nearby or associated military deployments, including Golestan Hospital in Ahvaz and medical sites in Kermanshah and other western regions.
“Hospitals get even stronger protection than schools. Under International Humanitarian Law, they must be respected and protected, but if they are used outside their humanitarian role, such as for a base, observation post, military center, shelter for military-security personnel, or weapons depot, they lose that special protection, although a clear warning is required before any attack,” the source said.
At least three mosques were identified in eyewitness accounts as having been used for military deployments. In the capital, Tehran, this included Rezvan Mosque on March 8 and Chahardeh Masoum Mosque in University Town on March 7, where special police units were stationed.
Malek Ashtar Mosque in Khosrowshah in East Azarbaijan province was also used on March 9, where IRGC forces were relocated.
To zoom in on the map, visit https://app.everviz.com/share/tryunIV0o
Mosques are protected as civilian objects and may also qualify as cultural property under the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property, the source said.
“Using mosques for military purposes is prohibited, but if turned into a military objective, they lose protection, while attacking forces must still take precautions and avoid indiscriminate or disproportionate action,” the source added.
How the reporting was assembled
As authorities imposed a near-total internet shutdown across the country after the outbreak of the war, only a limited number of messages were able to get through filtering systems, while photo and video footage remained scarce.
Iran International collected eyewitness accounts from March 2 to March 14 but could not independently verify every claim.
It was nevertheless able to geolocate visual evidence accompanying some of the reports, identifying seven locations, all of them schools.
A pattern across multiple provinces
The accounts reviewed by Iran International illustrate the breadth of the reported deployments across multiple provinces.
In the northeastern Iranian city of Mashhad, footage sent to Iran International on March 10 from Fakouri Boulevard showed vehicles belonging to security forces present in the courtyard of Ali Shahrestani primary school.In Tehran, eyewitness reports and images sent to Iran International on March 6, from the city’s Tehranpars neighborhood showed special police unit vehicles deployed inside the courtyard of Hashemi Nejad boys’ primary school on Parvin Boulevard, next to Bent ul-Hoda girls’ school.Footage and eyewitness reports from March 3, in Tehran’s Pirouzi neighborhood showed military forces deployed in the courtyard of Fatemeh Talimi girls’ high school, with buses stationed nearby and an individual carrying a weapon visible in the images.In Qazvin in northwestern Iran, footage sent to Iran International on March 2 showed military forces and motorcycles deployed at Sedigheh Kobra Girls’ School on Shahid Sales Street in the Sartak neighborhood. In Shahriar, west of Tehran, footage sent to Iran International on March 13 showed a Toyota pickup truck arriving at Al-Zahra High School carrying what appeared to be a machine gun concealed under a tarp.White Toyota pickup trucks fitted with machine guns or used to transport security forces were also reported during the crackdown on January’s nationwide protests in Tonekabon in Mazandaran province in northern Iran on January 11, 2026.Photo caption: In the northern Iranian city of Tonekabon, footage sent to Iran International on March 10 showed a police car inside Chamran Primary School on Sheikh Fazlollah Nouri Street in a busy central area, with witnesses saying forces had moved from a nearby police station into schools.
In Tehran and surrounding areas in north-central Iran, eyewitness reports said police, intelligence and administrative offices in Malard were relocated on March 8 to Fatemiyeh Girls’ High School, which is located alongside two other schools near a gas station.
One of the main hubs for Iran’s plainclothes security forces in Tehran is the Basij’s Meghdad Resistance District, known as the “Meghdad base.” It is located on Azadi Street, next to Sharif University of Technology.
During the June 15, 2009 protests – part of the mass demonstrations that followed Iran’s disputed presidential election and became known as the Green Movement – gunfire using live ammunition was directed at demonstrators from the base’s rooftop.
The Meghdad base sits next to the central headquarters of the West Tehran Combatants Council, a complex with significant influence across paramilitary and security structures. The surrounding area was targeted in strikes on March 6.
After the strikes, eyewitness accounts on March 8 said remaining personnel and equipment had been moved to a fire department building directly opposite the former Meghdad base.
Another eyewitness account on March 9 said forces and equipment were relocated again, this time to a Bank Mellat complex on Azadi Street near the start of Jeyhoon Street. The site is one of the bank’s key national facilities and houses its data center.
Beyond the capital, similar deployments were reported across multiple regions of the country.
In Khuzestan province in southwestern Iran, eyewitness accounts said military forces were stationed at Takhti stadiums in Izeh and Ahvaz, as well as at Chamran University and near Golestan Hospital in Ahvaz, and at a girls’ primary school in Dezful.
In Fars province in southern Iran, military forces were reported at Sardaran Stadium and near the Negin commercial complex in Shiraz, as well as at schools in rural areas.
In Kermanshah in western Iran, missile launchers and military forces were deployed near major hospitals and at an industrial factory. In East Azarbaijan in northwestern Iran, forces were reported at multiple schools in Tabriz and in Hadishahr.
In Isfahan province in central Iran, forces were stationed at women’s parks, sports facilities and schools in several cities, including Isfahan, Dastgerd and Naein. In Alborz province west of Tehran, deployments were reported across Karaj, Hashtgerd and Mehrshahr.
In Razavi Khorasan in northeastern Iran, forces were reported to have used schools in Mashhad as bases, while in Bushehr in southern Iran they were stationed at universities.
In West Azarbaijan in northwestern Iran, forces were reported at a school in Khoy, while 22 Bahman Stadium in Qazvin in north-central Iran served as a main base.
In Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province in southwestern Iran, military forces used Naft Stadium in Gachsaran. In Markazi province in central Iran, deployments were reported at a school and a government office in Arak. In Mazandaran in northern Iran, schools in Tonekabon were used as bases.
In Golestan in northern Iran, military forces were reported at a school and a government building in Gorgan, while in Lorestan in western Iran, deployments were reported at several high schools in Borujerd.
US warning and Israeli response
Iranian officials have repeatedly denied accusations that the country uses civilians as shields and have accused Israel of targeting civilian infrastructure during the conflict.
The Israeli military, when contacted for comment, confirmed that Iranian forces were deploying personnel and weapons at civilian sites such as schools, mosques and stadiums.
“Iran’s regime, like all of its proxy and terrorist groups across the Middle East that are activated and employed by this regime, has effectively turned defenseless people into its human shields and hides behind these innocent, unfortunate civilian populations,” Israel Defense Forces Persian-speaking spokesman Kamal Penhasi told Iran International.
“It tries to conceal its military assets and weapons behind people and among the population, including in hospitals, schools, and mosques,” he added.
Asked how civilian harm is minimized in populated areas, Penhasi said evacuation warnings are issued ahead of operations and precision-guided weapons are used to limit collateral damage.
“We do everything within our power to the extent possible to prevent harm to civilians and the citizens of the dear Iranian nation.”
Penhasi urged people to distance themselves from such locations and follow evacuation warnings.
“I ask the people of Iran to pay attention to our messages to protect their lives and safety. As soon as they receive a warning message, they should move away and also pass it on to their neighbors, friends, and relatives,” he said.
Iran International also reached out to the US Central Command, the White House and the Pentagon for comment, but they did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
US Central Command on March 8 issued a safety warning to civilians in Iran, saying civilian locations used for military purposes could become legitimate military targets under international law.
“The Iranian regime is using heavily populated civilian areas to conduct military operations, including launching one-way attack drones and ballistic missiles,” CENTCOM said in a statement.
“This dangerous decision risks the lives of all civilians in Iran since locations used for military purposes lose protected status and could become legitimate military targets under international law,” the statement added.
Dismay and alarm are spreading among Iranians over reports and images showing Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, or Hashd al-Shaabi, inside Iran, with messages sent to Iran International describing fear, anger and a growing sense of insecurity.
The strongest reaction has come from people in cities where the forces have reportedly been seen, especially in the southwest.
Viewers who contacted Iran International said the arrival of Hashd al-Shaabi fighters in Abadan had made the city feel “unsafe and frightening,” and said residents were worried about their children.
One viewer described the forces as “terrorists” and said their entry into Iran, particularly in Ahvaz, Khorramshahr and Abadan, was aimed at “another massacre of the people.”
Another message asked: “Hashd al-Shaabi convoys entered Iran with armored vehicles. Why are Israel and America not targeting them?”
A message from Abadan said: “I’m sending this message from Abadan. The presence of these forces with flags and military uniforms has made the city frightening.”
Another viewer said: “These forces have come to kill people. We have not forgotten the January killings, when the government used them to help kill people.”
Anger was also directed at the cost of hosting such forces at a time of economic hardship.
One viewer wrote: “In these terrible economic and inflationary conditions that people are facing, why should the Islamic Republic pay for Hashd al-Shaabi terrorists and even house and feed their families for free?”
Other messages sent to Iran International suggested a wider pattern of deployment.
One said Hashd al-Shaabi forces had gathered in warehouses belonging to the Arvandan company in Dehloran county in Ilam province.
Another said the forces had been stationed since the previous day at the Persian Gulf Hotel in Genaveh, Bushehr province.
A more detailed message from Abadan said: “Around 1:30 a.m. on March 30, Hashd al-Shaabi forces arrived with several Hilux vehicles at the Basij base opposite the City Center to be stationed there, and along the route there were several checkpoints with a large number of IRGC forces inspecting people so they could not film.”
The reports followed footage circulated this week showing a convoy of Iran-backed militias in Iraq moving toward Iran.
Iran International audiences also reported on Sunday that Iraqi militias had been housed in residential units belonging to Revolutionary Guards personnel on Otobusrani Street in Bandar Abbas.
Dadban, a legal advisory and training center for activists, warned this week that the purpose of deploying Hashd al-Shaabi forces inside Iran was “participation in repression.”
According to its report, Iraqi militias crossed into Iran and entered Abadan and Khorramshahr in Khuzestan province, where they were received by officials of the Islamic Republic.
Dadban said the organized and armed presence of foreign forces inside the country, without going through a legal process, had no legal basis and pointed to Article 146 of Iran’s constitution, which bars the establishment of foreign military forces in Iran.
It also warned that using foreign forces to suppress domestic protests would amount to an escalation in violations of citizens’ fundamental rights, including the right to assembly and personal security.
Reaction on social media echoed many of the concerns raised in messages sent to Iran International.
Users described the presence of Hashd al-Shaabi as a violation of national sovereignty and a sign that the authorities were preparing for a harsher phase of internal repression.
One user, referring to reports of their presence in Khorramshahr, wrote: “God freed Khorramshahr, and with the help of the disgraceful Islamic Republic it has been occupied again.”
Another wrote: “Hashd al-Shaabi terrorists have officially entered Iran. This is the invasion of Iranian soil by a foreign ground force. We must stand against it completely.”
Another user mocked pro-government rhetoric by writing: “What happened to the people who said domestic problems must be solved inside the family? Is Hashd al-Shaabi family too? Here, a foreign force is acceptable? But if we ask for help, we are traitors?”
Another post said the government knew “the final battle will be decided on the streets of the big cities, especially Tehran,” and argued that Hashd al-Shaabi had been brought in to help defend the state at that front.
Together, the messages and online reactions suggest that for many Iranians, the issue is not only the arrival of an allied militia, but what its presence may signal about the Islamic Republic’s readiness to use outside forces to intimidate and suppress people at home.
In an exclusive interview with Iran International, Sheikh Abdullah al-Jughayfi, a member of the Security and Defense Committee and adviser to the Anbar governorate, confirmed that “Hashd al-Shaabi forces in recent days have transferred financial and non-financial aid to Iran.”
He said the aid had been sent over the past three days “with Hashd al-Shaabi flags raised.”
Al-Jughayfi criticized the move and warned that “this action could further complicate Iraq’s relations with the United States and increase the likelihood of new sanctions.”
At the same time, Jalil al-Lami, deputy head of the Iraq Center for Strategic Affairs, told Iran International from Baghdad that the move amounted politically to “a clear alignment by Iraq” and warned that it effectively ended Baghdad’s balancing policy between Washington and Tehran.
He added that “the presence of Hashd al-Shaabi forces inside Iran could expand the range of targets inside Iraq, whether through direct attacks or indirect escalation, pushing the country toward an open atmosphere of confrontation.”
Iran said on Monday its ambassador to Lebanon would remain in Beirut despite a Lebanese order to leave, turning a diplomatic reprimand into a broader test of how far the Lebanese state can push back when its decisions collide with the interests of Tehran and Hezbollah.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said the envoy would stay. “Considering the discussions raised by the relevant Lebanese parties and the conclusions reached, the Iranian ambassador will continue his work as ambassador in Beirut and is still present there,” he said.
His remarks came days after Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry withdrew accreditation for ambassador-designate Mohammad Reza Sheibani, declared him persona non grata and asked him to leave by March 29, saying he had violated diplomatic convention by making statements about Lebanon’s internal politics.
Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi said he had instructed the ministry’s secretary-general to summon Iran’s chargé d’affaires to deliver the decision.
But as the deadline passed, there was no public sign that the order would be enforced. Instead, Iran and Hezbollah’s allies inside Lebanon made clear that the expulsion order would not be carried out.
An Iranian diplomatic source said the ambassador had no intention of leaving and would remain “in accordance with the wishes of the speaker of parliament Nabih Berri and of Hezbollah.”
Reuters has also reported that Berri, one of Lebanon’s most powerful Shi’ite politicians and a close Hezbollah ally, opposed the move and asked the envoy to remain.
Who decides for Lebanon?
The standoff has unfolded in the shadow of a wider confrontation over who decides questions of war, diplomacy and sovereignty in Lebanon.
The latest war erupted early in March after Hezbollah opened fire in support of Iran, drawing Lebanon into the conflict.
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has sharply criticized Hezbollah’s decision to enter the war and has said only the Lebanese state should decide questions of war and peace.
He has also accused Iran’s Revolutionary Guard of directing Hezbollah’s operations in Lebanon. “It is not the duty of the Lebanese to avenge Khamenei’s killing,” Salam said in comments about slain Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reported last week.
That accusation lands heavily in Lebanon because Hezbollah’s relationship with Iran is long-standing and structural, not incidental.
Hezbollah was founded in the early 1980s with Iranian backing and has for decades been Tehran’s closest and most powerful ally in Lebanon. The Council on Foreign Relations describes it as an Iran-backed Shi’ite movement that became the most powerful non-state armed group in the region.
Against that backdrop, the ambassador’s refusal to leave has become more than a diplomatic dispute. It is now a test of whether the Lebanese state can enforce a decision once Hezbollah and its allies oppose it.
Lebanon presented the expulsion order as part of a broader effort to curb Iranian influence after the war began, but the envoy’s continued presence in Beirut has raised questions about the state’s ability to carry it through.
Israel was quick to seize on that symbolism.
Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on Monday that the deadline had expired and that the Iranian ambassador was “sipping his coffee in Beirut, mocking the host ‘country’.” He added that “Lebanon is a virtual state that is, in practice, occupied by Iran.”
US President Donald Trump offered an upbeat but confusing picture of his approach to Iran on Sunday, saying a deal could come soon even as he floated the possibility of seizing Iranian oil and hinted at military options that could deepen the conflict.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said Washington was making progress in “direct and indirect” negotiations with Tehran and that a deal could emerge quickly.
But he also said he would like the United States to “take the oil in Iran” in an interview with the Financial Times, floating the idea of seizing Kharg Island, the terminal through which most of Iran’s crude exports pass.
“I could only say that we’re doing extremely well in that negotiation. But you never know where they’re at, because we negotiate with them, and then we always have to bomb them,” he told reporters.
“I think we’ll make a deal with them, pretty sure. But it is possible we won’t.”
Markets have struggled to interpret the shifting signals. Oil prices have surged more than 60 percent over the past month amid fears the war could disrupt global energy supplies, with Brent crude trading near $116 a barrel.
Hours before Trump’s remarks, Iran’s parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf posted a cryptic message on social media using trading jargon that many interpreted as a jab at the US president and his announcements.
“Pre-market so-called ‘news’ or ‘Truth’ is often just a setup for profit-taking. Basically, it’s a reverse indicator,” he wrote. “Do the opposite: If they pump it, short it. If they dump it, go long.”
Ghalibaf has been mentioned in several unofficial reports as playing a leading role in contacts with Washington. Trump referred to him in the FT interview, saying he had authorised more Pakistan-flagged ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
Aboard Air Force One shortly afterward, Trump suggested that “regime change” had effectively already taken place and that he was now dealing with “professionals.”
“We’re dealing with different people than anybody’s dealt with before. It’s a whole different group of people,” he said. “So I would consider that regime change, and frankly they’ve been very reasonable.”
But the president’s remarks left observers unsure whether diplomacy or escalation would shape the next phase of the conflict, which shows little sign of subsiding after a month of fighting.
Pakistan has renewed its offer to mediate between Washington and Tehran. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said after talks with the foreign ministers of Turkey and Egypt that Islamabad stood ready to help bring both sides to the negotiating table.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump is weighing a plan that could involve US forces entering Iran to seize its stockpile of enriched uranium, a move that would represent a dramatic escalation if pursued.
Newly released surveillance footage appears to show repeated strikes hitting a primary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab on the first day of the war, an attack Iranian authorities say killed more than 100 children and teachers.
The Shajareh Tayyebeh primary school, located in Minab in Hormozgan province, served boys and girls aged 7 to 12.
The school building stood in an area that once formed part of a Revolutionary Guards naval base but had reportedly been separated from the military compound by a wall for several years. Iranian officials say the school was privately run.
Research by Amnesty International’s Crisis Evidence Lab and its Iran team says US authorities could—and should—have known the building was a school and failed to take feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm.
Amnesty said the findings point at best to a serious intelligence failure by the US military and warned the strike could constitute an indiscriminate attack in violation of international humanitarian law.
Reuters has reported that two sources familiar with the matter said the strike may have resulted from outdated intelligence used during targeting, while an internal US military review found American forces were likely responsible for the attack.
The first strike occurred around 10 a.m. on February 28, when students were resting during a break. The explosion destroyed roughly half of one of the school’s buildings.
Mikail Mirdoraghi (9) killed in the school strike
Teachers gathered surviving children in the school’s prayer hall and called parents to collect them. Shortly afterward, a second missile struck the same building, killing many of the remaining children, teachers and some parents who had rushed to the scene.
Iranian officials, including the mayor of Minab and the Ministry of Education, say the school was struck three times in total.
Images published by Iranian media in the days after the attack showed rescue workers pulling remains, severed limbs and children’s backpacks from beneath the rubble.
Iranian authorities say 168 people were killed, including about 120 children, as well as teachers and several parents who had come to retrieve their children after the first explosion. Nearly 100 others were reported injured.
The Norway-based human rights group Hengaw says it has independently identified 58 victims so far, including 48 children and 10 adults.
Behind the casualty figures are the stories of children whose lives ended in ordinary moments between lessons.
Among them were three girls—Mahdis Nazari, 7, and Sonar and Niayesh Salehi, both 9—members of their school’s skating team. Photos shared online before the attack show them at training sessions and competitions.
Iran’s skating federation later confirmed their deaths.
Another child whose story has circulated widely online is nine-year-old Mikail Mirdoraghi, a third-grade student. A photograph of him standing on the stairs of his home with a water bottle slung over his shoulder, waving goodbye, has been widely shared.
Mikail’s family had moved from Andimeshk in Khuzestan province to Minab because of his father’s job. After the attack, his 31-year-old mother, Shakiba Derikvand, identified his body among victims placed in refrigerated vehicles.
He was found lying beside his friend Alireza, still clutching his school backpack. His body was largely intact, though his face was bloodied, his mother said.
He was buried three days later in Andimeshk. A widely circulated image shows his grandfather lying beside the flower-covered grave.
“Mikail was afraid of the dark,” he reportedly said. “We always slept beside him. I don’t want him to be alone here at night.”
One of the most haunting details to emerge is a drawing Mikail reportedly made the night before the strike.
Found later in his backpack, it shows a school building with the Iranian flag above it, five children standing in the yard and three missiles descending toward them.
Serious disagreements have emerged between Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian and IRGC chief-commander Ahmad Vahidi over how to manage the war and its damaging impact on people’s livelihoods and the economy, sources with knowledge of the matter told Iran International.
Pezeshkian has criticized the approach of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps regarding escalating tensions and continuing attacks on neighboring countries, warning about the economic consequences of the situation, according to the sources who spoke on condition of anonymity.
He has stressed that without a ceasefire, Iran’s economy could face total collapse within three weeks to one month, the sources said.
On March 7, Pezeshkian in a video message apologized for what he called “fire at will” attacks by the country’s armed forces on neighboring countries and instructed them to stop such attacks.
However, the attacks continued shortly after the release of his message.
Call for restoration of executive power
Informed sources told Iran International that Pezeshkian has called for executive and managerial powers to be returned to the administration, a demand that has been firmly rejected by Vahidi.
In response to the criticism, the IRGC commander blamed the current situation on the government’s failure to implement structural reforms before the conflict began, the sources said.
In recent days, Israeli media have also reported signs of divisions within Iran’s ruling system. The Times of Israel, citing a senior Israeli official, wrote: “There are signs of cracks in the Iranian regime. We are now creating conditions for its overthrow, but ultimately everything depends on the Iranian people.”
The Israeli outlet Ynet also reported similar internal divisions earlier this month.
Economic impacts
As the war enters its fifth week, its economic effects are increasingly visible. Reports from major cities indicate that many ATMs are out of cash, not functioning, or physically inaccessible, while online banking services for several major banks, including Bank Melli, are periodically disrupted.
Government employees have told Iran International that salaries and benefits for large segments of workers have not been paid regularly over the past three months.
In February, before the outbreak of the ongoing war, average inflation for basic necessities reached triple digits, estimated between 105% and 115%.