The Israeli military has been pursuing a new war tactic in targeting checkpoints set up in the Iranian capital by the paramilitary Basij force as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the United States launch more attacks.

The heavily armed checkpoints, roadblocks and patrols have been ramping up in Tehran and across the country in the aftermath of thousands being killed during January’s nationwide protests, and particularly since the start of the ongoing war over two weeks ago.

IRGC-affiliated media confirmed that drone strikes have been hitting the heavily armed checkpoints since Wednesday night, killing and wounding a number of Basij members.

A funeral was held on Friday in the province of Semnan for Morteza Darbari, who was described by the IRGC-linked Tasnim news agency as the commander of a local Basij force based in a mosque in Tehran. He was killed while commanding an armed checkpoint in southeastern District 15.

Footage from the funeral of another killed member, Mohammad-Hossein Kouchaki, was aired by state media on Saturday, showing his family members, surrounded by his fellow Basij fighters armed with assault rifles, promising revenge.

“Both those [dissidents] inside and outside the country, their fate is clear, we will slay them all,” said Kouchaki’s mother at the event. “We will give martyrs on our path but will not bow down. No compromise, no surrender, battle until victory, sacrifice for Mojtaba Khamenei”.

Kouchaki was reported to have been killed in a drone strike in northeastern Tehran, for which the Israeli army confirmed responsibility by releasing footage. The site of the attack was close to where a major fuel depot was bombed days earlier amid wider Israeli attacks hitting Iranian oil reserves.

The state-run Fars news agency said checkpoints have also been similarly targeted in multiple other districts of the sprawling city, and that state forces are responding through “new and creative plans” to adapt to the strikes, and by increasing their patrols.

Intelligence ‘from Iranians’

According to unnamed sources cited by multiple Western news outlets, Israeli commanders have partly acted based on intelligence sent to them by Iranians who have been filming the roadblocks and sending messages through social media.

Videos coming out of Iran continue to be circulated on social media, despite a near-total internet shutdown now being imposed by the theocratic establishment for a 16th day, which has created a black market for the few proxy connections to the outside world that still work.

The state had also imposed a 20-day total internet blackout in response to the protests in January, meaning that more than 90 million Iranians have now spent more than a third of 2026 without access to the global internet. Satellite television dishes found in most homes are the only other alternatives to state media, but those have been disrupted with jamming signals by the authorities, as well.

Through state media, the political, military and judicial authorities of the Islamic Republic have been issuing threats of reprisal against any form of dissent, which could be construed as functioning in line with the interests of the US and Israel.

The police chief, an IRGC commander and state television hosts have all emphasised over the past week that people who take to the streets against the establishment will be treated as an “enemy”.

The judiciary announced on Saturday that any “rioters” who are arrested while acting against the establishment will have their assets confiscated in order to “compensate a part of the damages suffered during the war” with the US and Israel. Multiple people have already been arrested for trying to film missile impact sites and roadblocks, with authorities continuing to promise strict punishments.

This comes days after the judiciary said Iranians living outside the country will also have their assets confiscated if they engage in anti-establishment activities like participating in rallies calling for the return of Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s US-backed shah, who was overthrown in a 1979 Islamic revolution.

War could drag on for weeks

Pahlavi released a video message on Saturday to say that he has a team in place for a “transition period” away from the Islamic Republic.

In lockstep with US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he has called on Iranians to remain vigilant in their homes until a suitable time arrives to take to the streets.

The Israeli military has also characterised its strikes on the roadblocks in Tehran, as well as numerous Basij, IRGC and police bases across the country, as an attempt to weaken Iranian authorities’ domestic security apparatus.

“These forces led the regime’s primary efforts to suppress internal protests, particularly in recent months, employing severe violence, ‌mass ⁠arrests, and the use of force against civilian demonstrators,” the military said last week.

Speaking on Fox News Radio on Friday, Trump said the establishment in Iran will eventually fall, but “maybe not immediately”.

“They literally have people in the streets with machinegun, machine-gunning people down if they want to protest,” Trump claimed, referring to Iran’s state security forces.

“That’s a pretty big hurdle to climb for people that don’t have weapons,” he said about anti-establishment Iranians, adding that the military strikes will continue.

Both sides of the conflict have said the war could drag on for weeks, with Iranian officials saying there are no prospects for negotiations.

A senior spokesperson for Iranian armed forces claimed in a statement carried by state media on Saturday that the USS Abraham Lincoln supercarrier has been “taken out of commission and taken away from the region after sustaining serious damage”.

“If regional countries do not trust in the fake power of the US, American forces will be forced to leave the region because they can’t even defend their own forces and bases,” said Abolfazl Shekarchi.

A member of Iran’s Expediency Council says the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed to US ships and called for their withdrawal from the Gulf. Shipping through the waterway, which normally carries about one-fifth of global oil supplies, has largely stalled since US-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.

Vancouver, Canada – Prime Minister Mark Carney’s efforts to unite Canadians around protecting the nation’s economy from the US are hitting roadblocks as he nears one year in power.

Indigenous peoples across Canada are increasingly divided over Carney’s aggressive push to expand resource extraction and projects on their ancestral lands.

Some experts question how his government can advance its agenda while respecting Indigenous rights enshrined in the country’s constitution.

March 14 will mark one year since Carney, former head of Canada’s central bank, was sworn into office.

After an election last year, his centrist Liberal party formed a minority government with the highest share of the popular vote in 40 years.

A key to Carney’s victory was his pledge to “stand strong” against US trade threats and grow Canada’s economic sovereignty, an assertive approach the prime minister has called “elbows up”.

“In the face of global trade shifts … we will build big and build fast to create a stronger, more sustainable, more independent economy,” Carney said in a statement on March 6.

Part of that push was to create a Major Projects Office to speed up approvals of economic developments, starting by fast-tracking 10 mega-projects.

They include two massive liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants and an open-pit mine in British Columbia, a nuclear plant in Ontario, a Quebec shipping terminal, and wind power in Atlantic Canada.

Those developments are worth 116 billion Canadian dollars ($85bn), the government estimates.

‘Our rights get pushed to the side’

Carney’s approach to the US trade war has gained support from Canadians, according to recent opinion surveys.

A March 3 poll of 1,500 citizens by Abacus Data found that 50 percent say Carney is protecting Canada’s core interests when dealing with Trump — compared with 36 percent with negative views.

“Whenever Canada is threatened, the protectionist nature of the state kind of re-emerges,” said Shady Hafez, assistant politics professor at Toronto Metropolitan University.

“Self-preservation of Canada becomes the priority.”

Hafez, a research associate with the Yellowhead Institute, is a member of the Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation in Quebec.

He said there are growing concerns in his community and others about Carney’s push to accelerate mega-projects across the country.

“For that to happen, Canada needs land, and it needs resources,” Hafez said, “and it takes those lands and resources from us.”

Blowback was swift after Carney pledged to build a highly controversial oil pipeline to the west coast in a late November deal signed with Alberta, Canada’s oil powerhouse.

Carney’s culture minister swiftly resigned, decrying “no consultation” with Indigenous nations and “major environmental impacts”.

And the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), which represents more than 600 Indigenous chiefs, unanimously passed an emergency resolution opposing a new pipeline.

“First Nations people, we stand with Canada against Trump’s illegal tariffs, but not at the expense of our rights,” AFN National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak told Al Jazeera in an interview. “If you want to fast-track anything, you better make sure that First Nations are being included right off the bat.

“Trying to sideswipe or push aside First Nations people when there’s agreements between provinces and the feds — they have to remember that First Nations are here … and they are to be respected in their own homelands.”

The rights of Indigenous people in the country are enshrined in Canada’s constitution.

But too often, Hafez said, in the name of national prosperity, “Indigenous communities have to suffer.”

“Whenever there’s somewhat of an emergency, our rights get pushed to the side.”

But the resistance to the major projects push isn’t universal.

The First Nations Natural Gas Alliance praised Carney’s “much more aggressive” approach compared with his predecessor on developing energy resources.

But the group’s CEO, Karen Ogen, acknowledged there’s a “highly charged environment” on such issues.

“First Nations communities continue to face significant socioeconomic barriers”, stated the former chief of Wet’suwet’en First Nation. “LNG and natural gas development are not just an opportunity; they are a national imperative.

“Billions of dollars in procurement benefits and revenues are flowing to First Nations.”

Call for collaboration ‘on all major projects’

The trade war with the US has galvanised and united many Canadians — but with little acknowledgement of the impacts on Indigenous communities, said Sheryl Lightfoot, political science professor at the University of Toronto.

Lightfoot is vice-chair of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

“These projects, by many accounts, are advancing without full consultation or transparency”, she told Al Jazeera.

“It appears that economic or geopolitical pressures … are being used to justify bypassing Indigenous rights and environmental safeguards.”

But Canada’s Major Projects Office insists it will “seek input, hear concerns and ideas, and work in partnership moving forward” with Indigenous communities — and “will not be skipping over vital project steps including consultations with Indigenous Peoples,” an agency spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement.

“We are unlocking Canada’s economic potential, while respecting our environmental responsibilities and the rights of Indigenous Peoples,”

A significant number of projects on Carney’s fast-track list are concentrated in British Columbia (BC).

Those include two liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals on the Pacific coast — LNG Canada and Ksi Lisims LNG — as well as the electric transmission line to power the sector, and a copper and gold mine.

BC is unique in the country because, historically, very little of its land was subject to treaties between the Crown and First Nations. Canada’s top court has repeatedly ruled in favour of First Nations rights and title in the westernmost province.

All four major projects in the province have proven divisive among the region’s Indigenous peoples — even though several have the backing of individual First Nations governments.

One of those is the massive Ksi Lisims LNG plant, in which the Nisga’a Nation is a direct partner.

Co-developed with Texas-based Western LNG, the mega-project will “benefit all Canadians,” said Nisga’a President Eva Clayton.

In 2000, her nation became the first in BC to reach a modern self-government treaty.

“We are co-developing the Ksi Lisims LNG project on land that our nation owns under our treaty,” she told a parliamentary committee on February 24.

“This project is expected to bring in 30 billion [Canadian] dollars [$22bn] in investment, create thousands of skilled careers, and strengthen Canada’s leadership in low-emission LNG.”

‘Elbows up’ meets opposition

But LNG is fiercely opposed by other nearby First Nations.

Tara Marsden is Wilp sustainability director for the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, traditional leaders of the 900-member Gitanyow community.

“We have a lot more concerns and evidence regarding impacts in our territory,” she said.

“The federal government has done zero consultation on their fast-track list and the projects that actually affect our territory.”

Gitanyow oppose the BC projects on the fast-track list as harming their interests.

She said Ottawa cannot ignore First Nations opposition, even if there is support from others like the Nisga’a.

“They have a right to develop in their own territories”, said Marsden. “But if you have maybe 20 to 30 First Nations whose territory would be crossed — and you get maybe three on board — that’s not a resounding consensus.

“They’re just trying to use this small handful of nations to steamroll over everybody else.”

If Canada truly wants to strengthen its sovereignty and economy, she said, it must do so alongside Indigenous people.

“This is something that First Nations across the country have been saying since Carney took the ‘elbows up’ approach,” Marsden said.

“The government has really just ignored that … and actually now back-stopping these mega-projects with taxpayer dollars.”

Free, prior and informed consent

McGill University economics lecturer Julian Karaguesian served for decades in the Department of Finance and Canada’s Embassy in Washington, DC.

He agreed that most Canadians support Carney’s attempt to boost the economy with “nation-building” projects.

“I think they’re a fantastic idea”, he told Al Jazeera. “But we’ve committed to consultations with First Nations, Metis and Inuit people.

“Once we’ve started compromising on economic and social justice … we can create bitterness. First Nations leaders understand the situation we’re in, and I think [Ottawa] can work with them.”

Even on projects endorsed by some First Nations, the international legal principle of “free, prior and informed consent” must still apply to other communities impacted, said Lightfoot.

That’s “not simply a procedural requirement” to rubber-stamp projects, she said.

“It is a substantive right, anchored in Indigenous peoples’ self-determination and their ability to make decisions about matters that affect their lands, communities, and futures.”

And that could risk slowing down Carney’s hopes to speed through projects if there is no Indigenous consensus — potentially tying more divisive ones up in the courts.

“Failure to include Indigenous knowledge and decision-making early in the process,” Lightfoot said, “can undermine the legitimacy and fairness of project approvals.”

Carney’s ratings among First Nations are “mixed,” says AFN’s national chief. One positive, she noted, is his openness to meeting Indigenous leaders raising concerns.

But with many of the prime minister’s economic hopes dependent on building “national interest” infrastructure on First Nations homelands, Woodhouse Nepinak said the relationship needs care.

“Carney is at a crossroads in his personal relationship with First Nations,” she said.

“And we understand First Nations rights are under threat in new ways by this government.”