In the winter of 2025, as Iran erupted in widespread protests fueled by economic desperation and simmering rage, the Islamic Republic didn’t just deploy security forces – it unleashed a sophisticated weapon of a different kind: a meticulously crafted campaign of disinformation.
While thousands took to the streets, risking everything to voice their discontent, and faced brutal suppression, the regime simultaneously waged a parallel war for perception, aiming to not only survive the crisis but to weaponize it against its enemies.
A detailed analysis revealed a structured, phased information warfare strategy. This wasn’t a spontaneous reaction; it was a deeply ingrained system, treating narrative control as vital to the regime’s very existence. The targets remained constant: Israel and the West.
Iran’s embrace of information warfare stemmed from a stark reality: its conventional military capabilities were no match for its primary adversaries. Unable to win a direct conflict, the regime turned to shaping the narrative as a central pillar of its defense.
This system wasn’t chaotic; it was a carefully orchestrated blend of ideological messaging, psychological manipulation, targeted disinformation, and coordinated digital networks. The goal was to paint the United States as hypocritical, Israel as an existential threat, and to solidify the regime’s grip on power.
The structure was rigidly top-down. Core narratives originated with the Supreme Leader or senior officials, then translated into concrete actions – arrests, staged confessions, and fabricated evidence – by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its media divisions.
A vast network of channels, operating under the banner of the “axis of resistance,” amplified these messages across Telegram, Twitter, Instagram, and other platforms, reaching global audiences in multiple languages.
Initially, the regime attempted to ignore the protests, hoping they would simply dissipate. But when that failed, the Supreme Leader acknowledged economic frustrations while carefully distinguishing between legitimate grievances and “mercenaries” seeking to destabilize the nation.
This calculated concession served a dual purpose: it deflected accusations of indifference while simultaneously justifying the impending crackdown against those labeled as instigators. It was a message aimed at both the Iranian public and the security forces tasked with suppressing dissent.
As protests swelled and international scrutiny intensified, the regime escalated its rhetoric, directly blaming the United States and Israel. The narrative shifted: the unrest wasn’t a spontaneous uprising, but a coordinated foreign operation, a covert act of war.
The IRGC presented “evidence” – arrested “agents,” forced confessions, and alleged documentation of foreign weapons – to support this claim. Protesters were divided into two categories: foreign operatives and naive Iranians manipulated by enemy agendas.
This framework effectively delegitimized the protests, allowing the regime to portray itself as the defender of the Iranian people against external aggression. It also provided a chilling justification for the brutal suppression of dissent and the deaths of thousands.
A key theme was the perceived hypocrisy of the United States, which had recently engaged in military action against Iran yet now claimed to champion Iranian freedom. Visually striking posts compared the suffering of Iranian civilians to the actions of former President Trump.
The regime also emphasized U.S. self-interest in Iran’s oil resources, dismissing any concern for human rights. Simultaneously, footage of protests in American cities was amplified, suggesting the U.S. had no moral authority to criticize Iran’s governance.
Once the protests were crushed, the narrative shifted again, portraying the crackdown as a resounding victory against foreign conspiracy. Staged rallies and confident public appearances by officials reinforced this message.
This “victory” narrative was primarily for domestic consumption, offering psychological closure and reinforcing the regime’s claim to legitimacy. For the international audience, it aimed to counter Western media coverage and present a picture of stability and public support.
Ultimately, the regime reframed the entire episode as a continuation of its long-standing confrontation with the West. The protests weren’t a domestic issue, but a new front in an ongoing war, a mere pause after the June 2025 conflict with Israel.
This reframing served as a powerful mobilization tool, transforming a crisis of legitimacy into a national security emergency demanding unified public support. It also issued a veiled warning: any future retaliation against the U.S. or Israel would be presented as legitimate self-defense.
Remarkably, throughout this domestic turmoil, Iran’s foreign influence operations against Israel and the West continued unabated, even intensifying. PressTV, the regime’s English and Hebrew-language propaganda channel, remained a central component of this effort.
The Hebrew-language service relentlessly portrayed Israel as economically weak, politically fractured, and morally bankrupt, aiming to erode public confidence and sow discord. English-language channels focused on unrest within the United States, highlighting perceived systemic failures.
Beyond media broadcasts, Iranian-affiliated networks even sent threatening text messages to Israeli civilians, creating fear and undermining morale without firing a single shot. This demonstrated a willingness to employ psychological warfare on a deeply personal level.
The regime’s ability to sustain these coordinated foreign operations while simultaneously suppressing a massive domestic uprising underscores the deeply institutionalized nature of its information warfare apparatus – a system that is not easily disrupted and remains a potent force on the modern battlefield.
