Iran's psychological warfare targets trust between Iranians and Israel

An Iranian journalist notes a significant and growing trust in Israel among people across Iran, a sentiment often overlooked by external observers. This trust, cultivated through conversations with diverse Iranians, arises from their prolonged experiences with the Islamic Republic's repression, regional aggression, and the negative consequences of its policies.

“

Many Iranians view Israel as the only actor with the determination and strategic clarity to confront the core of the regime’s power, targeting not only military capabilities and nuclear ambitions but also the leadership and networks behind them.

Many Iranians perceive Israel as the sole actor possessing the determination and strategic focus required to confront the Iranian regime's fundamental power structures. This includes targeting not only military capabilities and nuclear ambitions but also the leadership and networks that sustain them. They see Israel's approach as distinct from other powers, characterized by a strategy of confronting threats at their source.

“

This deep trust is a strategic asset for the Jewish state that must be continuously protected, defended, and nurtured against deliberate campaigns of subversion.

This deep well of mutual trust is identified as a valuable strategic asset for Israel, requiring continuous protection and nurturing against deliberate subversion campaigns. However, this trust is currently facing a sophisticated threat, not only from Tehran's overt propaganda but also from media narratives that inadvertently serve the Islamic Republic's strategic objectives.

“

This dangerous scenario is fundamentally flawed. More importantly, it acts as a devastating psychological operation that directly targets the trust ordinary Iranians place in the State of Israel.

The article specifically criticizes a recent narrative, advanced by reports in The New York Times and Haaretz, suggesting that Israeli intelligence considered or maneuvered to install Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power. The author argues this scenario is fundamentally flawed and acts as a devastating psychological operation. Presenting Ahmadinejad, a symbol of "domestic terror and democratic betrayal" responsible for the brutal crackdown on the 2009 Green Movement protests, as a potential alternative is deemed an insult to the Iranian people and risks fracturing a vital strategic friendship.

“

He is a symbol of domestic terror and democratic betrayal.