The Iranian regime’s response to internal protests in late 2025 reveals a complex interplay of violence and propaganda. As mass protests erupted due to economic turmoil, the Islamic Republic deployed security forces to quash dissent, resulting in the deaths of thousands. Simultaneously, the regime activated its propaganda machinery, illustrating a dual strategy aimed at both repressing public outcry and reframing the narrative to safeguard its position against perceived external threats.
A detailed examination by the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism highlights how Tehran orchestrated a structured information warfare strategy from late 2025 through January 2026. The regime understands that maintaining narrative control is vital for its survival, especially as public discontent mounts. Their approach combines ideological messaging, psychological operations, and coordinated disinformation efforts to shape perceptions within Iran and beyond. The primary enemies? The United States and Israel.
The regime’s propaganda aims to portray the U.S. as hypocritical and aggressive, while depicting Israel as the central adversary in a broader civilizational struggle. Despite this, many Iranians are willing to face deadly repercussions to voice their grievances, highlighting a profound disconnect between the regime and the populace.
Initially, the Iranian government hesitated to address the protests directly. The released propaganda largely ignored the issues, hoping that the demonstrations would dissipate. However, when this strategy failed, Supreme Leader Khamenei acknowledged the economic frustrations expressed by protesters, yet simultaneously cast them as moments of turmoil instigated by foreign mercenaries. This tactic served to delegitimize the protest movement and provided the regime with a justification for its violent crackdown.
The narrative quickly evolved. Khamenei’s messaging transitioned from vague allusions to foreign interference to explicitly identifying the U.S. and Israel as antagonists seeking to undermine Iranian sovereignty. The government showcased so-called “evidence” of foreign involvement, which included arrested individuals and confessional videos, to substantiate its claims. By presenting the protests as a coordinated foreign assault, the regime not only eroded the legitimacy of the protesters but also framed its repressive measures as essential self-defense.
Throughout this period, the regime exploited several key themes. It emphasized the U.S.’s historical hypocrisy, arguing that the same nation which had previously attacked Iran was now purporting to champion freedom for its people. The regime’s media outlets relentlessly pushed this angle, contrasting American geopolitical interests in the region with human rights discourses.
Economic critiques painted any interest in Iran as surface-level compared to real concerns about resources. In contrast, the portrayal of systemic issues within the United States served to undermine any credibility its leaders had in condemning Iranian governance.
Once the protests were violently suppressed, the narrative of triumph re-emerged. Pro-government channels celebrated the crackdown as a historical victory over foreign conspiracies, staging rallies to reinforce the regime’s perceived legitimacy. Khamenei’s later addresses reframed the unrest within the context of an ongoing war against the West, thus transforming domestic protests into a national security issue. This shift provided psychological closure to regime supporters and fortified the government’s narrative as a bulwark against outside aggressors.
The Iranian regime’s foreign influence operations did not pause during this intense domestic crisis. PressTV, with its English and Hebrew services, continued a barrage of messaging aimed at undermining U.S. and Israeli confidence. It highlighted Israeli instability and framed American political discord as indicative of broader systemic failures. Even psychological operations that sent threatening messages to Israeli civilians aimed to sow fear without direct military action.
The findings of the ICT analysis elucidate a crucial aspect of Iran’s strategy: this sophisticated and deeply institutionalized system of narrative management is not easily disrupted. For the U.S., Israel, and other engaged nations, this suggests that any military strategy must take into account Iran’s capacity to manipulate narratives and influence perception well beyond its borders.
In essence, the Iranian regime has mastered the dichotomy of violent suppression paired with aggressive narrative control. This combination allows it to maintain power and manipulate localized and international perceptions, making it a formidable opponent on the global stage.
"*" indicates required fields
