- Copy to clipboard
- Moderator
- #991
PakistanProud
Moderator
- Messages
- 358
- Reaction score
- 238
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Asim Munir with a Pro Israeli Pakistani:
Click space to scroll through posts
Iranian Defense
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #992
Saif
Senior Member
- Messages
- 14,145
- Reaction score
- 7,446
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Xi ‘deeply worried’ by Iran, Israel conflict
Chinese president Xi Jinping said Tuesday he was ‘deeply worried’ by Israel’s military action against Iran, as China also accused US leader Donald Trump of ‘pouring oil’ on the mounting conflict.
www.newagebd.net
Xi ‘deeply worried’ by Iran, Israel conflict
Agence France-Presse . Beijing 17 June, 2025, 23:02
Chinese president Xi Jinping. | File photo
Chinese president Xi Jinping said Tuesday he was ‘deeply worried’ by Israel’s military action against Iran, as China also accused US leader Donald Trump of ‘pouring oil’ on the mounting conflict.
Following decades of enmity and a prolonged shadow war, Israel launched a surprise aerial campaign last week against targets across Iran, saying it aimed to prevent its arch-foe from acquiring atomic weapons — an ambition Tehran denies.
The sudden flare-up in hostilities has sparked fears of a wider conflict, with Trump urging Iran back to the negotiating table after Israel’s attacks derailed on-going nuclear talks.
Trump also issued an extraordinary warning on his Truth Social platform: ‘Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!’
Asked about Trump’s remarks, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said: ‘Fanning the flames, pouring oil, making threats and mounting pressure will not help to promote the de-escalation of the situation, but will only intensify and widen the conflict.
‘The Chinese side calls on all relevant parties, especially countries with special influence on Israel, to shoulder their responsibilities, take immediate measures to de-escalate tensions, and prevent the conflict from expanding and spreading.’
China’s president Xi Jinping called for de-escalation of the conflict ‘as soon as possible’ during a meeting with Uzbekistan’s president in Kazakhstan on Tuesday, state media reported.
‘Israel launching military action against Iran has caused a sudden escalation in tension in the Middle East, China is deeply worried about this,’ Xi said, according to Xinhua.
‘We oppose any act that infringes upon the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of other countries.’
China’s embassies in Iran and Israel also urged Chinese citizens to leave the countries ‘as soon as possible’, after Israel and Iran traded heavy strikes.
‘The Chinese Embassy in Iran has coordinated with the Iranian side to facilitate outbound travel and reminds Chinese citizens currently in Iran to leave the country... as soon as possible’, the embassy in Tehran said in an online statement.
It suggested border crossings with Turkey, Armenia, and Turkmenistan as possible routes out.
China’s embassy in Israel urged citizens to depart ‘in the direction of Jordan’ as it warned that the conflict was ‘continuing to escalate’.
‘Much civilian infrastructure has been damaged, civilian casualties are on the rise, and the security situation is becoming more serious,’ it said in a post on WeChat.
Agence France-Presse . Beijing 17 June, 2025, 23:02
Chinese president Xi Jinping. | File photo
Chinese president Xi Jinping said Tuesday he was ‘deeply worried’ by Israel’s military action against Iran, as China also accused US leader Donald Trump of ‘pouring oil’ on the mounting conflict.
Following decades of enmity and a prolonged shadow war, Israel launched a surprise aerial campaign last week against targets across Iran, saying it aimed to prevent its arch-foe from acquiring atomic weapons — an ambition Tehran denies.
The sudden flare-up in hostilities has sparked fears of a wider conflict, with Trump urging Iran back to the negotiating table after Israel’s attacks derailed on-going nuclear talks.
Trump also issued an extraordinary warning on his Truth Social platform: ‘Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!’
Asked about Trump’s remarks, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said: ‘Fanning the flames, pouring oil, making threats and mounting pressure will not help to promote the de-escalation of the situation, but will only intensify and widen the conflict.
‘The Chinese side calls on all relevant parties, especially countries with special influence on Israel, to shoulder their responsibilities, take immediate measures to de-escalate tensions, and prevent the conflict from expanding and spreading.’
China’s president Xi Jinping called for de-escalation of the conflict ‘as soon as possible’ during a meeting with Uzbekistan’s president in Kazakhstan on Tuesday, state media reported.
‘Israel launching military action against Iran has caused a sudden escalation in tension in the Middle East, China is deeply worried about this,’ Xi said, according to Xinhua.
‘We oppose any act that infringes upon the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of other countries.’
China’s embassies in Iran and Israel also urged Chinese citizens to leave the countries ‘as soon as possible’, after Israel and Iran traded heavy strikes.
‘The Chinese Embassy in Iran has coordinated with the Iranian side to facilitate outbound travel and reminds Chinese citizens currently in Iran to leave the country... as soon as possible’, the embassy in Tehran said in an online statement.
It suggested border crossings with Turkey, Armenia, and Turkmenistan as possible routes out.
China’s embassy in Israel urged citizens to depart ‘in the direction of Jordan’ as it warned that the conflict was ‘continuing to escalate’.
‘Much civilian infrastructure has been damaged, civilian casualties are on the rise, and the security situation is becoming more serious,’ it said in a post on WeChat.
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #993
Saif
Senior Member
- Messages
- 14,145
- Reaction score
- 7,446
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Is the world close to a nuke radiation incident?
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to launch strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities has sparked concerns among sections of the global community, atomic energy regulators and experts on the risks of nuclear contamination.
ISRAEL’S ATTACKS ON IRAN
Is the world close to a nuke radiation incident?
Experts say Israel’s attacks on Iran’s atomic facilities have increased fears of nuclear and chemical contamination
People arrive with their luggage before the departure of buses evacuating foreign passport holders, mainly European and Polish nationals, from Israel at a meeting point in Tel Aviv yesterday. The operation, coordinated by the Polish embassy, aims to evacuate several hundred people who will board buses headed to Sinai, Egypt, and then continue to Warsaw, Poland. Photo: AFP
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to launch strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities has sparked concerns among sections of the global community, atomic energy regulators and experts on the risks of nuclear contamination.
WHAT DID THE IAEA SAY?
Addressing an urgent session of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna on Monday, Grossi said radiation levels appear normal outside both the Natanz nuclear installation and another facility in Isfahan also targeted in Israeli strikes.
However, the IAEA director general warned that military escalation "increases the chance of a radiological release". Grossi had on Friday told the UN Security Council that Israel's strike on Natanz destroyed the above-ground part of the facility. While the main centrifuge facility underground was not hit, it lost power because of the attack.
HAVE NUKE FACILITIES BEEN HIT BEFORE?
Al Jazeera cannot find a record of an operational nuclear installation coming under attack, but power plants have often been attacked while under construction – mostly in the Middle East.
A week into the Iran-Iraq War in 1980, Iran's Operation Scorch Sword damaged Iraq's unfinished Osirak nuclear reactor in the world's first attack on a nuclear power plant.
Israel conducted another air attack the following year, destroying the French-built reactor in Operation Opera. A decade later, US Operation Desert Storm attacked the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Centre, of which Osirak was a part.
Iraq also attacked Iran's incomplete nuclear reactor at Bushehr during the Iran-Iraq War, damaging it. The Soviet Union eventually completed the reactor in the early 2000s, and it went into operation in 2009.
In an interview with Al Jazeera, Dan Smith, the head of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said the world has rarely been in much danger from accidental nuclear weapons use. Previously, risks have primarily arisen from the threat of miscalculations.
"The last time that there was open information to show we were so close to disaster is the Petrov incident in September 1983 – a false alarm in the Soviet early warning system that he [an engineer] refused to report," Smith said.
RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR ADDED TO RISKS TOO?
A more recent nuclear contamination scare came early in Russia's invasion of Ukraine when it seized the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) on March 4, 2022. The ZNPP has six reactors, and it stands on the left bank of the Dnipro River, which forms part of the front line between Ukrainian and Russian forces.
The IAEA eventually intervened to ensure all six reactors were powered down and hostilities around the plant ceased, but the plant still needs a steady supply of water and electricity to cool spent fuel rods and reactors.
Is the world close to a nuke radiation incident?
Experts say Israel’s attacks on Iran’s atomic facilities have increased fears of nuclear and chemical contamination
People arrive with their luggage before the departure of buses evacuating foreign passport holders, mainly European and Polish nationals, from Israel at a meeting point in Tel Aviv yesterday. The operation, coordinated by the Polish embassy, aims to evacuate several hundred people who will board buses headed to Sinai, Egypt, and then continue to Warsaw, Poland. Photo: AFP
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to launch strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities has sparked concerns among sections of the global community, atomic energy regulators and experts on the risks of nuclear contamination.
WHAT DID THE IAEA SAY?
Addressing an urgent session of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna on Monday, Grossi said radiation levels appear normal outside both the Natanz nuclear installation and another facility in Isfahan also targeted in Israeli strikes.
However, the IAEA director general warned that military escalation "increases the chance of a radiological release". Grossi had on Friday told the UN Security Council that Israel's strike on Natanz destroyed the above-ground part of the facility. While the main centrifuge facility underground was not hit, it lost power because of the attack.
HAVE NUKE FACILITIES BEEN HIT BEFORE?
Al Jazeera cannot find a record of an operational nuclear installation coming under attack, but power plants have often been attacked while under construction – mostly in the Middle East.
A week into the Iran-Iraq War in 1980, Iran's Operation Scorch Sword damaged Iraq's unfinished Osirak nuclear reactor in the world's first attack on a nuclear power plant.
Israel conducted another air attack the following year, destroying the French-built reactor in Operation Opera. A decade later, US Operation Desert Storm attacked the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Centre, of which Osirak was a part.
Iraq also attacked Iran's incomplete nuclear reactor at Bushehr during the Iran-Iraq War, damaging it. The Soviet Union eventually completed the reactor in the early 2000s, and it went into operation in 2009.
In an interview with Al Jazeera, Dan Smith, the head of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, said the world has rarely been in much danger from accidental nuclear weapons use. Previously, risks have primarily arisen from the threat of miscalculations.
"The last time that there was open information to show we were so close to disaster is the Petrov incident in September 1983 – a false alarm in the Soviet early warning system that he [an engineer] refused to report," Smith said.
RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR ADDED TO RISKS TOO?
A more recent nuclear contamination scare came early in Russia's invasion of Ukraine when it seized the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) on March 4, 2022. The ZNPP has six reactors, and it stands on the left bank of the Dnipro River, which forms part of the front line between Ukrainian and Russian forces.
The IAEA eventually intervened to ensure all six reactors were powered down and hostilities around the plant ceased, but the plant still needs a steady supply of water and electricity to cool spent fuel rods and reactors.
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #994
Saif
Senior Member
- Messages
- 14,145
- Reaction score
- 7,446
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Disinformation and the Israel-Iran conflict
In the unfolding Israel-Iran conflict, disinformation is not peripheral—it is central.
Disinformation and the Israel-Iran conflict
A man looks at an Iranian daily newspaper, displaying an image of an explosion in Israel, at a newsstand in Tehran on June 15, 2025. PHOTO: AFP
In the high-stakes theatre of Middle Eastern geopolitics, few rivalries are as fraught and consequential as that between Israel and Iran. Their confrontation, long waged through proxies, covert operations, and cyberwarfare, has increasingly become a war not only of missiles and militias but also of narratives and perception. As the spectre of full-scale conflict looms, disinformation emerges not merely as a side-effect of war, but as a weapon of war itself. This is not unique to the Israel-Iran standoff. Recent conflicts such as the Ukraine-Russia war, and even the brief but intense India-Pakistan clashes, reveal how disinformation is now central to shaping international sympathy, diplomatic alignments, and battlefield legitimacy.
Disinformation—intentionally misleading or false information—has assumed a strategic role in contemporary warfare, shaping the informational terrain upon which public opinion, international diplomacy, and battlefield decisions rest. In the Israel-Iran conflict, disinformation is used to justify pre-emptive strikes, delegitimise opponents, rally domestic support, and neutralise global condemnation. Unlike the propaganda of the 20th century, today's disinformation is algorithmically amplified, digitally disseminated to be globally consequential. Crucially, it is disproportionately and deliberately shaped by a powerful consortium of US, Israeli, and European intelligence infrastructures—granting one side a decisive upper hand in monopolising interpretation and totalising perception on the global stage.
Psychological warfare by other means
For both Israel and Iran, the goal is to shape how their actions are perceived rather than merely to carry them out. Israel often justifies its operations as preventive measures against existential threats. When Iranian-backed militias are targeted in Syria or Gaza, Israeli officials frame their actions as limited, precise, and necessary. Iran, conversely, portrays such attacks as unlawful aggression, appealing to international norms and casting itself as the victim of Zionist and imperialist designs.
Yet these competing narratives are rarely anchored in transparent evidence. Casualty figures are selectively reported; satellite images are curated or doctored; and metadata is manipulated. But the informational advantage lies squarely with Israel and its allies. With robust support from the US and European intelligence agencies—often with access to global surveillance systems, sophisticated AI-driven media monitoring, and diplomatic channels—Israel enjoys a structural upper hand in controlling the flow and framing of information.
This intelligence collaboration doesn't simply defend interests. It pre-empts critique. Leaked dossiers, anonymous briefings to Western media, and selective disclosures are orchestrated to generate strategic doubt about Iran's intentions while shielding Israel's actions under a cloak of necessity and legitimacy.
Weaponising social media
The battleground has expanded from physical territory to digital terrain. On platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Telegram, Instagram, and TikTok, armies of bots, trolls, and ideologically aligned influencers wage a perpetual contest over meaning. Israel, bolstered by its cyber units and coordinated hasbara (public diplomacy) efforts, systematically targets trending narratives, deploying content that emphasises Iranian threat perceptions and casts its own military responses as moral imperatives.
Iran, meanwhile, leverages a network of regional proxies and sympathetic voices in the Global South to counter this narrative. But Iran's digital influence—fragmented, reactionary, and linguistically segmented—rarely achieves the same reach or credibility in the Western mainstream. The asymmetry is glaring: Israeli-aligned privileged narratives often appear in prestigious outlets through op-eds, embedded journalism, and think tank publications, while Iranian messaging is filtered through the lens of suspicion and delegitimisation.
Here, the algorithm becomes an ally. Content critical of Israel or sympathetic to Palestinians or Iran is more frequently suppressed, flagged, or shadow-banned on Western platforms—a reflection of the deeper entanglement between Silicon Valley, Washington, and Tel Aviv.
The proxy dimension
Proxy groups further complicate this information ecosystem. Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iranian militias in Iraq and Syria, and Hamas in Gaza operate not only as military actors but as narrative warriors. Through videos, statements, and martyrdom imagery, they craft emotional appeals aimed at mobilising regional solidarity and global outrage. These tactics often blur the line between information and spectacle.
But proxies also provide Iran with plausible deniability. When disinformation is disseminated through unofficial channels, Iran can distance itself while still benefiting from the resulting confusion or sympathy. Israel, in turn, leverages this ambiguity to cast wide suspicion on all Iranian activities, branding even peaceful dissent as subversive or terror-linked.
The disinformation advantage here again rests with Israel and its allies, who can quickly flood the zone with counter-narratives, backed by deep intelligence archives, press access, and institutional trust.
Influencing international diplomacy
Disinformation does not remain confined to the Middle East. Both states aim to sway international institutions and shape global policy. Israel frequently raises alarms about Iran's nuclear ambitions, sometimes leaking or selectively interpreting intelligence. These revelations, often disseminated through Western think tanks and friendly journalists, are rarely scrutinised with the same rigour applied to Iranian claims.
Iran counters by alleging that such leaks are fabrications designed to incite pre-emptive war or sanctions. But lacking equal access to global media platforms and credibility with Western audiences, Iran struggles to gain traction. This imbalance tilts diplomatic outcomes: sanctions regimes, arms sales, and UN resolutions are often influenced by narratives crafted within Western echo chambers, many of which are informed by intelligence sourced from or aligned with Israeli interests.
Suppressing dissent, manufacturing consent
Internally, disinformation serves a dual purpose: discrediting foreign adversaries and stifling domestic dissent. Iran frequently invokes the spectre of Israeli sabotage or Western espionage to delegitimise protests and arrest critics, labelling them foreign agents. Israel, particularly during military escalations, equates opposition to its actions with antisemitism or treachery, creating a climate of fear that chills journalistic and academic freedom.
This convergence of security, nationalism, and information control is hardly unique to these states, but its intensity in the Israel-Iran conflict illustrates how disinformation has become central to regime maintenance. In both societies, the space for debate narrows as truth itself becomes suspect.
A new type of fog: Epistemic chaos
The classical "fog of war" refers to the uncertainty commanders face in the chaos of combat. Today, that fog is epistemic. What is real? What is manipulated? What is staged? In the Israel-Iran conflict, this is no accident—it is design. The goal is not to assert a truth, but to overwhelm the informational field with conflicting claims, delaying action and deepening division.
Israel's alliance with Western media ecosystems and intelligence apparatuses ensures that its narratives often appear first, and more authoritatively. Iran, in contrast, must labour to dispute these with fewer tools, less credibility, and greater risk. This epistemological asymmetry renders global publics and policymakers vulnerable to persuasion through repetition rather than verification.
Disinformation as a weapon of mass distraction
In the unfolding Israel-Iran conflict, disinformation is not peripheral—it is central. But unlike a level playing field of contested claims, the disinformation war is lopsided. With algorithmic amplification and the strategic backing of US and European intelligence and media infrastructures, Israel wields disproportionate influence over what becomes the dominant narrative.
This is not to exonerate Iran or diminish its own manipulations, but to highlight how power shapes perception. Disinformation erodes trust—not just in states, but in the very notion of shared reality. If the international community hopes to de-escalate this volatile confrontation, it must confront the narrative imbalance embedded in the architecture of digital and diplomatic power.
Complicating this landscape further is the deepening division within the US political establishment—between the interventionist neoconservative camp, long aligned with Israeli strategic ambitions, and the MAGA-aligned isolationist right, which remains staunchly opposed to being drawn into another Middle Eastern quagmire, particularly one driven by regime-change aspirations. This internal fracture plays out in the disinformation arena as well, with conflicting leaks, contradictory messaging, and politicised intelligence shaping the narratives that reach both domestic and international audiences. Ironically, this discord—rooted in partisan self-interest rather than principled restraint—has so far acted as a brake on full-scale US involvement, frustrating efforts by more hawkish elements to entangle Washington in "finishing the job" Israel may have initiated.
That said, the imperative is clear: invest in genuinely independent journalism, establish multilateral verification frameworks, and enforce accountability on digital platforms. In an age where virality eclipses veracity—and where intelligence leaks parade as journalism—truth is not merely compromised; it is systematically dismantled. In this asymmetrical information war, that erosion of truth may be the most perilous casualty of all.
Dr Faridul Alam is a retired academic who writes from New York, US.
A man looks at an Iranian daily newspaper, displaying an image of an explosion in Israel, at a newsstand in Tehran on June 15, 2025. PHOTO: AFP
In the high-stakes theatre of Middle Eastern geopolitics, few rivalries are as fraught and consequential as that between Israel and Iran. Their confrontation, long waged through proxies, covert operations, and cyberwarfare, has increasingly become a war not only of missiles and militias but also of narratives and perception. As the spectre of full-scale conflict looms, disinformation emerges not merely as a side-effect of war, but as a weapon of war itself. This is not unique to the Israel-Iran standoff. Recent conflicts such as the Ukraine-Russia war, and even the brief but intense India-Pakistan clashes, reveal how disinformation is now central to shaping international sympathy, diplomatic alignments, and battlefield legitimacy.
Disinformation—intentionally misleading or false information—has assumed a strategic role in contemporary warfare, shaping the informational terrain upon which public opinion, international diplomacy, and battlefield decisions rest. In the Israel-Iran conflict, disinformation is used to justify pre-emptive strikes, delegitimise opponents, rally domestic support, and neutralise global condemnation. Unlike the propaganda of the 20th century, today's disinformation is algorithmically amplified, digitally disseminated to be globally consequential. Crucially, it is disproportionately and deliberately shaped by a powerful consortium of US, Israeli, and European intelligence infrastructures—granting one side a decisive upper hand in monopolising interpretation and totalising perception on the global stage.
Psychological warfare by other means
For both Israel and Iran, the goal is to shape how their actions are perceived rather than merely to carry them out. Israel often justifies its operations as preventive measures against existential threats. When Iranian-backed militias are targeted in Syria or Gaza, Israeli officials frame their actions as limited, precise, and necessary. Iran, conversely, portrays such attacks as unlawful aggression, appealing to international norms and casting itself as the victim of Zionist and imperialist designs.
Yet these competing narratives are rarely anchored in transparent evidence. Casualty figures are selectively reported; satellite images are curated or doctored; and metadata is manipulated. But the informational advantage lies squarely with Israel and its allies. With robust support from the US and European intelligence agencies—often with access to global surveillance systems, sophisticated AI-driven media monitoring, and diplomatic channels—Israel enjoys a structural upper hand in controlling the flow and framing of information.
This intelligence collaboration doesn't simply defend interests. It pre-empts critique. Leaked dossiers, anonymous briefings to Western media, and selective disclosures are orchestrated to generate strategic doubt about Iran's intentions while shielding Israel's actions under a cloak of necessity and legitimacy.
Weaponising social media
The battleground has expanded from physical territory to digital terrain. On platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Telegram, Instagram, and TikTok, armies of bots, trolls, and ideologically aligned influencers wage a perpetual contest over meaning. Israel, bolstered by its cyber units and coordinated hasbara (public diplomacy) efforts, systematically targets trending narratives, deploying content that emphasises Iranian threat perceptions and casts its own military responses as moral imperatives.
Iran, meanwhile, leverages a network of regional proxies and sympathetic voices in the Global South to counter this narrative. But Iran's digital influence—fragmented, reactionary, and linguistically segmented—rarely achieves the same reach or credibility in the Western mainstream. The asymmetry is glaring: Israeli-aligned privileged narratives often appear in prestigious outlets through op-eds, embedded journalism, and think tank publications, while Iranian messaging is filtered through the lens of suspicion and delegitimisation.
Here, the algorithm becomes an ally. Content critical of Israel or sympathetic to Palestinians or Iran is more frequently suppressed, flagged, or shadow-banned on Western platforms—a reflection of the deeper entanglement between Silicon Valley, Washington, and Tel Aviv.
The proxy dimension
Proxy groups further complicate this information ecosystem. Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iranian militias in Iraq and Syria, and Hamas in Gaza operate not only as military actors but as narrative warriors. Through videos, statements, and martyrdom imagery, they craft emotional appeals aimed at mobilising regional solidarity and global outrage. These tactics often blur the line between information and spectacle.
But proxies also provide Iran with plausible deniability. When disinformation is disseminated through unofficial channels, Iran can distance itself while still benefiting from the resulting confusion or sympathy. Israel, in turn, leverages this ambiguity to cast wide suspicion on all Iranian activities, branding even peaceful dissent as subversive or terror-linked.
The disinformation advantage here again rests with Israel and its allies, who can quickly flood the zone with counter-narratives, backed by deep intelligence archives, press access, and institutional trust.
Influencing international diplomacy
Disinformation does not remain confined to the Middle East. Both states aim to sway international institutions and shape global policy. Israel frequently raises alarms about Iran's nuclear ambitions, sometimes leaking or selectively interpreting intelligence. These revelations, often disseminated through Western think tanks and friendly journalists, are rarely scrutinised with the same rigour applied to Iranian claims.
Iran counters by alleging that such leaks are fabrications designed to incite pre-emptive war or sanctions. But lacking equal access to global media platforms and credibility with Western audiences, Iran struggles to gain traction. This imbalance tilts diplomatic outcomes: sanctions regimes, arms sales, and UN resolutions are often influenced by narratives crafted within Western echo chambers, many of which are informed by intelligence sourced from or aligned with Israeli interests.
Suppressing dissent, manufacturing consent
Internally, disinformation serves a dual purpose: discrediting foreign adversaries and stifling domestic dissent. Iran frequently invokes the spectre of Israeli sabotage or Western espionage to delegitimise protests and arrest critics, labelling them foreign agents. Israel, particularly during military escalations, equates opposition to its actions with antisemitism or treachery, creating a climate of fear that chills journalistic and academic freedom.
This convergence of security, nationalism, and information control is hardly unique to these states, but its intensity in the Israel-Iran conflict illustrates how disinformation has become central to regime maintenance. In both societies, the space for debate narrows as truth itself becomes suspect.
A new type of fog: Epistemic chaos
The classical "fog of war" refers to the uncertainty commanders face in the chaos of combat. Today, that fog is epistemic. What is real? What is manipulated? What is staged? In the Israel-Iran conflict, this is no accident—it is design. The goal is not to assert a truth, but to overwhelm the informational field with conflicting claims, delaying action and deepening division.
Israel's alliance with Western media ecosystems and intelligence apparatuses ensures that its narratives often appear first, and more authoritatively. Iran, in contrast, must labour to dispute these with fewer tools, less credibility, and greater risk. This epistemological asymmetry renders global publics and policymakers vulnerable to persuasion through repetition rather than verification.
Disinformation as a weapon of mass distraction
In the unfolding Israel-Iran conflict, disinformation is not peripheral—it is central. But unlike a level playing field of contested claims, the disinformation war is lopsided. With algorithmic amplification and the strategic backing of US and European intelligence and media infrastructures, Israel wields disproportionate influence over what becomes the dominant narrative.
This is not to exonerate Iran or diminish its own manipulations, but to highlight how power shapes perception. Disinformation erodes trust—not just in states, but in the very notion of shared reality. If the international community hopes to de-escalate this volatile confrontation, it must confront the narrative imbalance embedded in the architecture of digital and diplomatic power.
Complicating this landscape further is the deepening division within the US political establishment—between the interventionist neoconservative camp, long aligned with Israeli strategic ambitions, and the MAGA-aligned isolationist right, which remains staunchly opposed to being drawn into another Middle Eastern quagmire, particularly one driven by regime-change aspirations. This internal fracture plays out in the disinformation arena as well, with conflicting leaks, contradictory messaging, and politicised intelligence shaping the narratives that reach both domestic and international audiences. Ironically, this discord—rooted in partisan self-interest rather than principled restraint—has so far acted as a brake on full-scale US involvement, frustrating efforts by more hawkish elements to entangle Washington in "finishing the job" Israel may have initiated.
That said, the imperative is clear: invest in genuinely independent journalism, establish multilateral verification frameworks, and enforce accountability on digital platforms. In an age where virality eclipses veracity—and where intelligence leaks parade as journalism—truth is not merely compromised; it is systematically dismantled. In this asymmetrical information war, that erosion of truth may be the most perilous casualty of all.
Dr Faridul Alam is a retired academic who writes from New York, US.
- Messages
- 3,456
- Reaction score
- 1,311
- Axis Group
On a lighter note gents........
Trump ne iss ka naam 'Johnny' rakh diya hae......
I like this guy Donald Trump.
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #998
Saif
Senior Member
- Messages
- 14,145
- Reaction score
- 7,446
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
A video showing F-35 downed by the air defense missile of Iran. The video is in Bengali.
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Iran bombed MAGAland
- Copy to clipboard
- Thread starter
- #1,000
Saif
Senior Member
- Messages
- 14,145
- Reaction score
- 7,446
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Lulldapull
Senior Member
- Messages
- 5,970
- Reaction score
- 3,781
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
He thinks Irans like these other ghareeb/ colludzz muzlim peepals......
'Unconditional surrender' Trump says after posts about Iran
US president Donald Trump has just posted on social media, saying, "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!" In the previous post, Trump had said, "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran", BBC reports. "Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, butthefinancialexpress.com.bd
'Unconditional surrender' Trump says after posts about Iran
FE Online Desk
Published :
Jun 17, 2025 22:23
Updated :
Jun 17, 2025 22:48
View attachment 18984
US president Donald Trump has just posted on social media, saying, "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!"
In the previous post, Trump had said, "We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran", BBC reports.
"Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn’t compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured 'stuff.' Nobody does it better than the good ol’ USA."
In another post, he said, "We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding.
"He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.
"But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
The US has long provided Israel with military aid and equipment - but its official position since strikes began on Friday has been that the US is not involved in Israeli strikes on Iran.
I guess it must be the second time in modern history dat a ME country refused to suck dick no?........lol
What else can we say here?
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
Sharma Ji
Senior Member
- Messages
- 7,366
- Reaction score
- 1,205
- Origin
- Residence
- Axis Group
I have never seen you give the same advice to a Muslim.
And seen you sucking up to plenty pretty hateful ones.
Including lungis here.
Similar threads
