In every major war, the battle does not begin with missiles alone, but with the narrative. Before the first military target is struck, newsrooms have already started shaping the image of the victor and the defeated, deciding who is advancing and who is retreating, even while the facts on the ground remain unclear and open to every possibility.
What is happening today in the coverage of the ongoing conflict with Iran reveals this truth very clearly. For days, Washington has been speaking about “major progress” in negotiations, about a “draft agreement,” and about the approaching end of the crisis, while Tehran continues denying the existence of any final understanding, or even downplaying the significance of what is being leaked by the Americans. Between these two narratives, a large section of the Arab media does not stand in the position of observer or analyst, but rather in the position of an enthusiastic transmitter of the American narrative, as if it were a complete truth and not merely one part of an open political and psychological battle.
The problem here is not that the United States practices psychological warfare – this is normal behaviour carried out by all major powers during wars. The problem is that parts of the Arab media perform this task on Washington’s behalf for free, and sometimes with more enthusiasm than the creators of the narrative themselves.
The moment an American statement emerges about a “near agreement,” the leaks immediately become major headlines speaking of an “Iranian retreat,” or “acceptance of American conditions,” or an “imminent end to the war,” despite the fact that realities on the ground say something entirely different. The Strait of Hormuz remains unstable, maritime attacks have not completely stopped, economic pressure continues, and the White House itself repeats threats alongside its talk of de-escalation. In other words, we are facing a war that has not yet been decided, yet some news bulletins behave as though the ending has already been written.
Here the real question appears: why does this happen?
Part of the answer relates to the very structure of Arab media itself. Many Arab newsrooms rely almost entirely on Western agencies, American leaks, and thinktanks connected to Washington. As a result, the American narrative becomes the “original text,” while other narratives are treated as footnotes or delayed reactions. Even the language used sometimes reveals this. When Washington speaks of “progress,” it immediately becomes a “historic breakthrough,” while Iranian statements about continuing disagreements are presented merely as manoeuvring or attempts to save face.
But the problem is deeper than professional bias or weak verification. Modern war is no longer only a war of fire, but also a war of perception. The United States fully understands that managing the image is no less important than managing the battle itself. Therefore, leaking news about a “near agreement” is not aimed only at reassuring markets or calming allies, but also at creating a psychological impression that Iran has begun retreating and that Washington still holds the initiative.
On the other side, Tehran understands that quickly acknowledging these narratives could be interpreted domestically as surrender under pressure. That is why it deals very cautiously with any talk of agreements or understandings, especially while sanctions and military and economic pressures continue. Therefore, Iranian silence is not necessarily proof that no communications exist, just as American noise is not proof that a final agreement has been reached.
But part of the Arab media does not read the scene in this complex way. Instead, it deals with it through the logic of winner and loser before the battle has ended. Media does not always lie by inventing facts; sometimes it lies by removing half the truth, or by magnifying one part of it until it appears to be the whole truth.
For this reason, the most dangerous aspect of the current war is not only the missiles and aircraft, but the way Arab consciousness is being reshaped through a flood of ready-made narratives presented as final truths, when in reality they are often tools of pressure, negotiation, and perception management.
[by Mohammed Al-Maashani in Rai Al-Youm]
Compiled and Translated by Faizul Haque