Israel’s operation “Rising Lion” caught the Iranian regime by surprise, severely limiting its capacity to thwart the Israeli blitz and retaliate effectively. This surprise facilitated the smooth continuation of the Israeli attack and significantly diminished Iran’s strategic assets, including missiles and drones. Although Iran persisted in launching missiles at Israel, much of its strategic arsenal was successfully destroyed, including significant damage to key Iranian nuclear installations during the U.S. assault.
The mere fact that the Iranian propaganda machine had to resort to concocting fake news, such as claims that it had taken Israeli pilots prisoner or that it had targeted F-35 hangars in Tel Aviv, underscore the dire straits the regime found itself in amid a lack of any better option.
According to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel set two strategic objectives for this attack: to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capacity to the point where it could not resume a military nuclear program and to neutralize Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal. Notably, regime change in Iran was never on Israel’s stated list of goals. Statements from Netanyahu and other high-ranking Israeli officials clarified that while the toppling of the Shi’ite theocracy could be seen as a possible or beneficial side effect of the strike, it was not Israel’s premeditated aim.
Yet, the Iranian regime excels in hybrid war, meaning the capacity to fight the enemy on all fronts with all means possible. Propaganda, disruption, and information war are part and parcel of hybrid war, as outlined in Russian and Iranian intelligence playbooks. It is reasonable to assume that Iran will intensify its efforts in this direction as its position weakens. One should never underestimate the damage potential of Iranian disruptive activities in the South Caucasus. The recent Iranian recruitment of Israeli citizens to spy on its behalf demonstrate its capabilities.
Since the onset of Israel’s military operations against Iran in June 2025, Iranian media outlets have crafted specific narratives regarding Azerbaijan’s role in the conflict. These narratives form part of a broader campaign aimed at explaining Iran’s losses in a war it had prepared for decades. The campaign’s central message is that Iran is surrounded by enemies and is not merely fighting against a tiny state located nearly 2,000 kilometers away. Azerbaijan, a long-standing thorn in Iran’s side—a secular state with a Muslim majority and an independent multi-vector policy—serves as an ideal scapegoat for Tehran, which for 30 years has sought to destabilize it.
The narratives mentioned primarily focus on Azerbaijan’s media response, diplomatic stance, and strategic relationship with Israel, blaming the Azerbaijani Republic for allegedly “assisting” the Israeli military effort.
Read the full article on the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security.
Alex Grinberg is a Senior Fellow at the Turan Research Center.