ConflictClarifier

ردیاب بحران ایران-خلیج فارس ۲۰۲۶
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 16, 2026

‘Wait for death:’ Inside Iran’s psychological war against its enemies | CNN

Summary

“You must report immediately in case of any security incident,” read a text message sent to phones in the United Arab Emirates from “MOI” during the Iran war. But the country’s Ministry of Interior never sent such an alert. It later cautioned residents against acting on the “fake” message. In a country that bore the brunt of Iranian attacks as Tehran retaliated against Israel and the United States, authorities say the nation also faced barrages of a more insidious nature. The UAE had already noticed a sharp spike in cyberattacks weeks before the war, Mohamed Al Kuwaiti, the head of cybersecurity for the UAE Government, told state media last month. In the early days of the war, he said, cyber-attacks from Iranian proxies grew to 500,000 a day, mostly targeting critical infrastructure “After the (war began) the internet was cut (in Iran) yet their proxies continued (attacking us) from…outside of Iran,” he said. “Many people received phishing emails asking people to click on links…which began as data gathering and then transformed to become destructive.” During the war, Iran and its proxies launched thousands of missiles and drones at as many as 12 American-allied states in retaliation against US-Israeli strikes on its territory. But it’s on the less visible front – the psychological and information war – where Tehran has had an outsized impact. Threatening text messages purporting be from Iran’s Revolutionary Guards told Israelis to “wait for death” as evacuation orders – mimicking the Israeli military’s controversial style used in Gaza and Lebanon – urged civilians near critical infrastructure and major residential neighborhoods in Gulf Arab states to leave. Attacks on web servers early March disrupted banking systems in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, halting financial transactions and everyday banking activities. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards announced a hit list of American companies and universities operating in the Middle East - including Meta, Oracle, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google – forcing many to ask staff to work from home. Paolo Napolitano, associate director at Dragonfly from Dow Jones, a geopolitical and security risk firm based in London, said that cyber operations and influence campaigns are now an integral part of modern warfare, and Iran as well as Iran-linked actors made extensive use of these during the conflict with the US and Israel. The economic opportunities in countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE have long attracted foreign businesses seeking access to lucrative markets, capital and low taxes. Global talent has flocked to the nations that have for decades been seen as islands of stability in a volatile region. Iran’s campaign takes aim at this carefully cultivated image, aiming to inflict reputational damage – even if the physical damage is minimal. “Iran was under no illusion that it would be able to defeat the US and Israeli militaries conventionally and so has probably for several years been preparing such methods for such a conflict.” Napolitano said. In Jordan, Iran-linked groups launched cyber attacks aimed at manipulating the storage temperatures of wheat reserves to damage strategic stockpiles in a country already suffering economically, Jordanian National Cybersecurity Center reported in early March. After reports emerged that Iran was hacking into CCTV cameras and home security cameras, officials asked residents to change their passwords. “Iranian hackers have been trying to access surveillance footage from cameras in Israel and the Gulf countries since the start of the war,” said Seyoung Jeon, lead cyber analyst at Dragonfly. “This seems to be to support its air strikes, by helping them to more accurately identify target locations or to assess damage from missile strikes.” Hundreds of miles away from the Persian Gulf, Israelis received ominous messages on their phones too. “Thousands of Palestinian children died because of you. You and your family are a target for us. Wait for death,” one message in Hebrew sent to Israeli phones read, signed by the Revolutionary Guards. Controlling the flow of information For weeks ahead of the war, Tehran warned that any strike on its soil would trigger retaliation against Washington’s regional allies. As speculation about an imminent attack intensified following the deployment of US warships to the region, a pro-Iran X account called “Iran Military Media” – often mistaken for the military’s official account – posted an image of Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, the world’s tallest tower, with no caption. The veiled threat to the city left many residents concerned. In the hours after the first US-Israeli strikes on Tehran on February 28, Iran made good on its threats. Hundreds of projectiles were fired at cities that were known as some of the world’s safest, in what a senior UAE official, Anwar Gargash, described as “the worst-case scenario.” Even as the attacks targeted US bases, the Revolutionary Guards struck civilian targets including hotels in Dubai, residential high-rises in Bahrain, gas facilities in Qatar, and airports in Kuwait. As information and disinformation spread about the extent of the damage caused by Iran’s strikes, Gulf Arab governments rushed to control the narrative. Dozens of people were arrested in the UAE for filming interceptions or sharing videos deemed inappropriate. In Kuwait, Ahmed Shihab-Eldin, a prominent Kuwaiti-American journalist was detained after sharing videos related to the Iran war and in Qatar more than 300 people were arrested for “photographing, sharing and publishing misleading information.” In the following days, the tactic appeared to be working. Residents began self-censoring in private chats and deleting posts out of fear of reprisal. Even journalists working for some Western news outlets in the region began taking precautions, avoiding bylines on news stories and photos. Rise in cyberattacks Iran-linked hackers have struck targets far beyond the reach of its missiles, causing disruptions at multiple US oil, gas and water sites in recent weeks, according to a US advisory and three sources familiar with the investigation. The hacks have caused some industrial processes at the sites to shut down, forcing them to operate manually, the sources said. Tehran-linked hackers last month leaked emails stolen from the private account of FBI Director Kash Patel. Before that, they disrupted business for a major US medical device maker. The same hackers claimed responsibility for breaching the personal devices and accounts of former Israel military Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi. The group released dozens of photos and identification documents as proof of the breach. The cyber activity often has a psychological component. Iranian hackers boasted online of the hacks against Patel and the medical device maker while exaggerating their impact. Still, experts say that Iran’s blocking of foreign internet services at home has also limited the intensity of cyber attacks across the region. “We are seeing geopolitical tensions spill into cyberspace in more organized, sustained, strategic, and publicized ways than ever before,” Andy Piazza, senior director of threat intelligence at Unit 42 in Palo Alto Networks told CNN. But while the Islamic Republic has a “proven capability for highly sophisticated, multi-pronged cyber campaigns,” initial cyber activity was “significantly hindered because domestic internet connectivity dropped to between one and four percent following the initial conflict,” Piazza added. The effectiveness of Iran’s asymmetric campaigns is difficult to determine but a key objective was definitely achieved, Napolitano said. “The primary aim of these campaigns is to diffuse fear and amplify uncertainty in the Gulf, thereby demonstrating that local authorities are unable to address threats coming from Iran,” he added.

Actors involved

USIsraelIran

Sources

  • Mostafa SalemBy Mostafa Salem

    “You must report immediately in case of any security incident,” read a text message sent to phones in the United Arab Emirates from “MOI” during the Iran war. But the country’s Ministry of Interior never sent such an alert. It later cautioned residents against acting on the “fake

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran