Israel, Iran, and approximately 40,000 US soldiers in the Middle East are currently in a state of anticipation and anxiety, awaiting Iran and its allies' response to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas' political bureau, in Tehran on July 31, and the assassination of Hezbollah field commander Fuad Shukr the day before.
Iran and its proxies have justified the delay in their response to Israel by emphasizing that it is part of a psychological war, a narrative they have been actively promoting. Discussions of psychological warfare dominated Friday sermons across Iranian cities, reflecting the stance of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The newspaper Kayhan, close to Khamenei, noted that "Iran is conducting psychological warfare along with hard warfare to change the enemy's calculations and destabilize its public opinion."
Similarly, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah stated on August 6, 2024, that the delay in responding to Israel's assassinations and the anticipation of an attack is "part of the punishment," stressing that "the response is coming, whether we act alone or with allies." On August 12, Ali Damoush, Deputy Executive Council Chairman of Hezbollah, claimed that part of the response to Shukr's assassination had been carried out through "psychological warfare" that left Israel "drained, paralyzed, and gripped by fear and terror." Conversely, Israel believes its threats have prevented Iran from responding so far.
Mutual Pressure
The exchange of statements between Iran and its allies on one side and Israel and the United States on the other reflects an ongoing psychological warfare employed to achieve military and political objectives. Iran, through Khamenei, has committed to retaliating for Haniyeh's assassination. Meanwhile, Israel is experiencing "deep anxiety," not only at security and military levels but also among ordinary citizens, who are always on high alert, ready to take shelter at any moment.
According to a report by Yossi Yehoshua, a military affairs analyst for Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, Iran has achieved its goal in the psychological warfare by spreading fear across Israel, where citizens are now focused on stockpiling food and fuel, and settlers are rushing to buy generators out of fear of prolonged power outages caused by an Iranian retaliation and an escalation of the conflict.
Despite all its satellites and the logistical support available to it, Israel is still uncertain about the nature, scale, or location of Iran's potential response: Will it resemble Iran's direct attack on Israeli territory on April 13? Will Tehran consider targeting Israeli interests abroad, such as embassies or intelligence centers near Iran? To what extent would Tehran delegate the response to its allies in Lebanon and Yemen? These questions put enormous psychological pressure on Israeli society and military.
Iran's psychological warfare against Israel is further compounded by uncertainty surrounding a potential concerted response from the so-called axis of resistance. This raises more questions: Will each member of this Iranian axis act independently, or will Israel face a three-pronged attack for the first time in its history—from Iran from the east or northeast, Hezbollah from the north, and the Houthis from the south?
Israel is not the only side suffering from psychological warfare. Iran and all its proxies in the region are also under unprecedented psychological pressure, with many, both inside and outside Iran, doubting the effectiveness of any Iranian response, even if it is more powerful than its April 13 attack. Skeptics argue that the delay in Iran's response has allowed Israel and the United States to prepare more effectively for any retaliation. Israel also exploits Iran's delay, portraying it as hesitation and fear and claiming that Tel Aviv is fully capable of handling any Iranian response—another harsh psychological war waged by Israel and its Western backers, especially the United States.
The greatest psychological pressure on the Iranian leadership, however, comes from Iran's own allies, who argue that Haniyeh was assassinated on Iranian soil, obligating Tehran to avenge his death. As Hassan Nasrallah said on August 1, the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran was "an affront to Iran's honor," not just its sovereignty. This ratchets up the psychological pressure on Iranian decision-makers to respond, though the impact of such a response on Tehran and the region remains uncertain. Will Tehran retaliate against Tel Aviv? Could this lead to a large-scale regional war? Or will Tehran avoid retaliation, risking the loss of its allies' support abroad and emboldening internal opposition groups?
Complex Calculations
A common saying in Iran and among its allies goes, "the Iranians slaughter (a camel) with cotton," a metaphor for their ability to conduct "psychological warfare" against adversaries, embodying Tehran's strategy of patience and long-term planning to achieve its goals. More than three weeks after the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran and Shukr in Beirut's southern suburbs, neither Iran, Hezbollah, nor the Houthis have retaliated against Israel. Iran and its regional allies consider this a form of "psychological torment" or "slaughtering Israel with cotton." The key features and calculations of psychological warfare in the region can be discerned through the following indicators:
1. Ambiguity Surrounding Iran's Response
Ambiguity characterizes Iran and Hezbollah's stance on responding to the assassinations of Haniyeh and Shukr. Tehran has put its adversary, Tel Aviv, under the pressure of psychological warfare and the uncertainty surrounding its response. Despite Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guard stressing the need for a strong response to Haniyeh's assassination, the delay might have intensified the psychological warfare that Israel is experiencing on both civilian and military levels. Militarily, the Israeli army is on high alert around the clock, which is unsustainable for long periods. Civilian sectors in Israel are also affected, with many airlines suspending flights to Tel Aviv and Israelis constantly preparing to seek refuge in shelters. This imposes a harsh lifestyle with significant economic and psychological costs.
2- Double-Edged Sword
The consequences of psychological warfare are not limited to Israel; Iran is also currently under severe psychological pressure, manifesting in several ways:
A- Credibility Proof: Iran and Hezbollah need to prove their credibility to the so-called axis of resistance in responding to the assassinations of Haniyeh and Shukr. Failure to respond could lead to increased dissemination of narratives critical of Tehran, suggesting that it views its proxies merely as tools for advancing its own projects.
B- Restoring Deterrence: Failure to retaliate for the assassination of Haniyeh and Shukr would intensify the psychological warfare against Tehran and Hezbollah. Both are striving to return to previous deterrence parameters, as the killings in Beirut's southern suburbs and the Revolutionary Guard's barracks in northern Tehran are considered breaches of earlier deterrence boundaries. Thus, the onus is on Tehran and Hezbollah to re-establish those boundaries, which requires a significant and direct response against Israel.
C- Response Level: Although Iran's attack on Israel on April 13, which involved over 300 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones, was the first direct Iranian assault on Israeli territory, the lack of Israeli casualties led some to label the response as a staged performance agreed upon with Tel Aviv. This places additional pressure on Iran and its regional allies to deliver a painful response that resonates throughout the region and beyond.
D- Israeli Threats: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed that Israel will respond to any Iranian strike with double the force and that Israel's reach is long. This forms another aspect of the psychological warfare waged by Tel Aviv, with support from Washington, against Tehran. The United States' deployment of a second aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, and its accompanying destroyers to the Middle East on August 21, along with U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin's warning that Iran will suffer if it retaliates against Israel, all represent psychological warfare that has been difficult for Tehran to endure since July 31.
All indications suggest that Iran is working tirelessly not only to avenge Haniyeh's death but also to prepare for Israel's response to Iran's anticipated retaliation. This has led to unprecedented pressure to ready air defenses, protect nuclear facilities, and conduct military exercises in preparation for the expected Israeli response. A clear indicator of these pressures and "psychological wars" was the Revolutionary Guard's military drills near Iran's western border with Iraq on August 11, anticipating that any potential Israeli attack, whether by missiles or aircraft, might come from Iran's western borders.
E- War Expansion: Most major wars in human history have occurred due to miscalculations, with none of the parties involved intending to enter a long and violent conflict. The current political and military environment in the region places unprecedented pressure on Iran to ensure that its escalating tensions with Israel do not spiral into a wider regional war. As a result, Tehran and its allies have repeatedly stated that they do not seek to expand the conflict into a broad, comprehensive regional war. This is especially significant for Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who is in the early days of his tenure. The threats of sliding into a large-scale regional war with the United States and Israel represent a form of "psychological warfare" that Tehran and its regional proxies are carefully considering.
3. Psychological Warfare Against Washington
About 40,000 American soldiers stationed in the Middle East may be experiencing genuine psychological warfare since the Iranian leadership announced its intention to retaliate for Haniyeh's assassination. These soldiers are at risk of attack by Iran's allies, especially in Syria and Iraq. The January 8, 2020, attack on Ain al-Asad Airbase in Iraq following Washington's assassination of General Qassem Soleimani and the repeated attacks on U.S. forces at the Tanf base on the Iraq-Jordan-Syria border serve as a stark reminder of what U.S. forces might face if a regional war breaks out in which Washington has pledged to defend Israel. This makes all U.S. forces and bases vulnerable to attacks by Iran and its proxies.
In conclusion, more than three weeks after the assassinations of Haniyeh and Shukr, both Israel and Iran claim to have achieved victory without engaging in direct combat by conducting psychological warfare against each other. Israel believes that its threats and messages have caused Tehran and its allies to hesitate and fear retaliation to this day. At the same time, Iran views itself as having won the "first phase" of its response through the psychological warfare it has been waging against Israel since late July. Iranian officials have also been promoting the narrative in recent days that the delay in retaliating against Tel Aviv aims to give a chance for ongoing negotiations about a ceasefire agreement in the Gaza Strip.
