SAEDNEWS: The fall of a missile can be repaired, but the fall of trust and the collapse of national solidarity is a wound that cannot be healed easily.
'The prerequisite of the second war: striking under the tent pole' is the title of an editorial in Etemad newspaper by Bijan Hamdarsi, in which it is stated: The twelve-day war imposed by the Zionist regime against Iran can be considered one of the most costly strategic mistakes of Israel in recent years. The initial design of this aggression was carried out with the hope of an internal collapse; they thought that by targeting sensitive centers, attempting to eliminate some officials of the system, and at the same time fueling internal unrest through drone and sabotage operations, they could drag the existing social rift into the streets and push the people of Iran into confrontation with the establishment at a critical moment.
But what happened in practice was exactly the opposite of this calculation. Iranian society, in the face of the external threat, not only did not collapse, but clear signs of national solidarity and social cohesion emerged; as if the external threat turned into a factor of convergence and unity. From this point, the enemy front realized that the military path would lead nowhere, and once again pursued the project of cognitive and psychological warfare. Western media, networks affiliated with foreign powers, and scattered domestic opposition, with clear coordination, launched a new tactic: transferring the battlefield from military geography to the minds and beliefs of the people.
They deliberately exploited livelihood problems and daily shortcomings such as water and electricity shortages, rising prices, and managerial weaknesses, trying to inject a sense of distrust within society. In this new narrative, they implant the question in people’s minds: Should you continue to defend a government that is unable to solve your basic life problems?
Such a question seems simple on the surface, but in its depth it is part of a complex psychological operation aimed at breaking the main pillar of national power, namely 'the people's belief in the value of defending the country and the system.' Within this framework, one of the enemy’s new tactics is to highlight political differences at the top of the country’s management. Demanding the fulfillment of the people's basic needs directly from the Leader and holding him responsible for all shortcomings... direct attacks on the President—from bringing up the issue of impeachment to raising accusations such as 'being a spy'—or exaggerating his pre-election slogans and the state of the country after the elections, are defined exactly within this puzzle.
Such atmospherics, aided by hostile media and some opportunistic domestic currents, as well as by comparing with the promises of prominent but unsuccessful political figures in gaining the people's trust, and by reviving monarchism as the only fragile alternative to the system, seek to instill in the minds of the people the image that even the highest executive officials of the country are no longer trusted and have no legitimacy.
This dangerous game pursues a goal beyond one personality or one government; the enemy wants to weaken the root of trust in the entire political structure and make society lose faith in any hope of reform and progress.
In fact, the enemy knows very well that bombs and missiles may be able to destroy infrastructure, but what collapses a nation is doubt in the mind and weakness in beliefs. That is why their current focus is on a structural war against social trust. Exaggerating weaknesses, belittling achievements, painting a dark picture of the future, and highlighting political and social divisions are the tools used by foreign media to erode the social capital of the Iranian nation.
However, the experience of the 12-day war showed that Iranian society, in critical moments, is capable of distinguishing between domestic dissatisfaction and external threats, and in the face of an external enemy, reproduces its unity. This reality carries a clear message: although economic and social problems are real and undeniable, turning these problems into a pretext for national collapse is only possible when society submits to the enemy’s narrative.
Therefore, today the main responsibility lies both with the elites and with the people: the elites in correcting shortcomings and strengthening public trust, and the people in safeguarding the capital called national unity. Because what is being targeted in this soft war is not merely everyday life, but the very foundations of a nation’s identity. This reality carries a clear warning message: if the enemy succeeds in embedding its narrative in the mind of society, the danger that arises from this psychological operation will be far more serious than any military war. On the battlefield, the enemy attacks land and infrastructure, but in a soft war, it directly targets the roots of identity and national beliefs.
The fall of a missile can be rebuilt, but the fall of trust and the collapse of national solidarity is a wound that cannot be easily healed. Therefore, today more than ever, it is necessary that the nation and the government, despite all shortcomings, disagreements, and criticisms, stand together against this common project, because the enemy is not seeking the destruction of a single government or an individual; its goal is to break the central pillar under which we all live: national unity.
