In its editorial, the Hamshahri newspaper analyzed the war of narrative. The writer said: The base of war is to conquer the soul. The tool is also beyond the media. We are facing a hybrid war in which the media is also a part.

The supreme goal of this war is to conquer minds. When the enemy realized that he could not capture the soil of these people, he went to their minds.  Every mind that is captured as if a person's body is tied and a part of the country's soil and capital is looted. In this hybrid war, economy is also a tool to conquer the mind and also undermine hijab and manipulate riots. Everything is a tool until you and I don't see. And finally, a simple suggestion: we have a lack of explanation in Jihad. The people don’t find out the truth….  But what is the solution in the short time?  What to do? The solution is: look at every matter in this condition with attention to the enemy's plan.  What does it do and what does it want and what is its contribution?  The story will be different. Give it a try.

Iran: Baku's hatred against Iran

The Iran newspaper has published a report about a round table meeting with the presence of 4 cultural and political activists of the Republic of Azerbaijan, in which it investigated Baku's anti-Iran policies.  The publication said: Baku media falsely say that every day a Turk is executed in Iran and people believe it.  They have accepted that from the beginning there was a big country called Azerbaijan and Iran has occupied half of it and Iran is their enemy and Israel is their friend.  Their identity is defined by Israel.  For this reason, we believe that Hosseiniyoon should not work in a one-dimensional way and only with the military and security structure.  Right now, we have more than 100 channels, we have hundreds of thousands of viewers, sometimes one of our movies has millions of viewers.  Of course, these activities cause them to put pressure on us through diplomatic channels.   The Israeli media in Baku are putting great pressure on us, because they have realized that their ulterior motives have been revealed to us and that are we enlightening people in this regard.

Javan: England and the Karabakh Crisis

In a note, Javan discussed the British role in the Karabakh crisis and Baku's hostility with Tehran. The paper said: Inciting the Azeri authorities to be adventurous towards Iran has strategic and tactical benefits for the British and Westerners, and of course for Turkey and the Zionist regime…. Pan-Turkist slogans or gestures of relations with the Zionists, which have been displayed by some Azeri officials for some time coupled with a kind of arrogance and aggressive behavior, are all motivated and provoked by England.  Of course, while the destruction of Ukraine is unimportant to the British, the destruction and disappearance of Azerbaijan is also worthless to them.  It is important to provide an excuse for British and Western goals.

Farhikhtegan: Opposition circus

In a note, Farhikhtegan explained the behavior of Iran's opposition and their contradictory and mercenary behavior and wrote: From the beginning of the chaos project in Iran, the thing that was visible in the identity of this project more than anything else was its anonymity.  The anonymity caused a group of subversives to brand themselves with riots and start a business in the name of a riot leader.  The interesting point was about this mercenary approach of the subversives that the Western governments also recognized all of them as subversive leaders with the aim of putting more pressure on Iran.  Gradually, with the reduction in the intensity of the riots, this weakness on the front of the subversives showed itself more and more to the extent that they started fighting each other for a greater role.  This power struggle even happened to the gatherings that were held outside the country until the streets turned into a platform for the MKO as well as separatists and royalists to clash with each other.

Ham Mihan: What was the big lie?

In its editorial, the Ham Mihan newspaper addressed the Western attack on America's military adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq and wrote: After September 11, the United States and the Western world tried to consider themselves in a morally superior position and allowed to take any action.  They attacked Afghanistan, then (two of them) sent their troops to Iraq.  Although it was clear at the time that the attack on Iraq was based on a completely fake scenario and a lie, it wasn't long before the reports about the dimensions and details of the Bush-Blair big lie came to light, and now Tony Blair expresses his regret at the limit of words, but what's the point.

What was the main lie?  Apparently, the existence of weapons of mass destruction was the main lie, but it is not.  The main lie was the declared motive for the liberation of Iraq and before that, Afghanistan, that is, the spread and export of democracy to the region.  This is a lie that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq may have believed during the Bush-Blair attacks, but now that 20 years have passed since the war on Iraq and 22 years since the attack on Afghanistan, it has become clear even to the people of these two countries that the main lie was this claim.

The biggest damage caused by these two military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq was the falsification of the proposition that democracy can be brought by foreign military presence, and this means destroying the self-confidence of a nation.  This is even more dangerous than the massacre that took place during or after the military offensives. The damages caused by these two military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq were the falsification of the proposition that democracy can be brought about by foreign military presence, and this means destroying the self-confidence of a nation.  This is even more dangerous than the vast array of killings that took place during or after the military offensives.