TEHRAN —Gheis Ghoreishi, a West Asia and the Arab world analyst, tells the Tehran Times that Western-based media outlets, including Persian-language Iran International, Manato, and Voice of America, are trying to do what they did in Syria and Libya. 

Following is an excerpt of the interview:

Q: In the recent events in Iran, we are witnessing a full-scale online war. A war in which rumors and fake news spread so quickly that often there is not much room left for the truth. In your opinion, what are the characteristics of this online war?

A: This type of propaganda and spreading lies in this volume in the media is the experience of countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Emirates and Israel, which established a common think tank at the beginning of the Arab Spring, although this issue was never announced. These countries work closely together in the field of media and successfully implemented several media projects against the governments of Syria and Libya and even against the government of Nouri Maliki in 2014. 

From a professional point of view, if we want to differentiate and split hairs, BBC Persian tries to maintain its professional level and cannot be called an intelligence-established media, although it has come close to being an intelligence-established media. 

Western-based Farsi language media “also misuse ethnic and religious minorities” to inflame unrest in Iran.Iran International, Manoto, Voice of America, and Radio Farda are intelligence-established networks. That is, they directly have a think tank and they try to ride on the protests and give direction to the protests. If there is no protest, they pump despair in society. They also misuse ethnic and religious minorities. If you pay attention, whenever something happens in Iran and someone is killed or injured in any way, these media outlets go directly to his or her religion, ethnicity, and race. Is he or she a Baha'i or a Shia Muslim? Is he or she a Kurd or an Arab? Is he or she a Turk or Baluch? They try to invest on these divisions and gaps. Finally, the successful model of these media wars in the Syrian civil war and in the Libyan war, and in 2014 when ISIS entered the western provinces of Iraq and the spread of the disease of terrorism in the country of Iraq caused this mentality for the West to build and strengthen the Persian language media. 

They did so by spending huge amounts of money. It is safe to say that the budget for Iran International is 1 billion pounds. Considering the effect it has in the absence of professional Farsi language media and the strange inefficiency of the state media, Iran International has been able to create a serious challenge for the country's national security. This is the same pattern that was successful in Syria and Libya by the Israelis and Saudis with some help from the Emiratis on the one hand and media affiliated with the American government such as Radio Farda and Voice of America on the other hand. They almost used the same pattern in Iraq. They are trying to implement what they did in Syria and Libya in Iran.

In any case, it is a successful model and in the absence of professional media and a state TV that does not have the ability to recognize and analyze media, these media have become very influential and pose a challenge to the country's national security.

However, Qatar does not help in this matter, and Qatar and Al Jazeera news network never went into the details of these protests and previous protests in 2016 and 2018.

Their work is the same. They pump despair first. They reflect all the negative events in the country every day and interact with the audience's subconscious so as not to interfere with the audience's rational ability. 

They keep telling the audience that you are in a bad state, the conditions of the country are bad, and so on. They only talk about inefficiencies, deficiencies and problems, without explaining the roots of the problems. 

For example, in the field of livelihood problems, they say that the livelihood situation is bad without saying that sanctions are a pillar of this issue. They only talk about corruption and inefficiency and do not say that their respective governments like Saudi Arabia or Israel lobbied for the continuation of sanctions and convinced Trump to withdraw from the JCPOA. They do not say what kind of crisis the sanctions have caused in the country, but they talk about the consequences of the sanctions and the conditions after they are in place. 

They work on the subconscious mind of the audience. This pumping of frustration causes anger to be formed in the audience’s mind. This person has the potential to protest no matter what happens, and when they protest, these media direct and target the protest. 

“They pump despair first.”They take the protests out of the form of civil protests and turn them into riots. These are exactly what happened in Syria, Libya and Iraq in 2014. The society may protest for a right, such as protesting due payments, but these networks direct these protests and push them towards chaos and disturbance. 

In the end, their goal is to turn the protest into chaos. If they succeed at this stage like in Syria, they will turn chaos into civil war, and if they succeed at this stage again, they will disintegrate the country. This is exactly the experience that was partially successful in Syria, but they failed in the last four or five years.

However, this pattern was completely successful in Libya, and now its effects are felt. But in Iraq, due to the help of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the project of dividing Iraq failed.

In any case, this is the purpose of these media and they are propaganda machines. These are only media in name, while in reality they are implementing the orders and directives of the intelligence agencies of their respective governments, i.e. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. This is basically the reason for their establishment.

Q: In recent weeks, we have seen that even the official media have changed the tact and entered into a cognitive war. For example, the New York Times published that false report about the health of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution. Why and how did these media get ready to enter this battle so obviously and tell lies easily?

A: When we talk about extra-regional and international media such as the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or Deutsche Welle, there is a bigger picture. These media cannot be called intelligence-established media. They pursue a greater goal. When a country like the U.S. enters into the issue of Iran’s protests from the first week, we realize that the image they have of Iran's internal issues is not related to the human rights. They don’t care about human rights or women's rights situation in Iran. For them these issues are not important at all. 

They focus on the war between the axes, that is the war between the East and the West. In this regard and in this trans-regional media attack, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, many German networks, many English networks such as Time, and so on, see beyond the regional conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia, or Iran and the Israeli regime. 

They are doing their best in the war of axes. They are trying to ground Russia in Ukraine. They are trying to bring tension between China and Taiwan. They tried their best to hit Iran beyond the borders and failed. Iran's military and security power in the region and even Iran's political influence in the region have been so competent that they have not been able to harm Iran from outside the borders. 

For this reason, these media are looking for an opportunity to harm Iran from within the borders, and the behavior and method of the mainstream media in these three weeks is very different from the type of tension between Iran and the Israeli regime and Iran and Saudi Arabia. The mainstream media are in the war with the eastern axis, including Russia, Iran and China. These media look at Iran as a pillar in this axis. In any case, harming Iran and entangling the Islamic Republic in internal issues can create conditions for them to think that they can postpone the awakening of the “eastern dragon,” as Noam Chomsky puts it. All their efforts are to put pressure on the Eastern axis, through exerting pressure on Russia in Ukraine, or putting pressure on China in Taiwan, and hitting Iran from inside through social problems and challenges.

These issues were predictable. I personally said many times in the field of social freedoms, in the field of economic welfare and in the field of the Internet, these are the three challenges that the system is facing. I have been saying these issues for two years, especially after Raisi's government took office. These issues were predictable. Why were the officials so late, and why there is no think tank to foresee the shortcomings that the regional and extra-regional enemies are trying to use to take steps against Iran? Why are these issues not foreseen in the government and political system? These issues were easily predictable. I have repeatedly warned that these things happen.

Whether we like it or not, Iran is defined in the Eastern axis countries, siding with Russia and China. This issue is considered a stable pillar for the country. Iran is not a subordinate country in this axis, but an influential country. 

Iran does not play a role similar to Saudi Arabia in the American axis, which is a subordinate country. Iran is a pillar in the Eastern axis, and the great American and European strategists today admit that the pillars of the Eastern axis are defined by the three countries of Russia, China, and Iran.

In the mainstream media war against Iran, Iran is not the target. The Eastern axis is the target. They will do their best to get Iran caught up in internal issues. The mainstream media's entry into Iran's protests and the wave they created and are still spreading is due to trapping one of the pillars of the Eastern axis in the challenge between the East and West axes, that is between China, Russia, Iran (on one hand), and the United States, UK, and the European Union (on the other).

These media follow an idea based on the assumption that the countries in the Eastern bloc should be hit wherever and whenever possible. 

Russia is a successful example of foiling this plan. Iran's exit from this crisis is to give in to the demands of the society and quickly resolve cumbersome customs, which are considered a big challenge for the political system.

Iran can overcome this crisis, the same way Russia did; in my opinion Russia has been a successful model, as the sanctions against Russia have created the greatest calamity for Europe. 
The big loser of the continuation of the war in Ukraine is the European Union. Russia has largely overcome this crisis. Iran's internal crisis can also be resolved provided that the society's demands are listened to seriously and resolved.

In my opinion, we should pay more attention to the internal issues of the country as we did not leave a way for external victories for regional and extra-regional enemies. Considering Iran's welfare, economic and social issues, this area is considered the most vulnerable area for Iran. 

The media alliance between the EU and the U.S. against Iran is defined on a larger scale than regional conflicts.

Q: In your opinion, can Iran take legal action against these media supporting vandalism and separatism?

For 4 years, I have been sending messages to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the embassies of the Islamic Republic of Iran that they should not be silent about this kind of provocation in the media against the Islamic Republic and this level of propaganda, lies, and incitement to violence and chaos. The duty of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is to form a very strong legal team, but unfortunately, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not paying attention to this issue. In my opinion, not paying attention to public opinion is a crisis for Iran. This is in reference to both domestic media and state media, and in the field of dealing with the intelligence-established media that work against the security of the country. The least that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs can do is to challenge these media in consultation with a legal expert team. These media are violating European and UK laws on a daily basis. The least can be done is that a team of lawyers would record and archive these violations and send them to institutions like Ofcom (the UK's communications regulator) which monitors the media and television channels and has the power to shut them down.

Q: What should be the ideal reaction to this media war?

A: When it comes to the judiciary branch in Europe, governments' hands are tied for lobbying. It is possible to at least cause trouble for these networks, but unfortunately, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not taken any action except for routine statements and summoning ambassadors and charge d'affaires. In the current conditions of Iran that these media have created for us in an illegal manner, we must hire local European lawyers and these lawyers must be responsible for the recording of the daily violations of these networks, such as Iran International, which has extensive daily violations on its television and Twitter, and even through its employees on Twitter. 

These lawyers must collect these violations and keep a record of who is violating the Twitter terms as well as UK law and sue them in a court and create trouble for them. 

This freedom of action that these media have in Europe and in London and the freedom of their employees on social media can be countered by archiving violations and taking them to court. It is true that Saudi Arabia pays a lot of money to confront this, but we can try this way by forming a strong legal team in the UK and Europe. 

I said it 4 years ago and I say it now. The impudence of these media and their employees to publish and support violence and create chaos in Iran is due to the fact that Iranian legal institutions were completely silent and no complaints have been seriously raised against these media and their employees.

It does not work for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to make a statement. Forming a strong legal team can harm the media that spread lies. The biggest weakness in Iran is the neglect of the legal department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Iranian embassies. They must seriously demand the rights of the Iranian people, ask for compensations and even shut them down.

Q: What do you think about the hypocrisy of the West regarding issues such as human rights, including women's rights?

A: Expediency plays a prominent role in the behavior of Western countries. The dual behavior of the West is directly related to their interests. A clear example of this issue is the assassination and elimination of Mr. Khashoggi, which did not affect the relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia. This was a big scandal that Trump quickly tried to smear. Biden, who had clearly said that Bin Salman is a criminal, went to Saudi Arabia and you saw that he had no problem with Bin Salman. For him, it was important that Saudi Arabia would inject oil quickly and lower the price of oil in Europe and America. This is how the West behaves and reacts to the incidents in Iran, a country that is not their ally. If these incidents (such as the protests that followed the death of Mahsa Amini) happen in Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Bahrain, in a much bigger scale, as there are many examples, they will be easily ignored. 

These double standards are defined according to the interests of America and Europe. For their friends, they are completely silent in front of the biggest human rights tragedies, but when it comes to a country that is not their ally, if a tenth of the same thing happens, they magnify it tenfold, make statements, and impose sanctions.

As I said above, Europe and America's confrontation with Iran is in proportion to the war between the East and the West, and they look at Iran's case much more broadly.

They see Iran as a pillar in the new world order and they think that they can take down any of these pillars (Iran, Russia, China) and delay the process of transferring power from the unipolar world ruled by America to the multipolar world, where China, Russia, and Iran play a role in it.

Q: In the last few weeks, some Iranians living in Europe started anti-Iran demonstrations and their behavior was such that even the police of these countries confronted them. What do you think about this story and the duality of these countries that call the chaos in Iran a demand for freedom and deal with the slightest disorder and disturbance in their own countries?

The double standards is also the case with the police. The silence of the legal department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in front of this level of violence and brutality of Iranian protesters in Europe and the violence that I myself witnessed in London plays a big role in the continuation of such wrong processes.

The police in Britain, where I live, are very strict with riots. The events of 2010 and the riots that happened during (David) Cameron's time resulted in the sentencing of a young man to three years in prison for stealing a bottle of mineral water. Britain is very strict with protests that turn into riots.

If such events happen in a country that is not aligned with the West, voices and calls for human rights will be raised from the West, but if there is a disturbance in Britain for three days, they will confront it very firmly. When a young man was sentenced to three years in prison for stealing a bottle of mineral water in 2010 and they protested his sentence, it was said that because it was related to riots, this sentence should serve as a moral lesson for those who seek to disrupt security and public order.

However, I think that if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is persistent, it can sentence the elements who commit violence and brutality towards the embassy staff, clients, and even voters in the elections to long-term prisons, provided that it just won’t stick to make a statement and summon the ambassador.