Iran’s Unconventional Propaganda Strategy in Conflict with US and Israel

In a striking shift of information warfare tactics, Iran’s regime has embraced an unexpected approach to international messaging during its recent conflict with the United States and Israel. While the White House posted memes and AI-generated content, Iranian state media initially flooded global channels with ground-level footage of military strikes, civilian casualties, and infrastructure damage across Tehran.

This represented a dramatic reversal from just weeks earlier when the Iranian government had imposed the longest internet blackout in the country’s history, desperately trying to prevent footage of nationwide protests from reaching the outside world. When Iranian dissidents managed to circumvent these restrictions, the regime dismissed their evidence as “Zionist AI slop,” even as it acknowledged killing thousands of protesters.

The dynamics changed on February 28th when the United States and Israel launched attacks on Iran that resulted in thousands of casualties, including civilians. Suddenly, reality became powerful propaganda for the Iranian regime, which quickly mobilized to distribute high-definition videos documenting the destruction.

While maintaining the domestic internet blackout, Iranian authorities began selectively granting connectivity to those willing to amplify anti-war messaging. But what followed surprised many observers. By mid-March, Iranian propaganda took an unexpected turn toward AI-generated content featuring Lego figurines as soldiers, with videos referencing conspiracy theories and blending surreal imagery with serious war themes.

“It turned out that Lego AI slop was the voice that would carry the farthest,” notes Narges Bajoghli, who has studied Iran’s digital media infrastructure. Over the past 15 years, Supreme Leader Khamenei has invested significantly in digital content creation, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps operating or funding at least 50 production houses.

The most significant contributors during this conflict have been smaller studios that are “young, savvy, and less afraid of the US,” according to Bajoghli. These studios, while not officially part of the IRGC, receive funding from state and military establishments and had previously developed a style featuring “faster cuts and a sense of irreverence” that military leadership had previously considered insufficiently serious.

Iranian embassies worldwide amplified this content through their social media channels. The embassy in Tunis shared deepfaked videos of American soldiers with anti-war messaging, while the embassy in The Hague mocked then-President Trump with AI-generated imagery.

Afsaneh Rigot, a researcher specializing in human rights in the Middle East, explains that these propaganda videos weren’t intended for domestic Iranian consumption. With the ongoing internet blackout, most Iranians couldn’t access such content. Instead, they targeted international audiences with messaging that resonated with global anti-American sentiment.

“There’s a really deep understanding of social media sentiment right now, and global sentiment,” said Rigot. “Most people won’t know what’s going on in Iran, but they would have known what’s going on in their own neighboring countries in Latin America. Maybe they might have known what has happened to their own historical lineage and ancestors.”

The strategy appears to have been effective. Mahsa Alimardani, associate director of the Technology Threats & Opportunities program at WITNESS, noted that “international solidarity with the regime has never been higher,” describing how Moroccans thanked her for Iran’s actions when she visited the country.

The war created what Alimardani calls a “perfect propaganda moment” for a regime that has “created its identity around being a representative for the oppressed, being a representative for the global majority.” For over four decades, Iran’s ideology has centered on portraying America and Israel as aggressors, and the conflict provided powerful validation of this narrative.

Throughout the conflict, Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz emerged as a critical bargaining chip, creating an economic crisis that ultimately forced concessions during ceasefire negotiations. This geopolitical leverage proved more consequential than any social media campaign, though the online propaganda strategy demonstrated Iran’s evolving capabilities in information warfare.

Experts worry that the apparent success of Iran’s approach—combining internet blackouts, targeted propaganda, and control of information flows—could inspire other authoritarian regimes, despite the real humanitarian costs of restricting civilian access to critical information during wartime.

As the conflict demonstrates, the information battlespace has become as important as physical territory, with Iran meeting the United States “where it was, fighting brainrot with brainrot, holding up an uncanny mirror to the American government.” This evolution in propaganda tactics may signal a troubling new chapter in how future conflicts unfold online.