Iran’s Hybrid War with the United States and the Israeli Regime: Competition in the Cyber and Cognitive Domains
Tensions between Iran the United States and the Israeli regime have developed over several decades and have been shaped by political military and ideological factors.
Tensions between Iran, the United States, and the Israeli regime have developed over several decades and have been shaped by political, military, and ideological factors. These tensions intensified following the assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani by the United States in January 2020, alongside ongoing disputes over Iran’s nuclear program and its regional role. During a period when diplomatic negotiations between Iran and the United States were underway, Washington carried out two separate military attacks against Iran, effectively undermining the diplomatic process. After the second attack in Esfand 1404 (March 2026), Iran acted on its threats, and the confrontation gradually assumed a regional dimension.
From the early stages of the conflict, the Israeli regime expanded the electronic dimension of the confrontation through cyber operations and attacks on electronic infrastructure. At the same time, Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz extended the conflict into the economic and energy domains. As a result, the war evolved into a hybrid conflict encompassing military, economic, energy, media, electronic, and even agricultural and industrial arenas. Tensions escalated to the point that the President of the United States openly threatened to destroy Iran’s infrastructure.
The confrontation between Iran and the Israeli regime has moved beyond conventional warfare into a complex and technologically driven domain. These conflicts are now unfolding across cyber, electronic, and information dimensions, placing the vital infrastructure of both sides under constant threat. The following sections examine various aspects of this new form of warfare—from cyber operations to cognitive warfare.
- Cyber Warfare Against Electronic Infrastructure
The recent conflict between Iran and the Israeli regime has taken on new dimensions, extending beyond direct military confrontation. The war is now being waged in cyber, electronic, and information spaces, with both sides leveraging advanced technologies to gain superiority. Cyber and electronic attacks carried out during two U.S. and Israeli strikes in 2025 and 2026 can be analyzed across the following dimensions:
1.1. Cyber Warfare and Vulnerabilities
Recent events have shown that despite claims of cyber superiority, both sides possess vulnerabilities in their digital infrastructures. Reciprocal attacks targeted banks, cryptocurrency exchanges, government services, and information networks, with the intensity of operations increasing severalfold compared to previous years. In Tir 1404 (July 2025), the hacker group “Predatory Sparrow” disrupted the operations of Bank Sepah and inflicted damage on the Nobitex cryptocurrency exchange. Subsequently, on 20 Esfand 1404 (March 2026), a missile strike targeted the Bank Sepah building, tragically resulting in the martyrdom of several employees.
1.2. Attacks on Infrastructure
Cyberattacks on financial, communication, and security infrastructures on both sides caused temporary disruptions. Hacktivist groups and security structures employed methods such as DDoS attacks, phishing, and targeted intrusions to disable systems. Reports of such reciprocal attacks were circulated in Iranian and Hebrew-language media in Dey 1404 (January 2026).
1.3. Electronic Warfare Against Drones
Drone warfare emerged as one of the primary arenas of confrontation. Both sides sought to disrupt GPS signals, sever communication links, inject false data, and employ artificial intelligence to divert or neutralize drones.
1.4. Cyber Defense Structures
The Israeli regime relied simultaneously on specialized electronic warfare units and air defense systems, while Iran employed networks of electronic defense, indigenous counter-drone systems, and retaliatory cyberattacks.
1.5. Expansion of Conflict into Digital Space
The spread of warfare into the internet and social media introduced numerous new actors—more than one hundred cyber groups—into the battlefield. Internet restrictions, real-time information dissemination, and an increase in online attacks were defining features of this phase.
- Cognitive and Narrative Warfare
The digital battlefield was not limited to technical intrusions; misinformation, psychological operations, and efforts to influence public opinion also played a crucial role. The rapid transmission of information on social media became a key factor in shaping perceptions.
2.1. AI-Generated Misleading Images and Content
The recent conflict witnessed a sharp increase in misleading content, particularly AI-generated materials circulating on social media. Advances in artificial intelligence tools have made the creation of fake images and videos easier, leading to a surge in posts attributed to AI-generated content on the X platform. Although this content still represents a small fraction of overall misinformation, it has introduced new complexities into the information ecosystem.
2.2. Digital Diplomacy or Cognitive Operations?
Donald Trump, by publishing more than three posts per day on the Truth Social platform, has played a prominent role in shaping global narratives. Analyses suggest that the primary objective of this continuous messaging is to influence financial markets, particularly oil markets, U.S. stock exchanges, and equities. Evidence of suspicious transactions—such as stock purchases or oil trades conducted roughly 40 minutes before the publication of certain posts—points to the possible exploitation of this information by specific actors for substantial profits. This approach adds new dimensions to the concept of information warfare and its impact on the global economy.
On the opposing side, Dr. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Iran’s Parliament and head of the negotiating team, has sought to explain the hidden mechanisms of market manipulation to public opinion by publishing targeted analyses and data online. Meanwhile, reactions from users, media outlets, and even accounts affiliated with diplomatic institutions—such as Iranian representations abroad—through replies, memes, and internet satire, have rapidly amplified war-related discussions in the public sphere. These interactions demonstrate how diplomacy and economics have become increasingly intertwined with the communicative and cultural dynamics of cyberspace.
2.3. Lego-Style Animations in Digital Narrative-Building by Generation Z
In recent years, Iran’s Generation Z has creatively used digital media to represent news events. One notable trend is the انتشار of short videos in a “Lego-style animation” format, produced by anonymous groups. These videos typically reconstruct news events in symbolic, humorous, or ironic ways and spread rapidly on social media due to their visual appeal and ease of production. Using Lego characters allows creators to present complex narratives in a simple and accessible format for younger audiences without depicting real individuals or scenes. As a result, this type of content has become a favored medium among younger generations for expressing experiences, reactions, and digital narratives.
2.4. The Strategic Role of the Iranian Diaspora in the Conflict
During periods when domestic communications are disrupted or cut off, the resulting information vacuum amplifies the voices of certain expatriate groups beyond their actual weight, as access to diverse domestic narratives becomes limited. Under such conditions, some political factions within the diaspora are presented or perceived in international media as representatives of the opinions of 90 million Iranians, despite the fact that this image does not necessarily reflect the complex and multilayered reality of Iranian society.
Moreover, some migrants may believe that external pressure or international intervention can accelerate internal change—a perception rooted in their distance from domestic realities or their different experiences in Western societies. Consequently, the cognitive gap between the diaspora and domestic society often leads to narrative conflicts and deep misunderstandings, particularly when groups abroad assign themselves a role exceeding the actual capacity of the migrant community.
2.5. The Arena of Lost Narratives: A Silenced Voice
With the expansion of social media into the public sphere, contemporary conflicts have entered a new domain—one that unfolds less on the military battlefield and more within the realm of perception, narrative, and public opinion. During the Israeli regime’s war against Gaza, a sudden and widespread shift occurred in the online space, as user-generated content formed waves of narratives that influenced public sentiment across many parts of the world. As a result, conflicts increasingly entered the cognitive domain, where imagery, storytelling, and information flows play a decisive role in shaping global perceptions.
In the recent Iran-related conflict, the U.S. President adopted a new strategic communication pattern, attempting to provide real-time and widespread war narratives directly to global public opinion. However, Iran’s situation differed significantly from cases such as Gaza. Extensive disruptions and shutdowns of the internet inside the country prevented a large portion of Iranian society’s narratives and reactions from reaching beyond national borders. As a result, global public opinion had limited access to direct representations of domestic social reactions.
This occurred despite the emergence of social mobilization within Iran, including street presence and demonstrations supporting the state and protesting foreign attacks. Groups of citizens participated in nightly gatherings and marches over several weeks. Yet due to digital communication restrictions and weaknesses in transmitting domestic narratives to the global arena, these reactions received limited international media and social media coverage, and thus the voices of segments of Iranian society were largely unheard in the global narrative battlefield.
Conclusion: The Transformation of Power in Hybrid Warfare
An examination of the dimensions of this confrontation demonstrates that the nature of conflict among actors has shifted from traditional, purely military models toward a form of “full-spectrum hybrid warfare.” The findings of this analysis indicate that superiority in future battlefields will no longer depend solely on firepower in the physical domain, but rather on three key factors: first, the resilience of critical infrastructure against cyber intrusions; second, the capacity to manage cognitive warfare and construct dominant narratives in the international arena; and third, the maintenance of cohesion between governance and society under conditions of communication disruption.
In contemporary conflict models, the “information and digital space” and the “realm of collective perceptions” have become decisive components alongside physical battlefields—such that a failure in effective narrative construction can distort the international representation of on-the-ground outcomes.
Razia Bahrami, IPIS Expert
(The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IPIS)