After the military response of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the terrorist act of the Zionist regime on April 13, 2024, it became clear that any future military developments in the approach of Iran and the Zionist regime will, directly and indirectly, involve other countries in the region. The type of analysis presented at the level of public media in the countries of the region has become important and decisive. These analyses can indicate the unofficial propaganda of theories or discussions behind the curtain or the views of strategic decision-makers in these countries. Based on this, the capacity of public opinion or influential institutions on central media issues in these countries can be considered as an indicator in the development of regional policies of these countries. On the one hand, these analyses can create public legitimacy for a change in the defense policy or foreign policy of the countries of the region. On the other hand, they can affect the maneuverability of the Islamic Republic of Iran in any future military development.

Any lack of attention or neglect of Iran's strategic capital and related concepts such as the axis of resistance, deterrence power, the concept of resistance, confronting genocide, occupation, fighting apartheid, and occupation at the level of public opinion in the region will challenge Iran's hard power. Strengthening Iran's dominant discourse in legitimizing, empowering, and displaying the hardware capabilities of Iran's deterrence power in the field of public opinion in the region is practically a part of the deterrence power and force of resistance and narration of the Islamic Republic of Iran. At the same time, any development in the issue of Palestine and Gaza and its current issues, especially after the October 7 developments, has a direct relationship with the issue of Iran's deterrence power, and such an issue has shown much work and evidence. It has become a reality during these years. For example, Ami Ayalon, the former head of Shin Bet, wrote in Foreign Affairs.[1] Shortly before the events of April 13, 2024, International perception of Israel's war was important; unlike the past battles, today, the range of the Internet signal is more important than the range of missiles. For many viewers at home, the war has become something of a TV mini-series. People around the world judge what is right and right not by legal rules but by their media. People decide who is right and who is wrong, and who is good and who is bad, and pressure their government to make policy accordingly. The influence of world opinion is vital to Israel's prospects of victory. If Israel's partners do not provide military, economic, or diplomatic support at a critical moment, they may lose the war despite battlefield successes.

Based on this, by examining the written media of Turkish countries, you can see some of the most important current issues in the official and private media of the region, which can indicate the official and unofficial policies in these countries. There is objective documentation for each of the media propositions and analytical lines presented:

1. A number of Saudi elites, as in the past and in a traditional context (with possible official motives), believe that Iran's operational response of April 13 is somehow seeking to drag the entire region into conflict. In this context, they question the future of the political agreement between Tehran and Riyadh and the compromise that has been made.
2. Another line of analysis is that Jordan should play a more effective role in the process of normalization of the region with Israel with the intervention of Saudi Arabia and the United States.
3. A type of synergy and a single line of thought and analysis has been created throughout the region's media to help weaken the line of resistance and support Axis forces in all active countries, including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen (the opinion made by Paul Salem, president of the Washington Middle East Institute).
4. Restraining Iran's attacks showed that Israel and its allies had a pre-defined defense plan. Israel clearly did not succeed alone. This experience showed that Israel should invest more in strengthening foreign relations in the region and outside the region. This requires the adoption of more moderate and pro-peace policies on the Palestinian issue (The theory of Nimrod Garn at the Washington Middle East Institute)
5. The collective success in countering Iran's attacks showed that even in times of conflict, common regional and geopolitical interests are still important. The undeclared alliance with America and some Arabs sends a strong message to Iran and others in the Middle East. The strategic importance of the peace accords for the Israelis became very clear.
6. The press of the countries of the region observed induction of ineffectiveness, technological weakness, formal and operational weakness of Iran's response, and weakening of Iran's position in military deterrence power with the aim of preventing more public favor towards the Iranian approach of resistance.
7. Foreign Affairs have presented the
8. most important line of analysis, two researchers from Chatham House, and the University of California. This article states: Arab countries have decided that getting closer to each other is the best way to reduce Iran's risks, and if the escalation of tensions between Iran and Israel continues, the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, Egypt, and Jordan, are likely to be even more willing to support Israel's operations.
9. The only factor that can help the Zionist regime win in the Palestinian issue and its strategic deadlock against Iran is a scenario where a Palestinian state is established next to Israel. Finding military gains in one conflict may be satisfying, but in the larger perspective, it may be considered as part of a miniature major failure. For this reason, the imposition of mental and psychological failure should only proceed from creating a mechanism with the aim of enclosing and isolating Iran in the minds of the rulers and people of the region.

In general, in the recent developments, various opposing views need to be monitored and verified. Failure to pay attention to the views of think tanks and mainstream media can create obstacles in adopting effective policies toward regional issues. The production of effective narratives and dominant discourse at the regional level are elements of the dominance of resistance discourse and part of the active factor of deterrence. Due to the influence and structures of its discourse in America, the Zionist regime has been able to prevent any policy against its interests in the United States government and insinuate that my enemy is your enemy. Such an opportunity, in the light of recent developments, promotes this policy in the region and among the governments of West Asia with the help of pro-Zionist currents in the region.

Mohammad Javad Shariati, a senior expert in American foreign policy studies

 (The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IPIS)

[1] The Only Way for Israel to Truly Defeat Hamas, Ami Ayalon, April 11, 2024, Foreign Affairs.