The language surrounding Iran, especially in Western and some regional narratives, is heavily influenced by Israel and distorts the reality of the situation.
Terms like “regime” instead of "government", “proxies” for grassroots "liberation movements", and “terrorists” or “militias” for those resisting occupation are used to misguide policies on Iran.
Iran’s regional actions are labeled as “expansionist ambitions,” while similar actions by others are seen as "alliances." Its nuclear program is often framed as a “nuclear threat.” Iran’s leadership is reduced to “mullas” or “Ayatollahs,” ignoring the complexity of Iran’s political scene.
This biased language, pushed by Israel, is not just designed to frame Iran but to divert attention from its own illegal actions and occupation. For example, by labeling liberation movements as "terrorists" or "militias," Israel shifts focus away from its role as an occupier. Similarly, by labeling Iran as a “destabilizing actor,” the true context is obscured, and attention is diverted from the activities of other regional players.
Regional countries and those genuinely committed to dialogue should avoid using this Israeli-manufactured terminology. Employing neutral terms like "government", "liberation movements", and "nuclear program" offers a more realistic perspective on Iran and the true dynamics of the region, opening up space for diplomacy.
https://x.com/RezaNasri1/status/1868658024199368886?s=19
Terms like “regime” instead of "government", “proxies” for grassroots "liberation movements", and “terrorists” or “militias” for those resisting occupation are used to misguide policies on Iran.
Iran’s regional actions are labeled as “expansionist ambitions,” while similar actions by others are seen as "alliances." Its nuclear program is often framed as a “nuclear threat.” Iran’s leadership is reduced to “mullas” or “Ayatollahs,” ignoring the complexity of Iran’s political scene.
This biased language, pushed by Israel, is not just designed to frame Iran but to divert attention from its own illegal actions and occupation. For example, by labeling liberation movements as "terrorists" or "militias," Israel shifts focus away from its role as an occupier. Similarly, by labeling Iran as a “destabilizing actor,” the true context is obscured, and attention is diverted from the activities of other regional players.
Regional countries and those genuinely committed to dialogue should avoid using this Israeli-manufactured terminology. Employing neutral terms like "government", "liberation movements", and "nuclear program" offers a more realistic perspective on Iran and the true dynamics of the region, opening up space for diplomacy.
https://x.com/RezaNasri1/status/1868658024199368886?s=19