Nournews: Recent developments indicate that the core focus of Netanyahu’s trip to the United States is the Gaza file and the deadlock surrounding the so-called “Trump peace plan.” This plan now stands on the brink of failure, and any new move by the White House would carry significant consequences for Tel Aviv. Trump is seeking to implement a new step that does not align with Netanyahu’s political and security considerations. Consequently, the visit is seen as an opportunity to reestablish coordination, manage differences, and prevent unilateral action by the White House.
Gaza, as the main topic of the trip, presents multiple layers of complexity. The continuation of hostilities, political pressures, and the humanitarian crisis have severely limited the scope for any unilateral policy by Tel Aviv. From Israel’s perspective, the focus on Iran is largely a media and perceptual tool rather than a genuine agenda—an approach designed to capture public attention and contain internal crises.
Highlighting Iran: A Tool of Perceptual Warfare
Recent hype surrounding Iran’s missile and nuclear programs serves more of a psychological and media function than a reflection of realities on the ground. The purpose of this emphasis is to generate anxiety, project a sense of threat, and influence public opinion in Iran and across the region. Portraying Iran as the primary threat acts as a smokescreen for the real crisis in Gaza and as a strategy to preserve Netanyahu’s domestic credibility at a time when his regional policies have faced significant constraints and setbacks.
This tactic operates not only within the occupied territories but also at the international level. Highlighting Iran provides a pretext to secure U.S. political support and to reduce international pressure on Israel. Nevertheless, this media game cannot alter the reality of Tel Aviv’s operational limitations and effectively forms part of a prolonged perceptual war against Iran.
Limits on Tel Aviv’s Operational Capacity
Domestic and regional realities in Israel show that the regime lacks the capacity to enter a new confrontation with Iran. Security pressures on the northern front, diplomatic deadlock, a war of attrition in Gaza, and internal social crises have effectively stripped Tel Aviv of the ability to make high-risk decisions and take bold action. Any new military move would entail unpredictable and costly consequences; thus, the emphasis on Iran functions more as a bluff and pressure tactic than a real threat.
These operational constraints have pushed Tel Aviv toward a primarily media-psychological strategy. The focus on Iran amounts to managing a perceptual crisis and rallying political support at home and abroad. In other words, Netanyahu’s trip and the media spotlight on Iran reflect political desperation and an attempt to externalize an internal crisis.
A Forward Escape and Media Consequences
Bluffing about Iran is part of a broader psychological operation aimed at shifting attention away from the Gaza crisis toward an external threat and managing public opinion. This maneuver constitutes a “forward escape,” revealing Netanyahu’s desperation in the face of accumulated failures and political and security constraints. The reality is that neither Iran nor the international community is swayed by this perceptual warfare. Iran’s national cohesion and its capacity to neutralize such media and psychological threats, along with recent military and defense achievements, send a clear message of deterrence to adversaries. Meanwhile, the media emphasis on Iran is less a practical strategy than a tool for managing Tel Aviv’s internal crisis and providing political cover for failures and operational limitations.