ATA MAHAMAD

IranWire

Iranian citizens expressed divided views about Israel during the recent 12-day war, with some supporting Israeli attacks on their own country while others backed their government's military response.

Social media posts and interviews reveal a fractured public opinion that contradicted the Islamic Republic's claims of "national unity" during the fighting.

Some Iranians openly called for continued Israeli strikes, hoping they would lead to regime change. Others condemned Israel as "a terrorist state."

These divisions went beyond simple support or opposition to the war. Even citizens who held similar views about Israel often disagreed on strategy and desired outcomes, which created multiple factions within Iranian society during the conflict.

Some who called for Israel's destruction focused on Iran's control over information and mobile networks, as well as its intelligence failures.

Others ignored these issues, instead emphasizing missile strikes, efforts to make Israel "unlivable," and its collapsing economy.

On the other side, some users supported Israeli attacks, drawing historical parallels. They claimed that just as Iranians once helped Jews rebuild temples during the time of Cyrus the Great, now it was Israel's turn to save Iran's temple and national identity.

Others disagreed, arguing that while Iran needs to be freed from its current system, war would not bring true freedom.

Alongside these voices, many remained silent - not out of indifference, but out of fear. Fear of arrest, of being accused of treason, of being ostracized in a polarized environment.

These contradictions and fears reached a new intensity on the night of the ceasefire. For people like Raha, a Tehran resident who opposed the war and had not yet recovered from the shock of 12 days of fighting, the ceasefire brought no peace.

She told IranWire, "I really couldn't sleep that night until morning. I sat thinking all night... We endured those 12 days. If they had continued for two more days, the Islamic Republic would have collapsed, and we would have been free. I don't understand what Israel achieved now, but we're left alone with the Islamic Republic."

In the days following the 12-day war, Ali Larijani, an adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader, released a video summarizing Iran's official narrative of the war.

He described differences between Iranian and Israeli citizens, claiming that Israel consists of people from various parts of the world whose emotional attachment lies not with Israel but with their original homelands.

He said, "During the war, they sought to return to their countries." Larijani added that nothing like this happened in Iran, as people stayed in the country.

This claim had previously appeared in media outlets affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards. Around the launch of the “True Promise 3” operation, these outlets reported that “Iran’s threats forced many Israelis to flee by night, escaping to Cyprus by ship and boat.”

The presence of Israelis in Cyprus even became a source of mockery. One outlet wrote, “Israelis fled to Cyprus for two weeks, stole their cheese, and branded it with their own name.”

Revolutionary Guards-affiliated media compared Cyprus’s situation to Palestinian experiences.

According to these outlets, land purchases by “Zionists” began with settlement and ended with occupation.

Now, the Islamic Republic's media claimed that Israeli citizens’ presence in Cyprus had sparked public anger against “Zionism” on the island.

Revolutionary Guards-affiliated media outlets focused on the hardships faced by Israeli citizens, not to express sympathy, but to portray Israel’s government as weak.

Meanwhile, they ignored major domestic problems in Iran, such as internet shutdowns, the lack of bomb shelters, and threats against those sharing war-related information. Instead, they highlighted messages from Israelis feeling abandoned.

Within the Islamic Republic's borders, authorities arrested several citizens on charges of spying for Israel. Simultaneously, the Tasnim news agency published a report about an Israeli arrest in the West Bank over social media posts about Tel Aviv’s dire situation during the war.

Islamic Republic media presented this arrest as evidence of censorship and the suppression of battlefield realities in Israel while trying to cover up their own failures.

A broad propaganda wave emerged in the media affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards. The Tasnim news agency repeatedly used hashtags like "#Israel_Fall." The hashtag "#Israel_Terrorist" also gained traction among users aligned with the Islamic Republic.

Online support for Israeli attacks on Iran is not new. In the past, users had posted hashtags like "#Israel_Strike," calling for Israeli intervention that they believed could weaken or even overthrow the Islamic Republic.

This trend continued during the 12-day war and after the ceasefire was announced.

In the days following the ceasefire, some users urged Israel to “finish the unfinished work.” One wrote, “Bibi, come finish it off.”

Alongside "#Israel_Strike," many also used "#No_to_Islamic_Republic." They believed Israeli action could help topple the "clerical regime" and lead to “Iran’s liberation.”