The Rhetoric of Revenge: A Distraction from Iran’s True Weaknesses

The Iranian leadership has been escalating its rhetoric in response to the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calling for revenge against Western powers and their officials. This “revenge propaganda” is touted as a demonstration of the regime’s strength and determination, but it’s a smokescreen that distracts from the true weaknesses of the Islamic Republic.

Since Khamenei’s funeral, senior figures in the regime have used increasingly harsh language to mobilize supporters at home and intimidate opponents abroad. Politicians, state-controlled media outlets, and even the new supreme leader have joined in the chorus, calling for retaliation against those they blame for the slain leader’s death. The parliament has endorsed demands for revenge, and pro-government media outlets have published lists of Western officials and politicians who are supposedly next on the hit list.

The Iranian leadership is pursuing several objectives with its threats. According to legal scholar Moein Khazaeli, some of these threats can be seen as a form of psychological warfare, designed to portray the regime’s weakened military and security apparatus as strong and operational. Others aim to deter international pressure by signaling that Iran could resort to terrorist methods if provoked.

The regime’s use of rhetoric is not new. Iranian political activist Reza Alijani notes that mourning ceremonies for Khamenei were also a way to demonstrate support for the ruling establishment, divert attention from military setbacks, and legitimize the continuation of the conflict under the banner of revenge. The new supreme leader has reinforced this message, vowing to continue the path of his father.

The regime’s threats are directed at two main audiences: its own supporters and an international audience. Khazaeli argues that one of the most important targets is the regime’s own support base, which has been convinced by years of heightened threats and state propaganda that the Islamic Republic remains determined and capable of exacting revenge. This narrative creates the impression that the regime can respond effectively to military defeats or security setbacks.

At the same time, these messages are directed toward an international audience, targeting Western governments, opponents of the Islamic Republic abroad, and exiled dissidents. The impact on public discourse was evident in reactions to the recent death of Republican US Senator Lindsey Graham, who was among those who supported the policy of “maximum pressure” against Iran.

The irony is that these threats are a sign of weakness, not strength. By calling for revenge, the Iranian regime is diverting attention from its own vulnerabilities and failures. The regime’s military setbacks, economic woes, and human rights abuses are all being papered over by this rhetoric. But it won’t last forever. As Khazaeli notes, Iran’s history of overseas operations is a reminder that these threats cannot be dismissed outright.

The international community would do well to remember this when dealing with the Iranian regime. The “revenge propaganda” may be a clever distraction from the true weaknesses of the Islamic Republic, but it won’t change the fundamental facts on the ground. As long as Iran continues down this path, it will only isolate itself further and undermine its own legitimacy.

The regime’s reliance on rhetoric to mask its vulnerabilities is unlikely to succeed in the long term. In fact, it may ultimately prove counterproductive, further eroding the regime’s credibility and fueling opposition both domestically and internationally.