IRAQ PERSPECTIVE

Analysis of Iraqi media coverage reveals a complex geopolitical perspective, shaped by geographical proximity and historical ties with Iran. Iraqi News adopts an essentially defensive framing of Iran's position, emphasising Tehran's victimhood rhetoric against what is presented as unlawful American-Israeli aggression. This emphasis on Iranian statements to the UN suggests an intent to legitimise Iranian resistance within an international legal framework, reflecting structural sympathy towards a Shia neighbour sharing confessional and geopolitical affinities with Iraq.

The tone oscillates between factual and accusatory, particularly evident in uncritical repetition of Iranian figures (1,300 deaths, 7,000 wounded) and accusations of attacks on civilian schools. This approach reveals significant editorial bias: Iraqi media downplays or entirely omits Iranian actions that triggered this escalation, notably attacks on Gulf territories mentioned only late in coverage. Silence on American-Israeli motivations and regional security context reflects an intent to present Iran as victim rather than conflict actor.

The narrative framing clearly structures protagonists: Iran appears as the legitimate defender of its citizens against the "most anarchic and unscrupulous actors on the international stage." This Manichean dichotomy reflects Iraqi domestic stakes, where Baghdad's government must navigate between alliances with Iran (notably through Shia militias) and relations with the United States. Iraqi media coverage thus appears to amplify Iranian narratives, revealing Tehran's influence over Iraq's information space.

Structural biases are multiple: confessional (Shia solidarity), geopolitical (opposition to Western hegemony in the Middle East), and security-focused (fears of major conflict spillover into Iraqi territory). This convergence of interests explains why Iraqi media favour an anti-Western reading of the conflict, obscuring Iranian responsibilities in regional escalation and framing the energy crisis as a consequence of aggression rather than as a complex geostrategic issue involving all regional actors.