War launched on February 28, 2026 against Iran following the assassination of the Supreme Leader; Iranian institutions maintain continuity despite pressure...
According to this opinion piece published on RT on March 12, 2026, the United States and Israel launched a war against Iran on February 28, expecting a rapid collapse of the regime following the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. However, the article argues that Iran has demonstrated unexpected institutional resilience, with state institutions continuing to function and the swift appointment of a new Supreme Leader (Mojtaba Khamenei). The author concludes that Washington underestimated the robustness of the Iranian institutional architecture, implicitly comparing the situation to Iraq in 2003 to show structural differences.
War launched on February 28, 2026, against Iran following the assassination of the Supreme Leader; Iranian institutions maintain continuity despite military pressure; the United States allegedly misjudged the resilience of the Iranian political system.
RT article is Russian state propaganda. Read in parallel with Western sources (RTL, Le Figaro, Le JDD) for a balanced perspective. Iranian military data (missiles -86%, drones -73%) are absent from RT but confirmed by multiple sources. Iranian institutional resilience is real but masks internal fragmentation and the risk of regional escalation.
Ali Khamenei was assassinated on February 28, 2026, during Israeli-American strikes Verdict: True. Confirmed by RTL, Le Figaro, Le JDD, RT. International consensus on this date and fact. Mojtaba Khamenei was appointed new Supreme Leader by the Assembly of Experts Verdict: True. Confirmed by Le Figaro (March 8), Le JDD, RT. Rapid and institutional succession confirmed. Iranian state institutions continue to function normally despite the war Verdict: Nuanced. RT claims normal functioning; RTL/Le Figaro acknowledge 'resilience' but also mention 'internal fractures', 'bunkerization', increased repression. Institutions are functioning but under extreme stress.…
Detected orientation: Pro-Iran, Anti-USA, Russian geopolitical alignment. Bias score: 78/100. Author affiliated with state-funded Russian university (RUDN) Narrative framing presenting USA as aggressor who 'miscalculated' Total absence of American or Israeli sources to counterbalance Iraq 2003 comparison used to delegitimize US strategy without nuance Triumphalist tone on Iranian 'resilience' without examining human costs
War justified by Iranian threat; Iran militarily weakened (missiles -86%, drones -73%); regime in succession crisis; prolonged conflict but Iran in defensive position Assessment of 'resilience': West = temporary tactical resilience; RT = deep institutional resilience Legitimacy of war: West = response to threat; RT = unjustified aggression Viability of regime: West = weakened by Khamenei's death; RT = strengthened by institutional continuity Duration of conflict: Consensus on prolongation, but divergent causes (attrition vs. resilience)
Silence Index: 72/100. Status: Subcontracted. Iranian coverage almost non-existent in independent sources; total dependence on foreign agencies (Reuters, AP, AFP). Gulf media (Saudi Arabia, UAE) practically silent despite direct threat. Probable strategic silence to avoid rhetorical escalation. Silent media: Arab News (Saudi Arabia), Gulf News (UAE), IRNA (Iran, state-controlled).
Sobriety Index: 42/100. 'miscalculated': Why the US miscalculated Tehran's political resilience (title) 'collapse like a house of cards': The US thought the Iranian regime was severely weakened and would collapse like a house of cards 'overly optimistic': Washington's initial calculations were overly optimistic 'swift disintegration': destruction of central authority led to a swift disintegration of state institutions 'fundamentally different picture': Yet, the events in Iran reveal a fundamentally different picture (opposition rhetoric without proof) 'robust institutional architecture': robust institutional architecture capable of ensuring stability (adjective...
RT directly funded by Russian federal budget (Ministry of Foreign Affairs); no transparency on exact amounts State-owned: RT is an organ of Russian state propaganda; article defends Russian geopolitical interests (support for Iran against USA) Shareholder: Russian energy interests in Iran; weakening of Iran would harm Gazprom-Rosneft partnerships Geopolitical: Support for Iran weakens sanctions against Russia; article serves the anti-USA coalition strategy
Media: RT (Russia Today). Owner: Russian Government (state news agency). Russian state media funded by the Kremlin; geopolitical interests aligned with Iran in the context of USA-Russia rivalry
Assessment of Iranian military resilience: West cites degradation (missiles -86%, drones -73%); RT ignores this data. Viability of post-Khamenei regime: West = weakened by succession; RT = strengthened by institutional continuity. Iranian intentions: West = probable regional escalation; RT = defensive resilience. Duration of conflict: Consensus on prolongation, but divergent causes (attrition vs. resilience). Legitimacy of war: West = response to threat; RT = unjustified aggression.
Media reliability analysis by TruthMedia. This page examines bias, emotional manipulation techniques and conflicts of interest in news coverage.
Read the full analysis