If Trump’s America is not winning this war – and it’s not – who is?

smh.com.au·Peter Hartcher
View original article
0out of 100
Noticeable — persuasion techniques worth noting

This article uses quotes from experts and mentions established institutions to make its points about the "Iran war" sound highly credible and urgent. It wants you to believe that US leadership is making bad decisions, benefiting rivals like Russia and China, and painting a picture of an America that's losing its global standing.

FATE Analysis

Four dimensions of psychological manipulation: how content captures Focus, exploits Authority, triggers Tribal identity, and engineers Emotion.

Focus6/10Authority7/10Tribe6/10Emotion6/10
FFocus
0/10
AAuthority
0/10
TTribe
0/10
EEmotion
0/10

Focus signals

unprecedented framing
"Who’s winning the Iran war?"

Presents a novel and urgent framing of an ongoing conflict, suggesting a significant, evolving situation.

novelty spike
"The Israelis assassinated the Ayatollah Ali Khameini in the opening blow of the war."

Highlights a dramatic, high-impact event (assassination of a major leader) to immediately grab and hold attention.

attention capture
"We’re yet to see any proof of life from Mojtaba."

Creates a sense of intrigue and suspense around the fate of a key figure, drawing the reader in.

breaking framing
"Trump’s failure to plan is shocking. With the war in its third week, he’s still casting about for a way to reopen the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz."

Uses strong, declarative language ('shocking') and emphasizes the ongoing, unresolved nature of critical issues to maintain attention.

attention capture
"The world awaits a cogent explanation. Asked on the weekend (Australian time) when the war would end, Trump said: 'When I feel it in my bones.'"

Highlights the perceived absurdity and lack of clear direction from a leader, designed to capture and hold reader attention through a sense of inadequacy and concern.

novelty spike
"The war, brags Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a moment of headiness, is turning Israel into a 'global superpower'."

Presents a strong, potentially controversial claim from a leader, designed to generate interest and discussion.

Authority signals

expert appeal
"“Despite donning a turban, Mojtaba is the product of the regime’s national security deep state,” says Washington-based expert, Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defence of Democracies."

Leverages the credibility of a 'Washington-based expert' from a specific think tank to lend weight and insider perspective to the analysis of the new leader.

institutional authority
"According to the London-based Iran International news site, at least two influential clerics want to give executive authority to a temporary leadership council instead of to the Supreme Leader alone."

Cites a recognized news organization specializing in Iran to support claims about internal regime divisions.

institutional authority
"The Pentagon in all its war gaming for the past 45 years has planned for Iran to close the strait. And it has explicitly warned Trump, reports The Wall Street Journal."

Cites the Pentagon's long-standing strategic planning and a reputable financial newspaper to establish the credibility of the warning to Trump.

institutional authority
"A poll for the Israel Democracy Institute last week found public support for Israel’s part in the war at 82 per cent, and at 93 per cent among Jewish Israelis."

Uses statistics from a named institute to provide authoritative data on public opinion.

institutional authority
"“Russia rakes in $US150 million a day in extra revenue from surging oil prices,” headlined London’s Financial Times."

Cites a prominent financial newspaper for a specific, impactful economic statistic, leveraging its reputation for accuracy.

expert appeal
"“Russia is the big winner of this conflict,” oil analyst Sumit Ritolia of trade data firm Kpler told the FT."

Quoting an 'oil analyst' from a 'trade data firm' provides a specific, specialized expert opinion to bolster the claim about Russia's gains.

credential leveraging
"Trump’s undersecretary for war policy, Elbridge Colby, told me in 2024 that China was the only nation other than the US that had the potential to dominate the global economy..."

Cites a former high-ranking government official with direct experience in war policy to assert the significance of the China threat.

credential leveraging
"Next, Xi Jinping will see Trump in Beijing in a meeting due in about two weeks. He will seek an answer to a crucial question, says Australian retired major general Mick Ryan."

Uses the authority of a 'retired major general' to interpret the strategic implications of an upcoming meeting, lending military and strategic credibility to the analysis.

Tribe signals

us vs them
"For the regime, mere survival would constitute victory. For now, however, it’s in the balance in a contest of endurance against the US and Israel."

Explicitly frames the conflict as a binary 'us vs. them' between the Iranian regime and the US/Israel.

us vs them
"Israel is weakening its most serious enemy (with political cover and military assistance from the US)."

Reinforces an 'us vs. them' dynamic by identifying Iran as Israel's 'most serious enemy' and highlighting US support for Israel.

identity weaponization
"The sanctions, of course, were imposed precisely to starve Vladimir Putin’s war chest."

This phrasing implies a shared understanding and agreement among readers on the purpose and rectitude of sanctions, and by extension, opposition to Putin's actions, making it a tribal marker.

us vs them
"Even more startling is that Trump gave Putin this benefit knowing that Russia has been helping Iran to kill Americans. The Washington Post reported, and Trump has conceded, that Moscow is coaching Iran in how to target missiles at US military bases, ships and other assets in the Middle East."

Creates a strong 'us vs. them' dynamic by portraying Trump as aligning with adversaries (Russia, Iran) who are 'helping Iran to kill Americans,' positioning him against a patriotic American interest.

Emotion signals

outrage manufacturing
"The Israelis assassinated the Ayatollah Ali Khameini in the opening blow of the war."

Uses a highly charged term 'assassinated' to describe the killing of a significant political figure, which can evoke strong reactions of shock or outrage.

urgency
"Iran’s tactics are raising the price of oil, LNG and fertilisers. It’s an economic war against the US."

Frames the situation as an 'economic war' affecting basic necessities, aiming to create a sense of direct threat and urgency for the reader.

outrage manufacturing
"Trump’s failure to plan is shocking. With the war in its third week, he’s still casting about for a way to reopen the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz."

The word 'shocking' directly aims to provoke an emotional response, likely outrage or disbelief, regarding the leader's perceived incompetence.

outrage manufacturing
"Even more startling is that Trump gave Putin this benefit knowing that Russia has been helping Iran to kill Americans. The Washington Post reported, and Trump has conceded, that Moscow is coaching Iran in how to target missiles at US military bases, ships and other assets in the Middle East."

This passage is designed to evoke strong feelings of outrage, betrayal, and fear by connecting Trump's actions directly to the death of American military personnel facilitated by Russia.

fear engineering
"US credibility is harmed, its power in the Indo-Pacific drained, and its munitions stocks depleted. Next, Xi Jinping will see Trump in Beijing in a meeting due in about two weeks. He will seek an answer to a crucial question, says Australian retired major general Mick Ryan. 'It may be a key decision point for Xi,' Ryan tells me. 'Because he will be getting a sense of 'will Trump fight?'' against China in a crisis over Taiwan or the South China Sea."

Engineers fear by portraying a weakened US, depleted resources, and a looming 'key decision point' for China regarding potential conflict over Taiwan or the South China Sea, implying significant danger and instability.

Narrative Analysis (PCP)

How the article reshapes thinking: Perception (what beliefs are targeted), Context (what information is shifted or omitted), and Permission (what behavior is being encouraged).

What it wants you to believe

The article aims to instill the belief that the war with Iran is not just a direct conflict but a complex geopolitical event with significant, unintended consequences, primarily benefiting US adversaries. It wants the reader to believe that the US leadership under Trump is incompetent, short-sighted, and inadvertently strengthening geopolitical rivals like Russia and China, while Israel secures a tactical win.

Context being shifted

The article shifts the context from a direct US-Iran military confrontation to a broader examination of geopolitical power dynamics, particularly highlighting the gains of Russia and China. This framing makes Trump's perceived incompetence and the 'unintended' consequences feel like the central and most important aspect of the conflict, rather than the immediate military objectives or humanitarian impacts.

What it omits

The article omits detailed context regarding the specific strategic rationale or intelligence (if any) that led to the US initiating or engaging in the conflict with Iran, beyond a vague assertion of a war being 'launched.' It also largely bypasses the perspectives or motivations of Iran's actions from an Iranian standpoint, except for its military capabilities and economic impact. The deeper historical context of US-Iran relations, or a comprehensive analysis of the potential long-term benefits or deterrent effects the US might be aiming for, are also missing. This absence allows the narrative of US failure and rival gains to stand without significant counterbalancing.

Desired behavior

The reader is nudged toward skepticism and criticism of current US leadership and its foreign policy decisions, particularly those made by Donald Trump. It aims to foster a sense of alarm about the US's diminishing geopolitical standing and the strengthening of its rivals, potentially leading to calls for more coherent and strategically sound foreign policy, or a change in leadership.

SMRP Pattern

Four manipulation maintenance tactics: Socializing the idea as normal, Minimizing concerns, Rationalizing with logic, and Projecting blame.

-
Socializing
-
Minimizing
-
Rationalizing
-
Projecting

Red Flags

High-severity indicators: silencing dissent, coordinated messaging, or weaponizing identity to shut down debate.

-
Silencing indicator
!
Controlled release (spokesperson test)

""Despite donning a turban, Mojtaba is the product of the regime’s national security deep state,” says Washington-based expert, Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defence of Democracies. “Expect him to work with and through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to keep his hold on power.""

-
Identity weaponization

Techniques Found(4)

Specific propaganda techniques identified using the SemEval-2023 academic taxonomy of 23 techniques across 6 categories.

Causal OversimplificationSimplification
"Trump’s failure to plan is shocking. With the war in its third week, he’s still casting about for a way to reopen the oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz."

This quote attributes the complex issue of reopening oil flow solely to Trump's 'failure to plan,' oversimplifying the multifaceted challenges of international energy markets and military operations.

Exaggeration/MinimisationManipulative Wording
"The war, brags Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a moment of headiness, is turning Israel into a “global superpower”."

Describing Israel as becoming a 'global superpower' due to this war is an exaggeration of its current military and geopolitical standing.

Obfuscation/VaguenessManipulative Wording
"German Chancellor Friedrich Merz hinted darkly at Trump’s motives: “We think that’s wrong,” said Merz, speaking alongside Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. “There is currently a price problem, but not a supply problem. And in that regard, I would like to know what other factors led the US government to make this decision.”"

Merz's 'hinted darkly' and the phrasing 'what other factors' are vague and imply ulterior motives without providing specific details or evidence, creating suspicion without direct accusation.

Loaded LanguageManipulative Wording
"Even more startling is that Trump gave Putin this benefit knowing that Russia has been helping Iran to kill Americans."

The phrase 'helping Iran to kill Americans' is highly emotionally charged and frames Trump's actions in the most negative light possible, intended to evoke a strong emotional response from the reader.

Share this analysis