Why Did the Saudi-Backed Television Retreat? Part Two

What is the reason for the retreat of the Saudi-backed television?

What is the reason for the retreat of the Saudi-backed television? According to Iran Gate, experts believe that the Iran International TV network has been highly destructive during the days when the peaceful protests of the Iranian people occurred in response to the killing of Mahsa Amini in the custody of Tehran’s morality police, imposing heavy costs on Iranian protesters.

As mentioned in the first part of this case, the Iran International TV network has played a destructive role in recent years’ developments and has endangered Iran’s national interests.

However, in this part of the two-part case, the performance of the Saudi-backed network is examined, focusing on the past seven months and the developments of citizens’ protests against the mandatory hijab law. This performance has faced serious ambiguities, and the audience encounters dark spots in the file of this television network.

In addition to trying to radicalize the domestic atmosphere, there is evidence of this media’s biased cooperation with terrorist and separatist groups, which has had destructive consequences on the course of protests and public demands. However, this network significantly retreated after the agreement between the Islamic Republic and the Saudi government, and as the saying goes, its sting was removed.

Be radical; we are behind you.

As mentioned, International has played a significant role in radicalizing the protests of Iranian citizens in recent months. Although at first glance, the protesters favored this method of the Saudi-backed network, evidence shows that the number of viewers of this television has significantly decreased. This statement indicates that after the atmosphere became more logical, the protesters changed their approach and adopted a new strategy in expressing dissatisfaction.

In the early days of the protests against the killing of Mahsa Amini in the custody of Tehran’s morality police, this television network broadcast programs to fan the flames of people’s anger. These programs not only encouraged protesters to violence in the streets but also criticized non-violent methods of struggle, which the civil society had chosen as the best strategy in fighting tyranny over the past four decades. Incidentally, the formation of recent months’ protests was one of the fruits of this method of struggle.

This policy of the Saudi-backed network caused young people who took to the streets due to unprecedented social restrictions to show violent reactions against the brutal suppression by the authorities.

But the interesting point is that when these young people provided images of their protests to Iran International, this television network published them in full without adhering to professional principles and protecting the lives of its news sources, leading to the immediate arrest of individuals appearing in these images by security and suppressive forces.

On the other hand, the controversial content produced by this network, mainly involving separatist and anti-national elements and even some terrorist currents, led the security forces of the Islamic Republic to associate protesters whose images appeared on this network with these currents. In fact, it can be said that this Saudi-backed network acts as a catalyst in the process of the regime’s case-building against protesters who are mostly young and teenage.

Although this approach is not due to hidden relations between the Islamic Republic’s government and the managers of Iran International, these actions by the media managers are aimed at radicalizing the domestic atmosphere and are like pouring fuel on the fire that the Islamic Republic’s security forces have ignited to suppress protests.

The blood of the nation’s youth as a bargaining chip for the Saudis.

In truth, Iran International tries to expose young and teenage protesters in Iran to arrest and suppression, provoking the regime to apply even more violence so that it can exploit these harsh reactions in the media space. This policy not only excludes Iran International from being a professional media outlet but also positions it as a platform for spreading hatred and promoting violence, a platform that, by exploiting the dissatisfaction of young people, seeks to provoke the regime so that the Saudis can obtain broader concessions from the current rulers of Iran at the negotiation table with the Islamic Republic. This statement seemed more like an unproven claim before the final announcement of the agreement between Riyadh and Tehran, but in recent weeks, as this London-based Persian-language media has noticeably retreated from its previous policies, this claim has also gained credibility.

Goodbye to London.

As mentioned, the policy of Iran International changed immediately after the agreement between the Islamic Republic and Saudi Arabia. This change, which coincided with the relocation of Iran International’s office from the UK to the United States, was met with strong reactions from the audience.

Many viewers of this television network have expressed widespread criticism on Iran International’s Instagram and Twitter pages regarding the 180-degree change in the network’s policies. Given the evidence at hand and Iran’s request from its Saudi counterparts to shut down Iran International, it can be said that the Saudi government, with its covert support of this network, has sought to put the Islamic Republic under pressure and extract desired concessions from the Iranians.

Who is to blame?

Now the question arises whether the Iranian-born executives of this network were aware of the consequences of adopting such an approach in the country’s media space. Did they know that radicalizing the atmosphere would not only yield no results for the Mahsa protest movement but also pave the way for more violent suppression? Are the journalists and reporters working at this television network aware that their actions within the framework of Iran International are one of the main factors in the decline of protest fervor?

Protests that were once introduced in various programs of this network as the most pioneering movement of Iranian society towards overthrowing the Islamic Republic and have now significantly subsided.

Do former media colleagues know that their efforts to legitimize separatist currents have led to a significant retreat of Iranian protesters from their radical positions in recent months? One wishes someone would answer whether the Saudi oil pounds were worth the sterilization of the protest movement and the extensive and treacherous violation of Iran’s national interests.