Executive Summary

This report assesses the key ideological and operational narratives presented in the 500^th issue of Al-Naba, the Islamic State’s official publication, considering the recent Israeli-Iranian conflict.

This report details how Islamic State propaganda is shaping the conflict narrative to bolster its strategic communication and undermines the legitimacy of state and non-state actors in the area.

This publication paints both Iran and Israel as unified enemies of Islam, alleging a conspiracy against Sunni Muslims. These narratives exploit regional escalation, deepen sectarian divisions, and increase recruitment potential by portraying current events as a divine vindication of Islamic State doctrine.

Key Takeaways

1. According to ISIS propaganda, Iran and Israel are both enemies of Islam, conspiring to undermine Sunni political unity.
2. The group condemns all Muslim governments for supporting either side of the conflict, accusing them of being controlled by foreign powers.
3. The publication promotes the Islamic State’s caliphate as the only viable alternative, rejecting both nationalism and sectarianism.

Narrative analysis of Al-Naba, Issue No. 500.

The latest issue of Al-Naba structures its themes around the geopolitical confrontation between Iran and Israel. The article titled “The State of Persia and the State of the Jews” promotes several interrelated narratives:

1. Iran and Israel as Strategic Collaborators. The article claims both nations are collaborating on a sustained anti-Islamic agenda. The text contends Iran uses its anti-Zionist rhetoric as a disguise for its actual alliances with Israel. The Islamic State accuses Tehran of deliberately preserving Israeli security in Syria and Lebanon, allegedly targeting only Sunni factions.
2. Delegitimisation of Iranian Shia Identity. Al-Naba portrays Tehran not as an Islamic power but as a continuation of Persian nationalism dressed in Shia ideology. According to the Islamic State, sectarian and national interests, not religious obligations, motivate Iran’s actions in the region.
3. Israel as a Historic Enemy. Al-Naba describes Israel as consistently deceitful and allied with the West against Muslims. It repeats historical accusations of betrayal and aggression, positioning Israel as a constant adversary to the Islamic cause.
4. Rejection of All State Structures and Alliances. The Islamic State heavily criticises Sunni governments for either cooperating with the West or failing to confront Iran and Israel. Indeed, these countries are complicit, misled, or outright treacherous.
5. Call for Caliphate and Jihad. The core solution presented is the revival of the caliphate under Islamic State leadership. Islamic State leadership denounces all other political and religious structures as illegitimate. Al-Naba’s article explicitly promotes armed conflict while urging the abandonment of nationalism, sectarianism, and diplomatic solutions.

Regional Context

On 13 June 2025, Israel launched a surprise air campaign targeting Iranian nuclear and military installations, citing imminent threats from Tehran’s nuclear weapons programme. Iran responded with mass missile and drone barrages on Israeli territory.

On 21 June 2025, US President Donald Trump confirmed airstrikes on three fortified Iranian nuclear sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—using bunker-penetrating ordnance. The strikes inflicted heavy casualties on Iran, leading to threats of retaliatory action.

Rising tensions in the Middle East, fuelled by recent events, have led to heightened Israeli security measures and more assertive posturing from regional players, such as the Houthi forces in the Red Sea.

Risk Assessment

For Regional Actors

• Iran: Risks increased ideological backlash from Sunni populations beyond military confrontations. Islamic State propaganda might incite attacks on Iranian assets in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
• Israel: Intensified regional conflict fuels the mobilisation of jihadist groups, resulting in indirect repercussions. Increased domestic security shows a fear of asymmetric attacks.
• Arab States. Criticism and potential attacks are likely if perceived as favouring either Israel or Iran. Islamic State sympathisers may target Sunni regimes cooperating with the West or Iran, both operationally and through propaganda. In this context, Syria might experience a new wave of attacks against the interim-government led by al-Sharaa.

For International Actors

• United States: Directly bombing Iranian nuclear sites makes the country a key enemy of Muslim people in jihadist propaganda. US personnel and facilities in Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf face a heightened risk of attacks.
• Western Naval Forces: The twin threats in the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea elevate the operational exposure of US and allied naval assets. Houthi, or Iranian proxy, attacks could support jihadist anti-Western agenda, thus weakening Western control of the seas.
• Global Trade and Energy Markets: Islamic State narratives amplifying conflict escalation may compound instability. In key oil-producing states, propaganda promoting division and opposition to the government could spark wider unrest, affecting oil prices and shipping lanes.

Conclusion

The Islamic State is exploiting the Iran-Israel conflict to revive its ideology, presenting itself as the sole true representation for Sunni Muslims. By portraying Iran and Israel as working together against Islam, the group reinforces its long-held opposition to existing state systems, including those in Arab nations.

These narratives incite hostility against all regional powers and to capitalise on current hostilities to encourage recruitment, incitement, and destabilisation. Continued surveillance of Sunni areas, prisons, and online spaces is crucial to combatting the group’s ideology amidst current regional unrest.