The media discourse of Saddam's regime during and after the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) was based on a directed and intensive media strategy, which relied on the "demonization" of the Iranian regime and mobilizing the Iraqi and Arab street against it; for the war that erupted in the 1980s was not merely a military confrontation at the borders of the Shatt al-Arab, but an existential struggle between a young state resulting from a mass revolution whose slogan was against the imperialist states, and Saddam's army, which was internationally and Arab-supported to eliminate the Iranian revolution and restore its regime to allegiance to Washington. The fiercest of its battles unfolded on television screens, newspaper pages, and the airwaves of official radios.
At a pivotal moment in the region's history, the Iraqi state's media apparatus mobilized all its energies to build a thick wall of psychological and emotional mobilization, relying on a carefully invoked historical and national legacy to give the war a dimension of a historical epic that transcended the boundaries of direct political dispute.
In this context, the state sought through its official bodies to craft a comprehensive one-sided narrative that redefined the adversary on the other side and stripped it of its political and religious legitimacy, in an attempt to tighten control over collective memory and direct public opinion towards a single, unequivocal goal. The media methods and tactics used to achieve this aim varied across multiple dimensions and axes.
· Historical and Symbolic Invocation
This historical and symbolic invocation was most clearly manifested through the projection of the historical Battle of Qadisiyyah, in which Muslim Arabs triumphed over the Sassanian Empire, onto the reality of the contemporary war, framing the conflict as “Saddam's Qadisiyyah” and portraying it as an epic national struggle extending through the ages, transcending the boundaries of geographical political conflict to a historical existential battle.
This framing was paralleled by an intense dissemination of national treachery terms in official military and television statements, where strict mobilization titles like “Persian,” “Zoroastrian,” “Persian Zoroastrians,” and “enemies of the Arab nation” were used in a concerted effort to separate the Iranian regime from its Islamic identity and strip it away, placing it in the category of an eternal historical adversary against collective consciousness.
National Mobilization and Presenting Iraq as the "Eastern Gateway"
This mobilization did not stop at invoking the past, but extended to formulating a new national doctrine that portrayed Iraq and its regime as the nation’s steadfast guardian and the "eastern gateway of the Arab homeland" against what was described as the imperialistic expansionist threat from the east, a framing that enabled the Iraqi government at that time to garner broad national support and a strong financial and political backing from several Arab and Gulf states.
In parallel with this political mobilization, arts and music were harnessed to become a direct mobilization weapon; the Baghdad radio and television were flooded with hundreds of patriotic songs and anthems created by prominent Iraqi poets and artists, their themes revolving around defeating the enemy, absolute glorification of the Iraqi military might, and systematic belittling of the Iranian leadership, which contributed to charging emotions and inflaming public enthusiasm throughout the years of conflict.
Intense Focus on Personifying Hostility (Satire of the Iranian Leadership)
Alongside the historical framing and national mobilization, the media discourse took a sharper path, focusing intensely on personalizing enmity and directly satirizing the Iranian leadership.
Sharp verbal violence and media symbolism were directed towards the apex of political and religious authority in Iran, Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini, who was described in the official media with harsh and provocative terms such as “the impostor” and “the peacock,” in an attempt to break his religious aura and strip him of his sacred halo before the Arab and Islamic street.
This assault was not limited to official and serious discourses but utilized caricature and satirical art, producing television programs, radio series, and satirical cartoon works that portrayed the Iranian leadership as comical characters completely detached from reality, driven by ignorance and deception to sacrifice their people in senseless battles to serve ambitions and expansionist desires.
Daily Military Statements and Charging the Street
The tools of mobilization were not confined to political discourse or symbolic satire but extended to shape the daily rhythm of citizens' lives through military statements and systematic street agitation; television and radio would suddenly interrupt regular programming, and the voices of famous broadcasters (like Muqdad Murad and Ghazi Faisal) would rise to read "statements from the General Command of the Armed Forces" in a stern and enthusiastic tone that instilled awe and anticipation, announcing enemy losses and exaggerating the scale of the victories of the Iraqi army, solidifying the image of battlefield superiority as an undeniable truth.
This mobilization scene was completed by the diligent media effort to broadcast images of captured Iranian prisoners of war and display destroyed and seized military vehicles, in a visual strategy aimed at promoting the country's immense military capabilities and breaking the morale of the other side, while keeping the Iraqi street in a constant state of emotional mobilization throughout the years of war.
Did Saddam's Media Influence the Future of Iraqi Society?
The effects of that Ba'athist media and political approach continue to resonate in the future of Iraqi society, through a collective memory burdened by the bitterness of loss and constrained by the ongoing symbolic conflict over the narratives of war. Decades of mobilization and treachery have left a societal divide and sharp political polarization regarding the relationship with the regional environment, which weakened the shared national fabric and reinforced sectarian and political divisions after 2003.
The tactics of "demonizing the other" and delegitimization have also transitioned to contemporary partisan media that practices distortion against the neighboring Iran, alongside the absence of a unifying national discourse, while the scale of previous destruction has generated community sensitivities and a high phobia among most Iraqis against military ventures, creating a strong desire to prefer stability and economic development over mobilization and enthusiastic discourses.
In Conclusion:
The danger of this media legacy lies not only in the destruction it wrought upon the past but also in the time bombs it planted in the consciousness of the present and future; tracing this historical process reveals how unilateral mobilization discourse seeps in and reproduces itself in new forms and frameworks, turning social diversity from a source of richness into a battlefield of perpetual conflict.
The greatest danger lies in the subjugation of collective consciousness to methods of demonization and skepticism of identities, making societies fragile, susceptible to infiltration, and swayed by ideological or sectarian adventures under any new title.
Remaining shackled to these narratives threatens to disable critical thinking and hinder any genuine project for transitional justice and comprehensive national reconciliation; for a media founded on deception and inciting wars can continue to poison successive generations unless confronted with a rational national awareness that dismantles the illusion and replaces hate discourse with a culture of peace and stability, placing the interests of the nation above all slogans.