With Israel repeatedly announcing the launch of large-scale military operations in the West Bank, particularly in Nablus and Tubas, and more recently in Hebron, a series of reports published by Israeli and Western media during the final quarter of 2025 has resurfaced. These reports addressed what was described as “Iranian involvement in smuggling advanced weapons into the West Bank.” The most prominent among them was a report published by The Washington Free Beacon on 11 November 2025, based on information issued by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) and the David Institute for Security Policy, two research centres known for their close ties to decision-making circles in Washington and Tel Aviv.
Israeli media and political institutions treated this information as “evidence” of an escalating Iranian threat emanating from within the West Bank, warning of the possibility of a scenario similar to the 7 October attack—this time originating from the heart of West Bank cities. As military operations expanded in Nablus and Tubas, this narrative was revived to provide political and interpretive cover for actions on the ground. This study aims to deconstruct this discourse from political and security perspectives, examining how Israel constructs the narrative of the “Iranian threat” in the West Bank, why it activates it in parallel with military operations, and how it affects territorial control, domestic legitimacy, and international support.
Summary of the Report
The FDD analysis points to an increasing Iranian role in supporting armed groups in the West Bank through organised financing and weapon supplies overseen by units of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The institution links the wave of violence since March 2022 to this Iranian support, arguing that Iran seeks to transform the West Bank into a platform for direct threats against Israel, using the Jordanian–Israeli border as a smuggling route.
The report issued on 8 October 2025 stated that the Israeli army intercepted a drone carrying ten weapons and various types of arms while en route from Jordan, as well as another shipment containing explosives, five anti-tank missiles, twenty-nine improvised explosive devices, four armed drones, and a variety of firearms. The report alleged the involvement of specialised Iranian units in these activities.
The Propaganda Structure of the Israeli Narrative
The Israeli narrative rests on three interconnected pillars:
- Iran as a Renewed Regional Threat: Israel and its media portray Iran as an expansionist regional actor seeking to extend its influence across the Middle East through networks and proxies, presenting the West Bank as the newest link in the so-called “Axis of Resistance.” This framing elevates the conflict from a local security issue to a geopolitical confrontation, linking West Bank security and Israeli security to regional and Western security structures—thereby justifying enhanced coordination and political backing for Israel.
- The West Bank as an Emerging Front: Depicting the West Bank as a “potential new Gaza” prepares international public opinion to accept large-scale Israeli military operations in cities such as Jenin, Nablus, and Tulkarm. These actions are presented not as escalation or occupation, but as pre-emptive defensive measures against a growing terrorist threat, granting Israel broader political and moral latitude to justify the use of force internationally.
- Exclusive Intelligence Sources: The reports rely primarily on statements from Israeli security agencies, without independent sources or direct field documentation. This dependence lends the discourse an aura of secrecy and apparent credibility, strengthening confidence in the official narrative while marginalising alternative or critical accounts.
The Situation on the Ground in the West Bank
While the narrative of “Iranian weapons smuggling” dominated headlines, the West Bank witnessed a sharp escalation in settler violence against Palestinian civilians under the protection of the Israeli army. United Nations reports and documentation by organisations such as OCHA and Human Rights Watch recorded unprecedented levels of physical assaults, shootings, land seizures, property and crop burnings, and the expansion of settlement outposts.
At the same time, the Palestinian Authority faces growing difficulty in exercising effective control across the West Bank due to Israeli policies that restrict the movement of Palestinian security forces in Area B, prevent their operation in Area C, and carry out repeated military incursions into Area A. This dynamic portrays the Authority as ineffective and serves to justify continued Israeli security intervention. The report aligns with this narrative, accusing the Authority of failing to maintain security and depicting Israeli military action against alleged Iranian proxies as necessary.
Political and Security Objectives of the Narrative
- Securing International Legitimacy for Expanded Military Operations: Highlighting an external threat allows Israel to intensify its activities in Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nablus under the banner of counter-terrorism.
- Redirecting International Attention: Media focus on missiles and drone smuggling reduces scrutiny of daily settler violations and confines debate to Israel’s “right to self-defence.”
- Reinforcing the Iranian Threat Discourse in the West: Linking the West Bank to Iran adds a new dimension to the Iranian nuclear and regional file, reframing the conflict as part of a global war on terrorism and facilitating sustained U.S.–European support.
Impact on the Western Position
Several Western political and media circles received the Israeli narrative with relative acceptance, particularly amid heightened concern over Iranian influence. However, research communities raised questions regarding the absence of independent evidence and the concentration of information in Israeli sources, casting doubt on the timing and political instrumentalisation of the security claims.
Outlets such as People’s Dispatch noted that amplifying the issue serves political goals, including mobilising Western public opinion against Iran and justifying Israeli military expansion in the West Bank —especially in Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nublus.
Media and Security Implications
- Media-wise: The case demonstrates Israel’s ability to transform local issues into regional and international files.
- Security-wise: The discourse provides political cover for field escalation and weakens international pressure related to settler violence.
- Politically: It reinforces Israel’s position as an indispensable Western partner against Iran, limiting Washington’s leverage on settlement expansion or Palestinian statehood.
Conclusion and Recommendations
In conclusion, analysis of the Israeli discourse on Iranian arming of the West Bank shows that it extends beyond an intelligence assessment to function as a multi-purpose political tool: justifying territorial control, securing Western backing against Iran, and diverting attention from settler violence and the erosion of the Palestinian state project.
The continuation of this discourse deepens the politicisation of security and undermines opportunities to address the root causes of instability. Accordingly, international observers and independent media must distinguish between security information and its political function, and closely examine how perceived threats are reproduced in public discourse as justifications for dominance and control—rather than as pathways toward collective security.
