PSCRP-BESA Reports No 194 (April 4th, 2026)
Part 1
Epic Fury in the Social Networks: Anti-Israeli and Anti-American Discourses
In the situation described above, a wide range of anti-Israeli and anti-American stereotypes have spread widely across social media. Numerous videos portraying the alleged “successes” of Iranian strikes against Israel and American forces have circulated widely, particularly in the Tajik-language online environment. More broadly, Iranian propaganda describing supposedly massive losses suffered by the United States and Israel tends to resonate with certain groups within the Central Asian segment of the internet, especially since it is often amplified by channels associated with Islamic fundamentalism or with Russian media networks. At the same time, it should be noted that a significant number of Russian propagandists, who are well-known in Central Asia, have publicly distanced themselves from Iran and emphasize that the war is economically advantageous for Moscow.
Various conspiracy theories have also spread widely in the region and across the broader post-Soviet space. For example, many users claim that the Pakistani airstrikes against Afghanistan were in fact orchestrated by the United States and/or Israel. This interpretation has been particularly widespread in Russia but it has also gained traction in Central Asia.
Many mythologized conspiracy narratives have entered the Central Asian information space through Western media and social networks. In particular, discussions of the current war frequently refer to the so-called “Epstein files.” Several versions of this interpretation circulate online. One of them has an anti-Trump orientation and claims that the war is being used to distract public attention, in a manner reminiscent of the plot of the film Wag the Dog. Another version takes an anti-Israeli form, asserting that Israel allegedly controls American politics through such mechanisms — a narrative that structurally reproduces older conspiracy tropes associated with the infamous forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
In some comments, even broader generalizations appear that question the democratic character of the political systems of the United States and Israel. Within such conspiratorial interpretations, these states are portrayed as being controlled by corrupt elites acting in the interests of hidden backstage forces. Such arguments reproduce a typical narrative found in conspiracy discourse about the “secret governance” of political processes.
Critical assessments also frequently appear in the comments, reproducing arguments common in a number of Western media outlets, where the legality of military action against Iran is questioned from the standpoint of international law. Discussions also often include criticism of the Arab Gulf states that is typical of Islamist and more radical anti-Western narratives. For example, one commenter writes:
“They are direct accomplices in an act of aggression against a sovereign state. Iran repeatedly issued official warnings to all the countries where these traitors, lackeys of the USA (written in the original in lowercase), have allowed American military bases to be deployed. Such is the fate of such piglets — Tabaki jackals (a reference to Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle book). This is the natural right of a defending state according to the norms of international law. A country that hosts the aggressor’s military bases — from which strikes are launched, and where command centers, communications systems, surveillance equipment, radars, air defense systems, etc. are located — automatically becomes an accomplice to aggression, and therefore military facilities located in those countries become legitimate targets”.
Such arguments reproduce a widely circulated claim found in a number of anti-Western political narratives — that states allowing the deployment of U.S. military bases on their territory automatically become parties to armed conflicts involving the United States.
It is also noteworthy that the comment uses expressions such as “piglets” (podsvinki in Russian) and “Tabaki”. These metaphors are less characteristic of Middle Eastern propaganda rhetoric than of the Russian information space, where similar language has been used in political polemics, including in public discourse—albeit usually in reference to conflicts in Eastern Europe. From Eastern Europe also comes the insulting practice of writing the names of rival states with lowercase letters, e.g. usa instead of USA.
Finally, one can encounter arguments framed in the spirit of Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations. For example, some users claim that “the conflict is acquiring civilizational dimensions and Pakistan should threaten to transfer nuclear weapons to Iran in order to force the United States and Israel to stop the war”. This reflects the well-known notion circulating in the global information space about a common “Islamic nuclear bomb”.
Three Sources and Three Components of Anti-Israeli Sentiment in Central Asian Social Media
The examples discussed above illustrate that it is possible to distinguish three groups in Central Asia that express anti-Israeli and anti-American attitudes and that originate from fundamentally different external sources of influence. At the same time, these three informational influences often intersect and closely interact with one another.
These are: Islamist-fundamentalist discourse, Western left-radical discourse, and a Russian-language anti-Western discourse (which in some cases also carries anti-Semitic undertones).
Islamist-Fundamentalist Discourse. The first source of anti-American and anti-Israeli attitudes is connected with religious-political and Islamist narratives that circulate through Islamic media outlets, preaching networks, and social platforms. These narratives are frequently built around themes of solidarity within the Muslim world, support for Palestine, and criticism of Western intervention in the Middle East.
Studies of media discourse show that in Islamically oriented media, the Palestinian question is often interpreted through a religious and civilizational lens, which strengthens emotional mobilization among audiences and helps form durable political interpretations of the conflict.
Such narratives spread not only through traditional media but also through social networks and messaging platforms, which have become key channels for the circulation of politically and religiously framed information about conflicts in the Middle East. Research on digital communication shows that these platforms play an important role in forming transnational networks that support and disseminate political interpretations of international conflicts.
At the same time, within Central Asia the sources of such influence differ from country to country. In Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan, these ideas tend to spread primarily through Arab and, especially, Turkish media, as well as through religious organizations and transnational Islamic online platforms. Erdogan-era Turkish political-Islamic media, for example, actively shape discourse around the Palestinian question, presenting it as a central element of broader political and religious solidarity within the Muslim world.
In Tajikistan, by contrast, Iranian informational and even direct political influence may be more visible due to linguistic and cultural proximity. This includes media platforms and cultural initiatives aimed at Persian-speaking audiences. In such cases, political and religious narratives spread through Persian-language information channels and religious networks, which distinguishes Tajikistan’s information environment from that of other Central Asian countries.
Western Pro-Iranian Discourse. A second source of such ideas is a Western pro-Iranian discourse that spreads through international activist networks, English-language social media, and global online platforms. This discourse takes different forms — here we focus primarily on its more radical interpretations, which draw on the concepts of anti-imperialism. In its most radical form, which also influences some anti-Western interpretations in Central Asia, these approaches portray Middle Eastern conflicts involving Iran as part of a broader struggle against “colonial” and “neo-colonial” structures of global power. Such arguments largely echo the official rhetoric of Iranian propaganda. According to some experts, the spread of this discourse is supported by covert Chinese financial backing.
These ideas circulate actively in English-language social media and are often absorbed by part of the younger audience in Central Asian countries, particularly among users oriented toward Western educational and cultural environments.
Russian Anti-Western Discourse. Another important source of the anti-Western narratives discussed above is the Russian information space, which continues to play a significant role in media consumption across Central Asia.
A large share of the region’s population regularly receives news and analytical commentary from Russian television channels, online outlets, and social media platforms. Within this discourse, the United States and Israel are frequently portrayed as key actors of the “collective West,” pursuing an aggressive foreign policy and seeking to preserve global hegemony. Consequently, international crises are often interpreted as the result of Western actions, while their opponents, Iran in this case, are presented as victims or participants in defensive struggles.
Such interpretations are actively disseminated through Russian-language media and the blogosphere and are easily transmitted into local debates in Central Asian societies. Despite the broad presence of Russian media in the region, however, I would rank Russian sources only third in terms of their influence on the formation of anti-Western and anti-Israeli discourse in Central Asia. Among Russian commentators, not only pro-Iranian positions are widespread but also a more moderate alternative perspective articulated by the press secretary of President Putin, Dmitry Peskov: “The war that is taking place is not our war… We must minimize the consequences of global upheavals for our economy and extract benefits where possible…”
The Intersection of Discourses. In the information space of Central Asian countries, where different informational influences intersect, these three types of narratives frequently overlap in practice. In the digital environment, users often reproduce arguments originating from different informational ecosystems simultaneously — for example, combining anti-Western interpretations from Russian media with rhetoric of Islamic solidarity and left-radical critiques of imperialism.
As a result, a hybrid information space is emerging in Central Asia in which ideas that originate in different geopolitical and ideological contexts mix together and are adapted to local political and cultural conditions.
Conclusion
The reaction of Central Asian states to the 2026 war between the United States, Israel, and Iran demonstrates a clear contrast between official diplomacy and the dynamics of public discourse. Governments across the region have adopted cautious neutrality, driven primarily by economic vulnerability, geopolitical constraints, and the long-standing tradition of multi-vector foreign policy. For Central Asian elites, maintaining balanced relations simultaneously with Russia, China, the West, and the Middle East remains a central strategic priority.
At the societal level, however, the situation is far more complex. Social media discussions reveal a fragmented public sphere in which different ideological, cultural, and geopolitical influences compete. Sympathy toward Iran is stronger in regions where Islamic identity or Persian cultural connections are more prominent, particularly in Tajikistan and parts of the Ferghana Valley, while societies shaped more strongly by the legacy of Eurasian nomadic culture tend to display weaker pro-Iranian sentiment. In most cases, however, these differences do not translate into open political confrontation between elites and society, unlike the deeper “elite–street” divide observed in parts of the Arab world.
The analysis also demonstrates that anti-Israeli and anti-American narratives circulating in Central Asian social media originate from three overlapping external information ecosystems: Islamist-fundamentalist discourse, Western radical pro-Iranian discourse, and Russian-language anti-Western (and sometimes simultaneously anti-Semitic) media narratives. Although these discourses differ in origin and ideological foundations, they frequently merge within the digital environment, producing hybrid interpretations of international conflicts. This fusion creates an informational landscape in which religious solidarity, geopolitical resentment, and conspiracy narratives reinforce one another.
Despite this active online environment, the political consequences of these narratives remain limited for now. In most Central Asian countries, strict state control over public demonstrations prevents the transformation of online discourse into mass political mobilization. Nevertheless, the continued spread of anti-Western narratives, especially when combined with Islamist ideological frameworks, carries potential long-term risks for regional security.
Overall, Central Asia’s response to the war reflects the region’s broader geopolitical condition: political neutrality at the level of states, but cultural and political pluralism — and sometimes polarization — within society. As global conflicts increasingly unfold in digital spaces, the interaction between external propaganda networks and local cultural contexts will likely play an increasingly important role in shaping political perceptions across the region.