Iran's Foreign Policy Communication Through Legitimacy Strategy Rejection of the Ceasefire (Noam Chomsky's Critical Approach to the Case of the Iran-American War for the March 2026 Period)

Abstract

This study analyzes Iran's foreign political communication in establishing legitimacy for the rejection of the ceasefire in the Iran–American conflict in the March–April 2026 period. The rejection is understood not solely as a diplomatic decision, but as a political communication practice that constructs sovereignty, the right to self-defense, and resistance to external pressure. The research uses a critical paradigm and qualitative approach with the framework of the Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky Propaganda Model, which includes five filters: media ownership, advertising, information sources, pressure (flak), and dominant ideology. The data were critically analyzed by paying attention to the narratives and information of informants about the Iranian and Western media ecosystems. The findings show that media ownership, choice of information sources, narrative pressure, and ideology play an important role in shaping and contradicting the meaning of ceasefire rejection. Iranian media construct rejection as an attempt to defend sovereignty and reject agreements that are considered unfair, while Western media tend to place them in the framework of escalation and security threats. Advertising filters do not appear dominant based on available data. Iran also produces counter-narratives through media channels and diplomacy to gain domestic and international legitimacy. This research confirms that the Propaganda Model needs to be applied contextually and shows that political legitimacy in international conflicts is contested through the production, distribution, and contestation of narratives.