How Does Trump Conduct Psychological Operations?

WANA (Feb 25) – Recently, the French newspaper Le Figaro published a report that resembled a series of loaded assertions more than a conventional news narrative—assertions that cannot be dismissed as routine media mischief.

Beneath the surface, two clear objectives can be identified: first, undermining national cohesion; and second, firing off contradictory streams of information to cloud Iran’s cognitive environment.

Simultaneously, news circulated claiming that Mohammad Khatami—Iran’s president from 1997 to 2005 and a leading reformist figure—had left the country. The claim was swiftly denied, and statements attributed to him emphasizing national unity were republished.

This is not the first time Donald Trump has activated parallel media and field theatrics alongside a negotiation track. The key point is that such reports should be viewed as part of the media layer of his pressure doctrine.

Seyed Mohammad Khatami, The former president of Iran. Social Media / WANA News Agency

Le Figaro’s Turn

The report in Le Figaro alleged that presidential authority in Iran had effectively been transferred to Ali Larijani, describing him as Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. Citing unnamed “informed sources,” the paper claimed that Masoud Pezeshkian had been sidelined from major decision-making and that Larijani was now steering affairs in practice.

This scenario is not merely a factual error; it can be interpreted as an attempt at delegitimization—suggesting a rift between the popular vote and the governing structure, and portraying a form of “dual authority.

The narrative grows more consequential when the report advances a scenario labeled a “failed Rouhani–Zarif coup.” It alleges that Hassan Rouhani—Iran’s president from 2013 to 2021 and architect of the 2015 nuclear deal—and Mohammad Javad Zarif—his foreign minister and the chief diplomat in nuclear negotiations with the West—at one stage sought to alter the decision-making structure, an effort the report claims was thwarted by Larijani.

By adding details such as a supposed “several-day house arrest” or detentions of certain figures, the narrative attempts to imply fractures within the ruling establishment—an implication that could foster managerial distrust domestically while also helping legitimize external pressure at a broader level.

In response, Rouhani’s office issued a formal statement categorically describing the claims as “false” and “fabricated,” asserting that they were part of a psychological operation orchestrated by American and Israeli sources to sow doubt and anxiety within Iranian public opinion. The statement characterized the report as a fictional scenario built on anonymous sources that undermines the professional credibility of the outlets involved.

The name of Ali Shamkhani also appears in the report as another central power broker, completing the image of structural distrust. The technique guides the audience toward the conclusion that the country stands on the verge of internal collapse. Such patterns align closely with what Trump described in his 1987 book The Art of the Deal.

The Art of the Deal and the Logic of Exaggeration

To understand the timing of these narratives amid political developments, one must revisit that book. The Art of the Deal is less a business manual than a manifesto of psychological combat—an effort to pressure the other side into concessions. One of Trump’s core principles is “thinking big” and showcasing the “big deal,” a concept he has repeatedly invoked in political contexts. In the Iran file, this “big deal” extends beyond the nuclear program to include missile capabilities and regional influence.

Narratives such as the Le Figaro report—speaking of “structural collapse” or an “internal coup”—can function as complements to this strategy: portraying Iran as weakened in order to strengthen Washington’s bargaining leverage. Within this framework, recent remarks by Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy in U.S.–Iran negotiations, expressing surprise that Iran had “not surrendered despite the pressure,” become analytically revealing.

Another principle in this model is exaggeration. Hyperbole operates as a pressure tool. A limited disagreement or isolated quote can be elevated through media amplification into a full-blown crisis, thereby reinforcing negotiating leverage.

The Technique of “Not Appearing Eager”

Trump has repeatedly argued that “the worst thing you can do is seem desperate.” Accordingly, sending contradictory signals about war and peace, military readiness, and diplomatic initiatives forms part of a broader unpredictability tactic. This unpredictability can generate mental attrition on the opposing side. In this context, media outlets act as amplifiers; constant fluctuations in the news cycle raise the cost of independent decision-making and subtly convey that the only path to stability is accepting the other side’s terms.

Internalizing the Crisis

Another layer of this psychological operation is the internalization of crises. Emphasizing a “power struggle in Tehran” or “executive incompetence” can marginalize the role of sanctions and the “maximum pressure” policy, reframing economic hardship as merely the product of domestic discord. In this reframing, the roles of accuser and accused can effectively switch places in public perception.

An Iranian newspaper with a cover photo of U.S. President Donald Trump, in Tehran, Iran, February 17, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)

Psychological Operations and the “Pizza Index”

In moments of potential military tension, even peripheral concepts—such as the so-called “Pentagon Pizza Index” near the Pentagon—enter the narrative arena. The idea suggests that spikes in pizza orders around the Pentagon may signal impending military activity.

A Fox News reporter once raised the issue with the U.S. defense secretary, who jokingly replied that they might deliberately order from Domino’s Pizza simply to “confuse the system.” The anecdote itself demonstrates how even trivial data points can become instruments of imbalance in a psychologically charged environment.

News Terrorism

Taken together, such reports and narratives can be seen as elements of a broader architecture of perceptual warfare—an effort to shape the mental calculations of both society and decision-makers.

In this battle of narratives, advantage belongs to the side capable of distinguishing ground reality from informational fog—and of preventing artificial fluctuations from eroding national cohesion and political will.