Tehran Downplays War Risk as U.S. Forces Build Up

As reports of American military deployments to the Middle East multiply by the hour, Iran’s government-controlled media are downplaying the likelihood of war. Tehran appears cornered not only by a heightened U.S. military threat but also by renewed protests across the country, as thousands of families mourn relatives killed during the January crackdown on demonstrators.

On February 20, 2026, the relatively moderate Tehran news site Rouydad24 attempted to inject optimism by publishing an undated photo of President Donald Trump with an Omani official, suggesting that “hidden channels” might still help avert a military confrontation.

“The Trump administration’s strategy is built on maximum pressure, yet experience shows this pressure is usually accompanied by a half-open door to negotiations. The key question is whether Washington is using threats to secure quick concessions or preparing public opinion for a limited action,” the outlet wrote. The reference to “limited action” stands out, while many observers warn of a potentially broader military campaign against the Islamic Republic.

Whether Tehran aims to calm supporters or reassure the broader public remains unclear. Similar attempts to minimize the danger of confrontation have appeared across the media. Meanwhile, several social-media posts circulated images allegedly showing security forces leaving bases and seeking shelter in schools and even hospitals.

The Iranian Labor News Agency published two articles on February 20—one by a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps officer now serving in parliament, and another by a university professor, both downplaying the prospect of war. The first carried the headline: “The approach of U.S. warships does not mean war is imminent / A small segment of society that listens to enemy’s media is worried about war.”

Salar Velayatmadar, a member of parliament’s national security committee, told the Iranian Labor News Agency that the United States would not dare to use its navy against Iran. “Such an action is not rational from a military standpoint, because that vessel would be like a morsel within our firing range, and no rational actor would take such a risk.”

The second article bore the headline: “Most of Trump’s actions are aimed at creating a war of attrition through psychological pressure.” Its interviewee, Asghar Zargar, argued that the U.S. military buildup is intended to sustain pressure over time and force concessions through psychological means.

Meanwhile, some outlets cited pro-government commentators abroad who warn that any U.S. attack could spiral into an uncontrollable regional war. Iranian officials have invoked this argument in recent weeks, both as a deterrent and as an implicit warning to neighboring oil-producing Arab states.

The official news agency, Islamic Republic News Agency, also published a leading article portraying negotiations with Washington in optimistic terms. It claimed that International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi told CNN the talks were “serious” and marked by “determination.” In fact, Grossi mainly indicated that diplomacy could still avert confrontation, saying: “There could always be space for diplomacy; otherwise, this is a very dismal situation.”

Nour News, close to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, similarly tried to cast the February 19 visit of a Russian naval vessel in positive terms. The lone ship—the corvette Stoiky—was a small vessel for such a voyage to the Persian Gulf. Ukraine, despite lacking a traditional navy, has disabled or destroyed a significant share of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

“The docking of a Russian helicopter carrier in Bandar Abbas and the holding of joint Iran-Russia drills are not merely a military exercise; the event conveys a strategic message … and signals a change in the balance of power in the Gulf of Oman and the northern Indian Ocean,” Nour News wrote.

Such exaggeration may reflect the anxiety felt in Tehran as it faces the largest U.S. naval and air deployment in the region since the 2003 Iraq war. The government may be counting on weathering a limited U.S. operation, but with a weakened economy and a mobilized domestic opposition ready to return to the streets, the risks would be considerable.