A Comparative Analysis of Themes in Official and Unofficial Discourses Regarding the "Twelve-Day War"

This article examines and compares the thematic orientations of two dominant discourses within the Iranian humanities and social sciences concerning the "Twelve-Day War". The first data set comprises 60 speeches and sessions by academic critics and unofficial analysts, gathered from the Iranian Sociological Association and the University of Tehran. The second set consists of 30 speeches, interviews, and articles representing the official and Principlist (conservative) discourse, primarily sourced from the Research Institute of Islamic Art and Culture, national broadcasting (IRIB), and specialized publications.

The research period covers the aftermath of the war through October 2025. Utilizing Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis method, 14 primary themes were identified for the first group and 7 for the second, each supported by four sub-themes.

The findings indicate that these two discourses offer fundamentally distinct conceptualizations of the concept of "Iran". The two groups exhibit clear divergences regarding the ontology of war, the definition of human and society, the pathology of governance, and issues pertaining to women and the family. Ultimately, based on these distinctions, the article presents potential scenarios for the future of Iran, warning against the implications of a "mono-narrative" (one-eyed) approach to national issues.