ANALYSIS: How Iranian and Pro-Russian Media Accused the Mossad Without Proof

A Narrative Built Before the Investigation

As soon as the death of Iranian researcher Ali Ehsanian, killed in Nice on March 28, 2026, was announced, several media outlets affiliated with the Iranian state as well as pro-Russian relays immediately pointed to the Israeli Mossad, presenting his death as the latest step in an alleged "scientific decapitation" campaign targeting Iranian researchers abroad. This accusation was made even before the French investigation had produced its first conclusions, a chronological order that is itself revealing.

Building an accusatory narrative before the facts are established is not journalistic analysis. It is anticipatory propaganda. This fundamental distinction structures this entire analysis of how the case was handled by certain media outlets.

Press TV's Central Role

The outlet Press TV, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, played a central role in the initial spread of the accusation against the Mossad, never publishing a single document, verifiable testimony, or piece of material evidence to support the claim. This total absence of proof did not, however, stop other media channels sympathetic to Tehran or Moscow from picking up and amplifying the narrative.

I have followed enough cases of this kind to recognize the pattern: a serious accusation, launched within hours of a tragic event, with no proof whatsoever, but with a confidence that creates the illusion of certainty. It is precisely that unfounded confidence that should alert any attentive reader.

An Identifiable and Recurring Method

The method used in this case follows an identifiable, recurring pattern in state disinformation campaigns: exploit the confusion and emotion of the first hours after a tragic event to impose a narrative before verified facts can contradict it. This strategy relies on the speed of social media, far greater than that of traditional judicial investigations.

Once a narrative takes hold in the public mind, it becomes extremely difficult to dislodge, even when established facts later flatly contradict it. This is precisely the psychological phenomenon that architects of disinformation systematically exploit.

Exploiting a Real Historical Precedent

This disinformation campaign builds on an authentic historical precedent: several Iranian nuclear scientists, including Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, assassinated in 2020, were indeed killed under circumstances where Mossad responsibility was raised by Western and Israeli sources themselves. This real precedent lends a surface credibility to accusations that, in Ehsanian's case, rest on no comparable foundation.

Conflating a documented historical pattern with an unresolved individual criminal case is precisely the rhetorical mechanism that makes this disinformation effective. It borrows the credibility of past cases to legitimize a present, unfounded accusation.

The most troubling part of this mechanism is that it does not even need to invent a full precedent. It only needs to borrow the credibility of real, documented, widely accepted cases to lend borrowed legitimacy to an accusation that itself stands on nothing concrete.

Aligned Geopolitical Interests

The speed and consistency with which media affiliated with Tehran and pro-Russian relays amplified this accusation against the Mossad are no coincidence. Iran and Russia share a common geopolitical interest in discrediting Israel and its Western partners, as part of a broader strategic convergence that also includes military, economic, and diplomatic dimensions between the two regimes.

This convergence between Tehran, Moscow, and, to a lesser extent, Pyongyang illustrates the formation of a common information front against the West, where every individual tragedy becomes an opportunity to feed a broader narrative of victimhood against Western powers portrayed as systematically hostile.

Pro-Russian Distribution Channels

Several media channels and social media accounts known for systematically relaying Kremlin positions picked up and amplified the accusation against the Mossad in the days following Press TV's first publications, giving this theory an international reach vastly disproportionate to the strength of its factual foundations.

This cross-relay between Iranian and Russian propaganda concretely illustrates how the contemporary anti-Western disinformation ecosystem works, where narratives reinforce one another regardless of their actual factual validity.

I am never surprised to see Tehran and Moscow converge on an anti-Western narrative. What should concern us more is the speed with which this type of narrative crosses linguistic and cultural borders to settle durably in the minds of audiences who have neither the time nor the tools to verify these accusations.

What a Serious Accusation Would Require

An accusation as serious as an assassination orchestrated by a foreign intelligence service should, under rigorous journalistic standards, rest on verifiable elements: cross-checked testimony, authenticated documents, corroborated official statements, or, failing that, a judicial investigation that has itself established such responsibility. None of these elements has ever been presented in the case of Ali Ehsanian's death.

The total absence of these basic methodological elements is, in itself, the strongest proof that this accusation belongs to political speculation rather than serious investigative journalism. This distinction should always guide the critical reading of this type of narrative.

The Skepticism of Israeli Intelligence Experts Themselves

A notable and rarely highlighted fact: Israeli experts interviewed by the outlet i24NEWS, including former intelligence officials, themselves expressed skepticism about any Mossad involvement in this specific case, judging the researcher's profile poorly suited to the historical targets of this type of operation. This skepticism, coming from sources with no structural interest in protecting Israel out of principle, deserves particular attention.

When Israeli intelligence experts themselves publicly doubt a theory supposedly implicating their own country, the thesis loses much of its remaining credibility. This reality directly contradicts the narrative propagated by media affiliated with Tehran.

There is something ironic, almost revealing, in the fact that the strongest skepticism toward this Mossad theory comes precisely from Israeli experts themselves. If even they do not see the coherence of this accusation, it becomes hard to keep presenting it as an established fact.

A Notable Gap Between Official Rhetoric and Media Propaganda

There is a notable gap between the direct accusations made by outlets like Press TV and the official position expressed by Iran's Foreign Ministry. Its spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, confirmed he was following the case in early May 2026, calling the incident "very bitter," a notably more cautious phrasing that explicitly avoids naming a specific party responsible.

This gap between aggressive media rhetoric and official diplomatic caution suggests that even Tehran recognizes, behind closed doors, the lack of sufficient proof to bring a formal accusation against Israel in the international diplomatic arena, despite the propaganda aimed at its domestic population.

A Link Made to Other Cases Without Additional Proof

Baghaei also linked Ehsanian's death to two other deaths of Iranian citizens in France, a statement that broadens the narrative without providing any further concrete proof connecting these separate cases or establishing any identifiable common responsibility.

Broadening an accusatory narrative without additional proof does not strengthen its credibility — it only multiplies unresolved areas of uncertainty. This rhetorical technique, common in disinformation campaigns, deserves to be identified as such.

I always notice this gap between the rhetoric aimed at the domestic population and the relative caution of official diplomatic channels. That gap alone says a great deal about what authoritarian regimes actually know about the strength of their own accusations.

A Suspect Who Flatly Contradicts the Geopolitical Narrative

The French judicial investigation ultimately identified a radically different suspect from the one suggested by the Mossad narrative: a 15-year-old teenager, who reportedly confessed to the act to his own mother before being charged with murder and placed in pretrial detention. This identification flatly contradicts, and at this stage of the proceedings definitively so, the entire state-operation narrative that had circulated for weeks in certain media.

No link to foreign intelligence services has been established by French justice at this stage of the proceedings, a finding that directly invalidates the accusations made without proof by Press TV and its pro-Russian relays in the days following the death.

A Methodological Lesson for Analyzing This Type of Case

This radical divergence between the initial narrative propagated by certain media and the established judicial reality offers a valuable methodological lesson for anyone analyzing this type of case in the future: caution and waiting for an investigation's conclusions, even when they seem slow against the emotional urgency of a tragedy, remains the only responsible journalistic approach.

Giving in to the temptation of an immediate geopolitical narrative, however appealing it may be for explaining a tragedy, amounts to sacrificing factual rigor on the altar of media speed. This case illustrates the real costs of that recurring temptation.

I do not claim that vigilance toward hostile state operations is unfounded in principle — history is full of documented precedents. But legitimate vigilance must never turn into a systematic reflex of accusation, especially when the facts, once established, tell a completely different story.

A Narrative That Will Keep Circulating Despite the Facts

Despite the identification of a minor suspect with no apparent link to foreign intelligence services, it is likely that the initial narrative implicating the Mossad will continue to circulate in certain media circles and on certain social networks, particularly in digital spaces where Iranian and Russian propaganda's influence remains strong. This persistence of a narrative despite its factual invalidation is one of the most concerning features of contemporary disinformation.

Once a conspiracy theory takes hold in certain segments of public opinion, its later factual correction rarely manages to fully erase its initial influence. This is precisely what makes this type of disinformation campaign so effective, regardless of its ultimate judicial outcome.

The Responsibility of Western Platforms and Media

This case also underscores the responsibility of Western digital platforms and of media outlets themselves in limiting the spread of this type of disinformation. The speed with which an unfounded narrative can reach a massive international audience, even before local judicial authorities have had time to establish the real facts, raises a structural question about the regulation of information during a crisis.

The West cannot afford to remain passive in the face of these disinformation campaigns orchestrated by hostile regimes, at the risk of seeing its overall informational credibility gradually eroded by narratives that, though factually baseless, prove remarkably effective in shaping public perception.

I deeply believe the best weapon against this type of disinformation remains the radical transparency of democratic institutions themselves. Every silence, every delay in communication, becomes a space that propagandists rush to fill with their own narratives.

A Recognizable Modus Operandi Elsewhere

The pattern observed in the Ehsanian case is not isolated: similar disinformation campaigns, quickly attributing tragic events to Western or Israeli operations without proof, have been documented repeatedly within the broader conflict between Iran, Russia, and the West. This recognizable modus operandi paradoxically makes it easier for observers trained to spot these recurring patterns to identify it.

The repetition of this pattern across different cases, different countries, and different time periods is itself indirect proof of its orchestrated rather than spontaneous nature, reinforcing the hypothesis of a coordinated communication strategy between the regimes involved.

The Importance of Comparative Documentation

Systematically documenting these recurring patterns across several distinct cases allows analysts and Western journalists to build a solid knowledge base on the disinformation methods used by these regimes, enabling faster identification of similar patterns in the future, before such narratives can reach a massive audience.

This comparative approach is an essential methodological tool for anyone seeking to seriously analyze contemporary geopolitical disinformation, rather than treating each case as an isolated, unpredictable phenomenon.

Every time I identify this pattern in a new case, I feel both a kind of weariness and a certain urgency. Weariness at the repetition of such a predictable method; urgency at the need to keep exposing it, again and again, even when it seems to have no immediate effect on its spread.

A Textbook Case in the Manufacturing of Geopolitical Narratives

The case of Ali Ehsanian's death and the unfounded accusation leveled against the Mossad by Iranian and pro-Russian media is a textbook case of how a tragic crime story, lacking any proven geopolitical dimension at this stage of the investigation, can be exploited to serve a broader anti-Western propaganda narrative. The identification of a minor suspect with no established link to foreign intelligence services directly invalidates this narrative, without guaranteeing its complete disappearance from the information space.

This case is a reminder of a fundamental truth: in a world where Tehran, Moscow, and other regimes hostile to the West have powerful media and digital relays, factual rigor and journalistic patience remain the only truly effective defenses against the manipulation of international public opinion.

What the West Must Take Away From This Case

For the West, this analysis should serve as a constant reminder: every individual tragedy involving, even indirectly, regional geopolitical tensions becomes a potential target for disinformation campaigns orchestrated by hostile actors. The best response to this reality remains rapid institutional transparency and the priority release of verified facts, before unfounded alternative narratives have a chance to take lasting hold.

French justice will continue its work on this specific case, but the broader information battle against this type of state disinformation will continue well beyond the conclusion of this particular affair.

People sometimes ask me whether I believe this type of disinformation can ever be eradicated. I do not fully believe so, but I believe every rigorous analysis, every verified and published fact, shrinks a little the space available for these manufactured narratives. It is an endless fight, but one worth fighting.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a columnist and analyst. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. I claim analytical clarity, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between verified facts and interpretive analysis. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under Sources, never here.

Primary source families used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

Secondary source families: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under Sources.

Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a critical, contextual synthesis based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.