Extended Abstract

Introduction: The US and Israel have waged a long and subversive campaign against Iran ever since the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the US client, the Shah. This independence and determination of the Islamic Republic to be a subject of international relations, rather than an object of them represented a challenge to US geostrategic imperatives that underpin their strategy of global hegemony. Iran’s existence also represents a personal humiliation for the US and Israeli leadership who have for decades attempted unsuccessfully regime change the country and return it as an object of international relations as a client state. These background aspects are important in understanding how and why the June 2025 12-Day War against Iran took place, where a mixture of bluster and bluff in the information space was used to try and justify and legitimise the unjustifiable and illegitimate actions of the US and Israel. These actions took place during a period of formal negotiations between the US and Iran, which adds the immoral and unethical act of perfidy too.

Method: Using framing theory this present article seeks to track Trump’s Truth Social posts during the kinetic phase of the 12-Day War. This is one of the primary means of Trump 2.0 in communicating with external audiences, which projects a mixture of bluster and bluff to overwhelm the cognitive reasoning of the target and to whip into an emotional frenzy his domestic support base as an indicator of presumed justification and legitimacy for his actions. Results and Discussion: It is a demonstration of emotionally embedded tactics that lack consistency or long-term strategy. The 12-Day War posts reflects this aspect, when Trump 2.0 assumed an easy military win against Iran, the framing exuded bluster and hubris, when it was understood eventually that the war was going badly for Israel and the US, the exit showed bluff and hubris. This is as much about supporting Trump 2.0’s exorbitant narcissistic ego as about the enforcement and realisation of the US’s geostrategic imperatives.

Conclusion: The final reflection concerns the discussion, bringing together the data from Trump’s Truth Social posts and the theoretical and conceptual framework of the article to derive meaningful analysis and interpretations to contribute to the existing literature and theory. It demonstrates that the US as a declining power as the ability of Pax Americana to wield hard power effectively as in its heyday is more problematic. Hence Pax Americana and especially Trump, are attempting to use information power to bluff and bluster an opponent into submission as they are less capable of an effective measure of effect with coercive economic and military power. It also has a performative function of attempting to defend the ‘brand’ and ‘reputation’ of Trump as being an all powerful US president, for striking awe/fear in the international arena and wonder/devotion in the domestic arena. Trump is attempting to project himself as a wise and powerful political figure that is leading the revival of Pax Americana, and being able to achieve what no other US has been able to do. This accounts for the changing framing of the 12-Day War as he attempts to navigate a shifting public opinion.