Soft power Studies

From Classical Deterrence to Cognitive Deterrence: Toward an Iranian Strategic Framework for Countering Hybrid Threats

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Parham maddah
morteza nourmohammadi

.

Abstract
The phenomenon of war, an enduring companion of human civilization, continues to represent one of the most significant challenges confronting states in the modern era. Transformations in the levels, nature, and instruments of threats have led to a paradigmatic shift in the character of contemporary warfare—marked by the transition from hard power to soft and smart power. This evolution has redefined the objectives, tools, and strategies of conflict. Within this emerging paradigm, the exploitation of virtual and cognitive domains has become a defining feature of next-generation warfare theories, enabling short, low-cost, and decisive conflicts.

Consequently, states are compelled to design and implement adaptive defensive mechanisms to address such non-kinetic threats. The Islamic Republic of Iran, increasingly exposed to cognitive warfare, requires an effective strategic framework to safeguard its national security in this domain. Within this context, the concept of cognitive deterrence offers a valuable theoretical and practical foundation for the formulation of a comprehensive defensive doctrine.

Adopting an analytical–explanatory approach and relying on qualitative data, this study seeks to answer the fundamental question: What are the key components of Iran’s cognitive deterrence in response to cognitive threats? The central hypothesis posits that Iran’s cognitive deterrence rests upon the formulation of a cognitive defensive–offensive doctrine, the development of essential policy and strategic imperatives, and the adoption of an active diplomacy. Collectively, these components aim to introduce a novel approach to Iran’s national security and enhance its resilience against the challenges of cognitive warfare.

Keywords

Cognitive Deterrence
Cognitive Warfare
Defensive&‌ndash
Offensive Doctrine
Iran&‌rsquo
s National Security
Hybrid Threats
Modern Warfare
1.      بشیریه، حسین. (1389). جامعه شناسی سیاسی، تهران: نشرنی.
2.      دهقانی فیروزآبادی، سید جلال. (۱۳۹۴). سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران. تهران: سمت.
3.      پاکدل، محمد، محقق‌نیا، حامد، یوسفی، بهرام، و عبدالخانی، لنا. (1401). بررسی سیستم بازدارندگی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در حوزه خلیج‌فارس. مجله علوم و فنون دریایی ایران، مجله علوم و فنون دریایی، 21(3)، 1-11.
4.      خسروانی، عباس. (1395). نقش سواد رسانه‌ای در ارتقای امنیت عمومی شبکه‌‌های اجتماعی، مجله مدیریت رسانه، بهمن ماه، شماره 27.
5.      شادلو، عباس و کرم‌پور، رضا. (1394). تحلیل رابطه بین کارآمدی و مشروعیت دولت جمهوری اسلامی ایران باتکیه‌بر نظریه کلاس اوفه، فصلنامه سیاست‌‌های راهبردی و کلان، سال سوم، شماره نه ص 141-159.
6.      عالم، عبدالرحمن. (1391). بنیادهای علم سیاست، تهران: نشرنی.
7.      غنیمتی، حسن. (1396). بررسی انسجام اجتماعی با تاکید بر ایران (مورد پژوهی چندگانه تاریخی)، رساله دکتری، گروه جامعه شناسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
 
1.    Aronhime, L. (2021). Countering cognitive warfare: Awareness and resilience. Johns Hopkins University & Imperial College London.
2.    Bernal, A., Carter, C., Singh, I., Cao, R., & Madreperla, J. (2020). Cognitive warfare: An attack on truth and thought. NATO and Johns Hopkins University.
3.    Bjola, C. (2025). Digital diplomacy 2.0: Strategic communication in the age of AI and cognitive warfare. Oxford University Press.
4.    Blatny, J. M., & Søndergaard, S. (2025). Cognitive warfare (STO-OCS-001). NATO Science and Technology Organization (STO).
5.    Brodie, B. (1946). The absolute weapon: Atomic power and world order. Harcourt, Brace and Company.
6.    Devidal, P. (2026). “Cognitive warfare”: Why the human brain should not become a battlefield. ICRC Humanitarian Law & Policy.
7.    Dowse, A., & Bachmann, S. D. (2022). Information warfare: Methods to counter disinformation. Defense & Security Analysis, 38(4), 453–469. [DOI-Insert-If-Available]
8.    Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. [Publisher Name Needed - usually Free Press].
9.    Freedman, L. (2004). Deterrence. Polity Press.
10.   Jervis, R., Yarhi-Milo, K., & Casler, D. (2021). Redefining the debate over reputation and credibility in international security: Promises and limits of new scholarship. World Politics, 73(1), 167–203.
11.   Kerttunen, M. (2026). Technological deterrence in the era of hybrid threats. Oxford University Press.
12.   Knopf, J. W. (2010). The fourth wave in deterrence research. Contemporary Security Policy, 31(1), 1–33.
13.   Lawrence, G., & Barry, D. (1970). Computer network development to achieve resource sharing. Advanced Research Projects Agency.
14.   Lin, H. S. (2024). The cognitive domain: Emerging technologies and the future of influence. Defense & Security Analysis, 40(2), 112–130.
15.   Marsili, M. (2025). Cognitive warfare and the future of social resilience. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 38(1), 15–34.
16.   Marsili, M., & Wróblewska-Jachna, J. (2024). The hybrid battlefield: Cognitive engineering and strategic competition. Routledge.
17.   Morgan, P. M. (2003). Deterrence now. Cambridge University Press.
18.   Morgenthau, H. J., & Thompson, K. W. (2005). Politics among nations. McGraw-Hill Education.
19.   Nye, J. S., & Goldsmith, J. L. (2011). The future of power. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 64(3), 45–52.
20.   Ottewell, S. (2023). The age of disinformation: Assessing the UK's cognitive domain. Defense & Security Analysis, 39(1), 45–62.
21.   Putter, J. (2025). Artificial intelligence as a tool in cognitive warfare on digital platforms. Academic Conferences & Publishing International.
22.   Rosecrance, R. N. (1973). International relations: Peace or war. McGraw-Hill.
23.   Rubio, A., et al. (2024). Computational propaganda and social outbursts: A big data analysis of the 2022 Iran protests. Journal of Cyber-Social Dynamics, 14(2), 88–112.
24.   Stephan, M. (2025). Neuro-deterrence: The strategic fusion of biotechnology and cognitive science. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, 38(3), 310–335.
25.   Turner, J. H. (Ed.). (2006). Handbook of sociological theory. Springer.
26.   U.S. Department of Defense. (2022). National defense strategy of the United States of America.

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us