Following the Iranian Islamic Revolution, Iranian drama focused heavily on domestic affairs. However, it also featured prominently in several dramas, where the idea of the Egyptian as a bad or evil figure was instilled in the Iranian collective consciousness whenever the opportunity arose.
A prime example is the film “The Execution of Pharaoh,” which presented a biased narrative through three key techniques: role reversal, portraying Khalid al-Islambouli as a hero and Anwar Sadat as a traitor; reducing the event to the Camp David Accords and presenting them as an absolute betrayal without context; and offering a selective ideological narrative that ignored the internal Egyptian reality and employed rhetoric derived from the Iranian Islamic Revolution to serve an Iranian political vision.
Another film, “The Sniper,” which I happened to see in South Korea last October and which was subtitled in English, tells the story of the famous Iranian sniper Abdolrasoul Zareen in the Iran-Iraq War, presenting him as a legendary hero with exaggerated casualty figures. The film contains clear propaganda, portraying the opposing side (the Iraqi army and its allies) in a caricatured or negative light, even though no country mentioned in the film sent fighters to fight alongside Iraq.
The film featured an Egyptian army sniper (with the Egyptian flag draped over his shoulder) fighting with the Iraqis, which was untrue. He was depicted as a drunken, unruly man with long hair, speaking in a vulgar and ridiculous Egyptian dialect, supposedly there to teach the Iraqi army a lesson. He was ultimately killed as a villain. I understand the dramatic context and the Iranian Revolution’s hatred of Egyptian behavior and Egyptians in general, especially the Egyptian army.
However, in the excellent Iranian series “Prophet Joseph,” which tells the story of the Prophet Joseph (peace be upon him) in ancient Egypt, we find a different kind of trivialization of ancient Egypt (the cradle of civilization). The series “Prophet Joseph” presented a dramatic/ideological vision of ancient Egypt, and it included several treatments that critics and historians considered to be a distortion or a gross oversimplification of the image of Pharaonic Egypt. One of the most significant points is that the series, in some scenes, presents a one-dimensional religious portrayal of a complex society, along with some deliberate religious overtones. In several scenes, the series generally downplays civilizational achievements, rarely showcasing aspects such as advanced administration, engineering, medicine, or agricultural organization linked to the Nile. All or most of these achievements are attributed to the non-Egyptian Prophet Joseph, rather than to Egypt itself. The result is a one-dimensional image that ignores the reasons for the strength and continuity of the civilization.
Not to mention the stark moral dichotomy. The series constructs a world clearly divided between absolute good, represented by the Prophet Joseph, and absolute evil, represented by Egyptian society, with the exception of Joseph’s friends. While this dramatic structure is effective, it compresses historical reality into an overly simplistic framework.
The problem here lies not in narrating a religious story from a particular perspective, but in presenting Pharaonic Egypt as a flat backdrop to serve a didactic message, while neglecting its historical and civilizational complexity. If you read the work as a “religious drama,” you will understand its logic, but if you approach it as a source about ancient Egypt, you will be confronted with much oversimplification and distortion.
Despite the above, I expect Iran to focus on the following in the short term:
- Intensifying its efforts on social media and unofficial media outlets, increasing the use of unofficial accounts (individuals/influencers) instead of large-scale productions to convey subtle messages that are difficult to attribute to the state.
- Maintaining a dualistic approach in its rhetoric towards Egypt, while gradually moving towards rapprochement.
- Reframing history instead of directly attacking it. Instead of portraying Egyptians as villains, the focus will be on narratives highlighting the Iranian/non-Egyptian role in pivotal historical moments (as I previously mentioned regarding the series “Prophet Joseph”), but in a more subtle and professional manner.
- Achieving cultural penetration through co-productions, with limited attempts to produce joint works or host Egyptian artists, while indirectly controlling the core messages.
- Targeting elites primarily by hosting cultural/academic activities (scientific and research events such as conferences, seminars, and workshops), which may precede drama productions, with the aim of reshaping elite perceptions and then disseminating them to the public.
- Iran will avoid directly provoking the Egyptian military, and crude imagery (such as the sniper film) will be minimized as it hinders any political rapprochement.
- Testing the Egyptian reaction in stages: each step (dramatic work, media campaign, cultural initiative) will serve as a probe, and the course will be adjusted based on the response.
- Selectively highlighting religious commonalities by employing shared religious discourse, but subtly introducing a sectarian interpretation within the context.
- Re-employing historical/contemporary figures, presenting Egyptian or Egyptian-affiliated figures in a more positive light, but within a framework that serves the broader Iranian narrative.
- Linking cultural rapprochement to a larger regional context: any improvement in image will not be isolated but rather connected to broader regional arrangements (de-escalation, understandings, or realignment).
- Some satellite channels supporting the Iranian position, such as Al Jazeera, in Arabic language, will highlight the similarities between the Egyptian and Iranian peoples in terms of character, morals, religion, and the depth of their civilizations as key reasons for their rapprochement, hosting Iranian intellectuals who can help in this issue.
