MAGA’s Civil War: Who dares to take on the Israel lobby?
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | June 17, 2025
Steve Bannon – the smart, stubborn, and irrepressible right/far-right public intellectual and once ally as well as chief strategist and bestie of US President Donald Trump – is back in the news. And in a way that speaks to much more than the ups and downs, and ins and outs, of US elite careers.
The hill he has chosen to fight on this time is resistance to the US waging another war in the Middle East in the service of Israel and its powerful lobby in America.
Bannon, make no mistake, is not taking a de facto stand against Israel because of its apartheid, genocide, and wars of aggression. He ought to, obviously, especially as a man flaunting his Christian belief. (From one sort-of-Roman-Catholic to another, Steve: Our Lord Jesus Christ really didn’t like the child killers, and I am pretty sure he would have found the lingerie-camouflage cross-dressers with machine guns rather off-putting, too.)
But then, if Bannon had principled moral objections here, he would not be Steve Bannon, a very conservative American, who will probably never shake off deeply ingrained mental habits of violence and racism.
But from Trump’s perspective – and that of the Israeli influence agents surrounding him – Bannon’s line of attack is actually more dangerous than a genuinely moral stance. Because Bannon is positioning American national interest against following Israel’s lead. By declaring that Israel pursues an ‘Israel First’ policy about as egotistically as Berlin’s ‘Germany First’ trip between 1933 and 1945, Bannon has dared to state the obvious: Israel’s interests are not identical with those of the US, and therefore, a genuine ‘America First’ policy must not obey Israel. Hence, stay out of the war against Iran. Or to be precise, get out of it.
And there Bannon is of course right and has the facts and logic on his side, which makes his challenge all the more threatening.
The background to Bannon’s sally, which as the Financial Times points out, signals a split among Trump’s domestically indispensable MAGA base, is the perfect mess Trump and his team have made over the attack on Iran. Despite their clumsy mixed messaging – really, contradictory lying and boasting – Israel’s unprovoked war of aggression against Iran can obviously only be waged because of massive American support.
In reality this is already a combined US-Israeli attack, and it makes no difference to this fact that Israel always wants even more, including – as Axios, a network with remarkably easy access to Israeli sources, has reported – open US help in attacking the key Iranian nuclear installations at Fordow.
Never mind, by the way, that deliberately striking a nuclear facility is as criminal as it gets. It constitutes a clear breach of the Geneva Conventions, as the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei has recently had to publicly school German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul about. The latter is clearly just as ignorant of his job’s basics as his legendarily inept predecessor Annalena Baerbock used to be.
Yet, as Bannon’s intervention shows, the key role the US plays in the assault on Iran has caused noteworthy ripple effects inside America and in particular inside the movement now known as MAGA. Originally the abbreviation was an extremely successful 2016 Trump campaign slogan – inspired by a forerunner used by Ronald Reagan in 1980 – meaning ‘Make America Great Again’.
But as a movement, MAGA has a much longer history. Its influences and ancestors include, for instance, nativism, isolationism, the original America First, and the more recent Tea Party. That’s why it is important to understand that MAGA overlaps with but is not identical with Trumpism, as often assumed. In reality, MAGA is part of an older, powerful tradition that Trump has tapped into with great success. But he is not guaranteed to always be in control of it, as the term ‘Trumpism’ may misleadingly imply.
Take for instance the perhaps greatest cleavage running through contemporary Trumpism 2.0: that between a right-wing populist orientation still aiming at, for want of better terms, ordinary Americans, and a techno-elitist wing busy with fantasies of openly establishing an AI-based rule of the richest. Things clearly remain volatile. For wasn’t it only yesterday that the would-be tech lords, represented by former “first buddy” Elon Musk, seemed to have defeated the populist tribunes of the Steve Bannon type? And yet, now Musk, the “man-child” is out (if not necessarily forever) and Bannon, the old battle axe, is making headlines again.
Warning of the “fog of war” – read that as code either for just ordinary information unreliability or for deliberate Israeli and Western disinformation – and “unintended consequences,” Bannon has been explicit: The US must not be “sucked into another major war on the Eurasian land mass, particularly the Middle East.” And yet, he added, America is already an “active combatant” by providing air defense to Israel.
For Bannon, at least in his current iteration, none of this is new. As he has also recently charged, the fundamental reason why American troops are in Iraq and thus in harm’s way is that the US government and its media, including both Republicans and Democrats, have “lied to us,” i.e., the American people, for decades. It has not been, as Bannon stressed, simply incompetence or mistakes, but the “bald-faced lies” and “spin of the neocons.”
That is of course a reference to the fact that the US and its Western accomplices started their 2003 unprovoked war of aggression against Iraq with a massive, Gleiwitz-level deception by deliberately trying to deceive the world about non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. And that, according to Bannon, was along with the financial crisis of 2008 the original sin that triggered “this movement,” clearly here meaning what we now know as MAGA.
Bannon’s history may be a little off as far as facts are concerned. The roots of contemporary American right-wing populism include a tradition of isolationism, but they are certainly not identical with a revolt against the Iraq War, insane and criminal as the latter was.
But veracity and accuracy aren’t the point here. Instead what matters is how precisely Bannon is trying to rewrite history, namely by claiming opposition to neocon “forever wars,” specifically in the Middle East (transparent code for on behalf of Israel) as not only a core value of MAGA, but as a key element of its origin story.
As for Israel’s assault on Iran, Bannon was scathing. Rhetorically exploiting the silly pretense that Israel was “going it alone” when starting the attack – which Bannon is certainly intelligent and realistic enough to know is nonsense – he called on Israel to stick to doing just that. Yet instead, he scoffed, the “going-it-alone lasted six hours” and Israel is doing everything it can to drag Americans ever deeper into another massive war.
Importantly, Bannon is not alone. As he pointed out, conservative media heavyweight Tucker Carlson has made the same point. In fact, Carlson has been even more explicit. Using his X account with over 16 million followers to claim that the key divide of US politics is between “those who casually encourage violence, and those who seek to prevent it – between warmongers and peacemakers,” Carlson started naming “the warmongers,” including “anyone who’s calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran,” such as “Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rupert Murdoch, Ike Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson.”
Carlson added that “at some point they will all have to answer for this, but you should know their names now.” And what names they are: Of the five, three, i.e., 60 percent – Levin, Perlmutter, and Adelson – are as most Americans would know or guess, Jewish. Murdoch and Hannity, in the minority, are not.
But all of the five are staunch Zionists, Hannity having been acknowledged by the Jerusalem Post as one of “10 Pro-Israeli Christians,” i.e. a Christian Zionist. And that was in October 2024, a full year into Israel’s ongoing genocide of the Palestinians. Mark Levin, an influential and extremely rightwing media personality, got his “Friends of Zion Museum ‘Defender Award’ for his steadfast support of the State of Israel and the Jewish people” in 2018.
Murdoch, the Western publishing oligarch with massive political influence, used a rambling – but who’s going to edit him, right? – 2009 Jerusalem Post article to admit he feels very flattered by frequently being misidentified as Jewish and to explain that the “free world” – old-timers’ speak for “rules-based value West” – must support Israel to the hilt.
According to Wikipedia, Ike Perlmutter is “an Israeli-American billionaire businessman and financier” – although ironically enough born in Mandate Palestine – who “through a variety of sometimes unorthodox business deals” has been “an influential investor in a number of corporations.” He also used to run Marvel Entertainment. Yes, that Marvel, the superhero story company now absorbed by Disney and perhaps the single most effective vehicle of contemporary US propaganda.
And multi-billionaire Miriam Adelson is of course not only the widow of Sheldon Adelson, the “casino mogul” and arch Zionist, but also a fanatical Zionist in her own right. Both Adelsons have been among Donald Trump’s most generous supporters. During his 2016 presidential campaign they were already among his “top donors.” In 2020 – when he lost – they made the single biggest individual contribution, a whopping $75 million. In 2024, Miriam Adelson dialed it up to eleven with $106 million. Only Elon Musk ($276 million) and rich heir extraordinaire Timothy Mellon ($150 million) gave even more.
And then there is the influential MAGA icon and Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene. In a long post on X, she fired a broadside against any further US involvement in wars abroad: “We are $36+ TRILLION in debt and have mountains of our own problems. We have giant planks sticking out of our own eyes while we complain about splinters in other’s eyes. Every country involved and all over the world can be happy, successful, and rich if we all work together and seek peace and prosperity.”
MTG, as she is often called, has also preemptively and rightly rejected any accusation of “antisemitism” and even of isolationism: “Taking this position is NOT antisemitic. It’s rational, sane, and loving toward all people. Taking this position of peace and prosperity for all is not isolationism, it leads to GREAT trade deals and GREAT economies that help ALL PEOPLE.”
Worst of all, from Trump’s and Israel’s perspective, she has in effect reminded her 4.8 million followers, as well as many others who will read about her post in the traditional media, of Trump’s own campaign promise to end and not start wars, because no more wars is “what many Americans voted for in 2024.”
Clearly, there are influential representatives of MAGA who are not only willing to openly challenge the perversely self-damaging hold that Washington allows Israel to have over its foreign policy, but are also beginning to be explicit about the fact that Israel’s lobby in the US – whether Jewish or not – is putting another country first, at enormous cost to Americans.
Unfortunately, there are reasons to fear that this right-wing criticism of ‘Israel First’ will not prevail. Trump may very well be so beholden to and afraid of the Israel lobby that he will make the single worst mistake of his life and get even deeper into the war against Iran.
But then the question is: What will happen next? There is a brave left-wing opposition to Israel in America – full disclosure: my sort of people – and there also is clear polling evidence that Israel’s grip on American society as a whole is finally slipping, especially among the young. Now add a right-wing, MAGA-based opposition and another great US fiasco in the Middle East backfiring on America’s home front. Israel may get its wish once again, but in the not-so-long run it should be very careful what it wishes for. And that, as grim as the news is, is a tiny speck of hope on a very dark horizon.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory
Trump Attacks Tucker Carlson Over Opposition to Iran War, Says He Decides What ‘America First’ Means
By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | June 16, 2025
President Donald Trump is lashing out against popular conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson. The acrimony emanates from Carlson’s strong opposition to the White House’s indirect military support for Israel’s war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Trump declared he invented “America First” and he decides what it means while making his case for the potentially catastrophic war of aggression against Tehran.
On Monday, the president demeaned the influential pundit. Trump told reporters “I don’t know what [Carlson] is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.” In an interview with The Atlantic magazine this weekend, Trump was asked about Carlson’s comments against the war.
Trump responded “Well, considering that I’m the one that developed ‘America First,’ and considering that the term wasn’t used until I came along, I think I’m the one that decides [what it means]. For those people who say they want peace—you can’t have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don’t want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon—that’s not peace.”
“America First” is a political slogan which has seen a phenomenal resurgence in the wake of Trump’s first presidential campaign. It has been used by politicians in both major parties and dates back more than a century ago. It originated as a rallying cry for neutrality during the First World War and was used as part of President Woodrow Wilson’s 1916 reelection campaign. The following year, Wilson betrayed his supporters by ordering American forces into the war and imposing conscription. Since then, the antiwar, nationalist slogan has been deployed by non-interventionists, particularly on the right, exemplified best by Pat Buchanan.
Despite Trump’s continued insistence otherwise, his own intelligence agencies confirmed this year that there is no evidence Tehran is building a nuclear weapon nor has there been any suggestion that a political decision has been made to abrogate Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s fatwa against pursuing weapons of mass destruction.
On Friday, following Israel’s surprise bombing attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, residential areas, and military sites, Carlson released a newsletter denouncing US involvement in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war. It begins by quoting from Trump’s first inaugural address, “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first.”
The newsletter then reads, “Now that [Netanyahu] and his war-hungry government have executed their long-awaited assault, [Trump] faces a legacy-altering decision: to support or not to support?”
Carlson insists, “The United States should not at any level participate in a war with Iran. No funding, no American weapons, no troops on the ground. Regardless of what our “special ally” says, a fight with the Iranians has nothing to offer the United States. It is not in our national interest.”
The newsletter continues, with Carlson warning the consequences of supporting Israel will include future blowback terrorism against “the West” and “thousands of immediate American deaths, all in the name of a foreign agenda.” He concluded that a preferable option would be to “drop Israel” and “let them fight their own wars.” Carlson emphasized that because of the massive US military and financial aid to Tel Aviv, Trump is already “complicit in the act of war.”
US disbands undisclosed Russia pressure group – Reuters
RT | June 17, 2025
US President Donald Trump’s administration has reportedly halted the work of a special task force that was developing strategies to pressure Russia, Reuters claimed on Tuesday, citing anonymous sources.
The inter-agency workgroup, the existence of which had not previously been disclosed, was reportedly established earlier this spring as part of Trump’s efforts to speed up peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.
The task force had been examining measures such as increasing economic leverage over former Soviet republics and conducting intelligence operations to undermine Russian influence. However, it reportedly lost momentum in May, when the US president refused to adopt a more confrontational stance toward Moscow, officials told Reuters.
“It lost steam toward the end because the president wasn’t there. Instead of doing more, maybe he wanted to do less,” one of the officials said.
The agency noted that the effort was never formally shut down, but effectively stalled after a sweeping purge at the White House National Security Council several weeks ago removed most of the officials involved, including the entire team dealing with the Ukraine conflict.
Reuters noted that it is unclear if Trump himself was aware of the working group’s formation or subsequent dissolution.
The US president has repeatedly insisted that only Russia and Ukraine can negotiate a resolution to the ongoing conflict, and has consistently sought to pressure the leaders of both countries to engage in peace talks.
Although he has threatened additional sanctions on Russia as part of his efforts to mediate the conflict, Trump has also sought to rebuild Washington’s relations with Moscow and has already held several phone calls with President Vladimir Putin, all of which he has described as positive.
On Monday, during the G7 summit in Canada, Trump also publicly advocated for Russia’s return to the G8 format, arguing that excluding Moscow from major international forums was a strategic mistake.
Russian officials have repeatedly expressed appreciation for Trump’s peace efforts and attempts to rebuild relations with Moscow, which had hit their lowest point in decades under former US President Joe Biden.
However, Moscow has rejected the idea of returning to the G8 format, stating that it has “lost its relevance” and no longer reflects current global economic dynamics. Instead, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov pointed to the G20 as a more representative format.
Brussels warns Slovakia over constitutional change aimed at overriding EU law
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | June 17, 2025
The European Commission has issued a warning to Slovakia, declaring that proposed constitutional changes backed by Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government would breach European Union law by attempting to deny the supremacy of EU rules over national legislation.
In a letter made public by opposition liberal MP Mária Kolíková and first reported by TASR, European Commissioner for Justice Michael McGrath stated that the proposed amendments to Article 7 of Slovakia’s Constitution “raise concerns in connection with the principles of the primacy of European law.”
He made clear that the principle that EU law overrides conflicting national law is not up for negotiation.
Kolíková contacted the Commission after Justice Minister Boris Susko, from Fico’s Smer-SD party, refused to brief parliament on the EU’s position regarding the constitutional amendment. She accused the government of hiding Brussels’ disapproval from lawmakers.
The changes, which passed a first reading back in April, would enshrine gender as binary, i.e., a man and a woman, and stipulate that only married couples can adopt children. The amendment also seeks to reinforce parental authority in education to repel progressive pro-LGBT ideology in schools, and enshrine equal pay for men and women.
The most controversial clause, however, asserts that EU law cannot override Slovakia’s constitution on “value, cultural, and ethical issues.”
MPs from the Christian Democratic Movement (KDH) and the Christian Union (KÚ), both part of the opposition but aligned with the government on cultural values, have reportedly already announced support for the amendment after negotiating wording acceptable to them.
Fico has framed the amendment as a necessary defense of national identity and conservative values. Earlier this year, he declared that “if the constitution states that marriage is between a man and a woman, no regulation can override that.”
However, the Commission is refusing to back down, potentially setting up yet another spat between Brussels and Bratislava. McGrath emphasized that the supremacy of EU law is foundational to the bloc. “The primacy of EU law is not open for debate,” he said.
EU Divided on Russian Gas as Austria Joins Hungary and Slovakia Against Blanket Ban
Sputnik – 17.06.2025
The Austrian energy ministry believes that the European Union should be open to resuming imports of natural gas from Russia after the end of the Ukraine conflict, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.
“[Brussels] must maintain the option to reassess the situation once the war has ended,” the ministry told the Financial Times.
Austria is the third EU nation after Hungary and Slovakia to openly suggest resuming imports of Russian gas after the conflict ends.
The European Commission will propose on Tuesday that the EU ban new gas contracts with Russia. The Commission will use trade law to bypass potential vetoes by Hungary and Slovakia. According to the summary of the proposal seen by the Financial Times, the current short-term contracts are to be terminated starting 2026, while long-term contracts are to come to an end on January 1, 2028.
On June 12, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that Hungary and Slovakia believed that a ban on Russian energy imports to the EU was unacceptable interference in their energy sovereignty. Szijjarto said that Hungary and Slovakia had blocked the Commission’s proposal to this effect during the meeting of EU energy ministers in Luxembourg on Monday.
In early May, the EU Commission presented a draft roadmap to stop Russian energy imports to the EU by the end of 2027. It includes a ban on imports from Russia under new Russian gas contracts and existing spot contracts, which is to come into effect by the end of 2025. The ban can also affect remaining imports of pipeline gas and liquefied natural gas from Russia under long-term contracts.
Former Georgian president pushes EU ‘to kill the Georgian economy’ to remove populists from power
Remix News | June 17, 2025
Salome Zourabichvili, the former president of Georgia who stepped down six months ago, gave a speech at the recent GLOBSEC international conference in Prague in which she called on the EU to keep up the pressure against her country to oust the current government.
The populist, conservative Georgian Dream party won the election in Georgia last autumn, with incumbent Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze remaining in power, much to the dismay of liberals in Brussels.
“European sanctions against Georgia need to be stepped up. We need more and stronger European sanctions. Why? Because sanctions work against a small country like Georgia. They cause damage. They hurt. They kill the Georgian economy and private sector. In other words, in the long run, they will bring down the Georgian government,” Mandiner quotes her as saying.
Salome Zourabichvili continued: “The EU must continue to do what it has been doing towards Georgia for the past year: not to recognize the Georgian government and (its) rule and to stop their European accession as long as the Georgian Dream party is in power.”
Calling attention to her comments on social media, Anton Bendarjevskiy, director of the Oeconomus Institute, commented: “So the former Georgian president, who only left office six months ago, goes to an international forum and demands that as many and stronger sanctions be imposed on her country as possible, because that will kill the Georgian economy, and then she and the political forces that support him can take power in the country.”
Hungary has faced a similar situation, with the opposition Tisza Party MEP Kinga Kollár celebrating the fact that sanctions have hurt her country by way of withholding needed funds and thus helped increase the chances of her party ousting Prime Minister Viktor Orbán from power.
The Georgian Dream party has long been under scrutiny for its close ties to and preference for Russia, accusations of helping Putin evade sanctions, and its anti-Western stances, including Irakli Kobakhidze’s battle against what he has called a “Global War Party.”
Ritter’s Rant Ep. 5: Grossi’s got to go
The IAEA’s incestuous relationship with Israel has destroyed its credibility
Scott Ritter | June 16, 2025
World on the brink of new nuclear arms race – report
Israel is among the nations “believed to be modernizing its nuclear arsenal,” the Stockholm-based SIPRI institute has said
RT | June 17, 2025
The world risks plunging into a “new dangerous arms race” as most nuclear powers seek to modernize and expand their arsenals, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has warned in its annual review.
The pace of disarmament is slowing as nuclear-armed states launch “intensive” arsenal modernization programs, the research center said in a paper published on Monday.
Russia and the US, which together possess around 90% of all nuclear weapons in the world, are set to see the last remaining bilateral nuclear arms control treaty – the New START – expire in February 2026, SIPRI noted. The agreement limits the number of simultaneously deployed strategic nuclear warheads.
Moscow suspended its participation in the treaty in 2023, citing the impracticality of the inspection regime due to deep Western involvement in the Ukraine conflict. However, it maintained that it remained open to dialogue on the issue if the arsenals of Washington’s NATO allies were also considered.
Washington, meanwhile, insists on including China in any new agreement. According to SIPRI, China possesses the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal in the world and could rival “either Russia or the USA” in the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles by the end of the decade.
The UK and France are also modernizing their nuclear forces, focusing on nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, the report said. Paris additionally aims to develop a new ballistic missile warhead.
“The era of reductions in the number of nuclear weapons in the world, which had lasted since the end of the Cold War, is coming to an end,” said Hans M. Kristensen, Associate Senior Fellow with SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Program. “We see a clear trend of growing nuclear arsenals, sharpened nuclear rhetoric, and the abandonment of arms control agreements.”
The research institute also listed Israel among the nations “believed to be modernizing its nuclear arsenal.” While Israel does not officially acknowledge possessing nuclear weapons, SIPRI pointed to tests of new missile propulsion systems and alleged upgrades at the plutonium production reactor site in Dimona.
West Jerusalem could have up to 90 nuclear warheads at its disposal, the report stated. The findings come as Israel conducts air raids against Iranian nuclear and military facilities, claiming Tehran is nearing the creation of a nuclear bomb. Iran, which maintains that its nuclear program is peaceful, was not mentioned in the SIPRI report.
Report: Israel threatens “Dahiya-style” assault on Tehran in bid to destabilise Iran
MEMO | June 16, 2025
Israel is preparing a “Dahiya-style” military operation targeting the Iranian capital, Tehran. The plan, disclosed by Israeli broadcaster Channel 14, reportedly seeks to destabilise Iran’s government through systematic bombing of strategic sites while coercing mass evacuation from densely populated areas.
The operation, is said to have been greenlit by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Israel Katz, draws directly from Israel’s controversial military doctrine first employed during its 2006 war on Lebanon.
That assault saw the wholesale destruction of the Dahiya district in southern Beirut—a stronghold of Hezbollah—marking the beginning of what military officials would later describe as a deliberate strategy of “disproportionate force” and the targeting of civilian infrastructure to achieve political objectives.
In a message addressed to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Katz issued a stark warning: “Tehran will be treated like Beirut.” Israeli military sources confirmed that the occupation army have begun issuing Farsi-language warnings to residents near so-called dual-use or military sites, a tactic previously deployed in Gaza and Lebanon to pre-emptively displace civilian populations ahead of attacks.
Israeli airstrikes early Monday targeted the Iranian Ministry of Defence, the Foreign Ministry, and a civilian home adjacent to the Ministry of Communications. The assault marks a significant escalation and comes amid a wider regional campaign that has already seen Israel strike targets in Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen and Gaza where the Zionist state has been accused of committing genocide.
The Dahiya Doctrine represents a formal Israeli military strategy of deliberate and complete destruction. The doctrine openly advocates for the obliteration of entire civilian neighbourhoods, regardless of the proportionality or legality of such action. Human rights groups and legal experts have long condemned it as a doctrine of annihilation—tantamount to collective punishment—intended to erase communities under the guise of military necessity
Under international law, such tactics, particularly those that fail to distinguish between civilian and combatant populations, are explicitly prohibited. Yet Israeli officials have repeatedly reaffirmed their commitment to the doctrine.
Diplomacy as deception: The West’s war on Iran was pre-planned
By Hamid Bahrami | MEMO | June 16, 2025
As bombs rain down on Iranian cities and missiles arc across the skies of the Middle East, we must speak plainly: this is not merely a war between Israel and Iran. It is a war against sovereignty, waged by an Israeli-Western coalition that has long sought to dismantle any state in the Global South that dares to chart an independent course.
Iran is not the aggressor in this conflict. It is defending itself, legally, historically, and strategically from a premeditated assault. The airstrikes Israel launched on 13 June were not acts of deterrence; they were the execution phase of a long-orchestrated operation aimed at crippling Iran’s infrastructure, destabilising its political system, and ultimately returning it to the kind of failed state once imposed on Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Each of those nations was de-developed under the guise of humanitarian intervention or nuclear containment. Iran is now in the crosshairs of the same playbook.
The deception runs deep. In the lead-up to the strikes, Western officials and Israeli intelligence deliberately projected calm signalling to Tehran and financial markets alike that diplomacy would continue as scheduled. Negotiations in Oman were a trap. While diplomats discussed terms, war rooms in Tel Aviv and Washington finalised strike packages. It was a bait-and-strike strategy, the diplomatic equivalent of ambush warfare.
Israel’s justification for the attacks, its supposed fear of Iranian nuclear capability, collapses under scrutiny. Nuclear talks had resumed. Iran remained a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. And yet, Israel, a nuclear state that refuses to join the NPT, launched strikes that violated international law and killed dozens of civilians, including scientists and infrastructure workers.
Even more cynically, Tel Aviv has recycled a familiar accusation to justify civilian casualties: that Iran uses “human shields.” This baseless claim was used repeatedly in Gaza, where hospitals and apartment buildings were levelled on the pretence of targeting militants. Independent investigations have exposed the hollowness of these claims. Israel’s propaganda is less about evidence than about immunizing itself from consequence.
Despite years of Israeli terrorism, including the 13 June decapitation strikes that killed top Iranian commanders such as IRGC Chief Hossein Salami, Chief of General Staff Mohammad Bagheri, and missile-program leader Amir Ali Hajizadeh—Tehran has responded with calculated and disciplined force. Iran’s retaliatory strikes have been tightly focused on military bases, infrastructure, and command centers, avoiding civilian neighbourhoods and essential public services. In contrast, Israel has repeatedly struck residential buildings. Iran’s measured and purposeful response is not a weakness; it is a strategic posture rooted in moral strength and operational precision.
Some analysts have suggested that Israel expected internal dissent within Iran to paralyze the state’s response. This was a fatal miscalculation. While Iran is home to deep ideological divisions, foreign attack unites Iranians across the political spectrum. Even critics of the Islamic Republic now rally to its defence, because the threat is existential. In the face of foreign aggression, factionalism yields to nationalism.
The bigger threat now lies ahead. While headlines speak of “Israeli requests” for American support, the truth is that the United States has been involved from the outset. B-2 bombers were repositioned to Diego Garcia months ago. Joint U.S.–Israeli strike planning began under the pretext of nuclear containment. The deployment of bunker-busting bombs, diplomatic cover at the UN, intelligence sharing, and regional base access—all point to a war co-authored by Washington. They are simply waiting for Iran’s retaliatory capacity to be sufficiently degraded before launching a broader campaign.
Make no mistake: this is not a regional conflict. It is a US–Israel war, aided by Arab authoritarian regimes like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan. The West have lent support, whether through intelligence, logistics and approval. Iran is being isolated and encircled not because it poses a nuclear threat, but because it has refused to submit.
But Iran has deterrents of its own. The global economy cannot ignore the energy risks that come with escalating war in the Persian Gulf. Already, oil prices are surging. Tehran knows that its geopolitical power isn’t limited to missiles. Economic leverage, especially when energy prices are high, can shift political calculus in Washington, Brussels, and Riyadh.
There is also a deeper hypocrisy at play. Israel continues to possess a clandestine nuclear arsenal while Iran, still technically within the NPT framework, is sanctioned and threatened for the potential of one. This double standard is untenable. There are only two realistic futures in the region: either Israel is disarmed, or Iran becomes nuclear-armed. The era of unilateral vulnerability is over.
Iran now reassesses its participation in the NPT and reevaluates the assumption that international law provides any meaningful protection when facing nuclear apartheid. If the international community is serious about peace, it must begin not with limiting Iran’s defences, but with dismantling Israel’s offensive capabilities.
Finally, this war must be recognized for what it is: a strategic campaign to eliminate resistance in the Global South. From Baghdad to Tripoli, from Damascus to Tehran, the message has always been the same, those who seek autonomy must be brought to heel. Iran’s independence goal is not just political; it is existential. And every sovereign nation, every citizen with a memory of colonialism or foreign subjugation, should see themselves in its struggle.
What’s happening today is not merely a war on Iran. It is a war on independence, dignity, and the right of nations to choose their own futures.
Zenith of Western asymmetric warfare in Iran and Ukraine
By Drago Bosnic | June 16, 2025
Achieving strategic advantage over your opponents has been at the center of every conflict in human history. In modern times, this is accomplished with long-range strike systems and weapons of mass destruction. However, countries that are at a disadvantage in that regard can opt for asymmetric methods to achieve similar or sometimes even more efficient results. Ever since the advent of nuclear weapons, direct conflicts between global powers have been avoided, as all sides understand there would be no winners in such a war (or at least they did until recently).
Thus, the importance of intelligence services and other forms of non-kinetic warfare grew exponentially. The ability to infiltrate your opponent’s state apparatus is of the utmost importance, while maintaining plausible deniability adds to the strategic depth of defense, as the attacker can simply deny the involvement of its special services.
The political West has been at the forefront of such operations for years, targeting all of its opponents through asymmetric means, particularly through proxies. This is especially true for Russia, which still has major issues with the Kiev regime agents infiltrating the country and conducting operations of strategic importance. The latest attacks on Russian strategic aviation are a testament to that. It should be noted that Moscow’s services have been quite successful in detecting Western agents as they have decades of experience in doing so.
However, Ukrainian operatives are a different story. Namely, the vast majority of Ukrainians speak fluent Russian and can easily blend in virtually anywhere in the country. They can also obtain Russian citizenship, meaning they could be largely under the radar for years. It’s exceedingly difficult to uncover such plots, particularly if they’re being conducted over the course of several years.
This also holds true for other countries of the multipolar world, including Iran, which has been heavily infiltrated by foreign agents, as evidenced by the sheer number of assassinations and so-called decapitation strikes on top Iranian commanders. It’s still unclear how exactly Israel managed to create such a large network of its agents within Iran, but their operations have had a strategic impact on the ongoing conflict.
The Mossad had very close ties with the SAVAK, former Iranian secret police and intelligence service during the Shah era, so it’s quite possible that the Israelis maintained contacts with their Iranian associates even after 1979. They could’ve easily played the role of sleeper agents who were activated by Israel at the moment of the strike. In addition, new operatives could’ve infiltrated Iran from neighboring countries, particularly Azerbaijan which maintains a close partnership with Israel.
Apart from being a major client for the Israeli Military Industrial Complex (MIC), which was instrumental in Baku’s takeover of native Armenian lands in Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), Azerbaijan also has irredentist ambitions toward northwestern Iran, where a homonymous area has more ethnic Azeris than the South Caucasus country itself. The regime in Baku certainly sees the ongoing events as a perfect opportunity to achieve its goals, which could be a major factor in Israeli operations.
Numerous observers have also pointed out the many similarities between the actions of the Kiev regime and Israel, as both have been conducting these asymmetric hybrid attacks deep within Russia and Iran, respectively. The drones that were used in attacks on Moscow’s long-range aviation and Iranian air defenses operate in a virtually identical manner, targeting strategic assets from within.
There are two possibilities in this case. Either the Mossad is involved in training the SBU and/or GUR, or they’re all connected into a much larger network run from Washington DC and London. The latter is much likelier, as both SBU and GUR have strong ties with the CIA and MI6, respectively. In other words, the US-led political West is conducting these operations in an attempt to secure a strategic advantage over its rivals.
This is also done through so-called “international” organizations such as the UN, OSCE, IAEA, etc. For instance, after the start of the special military operation (SMO), Russian military intelligence uncovered that OSCE, which is supposed to be a neutral organization monitoring the ceasefire, was actually helping the Kiev regime target Russian forces by giving the former access to its cameras along the frontline. Moscow promptly ordered OSCE personnel to leave after this.
Some sources are reporting that the IAEA also did something similar in Iran, by giving Israel information on the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists. If true, this could explain how the Mossad was so effective in eliminating them virtually on the first day of the attack. In addition to scientists, a large number of high-ranking Iranian military officers were eliminated within the country. This is perfectly in line with the political West’s doctrine of so-called “decapitation” attacks that aim to paralyze the chain of command in a targeted country.
Many of the most prominent warmongers in Washington DC have been calling for such strikes, even against opponents like Russia. And indeed, in the last several years, there have been a number of assassination attempts against top-ranking Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin himself. Once again, this was done through proxies such as the Neo-Nazi junta.
In some cases, this could’ve also worked, as evidenced by disturbing revelations regarding the mysterious death of the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian. The aftermath of Raisi’s death has been disastrous for Iran and its Axis of Resistance. By the end of last year, Syria fell to NATO’s terrorist proxies, while Hezbollah’s long-time leader Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated, followed by a number of high-ranking Iranian and pro-Iranian figures at around a similar time.
The strategic consequences of these events cannot be overstated, meaning that the idea they were purely accidental is extremely unlikely, to put it mildly. By the time Israel attacked Iran, the geopolitical situation in the Middle East shifted dramatically in Israel’s favor. This made launching strategic attacks much easier, as it didn’t have to worry about Syrian air defenses.
Mossad operatives on the ground used not only drones, but also missiles (such as the “Spike NLOS”). Worse yet, it seems they didn’t even have to stay in the country to launch these strikes, as both drones and missiles were controlled remotely, which is yet another indicator of the same modus operandi used by the Kiev regime. Military sources indicate that Israel also used portable electronic warfare (EW) systems to disrupt Iranian air defenses, making it far easier for its missiles to reach targets within Iran.
As previously mentioned, this sort of deep infiltration also enabled Israel to assassinate top-ranking personnel. Reportedly, this includes General Mohammad Bagheri, the Chief of the Iranian General Staff; Hossein Salami, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and David Sheikhian, commanding officer of the IRGC’s air defenses. Many other senior military leaders were also killed.
Although Israeli strikes were far more efficient than those launched by the Kiev regime, it’s impossible not to draw parallels with high-profile assassinations of numerous Russian public and military figures, including Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the late commander of Russian NBC Protection Troops, who was killed in a terrorist attack back in mid-December. It should be noted that he was investigating US involvement in biological warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine and was in no way connected to military operations against the Neo-Nazi junta forces.
Thus, the only logical conclusion is that his assassination was certainly not conducted by the SBU of their own volition. Namely, such operations require significant resources that would be reserved for important operations to undermine the Russian military. The only thing that was undermined is the investigation into the Pentagon’s massive biowarfare program.
The Kiev regime conducted many similar attacks on Russian scientists, including Daniil Mikheev, a coordinator of new unmanned systems for the Ministry of Defense; Konstantin Ogarkov, an employee of a defense research institute in Voronezh; Igor Kolesnikov, an engineer at a design bureau in the Tula oblast (region); Sergei Potapov, a cybersecurity defense specialist from Nizhny Novgorod; Valery Smirnov, one of the leading experts in programs for radio-electronic protection of strategic facilities.
In January 2024, a car with officers from the electronic intelligence headquarters in the Bryansk oblast was blown up, while on the night of April 17-18, Evgeny Rytnikov, the head of the design bureau of the Bryansk Electromechanical Plant, the developer of the now legendary “Krasukha” EW systems, was also killed. Such assassinations are a testament to the terrorist nature of the Neo-Nazi junta, as all these people were non-combatants.
Among the prominent Iranian scientists killed by Mossad were Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, Dr. Ahmad Reza Zolfaghari, Dr. Abdolhamid Minuchehr, Dr. Amir Hosein Fekhi and Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi. Once again, it’s impossible not to draw parallels, despite the fact that Israeli strikes were far more strategically consequential.
Still, the main conclusion is that the political West continues to use its proxies to wage war on several countries simultaneously, while also maintaining plausible deniability.
The only way to counter such attacks is for the targeted countries to enforce tighter control over communications, as well as enlarge their intelligence apparatus. While these measures could be seen as “totalitarian” (and will no doubt be presented as such by the mainstream propaganda machine), there’s simply no other way to blunt the blade of the political West’s modern asymmetric hybrid warfare.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
