Iran in excellent position to prevail in war with US, Israel: John Mearsheimer
Press TV – March 25,2026
Senior political scientist John Mearsheimer says Iran has a good chance of dominating the ongoing war with the United States and Israel given the way the Islamic Republic controls the economic repercussions of the conflict.
Speaking to Piers Morgan Uncensored, Mearsheimer said the US and Israel failed to achieve their objectives in the aggression on Iran, which was to decapitate the government and force Iranians to submit to their demands in the first two or three days of the war.
He said, however, that the war has continued for nearly a month and the Iranians are now in a better position to dictate their demands since they control the flow of oil and other energy products from the Persian Gulf to other parts of the world.
“What’s happened here is that we did not achieve a quick and decisive victory and we are now in a long war, a war of attrition, and that’s a war that the Iranians prepared for and that’s a war that the Iranians are in an excellent position to prevail in,” Mearsheimer said.
He said if the United States decides to further escalate the aggression, it could face devastating responses from Iran that affect not only regional countries and American bases they host but also the entire international economy.
“They have the ability to go up the escalation ladder and tank the international economy.”
Donald Trump, the president of the United States, said on March 24 that he was considering holding talks with Iran to end the ongoing confrontation which many believe has put him in a very precarious position.
That comes as he has repeatedly claimed victory since launching the joint aggression with Israel against Iran on February 28.
Iran has yet to accept the US request for negotiations as authorities have indicated that the country will continue its reprisal attacks on US and Israeli positions while controlling the flow of oil in the Persian Gulf to ultimately punish the aggressors.
Iran warns US: Do not call your retreat an agreement
Press TV – March 25, 2026
Spokesman for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, Lieutenant Colonel Ebrahim Zolfaqari, says the strategic power that the enemy boasted about has “turned into a strategic defeat.”
“If the self-proclaimed superpower of the world could have escaped this predicament, it would have done so by now. Do not call your defeat an agreement,” he said on Wednesday.
This comes as US President Donald Trump backed away from his 48-hour ultimatum to strike Iran’s power plants after the Islamic Republic warned that all energy and power installations in the region would be targeted in retaliation.
Trump claimed in a post on his Truth Social media platform that the US and Iran have had “very good and constructive conversations over the past two days regarding a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in [West Asia].”
A source familiar with internal discussions in Tehran said Monday that there has been no official contact between Tehran and Washington.
“The era of your promises is over. Today, there are only two fronts in the world: truth and falsehood. And every freedom-seeking pursuer of truth will not be deceived by your media waves,” Zolfaqari said.
The spokesman further questioned the extent of internal divisions among enemies, asking sarcastically, “Has the level of your infighting reached the point of negotiating with yourselves?”
Zolfaqari also delivered a stark assessment of regional economic prospects, asserting that neither past levels of US investments in the region nor previous energy and oil prices would return.
“Stability in the region is ensured by the powerful hand of our armed forces,” the spokesman said. “Stability through [our] power.”
He also made clear that no previous state of affairs would return unless “the very thought of taking [military] action against the Iranian nation is completely erased from your vile minds.”
“Our first and last word from day one has been, is, and will be: someone like us will not come to terms with someone like you—not now, and not ever,” he further said.
Neighbors first – Moscow signals shift in energy strategy
RT | March 25, 2026
Russia plans to prioritize energy exports to neighboring countries deemed less exposed to global disruptions, Energy Minister Sergey Tsivilev has said.
Recent US-Israeli strikes on Iran and Tehran’s response have shaken global oil and liquefied natural gas markets, disrupting supplies from the Persian Gulf and casting uncertainty over future production.
”The entire world will have to reevaluate supply chains and reassess risks,” Tsivilev told reporters on Wednesday. While Russia’s own exports have not been directly impacted by the Middle East crisis, the country will still adjust its strategy, he added.
“We will prioritize energy deliveries to our closest neighbors, with whom we share land borders and face fewer risks,” the minister said. “We will also reconsider the logistics of oil transportation.”
Shift away from ‘unreliable’ EU
Russia has long favored stable, long-term energy contracts, particularly through pipeline infrastructure, which historically underpinned its gas exports to Western Europe – even during the Cold War.
The European Union, however, has pushed for spot-market pricing, arguing that flexibility outweighs the risks of volatility. This disagreement contributed to tensions even before the bloc declared it would phase out Russian oil and gas imports following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
Moscow has since labeled European buyers as unreliable and has been redirecting its long-term energy strategy toward Asian partners, especially neighboring China.
Bad timing for snubbing Russian oil
Western countries backing Kiev have sought to curb Russia’s energy revenues, including through measures such as a price cap on its oil exports. Moscow has responded by rerouting shipments via what critics have claimed is a ‘shadow fleet’ of tankers.
Ukraine has also targeted Russian oil and gas infrastructure and vessels suspected of carrying Russian hydrocarbons, including in international waters – which Moscow calls Western-enabled piracy.
The energy price shock caused by the Iran war is prompting neutral nations that previously accommodated the Western agenda to reconsider their approach.
On Tuesday, the Philippines, a traditional US ally, received its first shipment of Russian crude in years, local media reported. Around 100,000 tons of oil were delivered from the port of Kozmino, the export terminal of the Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean pipeline system. The fuel is intended for a refinery in Bataan province.
Brussels warns Slovakia over ‘discriminatory’ dual fuel pricing targeting foreign drivers
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | March 25, 2026
The European Commission has warned Slovakia that its newly introduced dual diesel pricing system — charging foreign drivers more than locals — violates EU law, setting up a fresh clash with Prime Minister Robert Fico over energy policy.
The dispute centers on emergency measures adopted by the Slovak government on March 18, which impose a 30-day restriction on diesel refueling and introduce higher prices for vehicles with foreign license plates. The policy is aimed at curbing “fuel tourism,” as drivers from neighboring countries flock to Slovakia to take advantage of significantly lower diesel prices.
A spokesperson for the European Commission said the measures were “highly discriminatory and contrary to EU law,” stressing that member states cannot introduce pricing policies that differentiate based on nationality.
“While we understand the need to support citizens, especially in these times, measures must not discriminate on the basis of nationality or undermine the integrity of our single market,” the Commission said on Tuesday.
Brussels also cautioned against unilateral action, emphasizing that energy and market disruptions should be handled through coordinated EU-wide measures rather than national interventions.
The Slovak government has defended the policy, arguing it is necessary to protect domestic supply. As reported by Denník N, Fico said the decision was justified given the circumstances and expressed frustration at the Commission’s stance, suggesting Brussels had shown little understanding of Slovakia’s position.
The move comes amid mounting concerns over fuel shortages due to both the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and Ukraine’s refusal to restart the transit of Russian crude to Europe via the Druzhba pipeline. The pipeline has been offline since January, leaving Slovakia facing potential supply constraints.
In response, Bratislava has sought to prioritize domestic consumers by limiting exports and discouraging foreign drivers from refueling within its borders. Under the new system, drivers with foreign plates are charged prices aligned with those in neighboring countries such as Austria and Poland, while Slovak residents continue to benefit from lower rates.
The price gap stems from Slovakia’s refinery sector, which has been selling diesel below broader European market levels, creating a strong incentive for cross-border fuel purchases.
The dispute also reflects broader tensions between Slovakia, Hungary, Ukraine, and Brussels over energy transit. Both Bratislava and Budapest have pushed Kyiv to restore flows through the Druzhba pipeline, while simultaneously blocking a proposed €90 billion EU financial package for Ukraine in ongoing negotiations.
The European Commission has offered to send technical experts and suggested EU funding could help cover repair costs, but no agreement has yet been reached.
Both governments in Hungary and Slovakia, however, have accused Brussels of hollow words, claiming the European Commission has sided with Ukraine over the EU member states. Hungary, in particular, believes the delay in restarting the transit is intended to influence next month’s critical parliamentary elections.
Hungary to halt gas deliveries to Ukraine – Orban
RT | March 25, 2026
Hungary will gradually halt natural gas deliveries to Ukraine until Kiev restores the flow of Russian oil through the Druzhba pipeline, Prime Minister Viktor Orban has announced.
In a video posted to his Facebook page on Wednesday, Orban said that Ukraine has been blocking the operation of the Soviet-era oil pipeline for 30 days. “As long as Ukraine does not provide oil, it will not receive gas from Hungary,” he said.
Orban stated that gas that would have been sent to Ukraine will instead be stored in Hungarian facilities, adding that the move is necessary considering that Ukraine “is also attacking the southern gas pipeline that supplies Hungary,” referring to the TurkStream route that brings Russian gas to Hungary via Türkiye and the Balkans.
“We will defend Hungary’s energy security, the protected petrol price, and the reduced gas prices,” Orban declared. He said the country has so far been able to “successfully defend against Ukrainian blackmail” thanks to the protected price scheme, adding that Hungarians pay the lowest prices at gas stations in all of Europe.
Orban’s announcement comes amid a long-running energy dispute between Budapest and Kiev after Ukraine halted oil shipments through the Druzhba pipeline in late January, citing supposed damage from a Russian drone strike.
Moscow has denied the accusations while Hungary and Slovakia, both heavily reliant on the pipeline, have similarly doubted Kiev’s justification, accusing it of deliberately blocking the flow as political blackmail.
Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said that satellite imagery shows the pipeline is fully operational and that Kiev’s refusal to allow a joint inspection proves the decision was political.
Budapest has retaliated by vetoing a €90 billion ($104 billion) EU loan for Ukraine, blocking a new round of sanctions against Russia, and opposing Kiev’s EU membership bid. Orban has said that Budapest will not back down until the pipeline restarts.
Embarrassing Pivot: U.S. considers dropping Iran oil sanctions amid war
By Alan MACLEOD | MintPress News | March 22, 2026
Forced into a humiliating U-turn amid a potential global economic meltdown, the Trump administration announced today that it may remove sanctions on Iranian oil already at sea.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that the move to free up 140 million barrels of oil was aimed at preventing China gaining from the situation. “That’s about 10 days to two weeks of supply that the Iranians had been pushing out that would have all gone to China,” he said. “In essence, we will be using the Iranian barrels against the Iranians to keep the price down for the next 10 or 14 days as we continue this campaign.”
He also noted that the U.S. government was considering a unilateral release of its oil reserves, in order to calm the market, which has seen prices almost double from $53 per barrel in January to $97 today.
“When we go through, as we plan, to unsanction the Iranian oil, that oil will go up to a market price, and it will end up in places other than China. It can flow into Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Japan, India, who have been good actors in this,” Bessent added.
No matter how the Trump administration spins their move, there is no doubt that this represents an embarrassing climb down – one which drew mockery on social media. “This is literally the dumbest war in human history. No hyperbole,” said Aaron Bastani of Novara Media. “Next up: US asks Iran to join anti-Iran coalition,” joked satirist Karl Sharro.
In response to U.S. and Israeli attacks that killed its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz on March 2. The narrow sea passage between the Islamic Republic and Arabia is a major choke point of global trade, through which around one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas supply flows.
The result has been economic and political pandemonium, which Trump administration officials appeared not to have anticipated. “Iran War Will Lower Energy Prices” ran the headline of a March 12 Wall Street Journal article penned by Peter Navarro, Trump’s Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing.
Trump appears to have believed that his Iran attack could be completed within hours, and with little blowback or fallout. Instead, the Islamic Republic has been able to hit American bases across the region, spread panic throughout the Gulf States, and create shockwaves in the global economy.
In response, Trump demanded his NATO and Asian allies come to his aid, and send their armed forces to the region to forcibly open the strait. Declaring it a “very small endeavor,” he stated:
“I really am demanding that these countries come in and protect their own territory because it is the place from where they get their energy. And they should come and they should protect it. You could make the case that maybe we shouldn’t be here at all, because we don’t need it.”
Instead, however, his allies responded with a resounding “no.” “Canada is not participating in the offensive operations of Israel and the United States, and will not, ever,” Prime Minister Mark Carney said. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius was equally adamant; “This is not our war. We have not started it. What does Donald Trump expect a handful or two handfuls of European frigates to do in the Strait of Hormuz that the powerful U.S. Navy cannot do?” he asked.
Most alarmingly for Trump, however, was the reaction from Belgian prime minister, Bart De Wever. In an interview with local newspaper, L’Echo, he stated that Washington’s Iran attacks will force Europe to come to a quick and independent agreement with Russia, in order to avoid financial ruin amid an impending energy crisis.
“We must normalize relations with Russia and regain access to cheap energy. That is common sense,” he said, adding, “In private, European leaders agree with me, but no one dares to say it out loud. We must end the conflict in the interest of Europe, without being naïve towards Putin.”
Trump has said that he is not worried that this war will turn into another Vietnam. Yet, with oil prices surging, public resentment mounting, a global economy potentially on the brink, and key allies openly rebelling against his dictates, it is quite possible that this conflict could spiral out of Washington’s control and do similar damage to the American empire.
Strait Of Hormuz closure brings Empire to brink
By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | March 24, 2026
Since the criminal Zionist-American war on Iran erupted, the Strait of Hormuz has remained stubbornly closed. Despite Donald Trump’s dire threats, Tehran has brought maritime traffic to a total standstill. The Empire has futilely scrambled to assemble an international coalition to reopen the economically vital waterway ever since, only to be rebuffed. NATO allies have been slammed for making a “foolish mistake”, by refusing to help militarily secure the Strait. In truth, there is no hope it can be forcibly reopened in the foreseeable future.
As Bloomberg reports, while discussions are ongoing among G7 members over potential methods of restarting trade in the Strait, the general consensus among US allies is this can’t happen until hostilities ease, or outright end. Bank of America’s head of research has ominously warned oil prices could rise above $200 per barrel “if disruptions persist for multiple months.” He forecast that if the Strait isn’t reopened within days, its closure could precipitate a global recession.
Tehran imposing a blockade on the Strait was absolutely inevitable, and widely predicted, in the event of war. Even if the conflict ends soon, lasting damage has already been inflicted in many economic spheres, and the effects will be increasingly felt by average citizens in the form of higher prices for essential goods. Global shipping has been thrown into disarray, with major logistics firms cancelling routes in West Asia, producing higher transport and insurance rates, and delays. Again, increased costs will be passed onto consumers.
In all, approximately 11% of global maritime trade passes through the Strait annually, accounting for 20% of the world’s total oil supply. Iran’s blockade, coupled with Resistance strikes on refineries throughout the region, will cause lasting chaos in energy markets and impact availability for years to come. Yet, despite a preponderant mainstream focus on the implications of the Strait’s closure for oil and gas, many vital commodities underpinning the operation of major industries worldwide also regularly transit through in substantial quantities.
Their availability and cost is in some cases likewise wildly fluctuating, impacting agriculture, construction, manufacturing, and in turn many fields of everyday life for countless people. And this is only the beginning. Approximately one third of the world’s seaborne fertilizer supply passes through the Strait every year. Before the war, Gulf states ranked highly among international fertilizer suppliers. Up to 43% of global trade in urea – a fundamental component of food production – flowed from the region.
The price of urea can affect production costs by as much as 90%. Now spring is upon us, and planting season has commenced across the West, urea has abruptly become a scarce commodity. Many farmers are already operating without profit, and grave concerns about how long this can be sustained widely proliferate. The prospect of Western sanctions on Russia – a major producer of fertilizer – being lifted to ameliorate the market bedlam grows ever-more likely as time goes on.
Sulfur is a core element of fertilizer production, and pre-war, the Strait provided up to 45% of the world’s supply. As an essay by elite US military academy West Point cautioned on March 13th, the price of sulfur has to date surged 25%, “squeezing one of the most consequential inputs to modern industrial power.” Sulfuric acid is not only vital for basic economic functions, “but also modern warfighting.” In a bitter irony, the Strait of Hormuz’s blockade will cripple Washington’s defence industry – and ability to maintain its conflict with Iran:
“[Sulfur] is needed for everything from the copper in the American electrical grid to the semiconductors in precision-guided munitions… For military planners and strategists, the looming loss of sulfur is a pre-logistical crisis…Chemicals like sulfuric acid sit upstream of copper extraction, battery-material processing, and semiconductor fabrication, meaning they can determine whether the US military can maintain industrial base production of electrical and digital systems needed to sustain the fight as munitions are expended and combat losses mount.”
Copper provides the “clearest example” of why the Strait’s blockade is “a warfighting problem” of historic proportions for the Empire. The widely-used metal is “embedded in the transformers, motors, and communications hardware” enabling US bases “to operate and defense factories to function.” This quickly translates into “a readiness and resilience problem” for the military. It will take over 30,000 kilograms of copper to replace US radar systems destroyed by the Resistance in Bahrain and Qatar alone.
Iran controls Strait of Hormuz, dictates terms of war and peace as US excursion backfires
By Pravin Sawhney | Press TV | March 24, 2026
While the US and Israel started the new war in West Asia, it is Israel and Iran who, with clarity on their war objectives, are now pitted against one another.
Given this, two things are likely. One, notwithstanding President Donald Trump’s latest claim of negotiations, the war will not end anytime soon. Instead, it will escalate.
And two, since the world is multipolar, the regional geopolitics will no longer be the same.
Two regional fundamentals would be impacted: the control over the Strait of Hormuz, and the security arrangement between the US and GCC (Persian Gulf Cooperation Council) countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman), which delivered the petro dollars critical for stabilisation of the US economy and its great power status in the world.
Unmindful of the reality that the world is in a once-in-a-century change and that Iran would not bend despite decades of US sanctions, President Trump started this war as ‘an excursion’ as he himself put it. Trump was made to believe by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu that, like Venezuela, Iran, with its senior leadership decapitated, would be an open and shut case.
Within, the wily Netanyahu knew that this would not happen, and that the decapitation would lead to a larger war, giving him greater control over the US military to achieve his war objectives, including the so-called “regime change”.
Fully aware that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz at the beginning of war, Netanyahu publicly gave out the alternative, which, by the land route through Saudi Arabia, would come to Israel and onto Europe through the Mediterranean Sea.
With this approach, only the Asian countries would need to use the Hormuz.
To escalate the war, Israel hit Iran’s South Pars gas field, with the retaliation coming on the energy infrastructure of Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia and especially the Israeli Haifa oil refinery, whose incapacitation would lead to a shortage of fuel for Israel’s war machinery.
Moreover, once the US and Israel struck Iran’s nuclear facilities, Tehran hit Israel’s Dimona town, which houses its nuclear plant, with the warning that if Iran’s nuclear facilities are hit again, then Iran’s strike would be on Dimona itself.
This was Israel’s red line, since in no war has the Dimona nuclear facility been touched.
Iran’s warning also serves the purpose of testing Israel’s nuclear deterrence. For instance, if Israel decides to hit Iran’s nuclear facilities again, with reprisal coming from Iran, then the region would be watching what Israel would do: would it use its nukes or keep quiet, in which case its nuclear bluff would be called off.
Meanwhile, Iran had been preparing for this war since 1988, when its eight-year war with Iraq ended. This includes building underground missile and drone cities, setting up production lines, and preparing regional allies like Houthis and Hezbollah. Enormous help came from Russia and China for its military preparations.
Moreover, Iran learnt the right lessons from the 12-day war of June 2025. Notable amongst them switching to the Chinese Baidu-3 satellite constellation by abandoning the US’s GPS. This explains why, unlike the 12-day war, this time the targeting of Iranian missiles and drones at long ranges has been accurate.
Special attention was given to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, including the Strait of Hormuz. This entire stretch is laced with formidable undersea capabilities comprising anti-ship cruise missiles, different types of naval mines, midget submarines that can fire both missiles and torpedoes, and fast crafts capable of hitting the hull of tankers.
Because of these, Iran now controls the passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has called upon the NATO nations to help the US Navy break Iran’s stranglehold on the oil and gas lifeline, which these nations, understanding the suicidal nature of the task, have refused.
This has created an unforeseen dilemma for Trump, where, on the one hand, it cannot declare victory and leave the region since Iran, controlling this waterway, is regulating the commercial traffic on its terms.
The latter involves countries that use this chokepoint to trade their cargo in Chinese Yuan instead of the US dollar. This would end the US Petro dollar arrangement with GCC, where they sell oil and gas only in US dollars and get the US security by having their bases on its soil.
On the other hand, with the end of petrodollars, the US will not be able to manage its huge national debt of USD 40 trillion, leading to economic instability in the US and curtailing its ability to sustain some 800 military bases across the globe.
This would be the end of the US as the world’s military hegemon.
To top it all, Iran has refused the American offer of a ceasefire. It instead wants permanent peace in West Asia with a list of demands, the most significant being that the US close down all its military bases in the region.
Moreover, the US is realising that all its threats to blow up Iran’s power grids and services, which impact civilian life, are not working.
Iran has warned that it would retaliate with similar actions against all GCC nations and Israel, where the interceptors to stop the Iranian wave of missiles are not working.
Israel, which instigated this war, is on the backfoot and the US’ excursion has backfired with grave consequences to its image as a great power.
As things stand, Iran is dictating the terms of both war and peace in West Asia.
Pravin Sawhney is a New Delhi-based journalist and commentator. He is the editor of FORCE, a magazine focused on national security and defence.
Outlasting the Superpower: The Reasons Why Iran is Beating uhe US and Israel
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | March 24, 2026
As the US-Israeli war of aggression continues to escalate and President Trump makes new threats against Iran’s energy infrastructure, the Islamic Republic and its allies are edging closer towards inflicting a historic defeat on the world’s top superpower. This is not hyperbole; instead, it can be demonstrated through the facts on the ground.
From day one of the attack on Iran, the United States and Israel have proudly claimed to have achieved enormous victories. Initially telling the public that this conflict would only last four days, we are steadily heading towards the one-month mark with no end in sight. So far, there has been no clear war goal articulated, nor is there a real excuse presented as to why it had to happen as it did.
Beyond assassinating Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, a number of other high-ranking officials, as well as striking Iranian infrastructure, there has yet to be any major blow delivered to the Islamic Republic. There is certainly nothing that could be argued to represent a strategic victory for Washington and Tel Aviv either.
In fact, Israel’s assassinations during the 12-day war, in June of 2025, actually delivered a bigger blow to the Iranian military leadership, along with killing nuclear scientists. The Israeli Mossad even succeeded in effectively sabotaging Iranian air defenses at the beginning of the war and successfully utilized a large number of agents to carry out armed action inside the country. This time, the agents appear to have been a relative non-factor, and Iran retaliated much quicker than it did during the 12-day war.
Despite this, day in and day out, US President Donald Trump and his Secretary of War Pete Hegseth continue to present to the public contradictory claims regarding how they are allegedly winning the war.
How Iran is Defeating the US Empire
The US government has repeatedly claimed that Iran’s navy is “at the bottom of the ocean,” that its air force and air defenses have been “destroyed,” while Trump himself claimed that “90% of Iran’s missiles” had been eliminated.
However, the US military itself continues to announce it is targeting more Iranian naval vessels, while the Islamic Republic itself has shown video footage of underground facilities where its naval assets are stored. The Iranian air defenses, which were allegedly destroyed according to the Trump administration, managed to intercept an F-35 fighter jet, forcing it to conduct an emergency landing, while they are shooting enemy drones out of the sky on a daily basis.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force continues to fire wave after wave of ballistic missiles, directly impacting US military facilities across the Persian Gulf and Israeli targets. It also launches its own drone swarms. In addition to the IRGC, the Iranian Armed Forces also have their own separate drone attack units that operate around the clock.
Iranian attacks, along with the support of their Iraqi allies, have now forced a full NATO withdrawal from Iraq, as US forces take round-the-clock missile and drone hits to their bases. Every US base in the Persian Gulf, Iraq, and Jordan has been damaged, in some cases entirely destroyed. Hezbollah also returned to the scene in Lebanon, stronger than ever, with its arms stockpiles replenished, managing to prevent the Israeli military from advancing in south Lebanon, all after both Tel Aviv and Washington claimed that the party had been defeated.
The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier was fired upon and has been forced to retreat, out of active striking distance of Iran, as the USS Gerald R. Ford is in need of repairs. The IRGC even fired missiles at the British-US military base in Diego Garcia, revealing that they possess missiles that can strike targets at over 4,000 kilometers.
Every day or so, there is another surprise that Tehran appears to be able to pull off. What have the Israelis and Americans done in return? They bomb civilian areas, police stations, and oil storage facilities in order to create acid rain across Tehran. They also strike the openings and exits to missile bases, which are simply dug out and remain largely unaffected.
Iran has retaliated each time a new escalation is committed by either the US or Israel, whether that be against oil facilities, water desalination plants, or nuclear facilities. Tehran does not show any signs of weakness; large crowds show up in support of their government.
Because Iran is no longer exporting food during the war, the prices of goods on the shelves have actually decreased, as government subsidies are being offered, as well as free public transport.
The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has meant that the Persian Gulf Arab states have taken enormous economic hits, while the price of oil has skyrocketed and is having a major impact on the global economy. It is an oil crisis worse than that of 1973. Fertilizer costs, too, have increased; over 40% so far.
Things have gotten so bad that the US is now weighing lifting the sanctions on Iran in order to allow purchases of its oil, just to bring the costs down. A move that the Trump administration has tried to repackage as some kind of strategic move, but is evidently a sign of how terribly the war is going for them.
Iran’s oil production is also up to a high that hasn’t been seen in at least 46 years, meaning that since the revolution in 1979 against the US-backed Shah, birthing the Islamic Republic, the country’s production has never reached such levels. As of now, only nations that gain Iran’s permission are able to purchase or transit through the Gulf of Hormuz. In other words, they have total dominance.
Escalation Without a Plan
Donald Trump’s depictions of Iran as a nation that is defeated, without any military capabilities and with a scared remaining leadership, are the opposite of reality. If anything, it appears that the Islamic Republic is only becoming more entrenched and popular, as one would expect given that a foreign attack targeting the nation’s civilian population is ongoing.
Ebrahim Zolfaghari, the spokesman of Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters (Iran’s Unified Military Command), openly mocks the US leadership, even recently stating, “Hey Trump, YOU’RE FIRED! You’re familiar with this sentence. Thank you for your attention to this matter. The Central Headquarters of Khatam al-Anbiya.”
While it is undeniable that the US and Israelis may have the technological edge, they are simply out of their depth and have no viable military strategy. As a next step, it is likely that the US could try to deploy ground forces to take over islands in the Persian Gulf, but this will change nothing even if they succeed. In all likelihood, it will be a costly endeavor that will result in little more than a photo op and fail to actually open the Strait of Hormuz.
Capturing Kharg Island from Iran will not stop Iran from blocking ships from transiting the Persian Gulf; that’s simply not how things work. Tehran may even decide to just allow the US to take it over, then hit it relentlessly with missiles and drones. As for the Strait of Hormuz, as long as Iran has missiles capable of sinking ships and mines that can do the same, it remains closed.
Which brings us to the conclusion: Iran is defeating the United States. Yet, it is not Washington that is making its own decisions; it is clearly under the control of policymakers in Tel Aviv. This is not a war for the United States’ interests—it is a war for Israel’s interests.
The Israeli calculation, as I have been writing about here for Palestine Chronicle for months, is that if they manage to inflict enough damage to Iran’s civil infrastructure—targeting electricity, agriculture, its industrial capacity, oil and gas, water, etc.—then it believes it can weaken the government in the long term. It is a Syrian regime-change tactic, but it is ultimately a costly gamble that doesn’t appear to be working right now. In Syria, the regime change didn’t come during the war; it happened due to the sanctions and lasting devastation to the country.
Israel knows that it is only the United States military that can deliver blows harsh enough to have a chance at crippling Iran in the long run, so it has used its puppet—Donald Trump—to commit to a war that no past administration would dare attempt. The US president is compromised and is willing to drag his nation, as well as the entire West, down in order to please Israel.
This war destroys the US military’s power projection, cripples its role in West Asia, demonstrates it is a liability to allies, while representing a victory for its two top enemies, Russia and China. Washington is also now draining its military stockpiles, compromising its military readiness, should it seek to engage in hostilities with either Moscow or Beijing. Although predicting the future is impossible, as of right now, this is shaping up to be the most disastrous US war, perhaps in its history.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.
Pakistan PM backs Iran’s right to self-defense amid tensions
Al Mayadeen | March 23, 2026
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif affirmed his country’s support for Iran, stressing that Tehran has the legitimate right to defend itself amid the ongoing joint US-Israeli aggression on the West Asian nation.
Sharif expressed “regret over the attack on Iran and the resulting martyrdom and injury of thousands of citizens and officials,” signaling Islamabad’s concern over the humanitarian and political consequences of the confrontation.
His remarks came during a phone call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, reflecting continued high-level coordination between the two neighboring states.
Call for Islamic unity to de-escalate crisis
During the conversation, Sharif emphasized the need for collective action among Muslim-majority countries to reduce tensions and restore regional stability.
He called for coordinated diplomatic efforts, stating that Islamic nations must work together to contain escalation and prevent further deterioration of the situation.
At the same time, he reiterated that Pakistan “stands alongside” Iran, underscoring a political position aligned with Tehran’s framing of the conflict.
Strait of Hormuz cooperation highlighted
Sharif also thanked Iran for its “positive handling” of recent developments, particularly in facilitating the passage of Pakistani vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.
This acknowledgment reflects the strategic importance of maritime routes for Pakistan’s trade and energy security, especially amid heightened tensions in the Gulf.
Ensuring uninterrupted navigation through the strait remains a shared priority for regional states reliant on these critical shipping lanes.
Deep-rooted Iran–Pakistan relations
Iran and Pakistan share a long border and maintain multifaceted relations spanning security, economic, and political domains.
Their geographic proximity has necessitated ongoing coordination, particularly in areas such as border security, counter-smuggling efforts, and addressing armed group activity along shared border.
In addition to security cooperation, the two countries have pursued joint economic initiatives, including energy projects and cross-border trade development.
SAFE Debt Trap: Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet on Unipolar Illusion
By Adrian Korczyński – New Eastern Outlook – March 23, 2026
For Poland—already one of NATO’s most heavily militarized economies—SAFE is therefore not merely a financial instrument but a strategic decision about how deeply the country wishes to anchor itself within the EU’s emerging defense architecture, and at what price.
Introduction: A “Turning Point” Built on Debt
In early 2026, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk described Poland’s €43.7 billion request under the European Union’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme as “a turning point for the security of Poland and Europe.” The statement was vintage Tusk—confident, sweeping, and designed for a headline. Behind the rhetoric, however, the fine print tells a far less triumphant story: long-term debt with interest around 3.17%, repayment schedules stretching toward the 2070s, and procurement rules that effectively redirect part of borrowed funds into specific defense supply chains—including those involving Ukrainian producers.
SAFE, officially presented as a major European defense investment programme, allows the European Commission to raise up to €150 billion on financial markets and lend the funds to member states for military spending. The loans come with relatively favorable terms: maturities of up to 45 years and a ten-year grace period before repayment of principal begins. On paper, the arrangement appears manageable. In practice, it represents a profound long-term commitment. Today’s political leaders can borrow vast sums for weapons systems, drones, and fortifications, while the financial burden will be carried by taxpayers decades into the future.
For Poland—already one of NATO’s most heavily militarized economies—SAFE is therefore not merely a financial instrument but a strategic decision about how deeply the country wishes to anchor itself within the EU’s emerging defense architecture, and at what price.
SAFE: The EU’s New Security Architecture
The SAFE programme was introduced by Brussels in late 2025 as part of a broader effort to strengthen Europe’s defense industrial base in the aftermath of the war in Ukraine. The mechanism is relatively straightforward. The European Commission raises funds on capital markets and redistributes them to participating states as long-term loans earmarked strictly for defense spending. Eligible projects include weapons procurement, ammunition production, and industrial modernization within the defense sector.
Yet SAFE also contains structural conditions that significantly shape how the money can be spent. One of the most consequential provisions is the so-called 65 percent rule: at least 65 percent of components used in projects financed under SAFE must originate from the European Union, the European Economic Area, or Ukraine. In practice, this requirement reinforces specific supply chains and pushes European defense industries toward deeper integration with Ukrainian production networks.
European Commission documents openly describe this as a strategic goal. SAFE, according to the Commission, will help “deepen Ukraine’s integration into the European security ecosystem” and allow member states to purchase defense products from Ukrainian manufacturers within joint procurement frameworks. This reflects the broader process of integrating Ukraine’s wartime defense industry into Europe’s defense economy since 2022.
Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet
Among all EU member states, Poland has emerged as the most ambitious participant in SAFE. Warsaw submitted a request worth approximately €43.7 billion, by far the largest share of the programme’s €150 billion envelope. If fully implemented, the funds would finance dozens of projects, including air-defense systems, artillery production, drones, and modernization of military infrastructure. The first tranche—roughly €6.5 billion, representing about 15 percent of the total—could arrive as early as spring 2026 once all domestic legal procedures are completed.
Prime Minister Tusk has framed the programme primarily as a financial opportunity. According to the government, SAFE offers “long-term capital without pressure on the budget today,” with borrowing costs significantly below commercial rates. Yet even under favorable terms, the sheer scale of the loan carries long-term consequences. Over several decades, total repayments could exceed €60 billion, effectively committing future governments to financial obligations extending well into the second half of the century. The issue is therefore less about immediate affordability than about the cumulative strategic and fiscal trajectory that such borrowing sets in motion.
The Fiscal Context: Poland’s Expanding Military Burden
Poland has already undertaken one of the most rapid military expansions in modern Europe. By 2026, defense spending is projected to reach approximately 4.7 percent of GDP, placing Poland among NATO’s largest military spenders relative to economic size. Major procurement contracts have been signed with the United States and South Korea, including tanks, fighter aircraft, missile systems, and advanced artillery.
At the same time, Poland has been one of Ukraine’s most significant supporters since the beginning of the war in 2022. When military aid, refugee support, and financial assistance are combined, the cumulative cost is estimated at roughly 4.9 percent of Poland’s GDP over several years. Taken together, these commitments mean that nearly one tenth of national economic output has been linked—directly or indirectly—to defense and war-related expenditures.
Against this backdrop, the addition of another €43.7 billion in long-term borrowing inevitably raises questions about fiscal priorities and sustainability. Unlike Hungary, which maintains diplomatic channels open with all parties while negotiating exemptions from EU financial guarantees, Warsaw’s rigid moralism increasingly translates into a balance sheet item: billions in interest payments for weapons that may become obsolete before the loans mature. The demographic pressures, rising housing costs, and uncertain European economic outlook only deepen the gamble.
Ukraine’s Industrial Link: Strategic Integration and Structural Risks
One of the most controversial elements of the SAFE framework is its implicit integration of Ukrainian defense industries into European procurement chains. Because the programme allows member states to purchase equipment produced in Ukraine as part of joint projects, some portion of the funds borrowed by EU governments may ultimately flow to Ukrainian manufacturers. In strategic terms, Brussels presents this as a logical extension of Europe’s security policy: strengthening Ukraine while simultaneously expanding Europe’s industrial base.
However, the policy also intersects with a persistent and widely documented problem—systemic corruption within Ukraine’s wartime economy. A notable example emerged in November 2025, when Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) uncovered a major bribery scheme within the state-owned nuclear company Energoatom. Investigators alleged that contractors were forced to pay kickbacks of 10 to 15 percent in order to secure contracts, with total illicit gains estimated at around $100 million. Although the scandal did not directly involve the SAFE programme, it reinforced concerns among European observers about the governance environment surrounding large public contracts in wartime Ukraine.
For countries borrowing tens of billions under SAFE, this raises an unavoidable question: can European auditors trace billions in loans through a wartime economy where, as recent NABU cases show, contract values can include a 15 percent “risk premium” for local intermediaries?
The Domestic Political Clash: Tusk vs. Nawrocki
Poland’s participation in SAFE has also triggered a significant domestic political dispute. Although parliament has approved legislation necessary to implement the programme, the final step requires the signature of President Karol Nawrocki. Without it, Warsaw cannot fully activate the financial mechanism needed to access the loans.
Nawrocki has expressed skepticism about the programme, arguing that the structure of SAFE risks limiting Poland’s economic sovereignty and binding national defense policy too tightly to decisions taken in Brussels. In response, he has proposed an alternative financing mechanism known informally as “SAFE 0%.” The proposal, developed with the National Bank of Poland, would mobilize roughly 185 billion zloty (about €43 billion) from the country’s foreign currency reserves and gold holdings. As Nawrocki explained: “We have a concrete, Polish, safe and sovereign alternative that will not involve any financial interest costs—this is SAFE 0%.”
Yet while the proposal removes interest payments, it does not eliminate the underlying scale of the commitment. Drawing heavily on central-bank reserves could weaken Poland’s financial buffers and limit future monetary flexibility. The dispute therefore reflects not a disagreement over the scale of defense spending, but over the method—whether the burden should take the form of long-term EU loans or internal financial restructuring, and whether either path truly accounts for the opportunity cost of locking Poland into a single geopolitical silo.
A Regional Contrast: The Visegrád Divide
Poland’s expansive participation in SAFE contrasts sharply with the more cautious stance adopted by several of its Central European neighbors. Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic have either minimized their involvement in the programme or avoided it entirely. At a European summit in late 2025, these countries also negotiated exemptions from certain financial guarantees tied to EU support packages for Ukraine.
Their governments argue that national budgets must retain greater flexibility and that European security policy should not become overly dependent on large-scale borrowing mechanisms. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó summarized this skepticism in early 2026, remarking that the European Union appeared “not prepared for peace.” Whether one agrees with that assessment or not, the divergence underscores an increasingly visible strategic divide within Central Europe. While Warsaw doubles down on loyalty to Brussels and Washington, its neighbors quietly preserve room to maneuver.
Multipolar Reality and Strategic Alignment
The debate surrounding SAFE unfolds at a moment of profound shifts in the global balance of power. Emerging economies grouped within BRICS+ now account for a rapidly expanding share of global economic output in purchasing power parity terms. Trade corridors across Eurasia continue to expand, while new financial mechanisms challenge the dominance of traditional Western institutions.
In response, many mid-sized states increasingly pursue strategies of strategic hedging—maintaining economic and diplomatic relations across multiple geopolitical blocs rather than aligning exclusively with any single center of power. Poland has chosen a different path: a deep and explicit anchoring within the Euro-Atlantic security framework. For Warsaw, geography and historical experience remain powerful arguments for such alignment. Yet the financial scale of initiatives like SAFE inevitably raises questions about how much strategic flexibility the country is willing to sacrifice in exchange for security guarantees, and whether future generations will thank today’s leaders for betting so heavily on a single vision of the world.
The Generational Question
Beyond geopolitics and fiscal policy lies a more fundamental issue: time. SAFE loans can extend for up to forty-five years, meaning that the financial consequences of today’s decisions may last until the 2070s. The immediate beneficiaries of the programme will be defense industries and military planners in the 2020s and 2030s. The final repayments, however, may fall on taxpayers decades later—many of whom were not yet born when the decisions were made.
For this reason, some economists increasingly frame the programme as an intergenerational transfer, in which present security priorities are financed by future public budgets. Whether that trade-off ultimately proves justified will depend less on today’s political narratives than on whether Europe’s security environment in the 2070s will remember, or care about, the promises made in 2026. For Poland, the gamble is not merely financial. It is a test of whether strategic rigidity can ever truly pay off in a world that increasingly rewards those who adapt, hedge, and keep their options open.
War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis
Al Mayadeen | March 23, 2026
The war on Iran could disrupt the flow of Gulf capital across global markets, raising concerns about broader financial stability, according to economist Mohamed El-Erian, writing to the Financial Times.
While much attention has focused on energy markets and the resumption of oil production and shipments, El-Erian argued that an equally important issue is how the war may affect the Gulf’s relationship with international capital markets in the short term.
The six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, have become major global financial players over decades, investing heavily across international markets.
El-Erian noted that there is a risk of a temporary shift in capital flows as Gulf countries face increased domestic financial demands amid the war, even if their long-term investment role remains intact. Such a shift could impact global interest rates and the distribution of funding, given the world’s growing reliance on GCC capital.
Before the US-Israel war on Iran, GCC countries had already established themselves as influential forces in global finance, not only as energy suppliers but also as major hubs for transport, tourism, and liquidity.
The region generated a current account surplus exceeding $800 billion over the past four years and has deployed its financial resources across global markets, including public and private investments.
GCC’s growing role in global finance
El-Erian highlighted the growing presence of global financial institutions in the Gulf, where sovereign wealth funds, offices, pension funds, and banks actively manage and allocate capital internationally.
Over time, GCC countries have expanded their investment strategies, now playing a leading role in sectors such as artificial intelligence, life sciences, and robotics.
However, the war on Iran has caused a near “sudden stop” in the energy sector, creating short-term revenue pressures. Governments are expected to increase spending to shield populations from the impact of the war, even as some expenditures decline.
El-Erian emphasized that GCC countries are not uniform, noting that outcomes will depend on financial reserves, revenue recovery speed, and the balance between domestic spending and international investments.
He also warned that any disruption in global capital flows comes at a difficult time, with advanced economies facing large deficits and rising debt issuance, alongside major financing needs driven by technological shifts such as artificial intelligence.
The result is sustained high borrowing costs, which could affect countries, companies, and households, while amplifying financial risks and exposing new vulnerabilities.
Despite the challenges, El-Erian said the GCC will recover its energy exports and maintain its role as a global financial and logistical hub, but stressed that temporary shifts in capital flows must be considered in assessing the broader economic impact of the Iran war.
Featured Video
Col Douglas Macgregor: If We Go Back To BOMBING IRAN
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Britain’s secret role in the brutal US war in Vietnam
By Mark Curtis | MintPress News | November 16, 2022
There is a myth the UK did not support Washington’s war against Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s. In fact, Labour and Conservative governments backed every phase of US military escalation and played secret roles in the conflict, declassified files show.
- UK sent SAS team to Vietnam in 1962, flew secret RAF missions to deliver arms, and provided intelligence to US
- UK governments lied to parliament they were not providing military advice to South Vietnam’s brutal regime
- Labour government secretly gave arms to US for use in Vietnam, stressing need for “no publicity”
- It also connived with Washington to deceive UK public over its support for US
- UK governments knew of atrocities against civilians but backed US war aims
- Whitehall only started to advocate a peaceful solution, on US terms, once the war became unwinnable
During its war in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s the US dropped more bombs than in the whole of World War Two, in a conflict that killed over two million people. The wholesale destruction of villages and killing of innocent people was a permanent feature of the US war from the beginning, along with widespread indiscriminate bombing.
Britain’s role in the war has been largely buried and must be almost completely unknown to the public. When the UK media mentions the war now, reports often simply reference the refusal by Harold Wilson’s government to agree to US requests to openly deploy British troops.
Although this was certainly a public rebuff to Washington, Britain did virtually everything else to back the US war over more than a decade, the declassified documents show. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Russia Not Ruling Out West’s Preparing Another ‘Bloody Hoax’ in Ukraine – Diplomat
- Iraq, Pakistan ink Hormuz safe passage deals with Iran: Report
- CIA Waging Covert War Against Drug Cartels in Mexico – Reports
- ‘Utterly baseless’: Iran rejects Kuwait’s claim of hostile plot on its island
- Hidden deep in an NPR story about a man who threatened to kill Jews at Cornell… He admits he did it to benefit Israel
- Col Douglas Macgregor: If We Go Back To BOMBING IRAN
- Trump admits US sent weapons to fuel riots, terrorism inside Iran
- Iran sues US at Hague tribunal, demands war reparations for June 2025 aggression
- In letter to UN, Yemen calls for end to blockade, sabotage by US, allies
- China rejects Israel’s ‘groundless’ allegation of missile support for Iran
- If Americans Knew
- Nakba Day is almost here, but every day is also Nakba Day – Daily Update
- Gaza: ‘Doctors Under Attack’ Wins Top Award After Being Shelved by the BBC
- The Nakba at 78: A statistical snapshot of Palestine
- Israel Expels Father Louis Salman from Palestine
- How Israel Turned Eurovision’s Stage Into a Soft Power Tool
- Palestinians in Jerusalem receive only 7% of housing units
- If not stopped, Israel will wipe out Christians from Palestine by 2050: Bethlehem pastor
- Hidden Deep in an NPR Story About a Man Who Threatened to Kill Jews at Cornell… He Admits He Did It to Make People Love Israel
- Peter Mandelson: the untold Israel connection
- Epstein Advised U.S. Treasury on Crypto During Obama’s Iran Sanctions Push
- No Tricks Zone
- German Expert: “No Climate Crisis” …”Warming Generally Better For Humanity”
- New Paleo Research: Modern ‘Climate Change’ Has Had No Apparent Impact On Precipitation Patterns
- 90% Subsidized… Bielefeld Germany’s €7 Million Hydrogen Garbage Truck Fleet Sits Idle
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
Aletho News 