The desalination front: Water as Israel’s Achilles heel
The Cradle | April 21, 2026
Israel’s near-total dependence on seawater desalination to secure almost 80 percent of its drinking water and industrial needs has created a security vulnerability unlike that of the Persian Gulf states.
While Gulf desalination facilities are spread across wide geographic areas, Israel’s production capacity is concentrated along a narrow stretch of coastline. That concentration leaves Israel’s water system vulnerable to paralysis through concentrated missile barrages or suicide drone attacks from multiple fronts – a danger that exceeds the ability of conventional air defenses to fully contain.
The longer the confrontation with Iran drags on, the more these facilities are transformed from civilian infrastructure into strategic targets. Israel’s five main desalination plants have become central nodes in Tehran’s target bank, placing domestic stability and regional water commitments under the threat of broad disruption.
A narrow coastline, a concentrated vulnerability
Israel may be the world’s most centralized state in desalinated water production. Five major plants – Ashkelon, Ashdod, Palmachim, Sorek, and Hadera – produce the overwhelming majority of potable water for homes, agriculture, and industry.
The Sorek complex, one of the world’s largest reverse osmosis desalination plants, carries particularly high strategic value. Any strike that disables it would not simply create a temporary shortage. It could knock out water service to entire areas of Gush Dan, including Tel Aviv and its surrounding settlements, in a matter of days.
It is also clear that Israel’s water system lacks geographic depth from a security standpoint. All the plants fall within the effective operational range of precision missiles and are fully exposed to maritime threats.
Their offshore intake pipes are especially vulnerable. These underwater systems can be targeted through naval drones, unmanned submarines, or sea mines, halting water extraction and treatment almost immediately.
A successful strike on Hadera alone could severely disrupt supplies to the north and center of the country, placing huge pressure on emergency planners already dealing with depleted groundwater reserves and the shrinking capacity of Lake Tiberias.
The gas–water dependency trap
The most serious structural weakness in Israel’s water sector lies in its dependence on natural gas. Unlike the Gulf states, which possess large emergency reserves of liquid fuel to keep desalination facilities running during crises, Israel relies almost entirely on gas from the Tamar and Leviathan fields in the Mediterranean and is now looking to claim ownership of Lebanon’s Qana gas field.
That means any successful strike on offshore gas infrastructure would quickly spread beyond the energy sector. Disrupted gas supplies would undermine the national electricity grid and cut power to desalination facilities at the same time.
This dual dependency turns Israeli water security into a hostage of offshore infrastructure. Gas platforms are difficult to defend against drone swarms, anti-ship missiles, or coordinated naval attacks.
A strike on Leviathan, for example, would leave Israeli planners facing an impossible calculation: should the remaining gas be directed toward electricity generation for hospitals and military facilities, or toward desalination plants to ensure water continues to reach homes?
That overlap amplifies the pressure Iran can exert. A single strike on one offshore target could cripple two strategic sectors simultaneously.
Water as a regional pressure point
The implications of a strike on Israeli desalination infrastructure extend far beyond the occupation state itself. Under its peace agreement with Jordan, Israel is obligated to provide Amman with fixed annual quantities of water.
Any serious damage to Israel’s desalination system would almost certainly interrupt those supplies, exporting the crisis directly across the Jordan River.
That dynamic transforms desalination plants from public utilities into instruments of regional pressure. Strikes on these facilities would not only weaken Israel internally but also place neighboring governments under stress and expose the fragility of regional arrangements built around Israeli infrastructure.
Jordan would be hit first. But the fallout would also test the broader framework of normalization agreements and regional cooperation. For Tehran, that creates an additional layer of leverage. Dependence on Israel for critical resources is becoming a growing strategic liability.
That, in turn, could push neighboring states to seek alternatives, pressure Washington and Tel Aviv to scale back their confrontation with Iran, or reassess the long-term value of regional ties with Israel.
Cyberattacks and invisible sabotage
Israel possesses one of the world’s most advanced cybersecurity sectors, yet repeated Iranian cyberattacks have exposed real vulnerabilities in industrial control systems.
Desalination plants rely on complex digital infrastructure to regulate chemical balances, water pressure, and membrane filtration. Penetrating those systems would allow attackers to alter chlorine levels, disrupt pumping pressure, or physically damage sensitive equipment.
The danger of cyberwarfare lies in the fact that it is largely invisible. Unlike missile strikes, digital sabotage can unfold quietly, triggering confusion and panic before the source of the disruption is identified.
Even a 24-hour shutdown at Sorek could leave millions without water and inflict severe losses on sectors that depend on highly treated water, including semiconductor manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and the precision industry.
The more Israel digitizes the management of water infrastructure, the more attractive that sector becomes as a target for cross-border cyber attacks.
Deliberate pollution and long-term disruption
The eastern Mediterranean coastline is also highly vulnerable to environmental contamination during wartime. A strike on fuel tankers offshore, or on storage facilities in Haifa or Ashdod, could trigger oil spills large enough to disable desalination intake systems within hours.
Israel’s heavy reliance on reverse osmosis makes that threat especially serious. Even limited exposure to oil residue can permanently damage filtration membranes. Replacing them is neither quick nor simple, particularly during wartime conditions when supply chains are already strained.
This kind of environmental warfare is especially dangerous because its effects do not end when the fighting stops. Oil pollution would not only shut down desalination capacity in the short term but also damage marine ecosystems that support natural filtration processes.
That would raise operating costs, lower water quality, and leave sections of Israel’s coastline economically crippled long after the war itself ends.
The economic cost of strategic thirst
From an investment and financial perspective, instability in water security poses a direct threat to the occupation state’s “startup nation” model. International investors and major technology firms evaluate risk based on the stability of essential resources.
Once water itself becomes a threatened commodity, sovereign insurance costs rise, while capital flees sectors that consume large volumes of water.
A prolonged shutdown in greater Tel Aviv could inflict losses that surpass the economic impact of conventional missile strikes. Water is tied to every layer of the economy, from households and hospitals to industrial parks and high-tech production.
International ratings agencies already assess Israel’s creditworthiness according to its ability to absorb wartime shocks, protect infrastructure, and sustain economic activity during prolonged conflict. Any major disruption to the water sector would add to concerns over fiscal strain, investor confidence, and the state’s ability to maintain basic services.
That would raise borrowing costs and place additional pressure on a state budget already strained by military spending.
“Thirst economy” is now a term increasingly heard in financial analysis circles, where water becomes the central measure of national economic resilience.
The supply chain problem
Israel’s desalination system depends heavily on imported technology, precision spare parts, and specialized chemicals. Wartime disruption to ports, shipping lanes, or supply chains would make routine maintenance increasingly difficult.
Anti-scaling chemicals, disinfectants, filtration membranes, and electronic control systems all require reliable imports. Any shortage would force plant operators to either lower water quality or shut facilities down altogether to avoid damaging equipment.
That creates another challenge for Israeli planners. Maintaining the desalination sector during a prolonged conflict may require costly air bridges for critical parts and chemicals – an option that is difficult to sustain over time.
Israel’s desalination network has become one of the clearest examples of how technological sophistication can also create strategic fragility. Water security now sits at the center of the occupation state’s military and economic calculations.
If these facilities become unsustainable under wartime conditions, every other pillar of Israeli power – from industry and public health to military readiness and regional influence – becomes far harder to sustain.
China blames US for diplomatic impasse with Iran, urges it to show ‘sincerity’ in talks
Press TV – April 21, 2026
China has called on the United States to demonstrate “sincerity” in resolving its prolonged standoff with Iran over its nuclear program, while censuring the joint US-Israeli military aggression against the country.
In its latest Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) report, Beijing said that Washington is responsible for the current diplomatic impasse with Tehran.
The national report on the implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was made public online by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Monday.
According to the report, the US and Israel’s military aggression against Iran, both in June 2025 and on February 28, “seriously violated international law and the purposes of the UN Charter.”
In the report, Beijing described Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as the “root cause” of the current diplomatic standoff between the US and Iran.
During his first term in 2018, US President Donald Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal, branding it “the worst deal ever.” Trump claimed that he was seeking stronger terms.
The US and Israel attacked Iranian nuclear and military sites in June 2025, even as indirect negotiations were underway between Tehran and Washington regarding Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
Seven months later, the two enemies launched a new wave of aggression against the country on February 28, again as Iran and the US were on the verge of finalizing a new nuclear agreement.
Tehran asserts its legal right under the NPT to develop nuclear technology for energy production, medical research, and scientific advancement.
The US and its allies, however, accuse Iran of seeking the technical capability to produce a nuclear weapon.
Tehran has consistently maintained that it regards weapons of mass destruction as a threat to humanity and has never included them in its defense doctrine, even in the face of direct military aggression.
On April 11–12, Pakistan hosted talks between the US and Iran after brokering a two-week ceasefire on April 8, which is set to expire on April 22.
The high-level talks, however, ended without an agreement. Now reports say a US delegation is headed to Islamabad for the second round of talks with Tehran. Iran has said it has not plans to take part in new negotiations.
Iranian Parliament Speaker and lead negotiator Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said on Monday that Tehran will not accept negotiations “under the shadow of threats.”
He said, “by imposing a blockade and violating the ceasefire,” Trump intends “to turn the negotiating table into a table of surrender or to justify renewed warmongering.”
The uncertainty shrouding the next round of talks escalated after the US Navy targeted an Iranian merchant vessel in the Sea of Oman on Sunday.
Iran’s military condemned the incident as a “criminal operation” and “maritime piracy.”
In a Monday statement, Chinese Foreign Ministry voiced “concern over the forced interception of relevant vessel by the US,” warning that the situation in the Strait of Hormuz is sensitive and complex.
The Iranian-flagged cargo ship Touska had been travelling from China.
After Islamabad: How the Global South Is Reshaping Eurasian Geopolitics
By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – April 21, 2026
The developments surrounding the “Islamabad Talks” underscore a broader geopolitical realignment in which Pakistan, China, and other regional powers are deepening their strategic and economic integration, accelerating the rise of a Global South-led order while exposing the waning influence of the US and its traditional allies.
Behind-the-Scenes Realignment of the Global South
The Islamabad Talks 1.0, apparently ineffective, actually reshaped Global South alignment unfolding behind the scenes. In reality, the backstage transpirations during the Islamabad Talks 1.0 were more consequential than the US-Iran peace negotiations. Pakistan’s deployment of military troops and jets to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the dispatch of its first transit shipment to Uzbekistan via Iran, and Aramco’s show of intent to finalize a $10 billion investment in an oil refinery in Gwadar, in partnership with OGDCL, PSO, GHPL, and PPL, were all extraordinary developments.
Obviously, all that did not happen by chance; these developments reflect a deepening strategic alliance between Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Iran. The timing of these events suggests that all the players involved were already prepared for their integration in a rising Global South alliance but were merely constrained by the international and regional geopolitical environment. Pakistan’s deployment of troops in KSA has made it a key security provider for the country, a service that other Gulf nations might soon seek as well. However, Pakistan cannot provide security services to other nations solely without China’s collaboration, which is its major partner in intelligence, technology, reconnaissance, and strategy.
Evolving Security Architecture in the Gulf Region
The United States is one of the key security providers in the Gulf. However, during the recent Iranian attacks on the Gulf nations and Israel’s attack on Doha in September, 2025, the United States failed to defend these states. Therefore, the Arab Peninsula would soon get rid of the US fighter jets, satellite coverage, intelligence penetration, and defense mechanisms by replacing them with Pakistani and Chinese security apparatus. This would make Pakistan a key security provider in the region.
Economic Corridors and the Emerging Eurasian Connectivity
The expected finalization of the Saudi-Pakistan oil refinery deal is also a remarkable move for the success of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and Gwadar. This development will enable international shipping to refuel at Gwadar, granting Pakistani consumers a 20% price cut on oil. This oil refinery, probably connected to Saudi Arabia via an undersea pipeline, will also smash the relevance of the I2U2, giving it leverage over its regional rivals.
Moreover, the opening of the Pakistan-Iran-Uzbekistan transit route underscores the opening of the Central Asian markets to the whole world via Pakistan and Iran, a move that will strengthen Central Asian and South Asian economies and relations. Just like the CPEC, the BRI connects many corridors via Afghanistan and Iran. China’s goal is to connect all these projects internally. This is the future that the entire region is looking forward to.
Decline of Western Influence and the Rise of a Multipolar Order
It also suggests that the “Islamabad Talks” were more about signaling to Washington and its allies that the international order has altered than about US-Iran peace. Many US allies have already abandoned it in this war of choice. Italy and Spain, for instance, have denied the US the approval to use their bases in the Mediterranean. Both countries have also joined South Africa’s case in the ICC, alleging Israel of genocide. Britain, France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Germany have refused to militarily assist the US in opening its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.
Chinese diplomacy is already in full swing, with the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez in China to strengthen bilateral economic and strategic relations. The Taiwanese opposition leader Chen Li-wun also visited Beijing, expressing the desire for a “peaceful” resolution of the bilateral dispute, stating that the Taiwan Strait will no longer be a focal point of the potential conflict and will certainly not become a “chessboard for outside forces to intervene in”.
With prospects of a second round of Islamabad Talks, which are expected to take place on Tuesday, emerging, concerns are mounting over the possible collapse of US-Iran peace efforts, which could trigger a renewed and more intense phase of conflict between the two sides. Furthermore, there are speculations that the US and Israel could use these negotiations to reorganize. However, the current circumstances suggest that the US is not in a position to initiate a ground invasion or any other military campaign against Iran, as it failed to open the Strait of Hormuz despite almost 40 days of continuous bombing on Iran. In addition, the United States stands militarily and diplomatically isolated over the issue of US-Iran, as none of its European allies have supported it militarily or diplomatically.
This war has made the United States an irrelevant and isolated international power. The whole agenda of the war has now shifted to opening the Strait of Hormuz, which was already open before the war. The US President Donald Trump is also happy that China will no longer provide weapons to Iran, which it already says it did not provide. This illustrates that the Islamabad Talks 2.0 is just to provide the United States with a face-saving way to get rid of the burden of this war, which Trump, acting as a “mad king,” started as a regime change operation, and a “God’s Plan” has ended up in expediting the decline of the US as a global superpower.
However, despite these unfavorable conditions and circumstances, there is always a possibility that the mad king might receive another directive from his Zionist master to go for a ground invasion of Iran. Although it is highly unlikely, counterintuitive, and counterproductive, as it would be a suicide mission for the United States, leading to the death of thousands of troops and causing the loss of billions of dollars, it is still expected from a person under the influence of the Zionist leader Benjamin Netanyahu.
The US President Donald Trump has already sacrificed the US hegemony to establish the Kingdom of Zionism. His ill-witted decisions have provided Russia, China, and the middle powers with an opportunity to replace the US as a global hegemon. It will also result in further strengthening the BRICS as an international alliance, replacing Western organizations and alliances. In sum, the US-Iran war has hastened the rise of a Global South-led world order and exposed fissures in the Western alliance.
Iran War fallout: Russia and China quietly take over natural gas markets in Asia, with Qatar gone
Inside China Business | April 20, 2026
The Iran War and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz have taken Qatari energy supplies completely off the market. Russian natural gas fields were shut out of Europe beginning in 2022, and energy giants there invested massively into new pipelines to Asia. China was a ready buyer for Russian oil and natural gas, and also invested heavily into huge strategic stockpiles of crude and natural gas storage. Now Russian energy production flowing East, and China is already well-supplied. Liquefied Natural Gas of Russian origin is offered at 40% discount to spot, to induce long-term supply relationships. As a result, Asian economies are shifting their supply chains from the Persian Gulf to Russia-China. Meanwhile, EU countries are unable to get LNG at all.
Resources and links:
Bloomberg, Russia Offers Sanctioned LNG to Energy-Hungry Asia at a Discount https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl…
S&P Global, Russia crude oil pipeline capabilities to mainland China—The ESPO crude oil pipeline https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/re…
Power of Siberia 2 reshapes China’s energy security calculus https://eastasiaforum.org/2025/10/31/…
Reuters, Russia’s Gazprom supplied 38 bcm of gas to China via Power of Siberia pipeline in 2025 https://www.reuters.com/business/ener…
Russia’s Oil Windfall From Middle East War Keeps Growing https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl…
Reuters Exclusive: Iran attacks wipe out 17% of Qatar’s LNG capacity for up to five years, QatarEnergy CEO says https://www.reuters.com/business/ener…
Supply chains breaking: The hidden bottlenecks threatening to bring the global economy to a standstill
The oil price is just the tip of the iceberg
RT | April 20, 2026
The surge in oil prices in light of the war on Iran has grabbed most of the headlines. For many observers, the severity of the crisis is measurable in the daily changes in the Brent ticker. Some analysts have also begun pointing to emerging stress in fertilizer markets. But beneath these familiar markers, several less visible – and in some cases more systemic – signals are now flashing red.
RT takes a look at the ominous signs that don’t always show up in the news.
Naphtha
Naphtha, a feedstock for petrochemicals, is a classic behind-the-scenes actor. Rarely in the headlines, naphtha is critical to the production of much modern technology, not to mention a whole host of everyday plastics, car parts, medical supplies, packaging – you name it. Naphtha sits at the base of the petrochemical supply chain, where it can wreak havoc if it’s not in supply.
So what exactly is naphtha? It is a liquid hydrocarbon mixture derived from the distillation of crude oil. It is then “cracked” at extreme temperatures to extract ethylene and propylene, which is upstream from a slew of chemical processes that produce the high-purity chemicals, solvents, and plastics that are used in numerous industries, including as supporting inputs in semiconductor manufacturing. Because naphtha is not a core chip material input itself, its role is often overlooked.
Unsurprisingly, naphtha generally exhibits a strong positive price correlation with Brent crude. It is a refinery product, so crude costs are an important driver of pricing. However, its price can diverge meaningfully because it is primarily used in petrochemicals and not simply as a fuel. Naphtha supply disruptions have already made themselves felt in parts of Asia, even causing shortages of plastic bags in South Korea. Incidentally, South Korea has purchased Russian naphtha for the first time in four years.
Several large petrochemical companies, such as LG Chem and Lotte Chemical, are having to cut production or shut cracking facilities due to feedstock shortages. This has disrupted supplies of plastics and packaging, impacting products from consumer goods to medical supplies.
For industrial heavyweight Japan, for example, the disruption to the flow of naphtha is arguably the most pressing economic fallout from the crisis in the Middle East. Japan gets around 60% of its naphtha from overseas. The Middle East is responsible for over 70% of those imports, according to the Japan Petrochemical Industry Association.
The 40% of Japan’s naphtha that comes from domestic refineries isn’t exactly immune to problems in the Middle East – 90% of the oil these refineries use comes from the same region.
Diesel
Diesel is a middle distillate fuel, meaning that it is heavier than gasoline but lighter than fuel oil. It is called “the fuel of the real economy.” It powers all the heavy stuff: trucks, ships, construction, mining, agriculture.
Of particular concern is the fact that diesel prices rise faster than gasoline in nearly every energy crisis. Because it is a critical heavy-transport fuel it has low demand elasticity – meaning diesel consumers will keep buying even at higher prices. Also, it is much harder to ramp up diesel refining quickly. Refineries generally operate at high utilization and have inflexible configurations, limiting their ability to respond quickly to demand surges.
Because diesel is the fuel for the “real economy,” price spikes can be broadly inflationary. According to BloombergNEF, diesel at $5 per gallon in the US could increase prices to consumers by 35%.
Diesel cost an average of $5.61 a gallon nationwide as of last Thursday, according to the American Automobile Association. That is just over $2 above the average on the same date last year and 63 cents more than a month earlier.
Diesel prices have also surged across Europe. Analysts are now warning of potential shortages of both jet fuel and diesel this summer. These two fuels are often grouped together as middle distillates and can to some extent be substituted or blended.
Aluminum
The Iran war has triggered a major crisis in the global aluminum market that could reverberate across numerous sectors of the economy.
Consultancy Wood Mackenzie estimates that the global market is staring at a supply deficit of up to 4 million metric tons this year, which would be the largest in over 25 years. JPMorgan has warned that the global aluminum market has entered a supply “black hole.”
Prices are forecast to exceed $4,000 per tonne. For comparison, the long-term “normal” range is $1,500-$2,500 per tonne. The majority of aluminum producers in the Gulf, which account for around 9% of global supply, have been unable to make shipments to world markets. Meanwhile, a missile strike last month damaged the Al Taweelah smelter operated by Emirates Global Aluminium. Repairs will reportedly take up to a year.
As smelters run through stocks of raw materials, production shutdowns could be forthcoming. But shutting down an aluminum smelter isn’t the same thing as turning off an appliance and turning it back on with the flip of a switch. Smelters run around-the-clock at extremely high temperatures. If you shut them down, the molten metal solidifies and damages the equipment. Restarting them is extremely costly and technically challenging and sometimes entails a full rebuild.
It is currently Western manufacturers taking the brunt of the crisis and partly by the doing of their own countries’ policies. China and Russia are both among the world’s main sources of aluminum but both have been cut off from Western markets because of tariffs and sanctions.
Crack spreads
The gap between what a refiner pays for crude oil and the price at which it sells the finished product is called the crack spread – the word to describe the refining process of “cracking” large hydrocarbon molecules into smaller ones (gasoline, diesel, naphtha, etc.)
A normal crack spread is between $10 and $20, although it can vary by product and region. What we are seeing now is crack spreads over $50. This means refined fuels are becoming more valuable relative to crude oil. This will show up in naphtha and diesel (already discussed above) and in gasoline prices at the pump. Crack spreads therefore provide a useful indicator of fuel-related cost pressures faced by consumers.
Meanwhile, what we’re seeing is a windfall for refiners. In crises such as the current one, pricing power shifts to the most capacity-constrained stage in the system, where output cannot be easily expanded. In this case – and often in oil markets – it is the refining stage.
Helium
Helium, a byproduct of natural gas processing, is a small market that punches well above its weight. Helium is essential in the high-tech world. It has important uses in chipmaking for which there is no easy substitute.
Currently, the global supply of helium is significantly disrupted and reports of rationing are already emerging. The war has thrown a wrench in both the production and transportation of helium. Supply chains for high-tech goods are already feeling the effects. If dislocations continue, this could start to noticeably interfere with production of goods such as electronics, automobiles, and even smartphones.
Helium production is highly concentrated in certain countries. Qatar, a large natural gas supplier, produces nearly a third of global supply, according to the US Geological Survey. However, the Ras Laffan Industrial City, the single largest helium production site in the world, sustained damage from a missile in early March. The Qatari government estimates that it will take up to five years to fully repair the site.
While shippers of some goods have diverted vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, a much longer but entirely unencumbered route, this is not as viable for helium, which is transported in specialized cryogenic containers. During long trips, the helium inevitably heats up and “boils off.”
Sulfur
The disruptions in fertilizer markets have garnered a lot of attention but less focus has been on the major feedstock components of fertilizer: sulfur. Called the “king of chemicals,” sulfur is a byproduct of oil and gas refining. It’s another of the vastly underappreciated inputs that keep things running and keep food plentiful across the globe.
Once converted into sulfuric acid, it is used in fertilizers and metal processing, as well as in many pharmaceuticals. The Gulf accounts for roughly 45% of global supply, which means the disruption is already having knock-on effects in both agriculture and metals. Compounding the problem is the fact that sulfuric acid isn’t easily replaced or immediately substitutable. Another vulnerability is that it is not stockpiled heavily, so when flows stop trouble can creep up quite quickly. This sends consumers scrambling for expensive spot supply – all of which eventually shows up in food price inflation.
Sulfur prices have moved sharply higher since the war on Iran began, and now countries are taking measures to insulate their own economies. Türkiye has announced a ban on sulfur exports, while India is also reportedly considering export restrictions.
Looking ahead
The global economy is as fragile as it is complex. As analyst Zoltan Pozsar says, “global supply chains work only in peacetime, but not when the world is at war, be it a hot war or an economic war.” Right now there are both. The confluence of multiple failures at key chokepoints could trigger cascades of crises that would inflict significant and enduring pain across the economy. Nobody thinks much about naphtha or sulfur when the world is humming along. But these and many other inputs, fuels and feedstocks are what keep the whole show running and their absence quickly becomes a crisis.
Col Doug Macgregor: US Strategy in Iran NEVER ADMIT DEFEAT
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – April 19, 2026
Israel attacks three nations for alleged backing of Iran
RT | April 19, 2026
Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations has lashed out at his French, Chinese, and Pakistani counterparts, accusing their countries of effectively backing Iran by allegedly striking deals to secure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
The rebuke appears to stem from media reports which recently indicated that commercial vessels from all three countries were able to transit the Strait of Hormuz during the blockade, in some cases with Iranian authorization, despite broader restrictions on shipping imposed by Tehran.
“I asked the French ambassador: How much money did you pay Iran to move ships safely through the Strait of Hormuz?” Danny Danon said in a post on X shortly after speaking at the UN General Assembly session on the Strait of Hormuz blockade.
“Surprisingly, he had no answer,” he wrote, adding: “The ambassadors of China and Pakistan also had no answer.”
Navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a key route handling around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows, has been disrupted since Tehran effectively blocked the waterway in response to the US-Israeli bombing campaign that began on February 28.
On Friday, Iran opened the Strait to all commercial vessels, framing the move as part of ceasefire arrangements linked to the Israel–Lebanon truce, but closed it again the following day. The decision came as US President Donald Trump said the US blockade on Iranian ports and shipping would remain in force until a peace deal is reached. Washington imposed the restrictions after bilateral talks in Pakistan collapsed last weekend.
In March, Iran said that vessels of India, China, Russia, Iraq, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka would be allowed to pass through the crucial waterway. Beijing is ranked as the biggest buyer of Iranian oil and most of its supplies pass through the chokepoint. At the same time, Malaysian authorities thanked Tehran for allowing the passage of the country’s ships.
In April, the Financial Times reported, citing the tracking data, that a container ship owned by a French shipping company had sailed through the Strait of Hormuz along with several other ships.
At the UN, France previously voted in favor of resolutions condemning Iran’s blockade of the strait, China either vetoed the measures or voted against critical wording, while Pakistan abstained.
Iran defends limits on Strait of Hormuz passage
The Islamic Republic once again shut the strategic waterway due to what it described as US “piracy”

© Ruptly
RT | April 18, 2026
Iran said the renewed restrictions on maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz are justified under international law and necessary to counter hostile actions, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei has said in an interview with RT.
Iranian military officials said on Saturday that Tehran had reasserted “strict control” over the strategic route, which carries about 20% of global oil, citing the continued US blockade of its ports, just a day after declaring it open. The Revolutionary Guard Navy Command later said the strait would remain under Iranian military control as long as US restrictions stay in place.
“There was no safe and secure passage in this waterway,” Baqaei told RT on Saturday, adding that as a coastal state Iran has the right under international law to take measures against what it sees as hostile actions.
“We cannot allow enemy vessels, especially military ones or those linked to countries involved in aggression, to pass through the strait normally, as they pose a direct threat,” the spokesman stated.
The US-Israeli bombing campaign prompted Iran to restrict passage through the strait for “enemy ships,” triggering a breakdown in supply chains and sending global crude oil prices soaring.
Oil prices eased during the first round of US-Iran talks in Islamabad last weekend on hopes of the Strait reopening. After the negotiations collapsed, US President Donald Trump ordered a naval blockade on Iranian ports and shipping, prompting tankers to turn back and pushing prices back toward $100 a barrel.
On Friday, Iranian authorities said the waterway was fully open to commercial vessels for the remainder of the ten-day Israel–Lebanon ceasefire, lowering crude oil prices on de-escalation hopes. Tehran later reversed the decision after Trump said the US blockade of Iranian ports would remain in full force until a peace deal is reached.
The disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has triggered broad global economic ripple effects, with Europe facing higher fuel and energy costs due to reduced oil flows. The International Energy Agency has warned of rising market volatility and possible jet fuel shortages within six weeks if disruptions continue. Humanitarian organizations have also flagged growing risks to global food security as fertilizer and agricultural supply chains are affected.
‘We warned you’: Hormuz Strait back to pervious state amid US blockade
Al Mayadeen | April 18, 2026
Iran’s military announced that the Strait of Hormuz has returned to its previous operational status, placing it under “strict management and control” by the country’s armed forces, following repeated violations of prior understandings by the United States.
In a statement, the spokesperson of the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said Iran had earlier agreed, in good faith and within the framework of negotiations, to allow the managed passage of a limited number of oil tankers and commercial vessels through the strategic waterway.
However, the spokesperson stated, the United States had failed to uphold its commitments, amid Washington’s continued acts of “piracy and maritime robbery” under the guise of a naval blockade.
The statement added that, in response, Iran has reinstated full control measures over the strait, emphasizing that the passage of vessels will remain tightly regulated unless the US fully lifts restrictions on Iranian shipping routes, both inbound and outbound.
“As long as the United States does not completely lift the restrictions on the passage of vessels from Iran to destination and from destination to Iran, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz will be strictly controlled and remain as before,” the spokesperson said.
IRGC-N affirms change in Hormuz regime
Meanwhile, Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps Navy (IRGC-N) reaffirmed the change in the regime of the Strait of Hormuz, stressing that any breach of promise by the United States will receive a fitting response.
“As long as the passage of vessels from and to Iran is threatened, the status of the Strait of Hormuz will remain unchanged,” the IRGC-N said, according to the Iranian TV, IRIB.
Iranian official outlines ‘new maritime regime’
Separately, Ebrahim Azizi, head of the National Security Commission of the Iranian parliament, outlined a new framework governing maritime transit in the strait.
“It is time to submit to the new maritime regime of the Strait of Hormuz; this regime is determined by the Islamic Republic of Iran, not by virtual posts,” Azizi wrote in a post on X.
“In this regime, only commercial ships, and only with permission from the Armed Forces General Staff, particularly the Navy, are allowed to pass through designated routes after paying the rightful dues of the Iranian nation.”
He added that any US interference with Iranian vessels could prompt further escalation in restrictions.
“If the Americans want to create the slightest interference for Iranian ships, this decision can easily be changed!” Azizi said.
In a follow-up post, he added, “We warned you, but you didn’t pay attention! Now enjoy the return of the Strait of Hormuz situation to its previous state.”
Iran rejects uranium transfer, warns of response to naval blockade
Al Mayadeen | April 18, 2026
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei flatly rejected on Friday any proposal to transfer the country’s enriched uranium abroad, declaring that Iran’s uranium reserves are as sacred as its own soil.
Responding to remarks made by US President Donald Trump, who told Reuters that Washington would work with Tehran to retrieve and transfer its enriched uranium, and claimed Iran had agreed to halt enrichment, Baghaei called such assertions part of a coordinated media campaign designed to pressure negotiators and tilt the direction of ongoing talks.
“Claims about a permanent suspension of uranium enrichment are aimed at influencing the course of negotiations,” Baghaei said, adding that any final agreement must fully safeguard Iran’s interests and rights.
Iran has consistently maintained that its uranium enrichment program serves civilian purposes, including agriculture and medicine, and that it operates no military nuclear program.
Compensation, sanctions relief are core demands
Baghaei stressed that compensation for the losses and damages inflicted on Iran is not a peripheral issue but a fundamental pillar of any potential deal.
He also placed the lifting of sanctions at the top of Tehran’s list of priorities, emphasizing that ending the war and halting hostilities across all fronts must be treated as a single, inseparable package, not piecemeal concessions to be negotiated separately.
He described diplomacy as “a continuation of military efforts on the ground,” signaling that Tehran’s negotiating posture is shaped by the same resolve it has brought to the battlefield.
Naval blockade crosses a red line
On the security front, Baghaei warned that a naval blockade would be met with a firm Iranian response, calling any such measure a direct violation of the ceasefire. “Iran cannot be blockaded,” he said, adding that Tehran would take all necessary measures in response.
He also invoked international maritime law, asserting that coastal states bordering strategic straits hold both the right and the responsibility, in wartime conditions, to take appropriate measures against states they consider hostile, in reference to the Strait of Hormuz.
No direct talks with Trump
Baghaei also denied Trump’s claims that US officials had held direct talks with Iranian counterparts, calling those assertions false.
He noted that while earlier rounds of negotiations had focused primarily on the nuclear file, the most recent discussions have shifted to center on ending the war entirely.
On the progress of talks, he said the Islamabad meeting had helped map out areas of understanding and define red lines, adding that “there is no ambiguity regarding the negotiation files.”
He cautioned, however, that developments over the coming days would ultimately determine the outcome.
Tehran’s previous uranium offer
Iran’s Deputy Parliament Speaker Ali Nikzad revealed on Monday that Tehran had at one point signaled a willingness to demonstrate goodwill, but on its own terms.
Nikzad said Iran had proposed diluting 450 kilograms of enriched uranium, not handing it over, and that earlier negotiations had explored the possibility of establishing a trilateral consortium involving Iran, the United States, and Saudi Arabia to carry out that dilution. He clarified that the other parties ultimately pulled back from that framework.
Nikzad also claimed that the US military operation targeting Isfahan had been aimed at seizing Iran’s uranium stockpiles, but that it failed.
Daniel Davis: Iran Reopens the Strait of Hormuz
Glenn Diesen | April 17, 2026
Lt. Col. Daniel Davis is a 4x combat veteran, the recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling, and is the host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive YouTube channel. Lt. Col. Davis discusses Iran’s announcement that it is reopening the Strait of Hormuz, yet the US decides to maintain the blockade on Iranian ports. While diplomatic developments are positive, the statements from the US and Iran do not correspond with each other.
Daniel Davis Deep Dive: https://www.youtube.com/@DanielDavisDeepDive/videos
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
- Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
- PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenndiesen
- Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
- Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Israeli General: War with Iran does not serve Israel as global standing erodes over Gaza
MEMO | April 17, 2026
A former Israeli General close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned of the strategic and political consequences of the ongoing conflict, saying a military confrontation with Iran is not in Israel’s interest.
Major General (res.) Giora Eiland, former head of Israel’s National Security Council, said in remarks reported by Israeli media platform Walla that Israel’s international standing has sharply declined over the past three years, adding that the war in Gaza is the main driver of this deterioration.
He said the prevailing view among political circles in Europe and the United States is that Netanyahu has drawn Washington into an unnecessary confrontation.
Eiland added that these tensions have caused tangible harm to the global economy and threatened its stability, fuelling international public opinion against Israeli policies.
He stressed that the erosion of Israel’s standing is no longer limited to international institutions, but has become “clear and evident” within the United States, Israel’s closest ally.
