Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran’s New Onslaught on US Gulf Bases Exposes Devastating Success of Spring Counterstrikes

Sputnik – 17.07.2026

Iran’s March drone and missile attacks disabled numerous critical US radars and forced it to “expend a significant portion of their air and missile defense stockpiles,” military expert and CAST security think tank senior research fellow Yuri Lyamin told Sputnik.

Lyamin pointed out, for example, that “the AN/TPY-2 radar in Jordan destroyed by Iranian strikes in March, was part of the American THAAD missile defense system battery providing cover for American bases in Jordan against medium-range ballistic missiles. The destruction of the radar effectively rendered the THAAD battery inoperable, as it’s used to detect and track targets and guides interceptor missiles to them.”

Fast forward the present, and Iran is freely targeting US barracks, logistics bases and Air Force facilities in Kuwait and Bahrain using Arash heavy drones.

Lack of effective resistance on the US’ part signals that whatever efforts the Pentagon took to restore regional capabilities (like transferring THAAD from South Korea) proved insufficient, Lyamin says.

“Iran is currently primarily targeting various US bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Jordan. The combination varies daily, as the US operates multiple bases [in these countries]. The selection of specific targets depends both on the pre-defined target list at these bases, and on operational intelligence,” Lyamin says.

“Relentless Iranian attacks on US-operated bases in the region generally complicate US operations against Iran that rely on them, and force the US to expend significant forces and resources to protect them. I’d even say that some of the bases nearest to Iran are now causing more problems for the US than they’re worth. For example, Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar was the largest US airbase in the region, but now the US has been forced to evacuate most of its aircraft because it’s too dangerous to keep them there.”

Arash drones have a range up to 2k km, variable warhead weight (up to 260 kg), and versions with advanced optoelectrical and other homing heads “for high-precision target engagement.” They are the Iranian Army’s long-range strike tool – distinct from the IRGC’s Shahed series of UAVs.

July 17, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran’s New Onslaught on US Gulf Bases Exposes Devastating Success of Spring Counterstrikes

US strikes kill 38 across Iran, destroy Chabahar port control tower, bridges

Press TV – July 17, 2026

Criminal attacks by the terrorist US Army targeted civilian infrastructure across several Iranian provinces overnight and into Friday, including the destruction of the maritime control tower at Chabahar’s Shahid Kalantari Port, killing eight people and injuring 20 others.

The attacks from late Thursday into early on Friday primarily struck the provinces of Hormozgan, Bushehr, Sistan and Baluchestan, Khuzestan and Lorestan, media reports said.

The latest strikes follow US President Donald Trump’s threats to target Iran’s civilian infrastructure, including bridges and power plants amid international community’s silence on war crimes committed by the US.

With temperatures soaring to 50 degrees Celsius in southern Iran, the Energy Ministry called on citizens to conserve electricity, conceding that US airstrikes have inflicted damage on power facilities and strained the national grid.

It said those areas “are currently experiencing extreme heat and attacks on power infrastructure.”

At least 38 killed, more than 400 injured

Iran’s Health Ministry announced on Friday that 38 people have been killed and more than 400 injured in criminal US attacks by Friday morning.

The ministry said the attacks killed three women and injured 22 others. One person under the age of 18 was killed and nine others were injured. It added that 47 people remain hospitalized.

Chabahar port control tower destroyed

The maritime control tower at Shahid Kalantari Port in Chabahar was struck for the third time by US warplanes on Friday morning and was completely destroyed.

Despite the destruction, the port’s berths, cargo-handling equipment and operational infrastructure were not damaged, and no casualties were reported.

IRNA said technical and operational teams immediately began damage assessments, secured the area and evaluated conditions for resuming port operations. Cargo loading and unloading at the port are expected to restart shortly after safety inspections are completed.

Chabahar holds immense strategic significance as Iran’s only deep-water port with direct access to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, bypassing the Strait of Hormuz entirely.

This makes it a critical alternative trade route for Iran, particularly as the US has reimposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports and largely closed the Strait of Hormuz.

The port is also a key trade gateway for Afghanistan and Central Asia, developed in close collaboration with India, which has invested heavily in the facility as a route bypassing Pakistan.

By targeting the control tower, commercial berths, and a warehouse in Chabahar, US strikes aim to effectively paralyze a route Iran is relying on to maintain trade while the Strait of Hormuz remains blocked.

Deadly attacks on Hormozgan

Hormozgan Province sustained the heaviest casualties.

Six bridges in Khamir County were hit during the early hours of Friday, damaging key transport routes linking Bandar Abbas, Bandar Khamir and Lar, as well as roads through Latidan, Kahorestan, Keshar and Maru village.

Provincial authorities urged residents to avoid the affected roads, use alternative routes and keep access clear for emergency, police and firefighting teams.

According to the Hormozgan Governor’s Office, seven people were killed and nine others injured in the bridge attacks.

Traffic on the Bandar Abbas-Lar highway through Bandar Khamir has partially resumed, although authorities continued to advise against unnecessary travel.

Separately, one person was killed and eight others injured after terrorist US forces struck the Allah Akbar Hill residential neighborhood in Bandar Abbas.

In another strike, a railway branch station in Bandar Abbas was hit shortly after midnight. Two people were injured and transferred to medical centers. Provincial authorities said the station is located away from residential areas and suffered only limited damage to its infrastructure.

The highway and railway bridge strikes appeared aimed at cutting off Bandar Abbas, Iran’s main port, from roads leading into the country’s central region onward to Tehran, the capital.

While other routes still are open, the terrorist US strikes appear to expand further, clearing aiming to disrupt the movement of goods needed for Iran’s 90 million people.

Bushehr struck again

Bushehr came under two US attack within hours, according to Governor Mohammad Mozaffari.

He said one person was injured and that emergency and medical personnel were responding while authorities continued to investigate the incident.

Attacks near Ahvaz

In Khuzestan Province, Deputy Governor Valiollah Hayati said terrorist American forces attacked areas around the city of Ahvaz on Thursday night.

He said the dimensions of the attack remain under investigation and that further details, including any damage, would be announced later.

The latest attack follows earlier US strikes near Ahvaz that forced the evacuation of Shahid Baghaei Hospital as a precaution. Tehran slammed the attack as a “cowardly war crime”.

Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences said the hospital was temporarily taken out of service.

Strike in Lorestan

In western Iran, Lorestan Deputy Governor Saeed Pourali said US forces attacked an area in the Veysian district of Chegeni County on Friday. No further details were immediately released.

Iran has declared the Strait of Hormuz closed “until further notice” and at least until “the end of US interference in the region.”

Tehran has responded to the US attacks by targeting American military bases and equipment across the region. On Friday, Iranian forces launched salvos of missiles and drones against US assets in Bahrain, Kuwait, Syria, and Oman.

July 17, 2026 Posted by | Economics, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on US strikes kill 38 across Iran, destroy Chabahar port control tower, bridges

John Mearsheimer: All-Out War in the Middle East & Trump’s War on Russia

Glenn Diesen | July 16, 2026

Prof. John Mearsheimer discusses how to make sense of the U.S. going back to war against Iran, and Trump’s decision to deepen the U.S. involvement in the war against Russia. Prof. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in the Political Science Department at the University of Chicago

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

Seyed M. Marandi: Plans for a U.S. Land Invasion of Iran; Yemen & Iran Enters the War?

Glenn Diesen | July 16, 2026

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on John Mearsheimer: All-Out War in the Middle East & Trump’s War on Russia

Yemen to confront Saudi blockade militarily, official to Al Mayadeen

Al Mayadeen| July 16, 2026

Sanaa’s Deputy Information Minister Mohammed Mansour told Al Mayadeen on Thursday that the positions laid out by Ansar Allah leader Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi effectively amount to a formal declaration that Yemen has decided to end the US-Saudi blockade imposed on it.

He said Yemen will see massive demonstrations tomorrow in response to Sayyed al-Houthi’s call, giving the Yemeni people a chance to make their position on lifting the Saudi blockade unmistakably clear.

“The Yemenis have grown tired of negotiations. Either the blockade is lifted in practice, or we move to break it by force,” he said.

Yemen moving toward confronting Saudi blockade militarily

Mansour told Al Mayadeen that Saudi Arabia bombed Sanaa International Airport just nine minutes before an Iranian aircraft was due to land. “By striking Sanaa International Airport, Saudi Arabia made clear that this blockade is its own doing, and that it has no intention of lifting it,” he said.

He added that Yemen is preparing, within days, to confront the Saudi economic blockade through military action. “If political channels fail to force Saudi Arabia to lift the economic blockade, we will confront it militarily,” he said.

He stressed that Yemen never raises a slogan it doesn’t have the means to back up. “Today, we have what it takes to dismantle this economic aggression,” he asserted.

On mediation, Mansour told Al Mayadeen, “We’ve grown tired of mediation, though we do appreciate Oman’s role, since it has not been party to the aggression against our country.”

“This is a matter between Yemen and Saudi Arabia,” he stressed.

He also said Saudi Arabia would do well to take note of Yemen’s positions on Palestine and reconsider the blockade it has imposed.

Yemen will not leave Hezbollah to face the enemy alone

Mansour also voiced regret over the Lebanese government’s stance toward the Lebanese Resistance, insisting that Hezbollah is an asset Lebanon cannot afford to squander.

He affirmed that no party within the Axis of Resistance will ever be left to face the enemy alone, and that Yemen will not abandon Hezbollah.

He recalled that the loudest voice in support of Yemen once belonged to the martyred Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, affirming that Yemen will never forget it.

Sayyed al-Houthi: Saudi escalation will be met in kind

Ansar Allah leader Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi said Thursday that Saudi Arabia’s aggression against Yemen has dragged on for years with no legal basis, framing it as an extension of Riyadh’s subservience to Washington and Tel Aviv.

In his weekly speech, Sayyed al-Houthi confirmed that “surrender is not an option in Yemen,” warning that if Saudi Arabia moves toward full-scale escalation, Yemen will respond in kind, “and blockade for blockade.”

Sayyed al-Houthi accused Riyadh of stalling and evading responsibility over the past several years, depriving Yemen’s people of their sovereign wealth and subjecting them to suffering under a severe blockade, and revealing that Saudi Arabia has cooperated with “Israel” against Yemen throughout that entire period.

“Saudi Arabia is reneging on all the obligations arising from the de-escalation phase, which are, above all, humanitarian obligations and inalienable rights of our people,” he said, accusing Riyadh of seeking to control every aspect of Yemenis’ lives, down to deciding who may travel abroad for medical treatment and who may not.

He added that no one, regardless of position or capacity, has the right to deprive the Yemeni people of their oil rights or freedom of movement.

He said Saudi Arabia wants Yemen’s people to remain trapped in an economic crisis, with betraying their homeland presented as their only means of earning money.

“Saudi Arabia should not imagine that this is a picnic,” he concluded. “It will be something else entirely.”

‘Israel’ aided Saudi interception efforts

Israeli aircraft assisted Saudi forces in their attempts to intercept Yemen’s retaliatory strike, which was launched in response to the Saudi bombardment of Sanaa Airport, a senior military source within the Yemeni Ministry of Defense revealed to Al Mayadeen.

According to the Yemeni source, the Israeli deployment consisted of specialized Gulfstream intelligence-gathering aircraft equipped for communications interception, wiretapping, and reconnaissance.

The aircraft took off from “Israel’s” Nevatim Airbase and operated primarily along a flight path over the Red Sea, where they actively participated in tracking and mapping the trajectories of incoming Yemeni missiles and drones, the source said.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Solidarity and Activism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Yemen to confront Saudi blockade militarily, official to Al Mayadeen

Sitting ducks: Why the US security umbrella no longer protects the Gulf?

By Dr Mustafa Fetouri| MEMO | July 16, 2026

In Kuwait alone—less than 150 kilometres across the Gulf from Iran—the United States maintains a major military hub of approximately 13,500 personnel spread across installations such as Camp Arifjan and Ali Al Salem Air Base. To its south, Saudi Arabia hosts roughly 2,700 U.S. troops, centered at Prince Sultan Air Base in Al Kharj. Elsewhere in the Gulf, every state hosts either a US military presence or provides access and defence cooperation under bilateral agreements: Qatar houses more than 10,000 personnel at CENTCOM’s sprawling forward headquarters at Al Udeid; Bahrain hosts around 9,000 personnel at the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet; the UAE accommodates approximately 3,500 personnel at Al Dhafra while providing deep-water naval access at Jebel Ali; and Oman offers strategic port and airfield access under bilateral agreements, despite having no large permanent US troop presence.

Beyond the Gulf monarchies, Washington maintains approximately 2,500 troops in Iraq and around 900 in northeastern Syria under Operation Inherent Resolve. To Iran’s northwest, the US operates from Incirlik Air Base in Türkiye— a NATO logistics and intelligence hub too. Until its withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, American forces also maintained a major military presence along Iran’s eastern frontier, supported for two decades by extensive supply routes and intelligence cooperation through Pakistan. Although the US lies nearly 10,000 kilometres from Iran, it has constructed an unparalleled regional military architecture of permanent bases, rotational deployments, naval facilities, pre-positioned equipment, access agreements, and security partnerships that stretches from the Eastern Mediterranean across the Gulf to the western Indian Ocean. Combined with the military capabilities of close allies—including Britain, France, and Türkiye—this network almost literally surrounding Iran from all sides. The common thread underpinning this posture has long been the protection of regional partners, the safeguarding of global energy routes, and the defence of US strategic interests.

Yet, this foundational premise has collapsed under the weight of the US-Israeli war on Iran, which has fundamentally transformed the entire regional security landscape. This “war of choice” has exposed how a security arrangement once marketed as an ironclad insurance policy has devolved into a primary strategic liability.

Rather than serving as an effective deterrent, large and static American military installations now act as strategic liability—drawing Iranian retaliatory strikes while denying host states true autonomy or the promised protective shield.

The Gulf states have discovered, at a heavy price, that they are trapped in an impossible paradox: their sovereign territory serves as a staging ground for military operations they were never consulted about—at least that is what they say publically –instantly transforming their critical infrastructure, oil facilities, and urban centers into high-priority targets. Compounding this vulnerability is the stark geopolitical reality that while Washington may eventually pivot away or withdraw—much as it did from Afghanistan—Iran is a permanent neighbour that is going nowhere.

Beyond the immediate threat of missile strikes, the presence of these US installations directly undermines the core national strategies of the Gulf monarchies. Mega-development projects and economic diversification plans—from Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 to Dubai’s global trade hubs—rely entirely on an image of absolute regional stability, investor confidence, and open maritime transit. By hosting forward US bases, host nations inadvertently tie their economic futures to Washington’s military posture, creating an environment of perpetual crisis. Furthermore, defending these expansive American footprints forces host militaries to consume their own finite air-defense interceptors and defense budgets to guard US assets rather than securing their own national borders.

At the same time, while almost all Gulf States have, at least publicly, refrained from taking direct offensive action against Iran to avoid total escalation, they recognise that they are already viewed as passive participants in the wider conflict.

Maintaining this precarious balancing act is becoming increasingly difficult against rising domestic anti-war sentiment, as public anger over regional devastation steadily erodes the host governments’ domestic credibility.

For Washington, this massive network of forward-deployed bases has produced a profound strategic paradox. What was designed to project uninhibited American power now ties US freedom of action to the political consent of cautious host nations. When host governments impose strict sovereignty restrictions—refusing permission for US forces to launch offensive sorties or intelligence missions against regional adversaries from their soil—the Pentagon finds its multi-billion-dollar installations functionally sidelined during critical military surges. Instead of providing seamless operational flexibility, these fixed, highly vulnerable outposts transform into costly “imperial entrapment” liabilities: requiring thousands of US troops, high-end missile defense batteries, and constant naval escort deployments simply to protect the bases themselves, rather than executing broader strategic objectives or enabling Washington’s long-sought pivot to the Indo-Pacific. With the conflict between the US and Iran reigniting, Trump is demanding that the Gulf states pay once again to protect the Strait of Hormuz—a vital transit route that never closed until the war was started by Trump, not Iran.

This strategic calculus becomes infinitely more complex when factoring in Israel’s role in the regional security outlook. In recent years, certain Gulf states—most notably the UAE—operated under the premise that normalization and closer security alignment with Israel via the Abraham Accords would yield a net security dividend. Yet, this belief was never shared across the Gulf; nations like Kuwait, Oman, and Saudi Arabia maintained a far more cautious, sceptical stance toward Tel Aviv. The outbreak of the US-Israeli war on Tehran on February 28 utterly shattered any illusion that an Israeli-linked security architecture could bring regional stability. Instead, it exposed deep internal fault lines among the entire region. Reaching a collective, long-term security understanding with Iran was already a formidable challenge; doing so now, in the wake of a devastating conflict that forced Gulf States into the crossfire, is immensely more complicated. Moving forward, no regional framework can hold if it relies on a anti-Tehran pact anchored in Washington and Tel Aviv while ignoring the permanent reality of Iranian geographic power.

Ultimately, the fallout from the US-Israeli war on Iran exposes a fundamental reality that Washington and its regional allies can no longer ignore: the entire Middle Eastern security architecture must be fundamentally re-evaluated.

The core dilemma facing the region is that no collective security arrangement can ever be viable or effective if it seeks to exclude Iran—an indispensable, geographically permanent power armed with increasingly sophisticated offensive, defensive, and asymmetric capabilities.

Moving forward, any stable regional order must not only account for Tehran’s military leverage, but also accommodate its non-negotiable strategic demands. This includes addressing governance and transit rights over the vital Strait of Hormuz—through which one-fifth of global oil flows—and reaching a durable, pragmatic framework on its nuclear program. Regardless of the final outcome of ongoing US-Iran negotiations, the lesson for the Gulf is clear: true security cannot be built on an external garrison model that marginalizes the region’s principal indigenous power.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sitting ducks: Why the US security umbrella no longer protects the Gulf?

Iran’s World Cup ordeal was a dress rehearsal for renewed war

By Faezeh Firuzeh | Responsible Statecraft | July 16, 2026

Over the past week, the U.S. resumed heavy airstrikes on Iran, hitting over 300 targets in the first three nights alone, according to U.S. Central Command. The strikes killed more than 30 civilians and wounded more than 260, according to Iran’s Health Ministry. This U.S. bombing campaign came amid ongoing peace talks between Iran and the U.S. and while Iran held cross-border funeral processions for the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

At the NATO summit in Ankara on July 8, President Trump declared the ceasefire with Iran “over.” He called Iranian officials “scum,” “sick” and “vicious, violent people.” Such insults against Iranians are not new. Weeks earlier, this aggressive rhetoric and the renewed bombing campaign were foreshadowed by the U.S. and FIFA’s mistreatment of the Iranian football team. I witnessed the rehearsal firsthand.

The opening act came well before the tournament began. U.S. officials accused the Iranian national team of attempting to smuggle Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps operatives and barred at least eleven members of the delegation from entering the United States.

Iran’s football federation condemned the claims as “false, fabricated, and lacking any credibility.” However, the accusations played their part. By casting the Iranian football team’s attendance at the World Cup as an infiltration risk, the U.S. could frame every discriminatory action it took as a necessary safety measure.

With the premise set, the restrictions followed. The Trump administration would not allow the team to camp on U.S. soil, despite all their matches being in the United States. They were only permitted to be in the U.S. during narrow windows of time to play their matches and forced to leave immediately after. As a World Cup host, the U.S. did not extend hospitality, only hostility.

I had a front-row seat with the Iranian national football delegation during their World Cup stay — at their matches in Los Angeles and Seattle, in the Seattle hotel we shared, and at their base camp in Tijuana, Mexico, to which I traveled twice. Over days of conversations, members of the delegation came to know me. I had not set out to write about them. That came once I heard what the tournament had been like for them from the inside.

At the airport on the way to and from all three of their matches, captain Mehdi Taremi and assistant coach Saeed Alhoei were held for nearly 30 minutes and questioned. The constant detainments, security, and immigration checks made the 127 mile flight from Tijuana to Los Angeles — normally a short hop — take nearly five hours. The team, initially promised they could stay the night in Seattle given their 8 p.m. match, received an email from FIFA three days before their game saying that they were no longer permitted to stay and would have to leave immediately after the match

Driving back to my hotel at 1:30 a.m. that night — the same one the team had been booked into — I was startled to see their distinctive royal-blue bus on the highway: not parked for the night, but moving. After the post-game press conference, anti-doping testing, airport fingerprinting, and flight, they arrived back at their hotel in Tijuana at 4:40 a.m., only to eat a post-game meal near sunrise.

By refusing them hospitality, the U.S. effectively deprived Iran’s World Cup team of time to sleep and eat, even on a match day. Iran was never offered fair play or an equal chance.

Iran’s Alireza Jahanbakhsh put the team’s ask plainly: “To be honest, we don’t ask for much. We just ask for the same procedure for all the other 47 teams.” The answer came from the head of the White House’s World Cup task force, Andrew Giuliani, who told ABC News the players should thank the U.S. for “our hospitality.” After Iran was eliminated came the curtain call. The Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin told reporters at a World Cup security briefing that he was “so happy,” that his department had “pulled their visas,” and that he “might’ve sung a song or two or maybe even danced a happy dance.”

On the same day Iran played its final match, the U.S. was bombing Iran. The players took the field while their own country was under American fire. When the players emerged from the plane in Tijuana, Mexico, at the start of the tournament, they were wearing pins reading “168” — a reminder to the world of the 168 Iranians, mostly children, who were killed on February 28, the opening day of the U.S.–Israeli war on Iran, at an all-girls’ school in Minab.

The treatment of Iran’s football team underscored the way wars are marketed to the public. Manufacturing an enemy and treating their people as a mortal danger is not realism, and does not bring security. Demonization and threat inflation are expensive habits. They foreclose possible avenues for pragmatic, effective diplomacy, and narrow the script until war looks like the only option. Even now, with no shortage of diplomats and mediators, Washington is attempting to bomb its way into negotiations. Trump said the strikes would “continue until I say it’s enough,” and threatened to bomb Iran’s bridges and power plants “next week” unless Tehran returns to the negotiating table.

The tactics used to promote the latest war on Iran, applied routinely, are a major reason Washington continues to talk itself into unwinnable and costly wars that the American people do not need. That fatal reflex didn’t end with the tournament. The World Cup was the rehearsal; bombing Iran is the show.

Faezeh Firuzeh is a Los Angeles–based writer and strategist whose work connects popular culture to foreign policy. Born in Iran, she was in the country during the 2025 U.S.–Israeli war. She previously served as managing director of the Rethinking Iran Initiative at Johns Hopkins SAIS and as a researcher at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. She holds a master’s degree from the University of Chicago, where she studied social policy and global conflict.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iran’s World Cup ordeal was a dress rehearsal for renewed war

Iran calls on UN rights chief to condemn US attacks on civilian infrastructure

Press TV – July 16, 2026

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva has called on the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to unequivocally condemn ongoing US attacks on civilian infrastructure, warning that Washington’s renewed illegal war against the Islamic Republic is inflicting grave humanitarian and human rights consequences.

In a letter on Thursday, Iran’s permanent representative to the UN Office and other international organizations in Geneva, Ali Bahraini, urged the UN rights chief to publicly denounce the attacks, saying the continuing US aggression against Iran is causing serious humanitarian and human rights harm.

Bahraini called on the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to take a clear and unequivocal stance by condemning the widespread US strikes on Iran, particularly those targeting the country’s southern ports.

He said the attacks constitute a blatant violation of international law, stressing that they have killed large numbers of civilians and caused extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and other critical facilities across the country.

As examples, Bahraini cited the targeting of sections of the Tehran–Mashhad railway, a drinking water production facility in Dehloran, wheat storage silos in the cities of Hoveizeh and Dasht-e Azadegan, fishing vessels belonging to fishermen in southern Iran, missile strikes near Baqaei Hospital in Ahvaz, and the attack on Semnan Airport.

Elsewhere in the letter, the Iranian envoy expressed regret that the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has yet to condemn the recent US attacks.

Bahraini warned that, at a time when the territorial integrity of a UN member state has been violated and civilians continue to suffer the consequences of the assaults, the absence of a clear, timely, and firm response could create the impression that human rights protection and the implementation of international law are being applied selectively.

The appeal comes amid renewed US military attacks on Iran, which have struck civilian areas and critical infrastructure alongside other targets.

Tehran has condemned the strikes as blatant violations of international law and the UN Charter, slamming Washington for escalating regional instability and endangering civilian lives through its continued military aggression.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran calls on UN rights chief to condemn US attacks on civilian infrastructure

Intl shipping firms shun US-controlled Hormuz corridor over failure to protect vessels

The Cradle | July 16, 2026

International shipping companies are avoiding crossing the Strait of Hormuz through the US-controlled alternative corridor that runs along the Omani coastline due to fears of Iranian strikes, sources told Reuters on 16 July.

After a series of Iranian strikes on ships attempting to bypass the Iranian-designated shipping channels as mandated in the Iran–US memorandum of understanding (MoU), shipping companies are reassessing the safety and viability of US military escort through the strait.

“The US doesn’t seem to have any control over the situation,” one shipping source said, noting that their firm chose to avoid the strait altogether out of concern for crew safety as security conditions worsen.

“Iran’s continued ability to target ships sailing through the Omani route means the Trump administration’s proposed solution to keep ships moving is unlikely to work,” said Torbjorn Solvedt, principal West Asia analyst at risk intelligence firm Verisk Maplecroft.

Following the resumption of US attacks on Iran and the reimposition of the US blockade on Iranian ports and shipping routes, traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has collapsed to a near-complete halt.

Kpler data shows only seven vessels transited the Strait of Hormuz on the first day of the renewed US naval blockade, down from 13 the previous day.

Just prior to the reimposition of the US blockade, Kpler reported 21 monitored transits through the Strait of Hormuz on 14 July, with vessels favoring the Iranian-approved route as the Omani corridor saw no crossings at all.

The firm also verified three additional attacks off Oman, bringing the confirmed toll to 56 incidents and 17 seafarer deaths.

More than 200 non-Iranian vessels applied for Iranian transit permits and insurance coverage in the three weeks between the signing of the Iran-US MoU and the resumption of the war, according to figures released by the Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) on Tuesday.

The authority approved 79 percent of requests, with tankers making up the largest share at 41 percent, and China and India each accounting for roughly a fifth of outbound destinations – figures that cover Iran-approved crossings only, excluding the US-escorted Omani route.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Intl shipping firms shun US-controlled Hormuz corridor over failure to protect vessels

Iran warned Vance that Kushner, Witkoff used peace talks as cover for insider trading: Report

The Cradle | July 16, 2026

Iranian negotiators sent a private warning to US Vice President JD Vance earlier this year, saying that US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were “abusing” their roles in the talks to profit from financial markets, Drop Site News reported on 16 July.

The Iranian negotiators sent the warnings to Vance through an intermediary during the late June talks in Lake Lucerne in Switzerland, telling him the pair cared more about profiting from insider knowledge of the negotiations than reaching a deal to end the war on Iran.

The negotiators also said that Kushner had been repeatedly leaking details of the talks to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with one US official telling Axios that Witkoff and Kushner “talk almost every day to Netanyahu” and the head of Mossad.

The Vance outreach came after Tehran had already tried to alert the White House to the pair’s conduct, presenting evidence that “individuals close to [US] President [Donald] Trump” were abusing the war on Iran and diplomatic developments to manipulate financial markets, while warning of Witkoff’s “overall destructive role in the previous negotiation.”

Financial analysts have observed a pattern since the war began in late February of speculative bets and unusually large positions in war-linked markets – oil futures, energy stocks, and prediction markets – often preceded by Trump announcements timed just before Monday trading opens in the US, fueling public suspicion of insider trading.

Iran calculated the profits from these manipulations at around $9 billion by June and formally demanded in writing that half of it, $4.5 billion, be allocated to Tehran.

The official said the exchanged texts “will ultimately become part of the historical record.”

Financial disclosure forms released on 3 July revealed that President Trump’s income soared past $2.2 billion last year, largely built on cryptocurrency ventures that his own administration was regulating.

The Wall Street Journal reported Trump made around $1 billion from crypto deals, including a UAE state-linked investment in World Liberty Financial and proceeds from his $TRUMP memecoin, which later crashed in value by 97 percent.

Trump and those close to him have also profited from massive, highly suspicious trading spikes in oil futures and stock indexes occurring just minutes before the president issued major market-moving announcements on social media about the US war on Iran.

Economists, lawmakers, and market analysts have raised alarms over insider trading, data leaks, and market manipulation coming from the White House.

Almost $1 billion in oil futures trades were executed in early May in the minutes before an Axios report revealed a US-Iran memorandum aimed at ending the war.

Market observers noted the White House’s wild swings between war and peace rhetoric appeared to be little more than a vehicle for insiders to profit through coordinated trading on Polymarket and traditional commodities exchanges

Meanwhile, the Financial Times (FT) reported that the president’s sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., were behind a $1.04-billion investment network funneling money into sectors championed by the White House, including drone companies pursuing Pentagon contracts.

The report also noted that Donald Trump Jr. serves as an advisor to Polymarket, where insider trading on US military action is reportedly rampant.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Corruption, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iran warned Vance that Kushner, Witkoff used peace talks as cover for insider trading: Report

The Saudis Back Down

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | July 16, 2026

On Monday July 13, airstrikes hit the runway at Sanaa International Airport shortly after a Houthi delegation returned from the funeral in Iran for the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yemen’s Defense Minister Gen. Taher al-Aqili said on X that the runway was struck to stop a plane carrying the Houthi delegation returning from Khamenei’s funeral. The IRG defense ministry said it had exhausted diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran and the Houthis to stay out of Yemeni airspace, that it would respond to hostile aircraft “by all available means,” and held Iran responsible.

However, Israel’s mouthpiece on Axios, Barak Ravid, citing two US officials, reported that Trump gave Saudi leader MBS his backing for the strike in a phone call last Friday — MBS asked for support for military action against the Houthis and received it. The White House declined to comment directly and the Saudi embassy didn’t respond.

The proximate cause is aviation, not ground war. About ten days ago a Mahan Air flight landed in Sanaa — the first Iran–Sanaa flights in over a decade — and picked up a Houthi delegation traveling to the funeral of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Saudi Arabia blocked subsequent flights, fearing they’d be used to move weapons or Iranian military advisers to the Houthis. (Note the airport itself has been largely destroyed and out of action since Israeli strikes in May.)

Following the Saudi Attack on Sanaa, the Houthis retaliated by firing ballistic missiles and drones at Abha International Airport in Saudi Arabia’s southwestern Asir region — a mountainous area near the Yemeni border and a domestic summer destination. Saree claimed the strike. The Saudi-led coalition spokesman said air defenses “dealt with a threat from ballistic missiles” launched toward the southern region. No casualties reported.

This exchange marked the first Saudi Arabian attacks on the Houthis since the informal truce took effect in March 2022. I thought that the Saudis would retaliate on Tuesday or Wednesday for the Houthi strike on Monday … Thankfully, I was wrong. The Saudis did not follow up by launching new attacks at Houthi positions.

The Saudi attack was foolish and reckless. At present, the Saudis are able to export a bit of oil from Yanbu, a Saudi city that sits on the shores of the Red Sea. This attack on Yemen — albeit an airfield — carried the risk that the Houthis would attack the Saudi oil facility at Yanbu and close the Bab al Mandab Strait. Given the Saudi vulnerabilities if their operation in the Red Sea is suspended or closed, you would think that MBS government would be engaged in further confidence building exercises with Yemen. Nope!! The Saudis almost touched off a renewal of the war with the Houthis.

I don’t know who convinced MBS to put a full stop to further attacks on the Houthi-controlled portion of Yemen, but the Saudis have not attacked again. The Saudis are in no position financially to handle the simultaneous closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al Mandab strait. It appears that cooler heads in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia prevailed… for now at least.

July 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on The Saudis Back Down

The monopoly of arms: Why the doctrine is enforced only where resistance exists

By Sondoss Al Asaad | Al Mayadeen | July 15, 2026

For decades, the slogan of “restricting arms to the state” has been presented as a universal principle of sovereignty and state-building. Yet a closer geopolitical examination reveals a striking inconsistency: the doctrine is aggressively promoted in countries like Lebanon and Iraq, while it is largely absent from discussions in surrounding countries such as Syria, Libya, or other fragmented states where multiple armed actors continue to exist.

This selective application raises an uncomfortable question: Is the objective truly the consolidation of state authority, or is the slogan primarily employed where armed movements challenge Israeli military superiority and American hegemony?

Political philosopher Carl Schmitt argues that sovereignty ultimately belongs to whoever decides the exception.

Modern geopolitical practice appears to confirm his observation. The international order invokes legal principles selectively, depending on whether they reinforce or undermine prevailing strategic interests. The debate over arms, therefore, is not merely legal; it is profoundly political.

The Lebanese case illustrates this contradiction with exceptional clarity.

Following the November 2024 ceasefire, “Hezbollah withdrew from the north of the Litani River and ‘accepted’ that decisions regarding war and peace would rest exclusively with the Lebanese state and its armed forces”. The expectation promoted by Western capitals was that this would allegedly strengthen Lebanese sovereignty and reduce tensions.

The reality unfolded differently; the Israeli enemy, unable to establish a lasting foothold inside southern Lebanese villages during sixty-six days of warfare, achieved after the ceasefire what military operations had failed to accomplish. It maintained positions inside Lebanese territory, continued near-daily airstrikes across Lebanon, and expanded targeted assassinations while facing little meaningful deterrence.

The sequence of events inevitably fuelled a renewed domestic debate. If sovereignty means that only the state possesses weapons, what happens when the state itself lacks the capacity to prevent violations of its own borders?

This dilemma reflects what Thomas Hobbes identified centuries ago as the fundamental purpose of political authority: providing security.

The legitimacy of the state rests not merely on possessing legal authority but on its ability to protect those living under its jurisdiction. When that capacity weakens, alternative security arrangements inevitably emerge.

The issue extends beyond Lebanon; In Iraq, international pressure consistently emphasizes integrating or dismantling armed resistance groups under the banner of state monopoly over force. Yet comparable urgency is rarely directed toward states where numerous militias continue to operate without challenging Israeli strategic dominance.

Syria offers another revealing comparison. Multiple foreign militaries, including American, Turkish, and Israeli forces, remain active on Syrian territory alongside various local armed factions.

Libya remains fragmented among competing military authorities and militias. Yet the international discourse seldom revolves around an immediate imperative to monopolize arms before broader political settlements are achieved.

Such inconsistencies have led many observers to conclude that the slogan itself is not universally applied but strategically deployed.

French philosopher Michel Foucault argued that power operates through discourse by defining what becomes accepted as common sense.

The phrase “arms outside the state” has increasingly become one such discourse. It transforms a complex security equation into a simplified legal formula while avoiding a more difficult question: Can sovereignty exist when a state cannot defend its territory?

July 15, 2026 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on The monopoly of arms: Why the doctrine is enforced only where resistance exists

Iran has no plans for negotiations, focused on defense: FM spokesman

Press TV – July 15, 2026

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman says the country has no plans to return to negotiations with the United States as long as Washington violates its commitments under the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the two countries last month.

Esmaeil Baghaei said on Wednesday that Iran is currently focused on repelling and retaliating against US attacks on its territory.

“We currently have no plans for negotiations and are focused on defense,” Baghaei said in response to claims by the US that its ongoing attacks on Iran would force Tehran back to the negotiating table.

The spokesman said Iran no longer considers itself bound by the terms of the MoU signed with the United States on June 17, citing Washington’s repeated violations of its commitments under the agreement.

“An MoU is a set of mutual commitments, and in the event of a breach by the other party, we too will refrain from fulfilling our obligations; this is a principle, and this same path will be followed henceforth,” he said.

“The other party has engaged in bad faith and breach of promise (beginning) from the very first article (of the MoU).”

The diplomat said that everyone inside Iran is supporting the policy of standing up against the US and its bullying demands.

“… our armed forces will respond with full force to any aggressor. If they strike, they will be struck back,” he said.

The comments came amid ongoing US attacks on coastal areas in southern Iran, which Washington claims are carried out to weaken Iran’s ability to “target ships” in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has rejected the US accusations, saying responsibility for managing transit through the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway in the Persian Gulf that is critical to global energy supplies, has been delegated to Iran under Article 5 of the 14-point MoU agreed between Tehran and Washington.

July 15, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Iran has no plans for negotiations, focused on defense: FM spokesman

« Previous Entries