Israel’s Attack on Iran: The Latest Developments
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 13.06.2025
Israel has carried out an unprecedented, multi-wave surprise attack against Iran involving 200 jets, plus drones operating inside the Islamic Republic. Here’s a recap of the key details, plus new information that’s come to light in the past hours.
The attack, codenamed ‘Operation Rising Lion’, targeted:
- The Natanz uranium enrichment facility and the Tabriz research site.
- Cities, with damage reported in Tehran and at least 9 other urban areas. 320+ civilians injured, nearly 80 killed.
- Air defense and missile launchers.
- Top IRGC and Armed Forces leaders, nuclear scientists, a senior aide to the Supreme Leader.
Iran’s Response
- Ali Khomeini vowed “severe punishment,” while President Pezeshkian promised to make Israel “regret” its “reckless” actions.
- Iran cancelled a new round of nuclear talks with the US, owing to US “complicity” in the attacks.
- Assassinated military leaders are being replaced, with Mohammad Pakpour taking Hossein Salami’s place as IRGC chief, and Abdolrahim Mousavi replacing Mohammad Bagheri as Chief of General Staff.
Has Iranian Counterstrike Taken Place?
- Initial reports suggested Iran launched 100-200 drones toward Israel.
- Other reports said up to 800 projectiles, including cruise and ballistic missiles, were launched.
- But Fars News says Iran hasn’t carried out ANY substantive retaliatory attacks yet.
Trump’s Ultimatum
The US president wrote a mob boss-style Truth Social post boasting about the murder of “certain Iranian hardliners,” and warning that the next attacks will be “even more brutal” unless Iran makes a deal. Later, he issued a post about his “60-day ultimatum,” signaling direct knowledge of Israel’s plans.
- Israeli officials told Axios the US gave Israel a “green light” for the strikes.
- JPost reported Israel is trying to convince the US to join in on the attacks directly.
Key Reactions
Traditional regional US allies including Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar sharply condemned Israel, with Qatar saying Tel Aviv’s “reckless actions continue to destroy prospects for peace” & put global security “in imminent danger.”
Russia condemned the sharp escalation of tensions and Israel’s blatant “violation of the UN Charter and international law.”
The UN’s response? “Concern” about the targeting of nuclear sites.
The U.S. is on the Brink of War with Iran… Why and for Whom?
If Americans Knew | June 12, 2025
Excerpted from original URL:
• “Millions would die and that’s exactly wha…
Col. Douglas Macgregor is a decorated combat veteran, author of five books, a PhD, and a defense and foreign policy consultant. In 2020 he was appointed Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense by President Trump. In 28 years of service Macgregor taught at West Point; commanded the 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry; served as the Director of the Joint Operations Center at SHAPE in 1999; and was awarded the Defense Superior Service medal. – https://www.douglasmacgregor.com/about
For more information regarding war with Iran, visit: https://www.IAKN.org/IRAN
Iran condemns ‘biased’ IAEA, announces enrichment countermeasures
Al Mayadeen | June 12, 2025
Iran has sharply rejected a resolution passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Board of Governors, accusing it of being “politically driven” and “biased”. In a joint statement released Thursday by the Foreign Ministry and the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), Iranian officials condemned the resolution and unveiled a series of countermeasures aimed at accelerating the country’s nuclear program.
This comes shortly after the IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution against Iran on Thursday, claiming Iran was in breach of non-proliferation obligations. The vote passed with 19 countries voting in favor, 3 opposing, and 11 abstaining, according to diplomats cited by Reuters. Two countries were absent and thus did not vote.
The resolution, marking the first formal accusation in nearly two decades that Iran has violated its nuclear non-proliferation obligations, was passed during a closed-door session of the 35-member board. The move, described as “politically motivated” by Iranian officials, was initiated by the United States along with the E3, Britain, France, and Germany.
IAEA resolution lacks ‘neutrality’
The joint statement asserted that Iran remains committed to its obligations under the Safeguards Agreement, adding that no IAEA report to date has ever confirmed any deviation or non-compliance. Iranian authorities described the IAEA’s latest move as lacking “neutrality” and being manipulated by Western powers, particularly the United States, Britain, France, and Germany, to pursue geopolitical goals.
In a direct response, Iran announced the activation of a new uranium enrichment facility at a secure site and plans to upgrade the Fordow nuclear plant by replacing older centrifuges with sixth-generation advanced models.
Iran blasts Western double standards on nuclear disarmament
Iranian officials criticized the IAEA and its Western backers for what they described as selective enforcement of nuclear obligations. The joint statement accused the US and its European allies of reviving “25-year-old allegations” that had already been settled under the 2015 nuclear deal, while turning a blind eye to “Israel’s” undeclared nuclear arsenal and refusal to adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
“The United States, Britain, and France have failed to comply with Article VI of the NPT regarding nuclear disarmament,” the statement read, adding that Germany remains in possession of “inhumane weapons of mass destruction.”
Iran further warned that continued political maneuvering within the IAEA would render any future engagement futile. “This political approach toward Iran, which has always honored its obligations and cooperated extensively with the Agency, forces us to conclude that the path of engagement and cooperation is futile,” the statement asserted.
Iran thanks allies opposing the resolution
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, strongly condemned the resolution passed Thursday by the IAEA Board of Governors, calling it a politically motivated effort by Western powers to undermine the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.
Baghaei specifically denounced the role of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, accusing them of exploiting the IAEA to “cast doubt on the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.”
He firmly rejected the allegations outlined in the resolution, which he said were based on “baseless and unfounded claims” and stemmed from a political report by the IAEA Director General. The resolution, jointly submitted by the four Western states, was described as “an unjustified, groundless, and cruel move,” aimed at exerting “maximum pressure on Iran to deviate from the legitimate rights and interests of the Iranian people in the peaceful use of nuclear energy.”
Baghaei warned that those behind the resolution will be held accountable for its repercussions. “The Islamic Republic of Iran will take proportionate measures in response to this move to secure and protect the interests and inalienable rights of the Iranian nation in benefiting from peaceful nuclear energy,” he said.
He also expressed deep concern over the conduct of the IAEA Director General, criticizing his public statements and what he described as provocative interviews on Iran’s nuclear activities. Baghaei accused the agency chief of undermining the organization’s neutrality, stating that he “must adhere to his missions and duties in accordance with the Agency’s statute.”
Furthermore, the Iranian diplomat extended gratitude to China, Russia, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Belarus for issuing a joint statement rejecting the resolution. He praised their “responsible and legal positions” and reaffirmed the Iranian nation’s determination to defend its rights and interests as outlined in the United Nations Charter and the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Iran’s IAEA representative Najafi slams politicized resolution
Iran’s representative at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Reza Najafi, strongly criticized the agency’s recent resolution against Iran, denouncing it as politically motivated and based on unreliable sources. Speaking on Thursday, Najafi warned that such moves undermine the IAEA’s credibility and threaten the rights of member states under its founding charter.
Najafi emphasized that any draft resolution brought forward by the Board of Governors should rely strictly on unbiased, verifiable evidence, not intelligence supplied by specific states with vested interests. “Basing reports on questionable or politicized information undermines the agency’s objectivity,” he stated, in clear reference to data provided by Western governments and the Israeli occupation.
US current approach risks setting a dangerous precedent
He warned that the United States’ current approach risks setting a dangerous precedent, one that could erode trust and cooperation between the agency and its member states. Najafi asserted that such behavior contradicts the IAEA’s stated commitment to impartiality and transparency.
Reaffirming Iran’s position, Najafi made it clear that the Islamic Republic would not tolerate any attempt to erode its sovereignty through international pressure.
“Iran categorically rejects any pressure or mediation that seeks to undermine its sovereignty. We will defend our national interests, independence, and dignity,” he declared.
Politicized resolution in disguise
Najafi also expressed Iran’s outright rejection of what he described as a politicized resolution disguised as a technical safeguard concern, echoing Tehran’s longstanding understanding that the IAEA is being used as a tool for Western geopolitical agendas.
In a pointed warning to the E3, Britain, France, and Germany, as well as the United States, Najafi made it clear that Iran’s response would be firm. “These measures will not pass without consequences. They must take full responsibility for the repercussions and Iran’s strong reaction,” he said.
Kamalvandi: Political pressure will escalate Iran’s nuclear program
Behrouz Kamalvandi, Deputy Head of the Atomic Energy Organization, reinforced the government’s defiant tone, declaring that political pressure would only accelerate Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“It is a strategic mistake to think that political pressure will push Iran to abandon its legitimate positions,” Kamalvandi said, warning that the current approach would “backfire”.
He confirmed that Iran would soon launch a third uranium enrichment facility, in addition to boosting enrichment capacity at existing sites. “We will develop sixth-generation centrifuges and increase uranium enrichment significantly,” he stated.
More Western pressure, more Iranian countermeasures
Iran’s latest response underscores its growing rejection of Western pressure and marks a new phase in the country’s nuclear trajectory, one increasingly independent of multilateral negotiations and oversight mechanisms perceived by Tehran as compromised.
This development comes just days ahead of the sixth round of indirect nuclear talks between Iran and the United States, set to take place this Sunday in Muscat, Oman. The announcement was confirmed by Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, who wrote in a post on X: “I am pleased to confirm the 6th round of Iran-US talks will be held in Muscat this Sunday, the 15th.”
Tehran and Washington have held five rounds of talks since April to carve a new nuclear deal to replace the 2015 accord that Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018.
Trump to Netanyahu: No green light to attack Iran, pursue deal
Al Mayadeen | June 10, 2025
US President Donald Trump has reportedly told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “Israel” does not have a “green light” to launch a military strike against Iran, emphasizing that diplomacy remains Washington’s preferred path.
According to Israeli Channel 12 sources, Trump stated during a phone conversation on Monday, “You don’t have a green light, there will be a deal with Iran. The attack (on Iran) needs to be taken off the agenda right now.”
The firm statement came in response to Netanyahu’s demand that Trump abandon ongoing negotiations with Tehran and support an Israeli military operation. Netanyahu reportedly insisted that Washington should “cease talks and support direct military action.”
Despite Netanyahu’s warning that “negotiations with Iran are futile, and they are trying to deceive you; all they want is to buy time,” Trump pushed back, reiterating that “nothing closes the door” and that “work is underway to reach an agreement.” Israeli Channel 12 previously reported that Trump expected a “not-so-good response” from Iran but remains committed to diplomacy.
Trump also addressed the war in Gaza during the call, urging Netanyahu to de-escalate. “I want you to work on ending the war in Gaza, not just the Deal of the Century, the war has exhausted itself,” he said.
Intelligence Blow to “Israel” Changes Strategic Calculus
The conversation took place against the backdrop of a major intelligence breakthrough by Iran, which, according to Iranian and regional sources, has obtained thousands of highly sensitive documents detailing “Israel’s” nuclear infrastructure and strategic projects.
On June 7, Al Mayadeen cited Iranian intelligence sources who revealed that the trove includes photos, videos, and technical data on “Israel’s” nuclear facilities, some previously undisclosed. The volume of data, the sources said, was so vast that reviewing it all “would take an exceptionally long time.”
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council announced on June 9 that this intelligence enables Tehran to carry out a proportional retaliatory strike on hidden Israeli nuclear sites if Iran is attacked. “Today, access to this information… has allowed the warriors of Islam to give a clearly proportionate response to a possible attack by the Israeli regime,” it stated.
Meanwhile, Iran has accused the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of leaking confidential communications to Israeli intelligence, claiming this had led to the targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. “These documents clearly show that instead of playing a neutral role, the IAEA has become an instrument serving the objectives of the Zionist regime,” a source told Fars News on June 10.
Broader Implications
The revelations have added urgency to Trump’s diplomatic posture, as US intelligence officials increasingly warn that a unilateral Israeli strike could unravel the fragile state of nuclear negotiations and trigger a regional war. According to the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, “Israel” had been preparing to strike Iran’s nuclear sites but delayed the move at Washington’s request.
Iranian officials, meanwhile, have warned that any Israeli military action will be met with devastating counterstrikes. IRGC Commander Major General Hossein Salami recently said that it is not Iran’s nuclear sites that will be destroyed, but the “targets of the Israeli occupation entity.” Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh echoed that sentiment, stating, “Any hostile action by Israel against Iran would inevitably result in its destruction.”
With Iran holding what it describes as “one of the most significant intelligence blows” ever dealt to “Israel,” and with talks in Washington still on the table, analysts say that Trump’s call to de-escalate may reflect a growing US effort to avoid being drawn into a full-scale conflict.
UNIFIL denies talks on ending its mission in south Lebanon: Exclusive
Al Mayadeen | June 9, 2025
Any discussion about the future of UNIFIL falls solely under the authority of the UN Security Council, the spokesperson for UNIFIL clarified to Al Mayadeen, noting that the force remains committed to coordinating with the Lebanese Army and insists on the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon.
UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti told Al Mayadeen, “There are currently no talks about UNIFIL’s future,” adding that “any such discussion would take place within the UN Security Council.”
Meanwhile, a US State Department spokesperson told Al Mayadeen in a short briefing that the recent reports claiming the United States intends to end the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon are inaccurate.
Tenenti stated that UNIFIL continues its operations in southern Lebanon in full cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces. He emphasized that Israeli forces should withdraw from their occupied positions in the area, noting that the UN Security Council alone holds the authority to assess whether UNIFIL’s ongoing presence remains necessary and effective.
“Restoring stability to southern Lebanon depends on Israel’s withdrawal from recently occupied positions,” he added.
Lebanese Army is adhering to resolution 1701
Tenenti also affirmed that the Lebanese Army remains committed to implementing UN Resolution 1701, deploying to required areas in close coordination with UNIFIL forces.
When asked about French troops, he responded: “I don’t distinguish between the role of French forces and UNIFIL, all are fulfilling their duties under Resolution 1701.”
The statement follows reports in Israeli media claiming the US and “Israel” agreed to terminate UNIFIL’s operations in southern Lebanon.
The Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom cited sources claiming that “the United States and Israel have agreed to end UNIFIL’s operations in southern Lebanon.” According to the report, the US administration is “not interested in renewing UNIFIL’s mandate,” and “Israel, frankly, isn’t pushing hard to convince them otherwise.”
US, Israel agree to end UNIFIL mandate in south Lebanon: Report
The Cradle | June 9, 2025
The US and Israel have agreed that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) must cease its operations in the country’s south, according to Hebrew media outlets.
Washington has decided not to renew UNIFIL’s mandate, and Israel “did not try to convince them otherwise,” the report said.
A vote on the UNIFIL mandate is expected to take place at the UN Security Council within the next few months, likely in August.
Another report in Israel Hayom said the US is considering pulling support for UNIFIL. Sources told Times of Israel that the “option is on the table.”
“The US has not yet made up its mind regarding its future support for UNIFIL, but it wants to see major reforms, which could mean pulling support,” the sources added.
No officials from the US, Israel, or the UN have publicly commented on the matter yet.
UNIFIL, which was established in 1978 and expanded after Israel’s war on Lebanon in 2006, currently includes more than 13,000 uniformed personnel tasked with monitoring hostilities along the Blue Line and ensuring humanitarian access.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been pushing for UNIFIL’s removal from Lebanon since as far back as October 2024.
Analysts have said that the move is intended to eliminate international observers who could monitor or document Israeli military activity in southern Lebanon. During the latest war, UNIFIL forces came under Israeli fire several times.
“The exclusion of outside observers, whether it is journalists or UN peacekeepers, seems a deliberate strategy to limit the scrutiny of Israeli forces at a time when they are most needed,” Shane Darcy, professor at the Irish Centre for Human Rights, said last year during Israel’s ground operation in Lebanon.
Other reports and analyses have said that Washington is looking to pressure Beirut into accepting a new mandate for UNIFIL, including changes that would see the interim force actively work against Hezbollah’s presence in the south and destroy infrastructure without needing to coordinate with the Lebanese army.
Such changes to the UNIFIL mandate are advocated for by Israeli reservist and former head of the Israeli army’s Strategic Planning Division, Assaf Orion, in a 29 May piece for the Washington Institute. “The time has come for UNIFIL to either adapt or disband,” Orion says.
The Israeli media reports about UNIFIL’s future in Lebanon come days after Tel Aviv launched its largest attacks on the Lebanese capital since the start of the ceasefire.
Since the truce was reached in November 2024, Israel has violated the deal over 3,000 times with constant attacks. Israeli forces also maintain an occupation of five locations inside Lebanon, which they established themselves in after the ceasefire, in violation of the agreement.
Hezbollah and the Lebanese state have abided by the agreement. The resistance has handed over weapons and military positions to the Lebanese army south of the Litani River.
Yet it rejects US and Israeli pressure for full disarmament.
On 6 June, Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, threatened Lebanon with an escalation of attacks if Hezbollah is not disarmed.
“There will be no calm in Beirut, and no order or stability in Lebanon, without security for Israel,” he said.
US must stop pursuing Netanyahu’s ‘failed’ Iran policies: Iran Parliament Speaker
Mehr News Agency | June 8, 2025
Iran’s parliament speaker says Washington’s recent nuclear proposal lacks any mention of sanctions relief, calling the US stance contradictory and coercive.
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf criticized the latest US proposal in indirect nuclear talks, saying it lacks any reference to lifting sanctions and reflects a coercive and contradictory approach by Washington.
Speaking on Wednesday, Qalibaf stressed that according to the Strategic Action Plan to Lift Sanctions passed by Iran’s parliament, the Islamic Republic remains fully prepared to build trust by demonstrating the peaceful nature of its nuclear program—but only in return for genuine sanctions relief and tangible economic benefits, all while continuing uranium enrichment on its own soil.
“The fact that the US proposal doesn’t even mention lifting sanctions clearly proves the dishonesty and contradiction in America’s approach to the indirect nuclear negotiations,” Qalibaf said.
He blamed the US for trying to deprive Iran of its internationally recognized right to enrich uranium, all while offering empty promises of economic openings. “They smile in front of the cameras and talk of economic relief, but in reality, not only do they avoid lifting sanctions—they don’t even promise to.”
“It is clear that no rational logic would accept such a unilateral and imposed agreement,” he stressed.
Qalibaf further criticized US President Donald Trump, calling him “delusional” and urging him to change course.
If Trump truly seeks a deal, he must abandon his coordination with the Zionist regime and Netanyahu’s failed policies, Qalibaf said.
He concluded by emphasizing that Iran must resolve its domestic economic problems by relying on internal capacities, thereby forcing the United States to accept a win-win deal that includes genuine sanctions relief.
The US and Iran have held five rounds of nuclear talks since April 12 and are expected to meet again for negotiations aimed at reaching a new agreement. The two countries have been at odds over the level of uranium enrichment.
Last week, the head of the Iranian negotiating team, the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Abbas Araghchi, said in a post on X that Omani Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi presented the elements of the US proposal regarding the nuclear agreement to Iran during a short visit to Tehran. He also said that “Iran will respond appropriately based on principles, national interests, and the rights of the Iranian people to the proposal.”
On Monday, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ismail Baghaei underlined that considering national interests would be the basis of Tehran’s response to the US proposal. “Naturally, any proposal must be carefully reviewed, and the appropriate response must be based on national principles and interests.”
Tucker Carlson warns: ‘Iran is not alone; attacking it risks world war, US defeat’
Press TV – June 5, 2025
Iran, backed by its allies, is not alone, an ex-Fox News host says, warning that any attack by the United States against the Islamic Republic risks a world war that would lead to the US defeat.
American political commentator and presenter Tucker Carlson sounded the alarm on Thursday, as Iran has stressed the inseparable nature of uranium enrichment activities to the nation’s nuclear program, dismissing calls by US President Donald Trump and other US officials for “zero-level” enrichment.
The provocative demand by the US administration has already sent shockwaves through the ongoing Oman-mediated negotiations between Tehran and Washington over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program, leaving the future of the talks in limbo and raising the risk of military confrontation between the two.
In a post on his X account, Carlson argued that figures like Mark Levin are pushing for war with Iran under the pretense of stopping nuclear proliferation, stressing that there is no credible evidence that Iran is close to developing a nuclear bomb, and the ongoing fear-mongering is a recycled narrative from decades past.
“It’s a lie. In fact, there is zero credible intelligence that suggests Iran is anywhere near building a bomb, or has plans to. None. Anyone who claims otherwise is ignorant or dishonest. If the US government knew Iran was weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, we’d be at war already. Iran knows this, which is why they aren’t building one. Iran also knows it’s unwise to give up its weapons program entirely,” the ex-Fox News host said.
“So why is Mark Levin once again hyperventilating about weapons of mass destruction? To distract you from the real goal, which is regime change — young Americans heading back to the Middle East to topple yet another government. Virtually no one will say this out loud. America’s record of overthrowing foreign leaders is so embarrassingly counterproductive that regime change has become a synonym for disaster. Officially, no one supports it. So instead of telling the truth about their motives, they manufacture hysteria: ‘A country like Iran can never have the bomb! They’ll nuke Los Angeles! We have to act now!” added the conservative political commentator.
Carlson described Levin and like-minded ideologues in Washington as dishonest ideologues exploiting fear to trigger another disastrous conflict, warning that a war with the Islamic Republic would be catastrophic, far more dangerous than previous US interventions.
“And then there’s the question of the war itself. Iran may not have nukes, but it has a fearsome arsenal of ballistic missiles, many of which are aimed at US military installations in the [Persian] Gulf, as well as at our allies and at critical energy infrastructure. The first week of a war with Iran could easily kill thousands of Americans. It could also collapse our economy, as surging oil prices trigger unmanageable inflation. Consider the effects of $30 gasoline,” he warned.
An ardent advocate of Trump, Carlson emphasized that Iran has significant missile capabilities, strong allies like Russia and China through BRICS, and a vital role in global oil markets.
“But the second week of the war could be even worse. Iran isn’t Iraq or Libya, or even North Korea. While it’s often described as a rogue state, Iran has powerful allies. It’s now part of a global bloc called BRICS, which represents the majority of the world’s landmass, population, economy and military power. Iran has extensive military ties with Russia. It sells the overwhelming majority of its oil exports to China. Iran isn’t alone. An attack on Iran could very easily become a world war. We’d lose,” he stressed.
Carlson also slammed war advocates for intentionally pushing Iran toward conflict by making demands they know Tehran will reject, all to corner Trump into betraying his anti-war promises.
Iran and the US have so far held five rounds of indirect talks on a replacement for the 2015 nuclear deal. However, the talks have faced an obstacle over the US demand for Iran to stop enriching uranium under any new deal.
More signs of Britain grooming Syria’s Al-Qaeda-rooted government
The Cradle | June 4, 2025
When Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa (previously known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani), the former Al-Qaeda emir who led the Nusra Front, was affiliated with ISIS, and later headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), visited Saudi Arabia to meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) in February, he was accompanied by a surprising figure: Razan Saffour, a 32-year-old British-Syrian activist who had never set foot in Syria before the fall of former president Bashar al-Assad’s government in December.
Saffour also joined Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani on his trip to the Munich Security Conference that same month. Her presence in Syria’s new ruling circle highlights Britain’s outsized role in shaping the conflict – bringing Al-Qaeda to power, whitewashing its leadership, and embedding UK operatives within its political infrastructure.
Her presence alongside Julani on official state visits signals not just personal ascension, but the triumph of Britain’s long war to launder extremist power through western-groomed proxies.
Razan Saffour was born and raised in London, studied at SOAS, and emerged as a high-profile Syrian opposition voice during the early years of the war, when she was only in her early 20s. Platformed by major western and Arab media outlets from the Persian Gulf, she was a familiar figure on the regime-change circuit. Her father, Walid Saffour, a leading Muslim Brotherhood (MB) dissident, had fled Syria in 1981 during the MB’s armed uprising against the state.
Walid Saffour would later become the Syrian opposition’s ambassador to the UK, representing the Syrian National Council. Academic Dr Dara Conduit notes that this gave “the Brotherhood an important formal diplomatic link to the UK through an undeclared member.”
Engineering regime change
By the mid-2000s, the British government had aligned with US neoconservatives and MB-linked activists to prepare a full-blown insurgency in Syria.
In October 2006, several members of an MB front group, the National Salvation Front (NSF), traveled to Washington to meet with Michael Doran, a member of the US National Security Council, to discuss plans for regime change in Syria. Doran was a close associate of prominent Jewish neoconservative and former US president George W. Bush’s administration official Elliott Abrams.
In 2009, former French foreign minister Roland Dumas was told by top British officials that “they were preparing something in Syria … Britain was organizing an invasion of rebels into Syria.” When asked why, Dumas responded, “Very simple!” because “the Syrian regime makes anti-Israeli talk.”
The covert US-UK effort to topple Assad involved training young, media-savvy Syrian activists to organize anti-government protests, as well as flooding Syria with Al-Qaeda militants from Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, and dozens of other countries to carry out false flag attacks against Syrian police and security forces.
Many were UK nationals and members of the Al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). They had been allowed by British authorities to travel to Libya to topple late Libyan president Muammar al-Gaddafi, before being funneled into Syria via Turkiye.
US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford served as the operation’s field coordinator. As former US Naval officer Wayne Madsen reported in 2011, Ford was recruiting death squads from Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Chechnya. His previous role as political officer in Iraq involved implementing the El Salvador Option: organizing Shia death squads to crush Sunni insurgents under Ambassador John Negroponte.
Among those released from the US-run Bucca prison in Iraq and dispatched to Syria was none other than Abu Mohammad al-Julani. He would go on to found the Nusra Front, the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda, after orchestrating a series of suicide bombings in Damascus.
The Powell connection
While Al-Qaeda’s Syrian franchise grew, British intelligence cultivated parallel assets to manage the political front. In 2011, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, founded the NGO Inter Mediate, a Foreign Office-funded project designed to open secret channels with insurgent groups.
In March 2012, Powell wrote to Hillary Clinton’s advisor Sidney Blumenthal seeking US support: “We are setting up secret channels between insurgents and governments.” He boasted that his group worked “closely with the FCO (the Foreign and Commonwealth Office), NSC (National Security Council) and SIS (Special Intelligence Service, or MI-6) in London.”
“We are starting work in Syria,” Powell added, suggesting that he was communicating with the Nusra Front and other Al-Qaeda linked groups.
By this time, Walid Saffour had assumed his UK ambassadorial post for the Syrian opposition. He lobbied hard for the arming of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) – a cover or “weapons farm” for transferring NATO-grade weapons to Nusra.
His appointment gave “the Brotherhood an important formal diplomatic link to the UK through an undeclared member,” academic Dara Conduit wrote in her book detailing the history of the MB in Syria.
Armed with CIA-supplied TOW missiles and led by Julani’s suicide battalions, Nusra captured Idlib in 2015. A year later, it declared an Islamic emirate in the province, modeled on ISIS’s Raqqa. Brett McGurk, the US envoy to the anti-ISIS coalition, would later call Idlib “the largest Al-Qaeda safe haven since 9/11.”
While McGurk claimed “Idlib now is a huge problem,” the US and UK were quietly working with the Nusra, which was soon rebranded as HTS.
Arab media outlet Jusoor wrote that the “attempts of [Hayat] Tahrir Al-Sham for polishing itself began in the summer of 2017, with a campaign of contacts with the west.”
Jusoor added that HTS media official Zeid Attar had a meeting with the former UK diplomat Powell, “who manages many back channels for negotiating with designated terrorist groups either internationally or nationally.”
From terrorist to statesman
In 2019, US envoy James Jeffrey openly described HTS as an “asset” to Washington’s Syria strategy. The goal: preserve an Al-Qaeda-controlled buffer in Idlib to pressure Damascus.
Russian media later revealed that Powell had met Julani near the Bab al-Hawa crossing with Turkiye, coaching him on how to rehabilitate his image. Julani was advised to grant a western media interview to soften his profile.
PBS journalist Martin Smith soon arrived in Idlib. His April 2021 interview with Julani aired in the US, casting the Salafist extremist leader as a reformed figure who posed no threat to western interests.
In May 2024, Robert Ford revealed at a conference that he, too, had met Julani in Idlib. “In 2023, a British non-governmental organization specializing in conflict resolution invited me to help with their efforts to get this man out of the terrorist world and into regular politics,” Ford told attendees.
That NGO, according to Independent Arabia, was Powell’s Inter Mediate. In a revealing twist, Powell was appointed UK National Security Advisor on 8 November 2024 – just weeks before Julani’s HTS launched its final offensive on Damascus. By 8 December, Julani, who now goes by his government name Ahmad al-Sharaa, had assumed power.
London’s ‘post-Assad’ playbook
As Sharaa settled into the presidential palace, western and Arab media launched a PR blitz to sell him as a modern, diversity-friendly ruler. This was difficult given his previous pledges to carry out a genocide against any of Syria’s minority Alawites who refused to convert to Sunni Islam, and his role in dispatching car and suicide bombers, killing tens of thousands in Syria and Iraq over more than a decade.
An image facelift ensued nonetheless: Military fatigues gave way to tailored suits; his nom de guerre was dropped in favor of his alleged birth name. Time magazine listed Sharaa as one of the year’s 100 most influential people – at Ford’s behest, no less. And the US lifted its $10 million bounty on his head for terrorism.
Sharaa pledged to protect minorities, including the Alawites – even as Syria’s new HTS-led security forces began targeting them under the guise of counterinsurgency. HTS-led Syrian government forces were carrying out brutal massacres against Alawite civilians on the Syrian coast, during an operation to quell an armed uprising against the authorities. During a four-day period of massacres, at least 1,700 Alawite civilians, including scores of women and children, were killed.
The following February, after Razan Saffour accompanied Julani to meet MbS, The National reported that Powell had recently held a “low-key meeting” with Syria’s new government in his new role as National Security Advisor, “boosting suggestions he will play a leading role in relations.”
Syrian analyst Malek Hafez told the Syrian Observer that Powell’s team even runs a media office inside the presidential palace, “reportedly run by two women – one British, the other of Lebanese-British heritage.”
As Hafez concludes, “The rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa was not spontaneous – it was carefully engineered through a long-term, western-backed strategy, in which Britain played a disproportionately influential role among western powers.”
While London has not yet officially expressed its support for Sharaa and Syria’s new government, the UK’s “fingerprints” are increasingly visible, the Observer added.
When weighed against the hundreds of thousands of Syrians killed, the millions displaced, and the wreckage of a nation, the UK’s central role in bringing Julani to power should not be forgotten.
US reshuffle of pro-‘Israel’ officials alarms occupation
Al Mayadeen | June 3, 2025
Israeli officials are expressing growing concern over a series of unexpected personnel changes within the US administration, which have targeted figures long regarded as staunch supporters of “Israel”, Israeli news outlet Ynet reported.
The shake-up comes amid escalating tensions between US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over both the war on Gaza and a possible strike on Iran.
Among the most notable dismissals are Merav Ceren, a dual US-Israeli citizen who oversaw the Iran and “Israel” portfolio at the National Security Council, and Eric Trager, who led Middle East and North Africa policy. Both were appointed by former National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, a strong supporter of “Israel”, who was removed by Trump.
Their removal was reportedly executed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Waltz’s successor.
Another high-profile figure expected to be removed is Morgan Ortagus, deputy to special envoy Steve Witkoff and in charge of the Lebanon file.
Ortagus’s leaving her post, although unfavorable for “Israel” due to her critical role in efforts to disarm Hezbollah, marks the departure of a controversial figure in Lebanon, with her statements, such as thanking “Israel” for what she claimed was defeating Hezbollah in the Presidential Palace in Baabda, inflaming tensions in the country, flouting proper protocol, and meddling in Lebanon’s internal affairs.
Her dismissal, which sources say was not voluntary, has shocked officials in “Israel”, where she was seen as a key ally. Ortagus is reportedly being reassigned to internal duties within the State Department and will have no further role in Middle East diplomacy.
According to Lebanese outlet al-Akhbar, Ortagus had sought a more senior regional role, aiming to take over the Syria portfolio. However, her responsibilities are now expected to be reassigned, possibly to Joel Rayburn or Thomas Barrack. The Lebanese file, sources noted, has been downgraded in US priorities, with attention shifting to Syria.
American sources confirmed to Lebanon’s MTV network that Ortagus had been dismissed due to internal professional issues unrelated to Lebanon. Her upcoming trip to Beirut has been canceled, and Rayburn is expected to assume oversight of the Lebanon file as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs.
US terms for nuclear deal ‘out of touch with reality’ – Iranian source to RT
RT | June 2, 2025
The US proposal for a new nuclear agreement with Iran is unacceptable, an Iranian source familiar with the matter told RT. Washington recently outlined its terms in a letter to Iran after five rounds of talks mediated by Oman.
“Iran views the US written elements as extremely far from what could possibly be regarded as a fair and realistic basis for a likely compromise,” the source said.
“Iranians were dismayed to see such a fanciful, one-sided text that is so out of touch with reality,” the source added.
The White House said on Sunday that President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, sent “a detailed and acceptable proposal” to Tehran. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt reiterated Washington’s position that “Iran can never obtain a nuclear bomb.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the Islamic Republic would provide a response “in line with the principles, national interests, and rights of the people of Iran.”
Trump earlier insisted on a “total dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program, suggesting the country should not be allowed to enrich uranium even for civilian purposes. Araghchi rejected these terms, saying the US must lift all sanctions and “uphold Iran’s nuclear rights, including enrichment.”
During his first term in office, Trump withdrew the US from the 2015 UN-backed nuclear deal, accusing Iran of secretly violating it. He then reimposed sanctions as part of his “maximum pressure” campaign. Tehran denied breaching the 2015 deal at the time but has since increased uranium enrichment.

