Ansar Allah triumphant: US facing Red Sea defeat again
By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | May 3, 2025
On April 28th, Western media outlets became abuzz with news that the USS Harry S. Truman – which is leading the Trump administration’s effort to dismantle Ansar Allah’s anti-genocide Red Sea blockade – lost an F/A-18E fighter jet and tow tractor, while executing a hard turn to evade fire from the Resistance group. While a US Navy press release on the incident made no reference to Ansar Allah’s assault, nameless American officials have briefed several mainstream journalists that the losses were Yemen’s doing.
Reporting on the disaster by dependably servile CIA and Pentagon propaganda megaphone CNN was extraordinarily candid. “US Navy loses $60 million jet at sea after it fell overboard from aircraft carrier”, its headline read. The outlet explicitly acknowledged this resulted from an Ansar Allah “drone and missile attack” on USS Harry S. Truman. CNN went on to note the aircraft carrier has “repeatedly been targeted in attacks” by Yemen, while suffering a series of shameful blunders since its deployment to the Red Sea in September 2024.
In December that year, a US fighter jet posted to USS Harry S. Truman was shot down while conducting a refueling mission over the Red Sea in a friendly fire incident. The USS Gettysburg, which was escorting the aircraft carrier, blasted the jet with a missile for reasons unclear. This gross misadventure remains subject to official investigation. Then, on February 12th this year, USS Harry S. Truman was extensively damaged after colliding with a commercial vessel near Egypt’s Port Said, at the Suez Canal’s northern end.
The aircraft carrier returned to service after a period spent in Greece’s Souda Bay for repairs. The US Navy refused to release details about the cost of these repairs, or the total damage USS Harry S. Truman sustained in the collision. Whether further repairs were required was also not clarified. However, the accident was apparently considered so catastrophic within the Pentagon that the carrier’s chief, Dave Snowden, was fired from his post on February 20th, “due to a loss of confidence in his ability to command”.
These humiliating developments were completely ignored by the media. Concurrently, however, mainstream outlets were engaged in a concerted effort to rehabilitate Operation Prosperity Guardian, the embarrassingly failed Biden administration attempt to smash Ansar Allah and end the Resistance group’s righteous Red Sea blockade. Launched with much hype following the Gaza genocide’s eruption, a vast US flotilla led by USS Eisenhower spent nine months getting battered by a relentless barrage of Ansar Allah drones and missiles to no avail, before scurrying back to the US.
‘Defensive Systems’
Throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, current and former US military and intelligence officials expressed disquiet at the enormous “cost offset” involved in battling Ansar Allah. The US Navy squandered countless difficult-to-replace missiles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars – if not millions – daily to shoot down the Resistance group’s low-cost drones. As Mick Mulroy, a former DOD official and CIA officer, bitterly told Politico :
“[This] quickly becomes a problem because the most benefit, even if we do shoot down their incoming missiles and drones, is in [Yemen’s] favor… We, the US, need to start looking at systems that can defeat these that are more in line with the costs they are expending to attack us.”
There was no sign of this “cost offset” having been remediated by the time Operation Prosperity Guardian fizzled out in July 2024. Official US Navy figures on the “unprecedented” engagement suggest the USS Eisenhower-led carrier group fired a total of 155 standard missiles and 135 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, while accompanying fighter jets and helicopters “expended nearly 60 air-to-air missiles and released 420 air-to-surface weapons” – 770 munitions in total – over the nine-month-long conflict.
Independent analysis suggests these figures are likely to be even higher. Moreover, the US Navy did not provide a breakdown of the costs involved in Operation Prosperity Guardian. Even if one accepts the official figures, a single Tomahawk alone costs around $1.89 million, meaning firing 135 cost a staggering $255,150,000. There is also the enduring question of whether this astonishingly expensive arsenal failed to protect USS Eisenhower from direct Ansar Allah attack.
In February 2024, a cruise missile fired from Yemen penetrated so many layers of the aircraft carrier’s defences it was seconds from impact, forcing USS Eisenhower to employ the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System – its “last line of defense”. It marked the System’s first-ever recorded use in battle. Then in June that year, the USS Eisenhower inexplicably withdrew from its sphere of operations in the Red Sea at maximum speed, immediately after Ansar Allah announced it had successfully struck the carrier.
As Al Mayadeen recorded at the time, multiple Western news reports painted a dire picture of Operation Prosperity Guardian in its aftermath. Associated Press revealed that participating sailors and pilots had found the experience “traumatizing”, as they “weren’t used to being fired on.” Many had repeatedly come within seconds of being struck by “Houthi-launched missiles”, before they were destroyed “by their ship’s defensive systems.” The Pentagon was thus considering providing “counseling and treatment” to thousands of US Navy employees suffering from “post-traumatic stress”, and their families.
‘Supplemental Funds’
Fast forward to February 2025, and Business Insider published a curious article, claiming, based on documents exclusively obtained by the outlet, that in fact the US Navy had successfully “fended off” Ansar Allah’s Red Sea blitzkrieg throughout Operation Prosperity Guardian, “without firing a shot”. Instead, “undefined” and “unspecified” methods and weapons of a “non-kinetic” variety were “successfully” employed to protect “Navy and coalition warships and commercial vessels”. This was, of course, at total odds with literally everything the mainstream media had hitherto reported on the debacle.
With hindsight though, the report’s propaganda utility was clear. It served to rehabilitate the US Navy’s performance in its war on Yemen at a time the Trump administration was preparing to kickstart hostilities against Ansar Allah again. So it was on March 15th, US airstrikes began raining down on Sanaa anew, while the USS Harry S. Truman-led carrier force thrust stridently into the Red Sea. US officials have talked a big game about the fresh assault continuing “indefinitely”, and Trump has bragged that Ansar Allah is “decimated”.
The April 28th loss of an F/A-18E fighter jet due to Yemeni attacks amply demonstrates such boasts to be entirely untrue. In the meantime, on April 4th, the New York Times reported Pentagon officials were “privately” briefing that Trump’s belligerence was failing to graze Ansar Allah, while costing in excess of $1 billion to date. This not only meant “supplemental funds” for the operation needed to be mustered from Congress, but doubts about continued ammunition availability gravely abounded:
“So many precision munitions are being used, especially advanced long-range ones, that some Pentagon contingency planners are growing concerned about overall Navy stocks and implications for any situation in which the United States would have to ward off an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China.”
The New York Times also noted the Trump administration had offered no explanation as to “why it thinks its campaign against [Ansar Allah] will succeed”. Almost a month later, clarity on this crucial point remains unforthcoming. We can perhaps surmise then that the flurry of mainstream interest over the USS Harry S. Truman’s recent troubles is indicative of a determination by the Pentagon to end Washington’s renewed malevolence against Yemen before Ansar Allah inflicts yet another historic defeat on the US Empire.
More Exciting News from the White House
Donald Trump has appointed a Jewish community liaison officer
By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • May 2, 2025
I know that those who read my articles will be interested to learn that President Donald Trump has appointed Martin Marks to be his administration’s liaison to the American Jewish community with the title Special Assistant to the President and Director of Jewish Engagement in the White House Faith Office. Marks, whose mother handbag designer Lana Marks served as US ambassador to South Africa in Trump’s first term, appears to be well qualified for the position as “Before turning to politics, [he] was a writer and owned a yoga studio in Palm Beach.”
To be perfectly honest I was a bit confused by the appointment as the US government already has an Office of the Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism and a Office of the Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues actively promoting the Jewish/Israeli line at the State Department and even worldwide. And one might observe Trump’s entire cabinet is unrelentingly Zionist in its inclinations while Congress is discussing the so-called Antisemitism Accountability Act which will turn any criticism of Israel into a crime even more so than it is regarded as such right now, ask any one of the college students who are being deported! How much “liaison” protecting the most wealthy and educated 3% of the population against the curse of perceived perpetual Jewish victimhood is still warranted? And how will such “liaison” differ from the orders delivered directly from Benjamin Netanyahu, the “Chosen” leader, of the Jewish state of Israel to provide Trump and the rest of the US government with their marching orders, just as was the case with Genocide Joe Biden and his merry band of largely Jewish/Zionist cabinet members?
Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University has described the current Donald Trump regime as an “Israel First Administration” packed with Zionists at all levels. The State Department Press Secretary Tammy Bruce has declared that “Anyone who tries to touch Israel will wind up in hell.” But there are some who are still brave enough to go against the tide. The Institute for Historical Review, which is one of the few online publishers and free speech associations that still survive in the good old USA, has been confronting the Israel Lobby for forty-seven years. In an email that appeared last week they discuss another new Jewish appointment and laid out the problem in plain English that even Donald Trump might understand:
“Power, Priorities, and Puppeteers: Who Really Governs America?”: The nomination of Yehuda Kaploun — a Chabad-Lubavitch rabbi, Trump loyalist, and confidant of Republican megadonor Miriam Adelson — as US Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism underscores an uncomfortable reality: Zionist interests wield disproportionate influence over American politics, even as the nation fractures under economic despair. Kaploun’s appointment, framed as a defense against antisemitism, instead reveals a political dynamic that prioritizes the interests of world Jewry over the needs of ordinary Americans. Consider the timing. Household debt has soared to $18.04 trillion, credit card delinquencies hit 14-year highs, and inflation continues to erode wages. Yet policymakers focus on policing campus activism, cracking down on criticism of Israel, while ignoring the collapse of social mobility. Kaploun’s own rhetoric comparing US universities to “1930s Germany” diverts attention from the rising cost of living and the United States’ fraying social fabric. Meanwhile, pro-Israel groups like AIPAC have funneled $100+ million into elections, ensuring bipartisan fealty to policies that prioritize Israeli interests at the expense of America. This is not governance. It’s an occupation by foreign interests.”
The IHR point is well made and applies to Biden, Trump and Congress as well as to the 38 states that require citizens to sign documents or swear oaths pledging themselves not to support any boycotts of Israel if they wish to receive benefits or jobs. To even suggest that Israel and American Jews are some kind of victims who must be protected at a time when they are actively engaged in genocide and complete ethnic cleansing of literally millions of Palestinians.
My principal complaint with the government Jewish agenda is that it creates two classes of people before the rule of law, i.e. those who are Jews and must be protected and the rest of us who, on the contrary, will face the consequences if we so much as criticize Israeli or Jewish behavior. Ironically, we can criticize our own country or any other country in the world, but not Israel. If we are a legal resident or a student on an educational visa who crosses the line we can have that status erased and be deported without any due process. It also means that any encounter with law enforcement or government that has any taint of being critical of Jews can lead to two level justice, as many foreign students in the US are currently discovering.
A story last week out of Crown Heights Brooklyn illustrates precisely what I mean. Israel’s monstrous Security Chief Itamar Ben-Gvir, who believes in killing all Palestinians if it becomes necessary to remove them, was in town being cheered on by a large crowd of the indigenous Ultra Orthodox Jews. A local resident, a woman in her thirties, wondered what all of the noise was about and went out to take a look. She was immediately set upon by a large crowd of roughly one hundred, which screamed at her that she was a “Palestinian demonstrator,” which was not true. She “feared for her life as she was chased, kicked, spit at and pelted with objects by [the] mob of Orthodox Jewish men. She recalled how ‘They were shouting at me, threatening to rape me, chanting death to Arabs. I thought the police would protect me from the mob, but they did nothing to intervene.’ As the chants grew in intensity, a lone police officer who had joined her sought to escort her to safety back towards her apartment. They were followed for blocks by hundreds of men and boys jeering in Hebrew and English. Video shows two of the men kicking her in the back, another hurling a traffic cone into her head and a fourth pushing a trash can into her. She was beaten and kicked and even had a large garbage can thrown on top of her.” The woman later recalled how “I felt sheer terror. I realized at that point that I couldn’t lead this mob of men to my home. I had nowhere to go. I didn’t know what to do. I was just terrified.” After several blocks, the officer moved the woman into a police vehicle which prompted one assailant to yell, “Get her!” but the crowd erupted then in cheers as she was driven away. Interestingly, there were many police officers in the immediate area, presumably to protect all the rioting Jews from attacks by antisemites, but they had not intervened while the woman was being pursued apart from the one officer who came to her assistance.
The entire episode was filmed by bystanders and one would think that the Jews who had beaten the woman would face some consequences, but as is always the case when it is Jews/Israelis who are committing crimes there is the presumption of antisemitism at play and nothing happens. I could find nothing in the subsequent press coverage that suggests that anyone was arrested or even detained. I have previously suggested that this has also been the pattern connected to the past year’s demonstrations over the slaughter in Gaza. The universities and local police are quick to detain those normally peaceful demonstrators regarded as pro-Palestinians but when those individuals are in turn physically attacked by Jewish organized groups the Jews are not subjected to the same standard of law enforcement. To put it mildly, there is absolutely no mandate to protect Palestinians or ordinary Americans who become victims in the violent counterattacks on peace encampments staged by local Jews and, reportedly, including some Israeli army veterans in incidents at both Columbia University and the University of California at Los Angeles. Have any violent Israelis been arrested or deported? No? Apparently, the US “justice system” is focused on serving Israel at the expense of the US Constitution’s protection of free speech and free association.
The “Jewish Exemption” that is in practice at all levels of US and local government is readily discernible nearly everywhere to include the media coverage of Israeli atrocities. Israel, has, for example, its own completely illegal nuclear arsenal obtained through theft and deception from the United States, but nobody in the US government is allowed to mention that and it rarely comes up in the press. And no one is permitted to enforce American laws if they impact on Israel, like the Leahy Law which forbids military assistance to any country that violates human rights “with impunity.” Israel clearly is qualified to be sanctioned by that standard, but no US Administration has dared to enforce the law for fear that the powerful Israel Lobby will retaliate.
My point is that every time one turns around currently the government is doing something to exempt Jews or Israel from the consequences of their own behavior while at the same time the folks who criticize that behavior are being punished with denial of free speech and crippling penalties that will in some cases diminish their prospects for the rest of their lives. This has got to stop and all Americans must be treated the same under law. Jews are the most protected and coddled tribe that goes to make up what we Americans call a “country” but they are not the only ones here. It is time that the corrupted political class in this nation begin to realize that.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
From loans to crypto, the US financial siege of Hezbollah
The Cradle | May 2, 2025
In its relentless campaign to weaken the Lebanese resistance, Washington has launched a comprehensive financial and economic offensive against Hezbollah, aimed at isolating the group and eroding its post-war influence.
This effort is part of a wider US regional agenda to neutralize Israel’s enemies and ensure that Hezbollah plays no role in Lebanon’s recovery, in order to weaken its standing among both supporters and the broader population.
The US playbook draws from its standard regime-change toolkit – blockades, sanctions, institutional sabotage – but now with furious intensity, bolstered by the regional fallout of Syria’s unraveling and Washington’s increasing grip on Lebanese institutions.
A major component of this pressure campaign is the US’s direct and increased involvement in the day-to-day operations of Lebanese state agencies, particularly around ports, airports, and financial networks.
Despite this, Hezbollah has managed to mobilize close to $1 billion in aid since the ineffective ceasefire agreement five months ago – supporting displaced civilians and initiating early-phase reconstruction in the country’s south, Bekaa region, and southern suburbs of Beirut.
Sealing off Lebanon: Borders, skies, and ports
The late, martyred Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah never shied away from publicly acknowledging Iran as the group’s primary financial backer. In response, the US and Israel have worked aggressively to sever that link – most notably by targeting direct flights between Beirut and Tehran.
Following direct Israeli threats against Beirut-Rafic Hariri International Airport and intense US diplomatic and security pressure, Lebanon’s government under western-backed President Joseph Aoun moved to block Iranian aircraft from landing or taking off in Beirut. The goal: severing physical currency flows and cutting off high-value transfers via air.
These measures were followed by a sweeping overhaul of airport security. Electronic surveillance initiated under the Najib Mikati government and Transportation Minister Ali Hamieh – viewed as close to Hezbollah – was expanded.
Inspections were tightened, and dozens of staff were removed or reassigned based on religious, familial, or political affiliations. Control over airport security was consolidated under Brigadier General Kfoury, with American officials closely monitoring implementation.
The aim is clear: Eliminate cash transfers through travelers. In one case back in February, authorities seized $2.5 million from a passenger arriving from Turkiye, which the Higher Islamic Shia Council claimed as its own – though opponents alleged the funds belonged to Hezbollah.
Surveillance now targets passengers arriving from Turkiye, the UAE, Iraq, and African states, especially frequent fliers with little or no luggage, suspected of being couriers.
The US has also ramped up pressure on Turkiye, Iraq, and Qatar to monitor Lebanon-bound financial flows, leveraging their ties with the Islamic Republic. Border inspections across West Asian airports have intensified dramatically.
At Beirut Port, similar efforts are underway. Inspection protocols have been revamped, and staff purged to prevent Hezbollah from using shipping containers for cash smuggling. Israeli officials and Lebanese political adversaries have spotlighted the port – still reeling from the devastating 2020 blast – as a supposed smuggling hub, pushing for stricter measures.
On Lebanon’s eastern border with Syria, pressure is being reinforced militarily. Syrian army operations near the Qusayr region – adjacent to Lebanon’s Hermel – appear coordinated with US and Israeli demands to close off land routes Hezbollah once used to move funds and arms.
Syria’s President and former Al-Qaeda leader, Ahmad al-Sharaa, has reportedly informed US and European interlocutors that his government is actively disrupting Hezbollah supply channels. Meanwhile, Israeli drones conduct routine surveillance of the border, striking suspected transfers at will.
Financial asphyxiation through the banks
With smuggling routes under siege, Washington is escalating efforts to choke Hezbollah via the banking and commercial sectors. All financial activity – from remittances to basic commerce – is now under microscopic scrutiny to ensure the group is cut off at every node.
The recent appointment of Lebanon’s Central Bank Governor Karim Saeed has further solidified US influence over Lebanon’s financial system. While his predecessor Wassim Mansouri (aligned with the Amal Movement) took initial steps that constrained Hezbollah’s financial networks, Saeed has expanded on this approach further, taking an increasingly hostile stance toward Hezbollah – helping enforce Washington’s dictates within Lebanon’s banking institutions.
Measures include arbitrary account closures, frozen transfers, and heightened scrutiny of routine transactions suspected of even peripheral links to Hezbollah. While designed to stifle the group, these policies have ensnared countless ordinary Lebanese – especially Shia populations and those from opposition-aligned backgrounds – trapping them in a banking system that now functions as a US-enforced surveillance and punishment mechanism.
Currency exchange offices are also under fire. Hefty fines have been levied under both Mansouri and Saeed for dealing with individuals flagged by Washington – often baselessly – as Hezbollah affiliates. Ostensibly part of a campaign to dry up Lebanon’s cash-based economy, the deeper objective is political: Make Hezbollah’s support base pay the price of resistance, and sow dissent among Shia communities.
Even cryptocurrency has not escaped notice. Though harder to track inside blockchain systems, US authorities are targeting the fiat-to-crypto entry point, focusing on how individuals acquire digital currency before it moves beyond the reach of formal oversight.
The assault on Al-Qard al-Hassan
In addition to economic warfare, Israel has militarily targeted Hezbollah-linked institutions – chief among them, the Al-Qard al-Hassan Association. During the war, several of the loan institution’s branches were bombed. But the campaign against this financial cooperative extends far beyond airstrikes.
Washington and Tel Aviv are determined to dismantle Al-Qard al-Hassan, viewing it as a pillar of Hezbollah’s socioeconomic infrastructure and a symbol of grassroots resistance. The US is pressuring Lebanon’s central bank to shut the institution down altogether. Although Governor Saeed has publicly denied plans to do so, political insiders widely believe dismantling the cooperative is one of his key tasks.
Unlike traditional banks, Al-Qard al-Hassan operates as a solidarity-based financial institution. Its mission is to provide accessible services to underserved communities – many of whom have lost trust in Lebanon’s scandal-ridden private banking sector. This alternative model undermines the profit-driven logic of western financial institutions, making it a strategic target for elimination.
The campaign to vilify the cooperative has gained momentum in recent years. Claims have surfaced of a past hacking incident that allegedly exposed highly sensitive client data – names, transactions, and account details.
If true, it would hand Washington a sanctions hit list and serve as a deterrent to anyone considering using the institution. The goal is to isolate Al-Qard al-Hassan, destroy public trust in it, and neutralize its utility to the resistance.
Strategic sabotage by another name
Washington is banking on these combined tactics – air, land, financial, and digital – to bear fruit ahead of Lebanon’s next parliamentary elections.
The underlying calculation is blunt: Cut off Hezbollah’s resources, weaken its institutions, and its base will either abstain or swing toward rival factions. Such an outcome could shift the balance of power in the Lebanese parliament, eroding both Hezbollah’s share and that of its primary ally, the Amal Movement.
It is a strategy not of persuasion, but of attrition – waged not on the battlefield, but through bureaucracies, banks, and surveillance networks. The US hopes that a starved resistance will become a subdued resistance – and, eventually, no resistance at all.
U.S. Continues Strikes on Yemen: Objectives, Criticism, and Alternatives
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – May 1, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that the United States will continue missile strikes on Yemen until the Houthis cease their attacks on Israel and ships in the Red Sea.
American officials have baselessly insisted that the attacks, which began on March 15, 2025, have achieved significant success. They claim to have allegedly destroyed personnel linked to the Houthis’ missile capabilities, as well as missile sites and weapons depots. However, many observers doubt the effectiveness of this campaign. While the Trump administration’s strikes have been less restrained than the bombings carried out under Biden, they have failed to eliminate Houthi leaders or undermine their missile production capabilities. Meanwhile, the Houthis continue to strike Israel and Israel-affiliated vessels, clearly demonstrating the limited effectiveness of the U.S. operation in achieving its stated goals.
Risks of Escalation and Humanitarian Consequences
Many analysts argue that the U.S. should intensify its operation by targeting critical infrastructure tied to the Houthis’ military potential. The recent barbaric bombing of the port of Ras Isa, which killed over 80 civilians, including rescue workers, may signal the start of a new phase. But experts doubt the U.S. can sustain such an operation, which has faced bipartisan criticism for lacking strategic results and for its financial cost—estimated at $1 billion in just two weeks. Some Democratic and Republican lawmakers have also stated that the Yemen operation violates the War Powers Act, which prohibits prolonged overseas military deployments without congressional approval.
Pentagon officials have also expressed concerns over U.S. Central Command’s (CENTCOM) heavy use of long-range Tomahawk missiles in Yemen, warning that this could deplete U.S. stockpiles in the event of a future military confrontation with China.
For their part, the Houthis have a decade of experience enduring massive and sustained bombings—whether from the Saudi-led coalition since 2015 or directly from the U.S. under Biden. Neither side has achieved its primary strategic objectives. Moreover, prolonged strikes could create political pressure on the U.S. due to civilian casualties amid Yemen’s worsening humanitarian crisis. Since the beginning of the month, Trump administration strikes on Yemen have killed at least 160 civilians, including many children.
A Failed Military Approach and Pressure for Quick Results
The military setbacks, combined with pressure on Washington to deliver quick results, point to another possibility—turning to the Yemeni army. In theory, local ground forces could engage the Houthis on multiple fronts, particularly in coastal provinces, with the goal of degrading the Houthis’ military capabilities in the region and securing Red Sea shipping lanes, including vessels carrying critical supplies for aggressive Israel.
Earlier this month, the Yemeni army’s chief of staff met with the commander of U.S. CENTCOM to discuss joint military objectives and efforts to counter the Houthis. CNN, citing regional diplomatic sources, reported that a ground operation against the Houthis is being prepared in southern Yemen. The coordinated attack would be supported by Saudi and U.S. naval forces and aim to push the Houthis out of the critical port of Hodeidah. According to Yemeni sources, up to 80,000 troops have been mobilized for this purpose.
So far, there has been no official confirmation that a U.S.-backed Yemeni army offensive is in the works. In reality, this option comes with several practical challenges, not least of which are structural issues within the military apparatus of Yemen’s internationally recognized government.
While the official Yemeni army has received significant military support in training and equipment since 2015, including the formation of local militias, it remains weak and ineffective due to outdated pre-war weaponry, limited air defense capabilities, ammunition shortages, and insufficient training and maintenance. Other problems include pay disparities among soldiers from different factions and the prevalence of “ghost soldiers”—names added to payrolls for embezzlement purposes.
The Yemeni army is deeply fragmented, composed not of individual conscripts but of political and tribal factions that often hold conflicting regional, ideological, political, and even foreign allegiances. This is the main reason for poor coordination and the lack of a unified command. A joint security and defense committee was established years ago to reorganize and centralize the armed forces, but key factions—particularly the Southern Transitional Council (STC)—have resisted such efforts, preferring to maintain autonomy.
The situation is further complicated by infighting within the Presidential Leadership Council, lingering separatist sentiments in the STC, and Yemen’s economic devastation after years of civil war. These issues would not only hinder a military campaign against the Houthis but could also derail the UN-backed peace process. Even setting aside these concerns, overcoming structural problems would require extensive military and financial support from regional and international forces, long-term training and equipping, and measures to address gaps in the sanctions regime.
Diplomatic Alternatives
Reports suggest that U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations also touch on Iran’s role in the Middle East. In this context, Washington may pressure Tehran to convince the Houthis to halt attacks on Israel and Israel-linked ships in the Red Sea. This approach depends on Iran’s level of influence over the Houthis on one hand and progress on other issues—such as Iran’s nuclear program, missile capabilities, and sanctions—on the other.
A deal would benefit both sides. Iran wants to avoid a war that could cost it much of its remaining power and influence—especially after losing most of its military allies in the region—and could potentially lead to regime collapse. The U.S. wants to avoid further draining its military resources in the Middle East, preferring to conserve them for a prolonged conflict with China, which remains the current administration’s top priority. Still, the prospects of a negotiated solution to the Houthi problem remain uncertain, given its entanglement with other critical issues.
Each of the three options discussed has major drawbacks—yet none can be ruled out. The failure of one could lead to another, or two approaches could be pursued simultaneously. In the long run, Houthi attacks will likely stop. The question is how, under what terms, and what impact this will have on Yemen’s broader crisis.
If the Houthis are forced to halt due to a ground offensive, it would strengthen Yemen’s legitimate government, either compelling the Houthis to engage in peace talks or ousting them from Sanaa and restoring the official government. Conversely, if the Houthis relent due to a deal with Iran, it would solidify their control over northern Yemen.
The outcome hinges on whether the U.S. can break the Houthis or force them into peace on American-Israeli terms.
Viktor Mikhin, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Middle East Expert
Who and what was behind the purge of Pentagon officers?
If Americans Knew | April 30, 2025
As is often the case, it appears that Israel partisans were behind this, as revealed by Col. Douglas Macgregor in this interview with Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis. 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
Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow and military expert at Defense Priorities. Davis retired from the U.S. Army as a Lt. Col. after 21 years of active service. He was deployed into combat zones four times in his career, beginning with Operation Desert Storm in 1991, and then to Iraq in 2009 and Afghanistan twice (2005, 2011). He was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for Valor at the Battle of 73 Easting in 1991, and awarded a Bronze Star Medal in Afghanistan in 2011. He is the author of The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America. – https://www.defensepriorities.org/peo…
The full Tucker Carlson interview with Dan Caldwell is here: https://tuckercarlson.com/tucker-show…
This video is excerpted from the “Daniel Davis / Deep Dive” interview with Col. Macgregor on April 22, 2025. View it at 
• Col Doug Macgregor: Defense Sec Hegse…
To learn more about If Americans Knew, an American nonprofit organization, go here: https://ifamericansknew.org/
‘Prepare to face consequences’: Yemen warns UK after attacks on Sanaa
The Cradle | April 30, 2025
The Yemeni government issued a statement on 30 April warning the UK against its continued participation in the US campaign of deadly airstrikes against Yemen that began last month.
“In a display of typical British arrogance, the UK Ministry of Defense announced participation in a joint military operation with the US enemy against our country, targeting areas south of Sanaa … The Government affirms that the British enemy must carefully consider the consequences of its involvement and be prepared to face the repercussions,” the Sanaa government said.
“While we pledge to respond to this unlawful and unjustified aggression, we stress that this attack is part of ongoing Anglo-American efforts to support the Israeli enemy by attempting to block Yemen’s support for Palestine – enabling the Israeli enemy to continue its genocide in Gaza,” it added.
The government statement also said Yemen will stand against the “trio of evil,” referring to the US, UK, and Israel, as well as “those who orbit around them.”
The statement came hours after the UK announced its first joint attack against Yemen with Washington since US President Donald Trump entered office this year.
The UK Defense Ministry claimed the strikes targeted a “cluster of buildings” used by the Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF) and Ansarallah movement for storing drones, adding that the attack came after “very careful planning” to avoid civilian casualties.
London played a primary role in the initial campaign against Yemen, launched in January 2024 by the former US administration of Joe Biden.
Yemeni forces targeted UK vessels in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden a number of times last year in response.
The UK announcement came after at least six US airstrikes struck the Sanaa governorate on 29 April.
Two days ago, around 70 African migrants were killed in US strikes on a detention center in Saada governorate. Dozens of others were injured.
The Interior Ministry of the Sanaa government said the shelter, located in Saada’s reserve prison, was supervised by the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Red Cross.
In response, the YAF said it targeted the USS Harry Truman in the Red Sea with missiles and drones, adding that it forced the aircraft carrier to retreat northward. It also said it targeted a “vital” Israeli site in the city of Ashkelon.
US warplanes have been launching deadly attacks against Yemen every day since 15 March, when Trump intensified the campaign that was started by the former administration last year.
The bombing campaign comes in response to Yemen’s reimposition of a ban on Israeli shipping in the Red Sea and elsewhere, as well as its renewal of drone and missile attacks on Israel after Tel Aviv restarted the war on Gaza last month.
Yemen has repeatedly targeted US aircraft carriers in response to Washington’s campaign, which has cost around $1 billion and has depleted weapons stocks, while failing to significantly impact the YAF and Ansarallah.
Iran: French threat to reimpose sanctions is ‘economic blackmail’
Press TV – April 30, 2025
Iran’s ambassador to the UN has lambasted the French foreign minister’s open threat to reimpose sanctions lifted under a 2015 deal on Tehran’s nuclear program.
“Resorting to threats and economic blackmail is entirely unacceptable and represents a clear breach of the principles enshrined in the UN Charter,” Amir Saeid Iravani wrote in letters to UN chief General Antonio Guterres and Security Council head Jérôme Bonnafont.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said on Monday that his government along with Germany and Britain “will not hesitate for a single second to reapply all the sanctions” lifted a decade ago if European security is threatened by Iran’s nuclear activities.
Iravani said France’s threat to trigger the so-called snapback mechanism despite its own failure to honor its commitments contradicts the fundamental principles of international law that preclude a party from claiming rights under an agreement while simultaneously failing to fulfill its obligations.
“Such an action is legally and procedurally flawed, unacceptable, and invalid, and would undermine the credibility of the Security Council,” he added.
The snapback mechanism is triggered simply by the assertion of significant non-compliance on the part of a participating state, a prerogative the West might abuse based on its accusations.
Iravani further reaffirmed Iran’s commitment to diplomacy and constructive engagement, but “genuine diplomacy cannot be conducted under threats or pressure”.
“If France and its partners are truly interested in a diplomatic resolution, they must abandon coercion and respect the sovereign rights of States under international law.”
Iravani said France’s credibility on non-proliferation is fundamentally undermined by its own record as it continues to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal, remains silent about, and is complicit in the Israeli regime’s undeclared nuclear weapons program.
France has also yet to fulfill its disarmament obligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), he added.
The ambassador rejected the French foreign minister’s accusations that Iran sought to acquire nuclear weapons,
“Allegations that Iran is ‘on the cusp’ of developing nuclear weapons are entirely unfounded and politically irresponsible. The Islamic Republic of Iran has never pursued nuclear weapons, and its defensive doctrine has not been changed,” Iravani said.
“Iran unequivocally rejects all weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), including nuclear arms,” he said. “As a founding member of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), Iran remains fully committed to its obligations under the treaty.”
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he said, “continues to monitor and verify the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. Its reports have consistently verified that there has been no diversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful purposes.”
Barrot’s allegations about Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program reflect either a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of Iran’s legal rights under international law, Iravani said.
The claims also demonstrate a selective interpretation of facts and exemplifies a persistent pattern of double standards by a country that bears specific responsibilities as a permanent member of the Security Council, he added.
Mossad agents, warmongers trying to derail Iran-US talks: Trump allies
Press TV – April 30, 2025
US President Donald Trump’s closest media allies and supporters say “Mossad agents” and “warmongers” are pushing the US into a conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Last week, conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson featured a senior Pentagon official who he claimed was ousted because he was seen as an obstacle to hostile US measures against Iran.
Dan Caldwell, a top advisor to Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth, was removed earlier this month on charges that he allegedly leaked classified information about Hegseth’s use of a Signal chat, according to several media outlets.
Not so by Carlson’s telling, who has unparalleled access to Trump.
“You did make maybe one career mistake by giving on-the-record interviews describing your foreign policy views… that are out of the mainstream among warmongers in Washington,” Carlson said to Caldwell.
On Sunday, another conservative podcaster, Clayton Morris, a former Fox News anchor, said pro-Israel voices were “working overtime” to destroy the “anti-war team” that Trump has assembled at the Pentagon.
“We’ve learned here at Redacted that former Israeli Mossad agents are working overtime on social media and behind the scenes trying to discredit Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth,” Morris said, referring to his show.
Trump’s administration is reportedly divided between more traditional Republicans like US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security advisor Mike Waltz, and “America First” isolationists like White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
Pro-Trump media personalities have singled out Merav Ceren, who was nominated to head Iran and Israel at the White House National Security Council, for criticism.
Ceren was born in Haifa, and worked in the Israeli ministry of military affairs. On his show, Morris said that, “Neo-con Mike Waltz has now hired basically a dual citizen and former IDF (Israeli army) official to work under him.”
According to a Pew Poll published in April, 53 percent of Americans now express an unfavorable opinion of Israel, up from 42 percent in March 2022.
On Iran, Trump’s closest envoys have been left contradicting themselves.
Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy who has emerged as his go-to global troubleshooter, suggested earlier this month that Washington would allow Iran to enrich uranium at low levels.
After backlash from pro-Israel voices, he flipped, saying that Tehran “must stop and eliminate” its nuclear enrichment program fully.
This week, Secretary Rubio said the US could re-enter a deal that sees Iran keep a civilian nuclear program – so long as it halts enrichment, and instead ships it in from abroad.
American and Iranian technical teams met in Oman on Saturday for their third round of talks. Trump told reporters on Monday that the talks are going “very well” and that “a deal is going to be made there”.
“We’ll have something without having to start dropping bombs all over the place,” he said.
Are You Tired of Hearing About Antisemitism?
Simply stop killing Gazans and the anger directed at Jews might end
By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • April 26, 2025
One might well ask how a group composed of little more than 3% of the US population has managed to gain control of the nation’s foreign policy, its legislature and executive branches, its media, its entertainment industry, its financial institutions, and its elite universities while also making the United States subservient to the wishes of a monstrous small state located seven thousand miles away and composed of its coreligionists? Well, it helps to have a great deal of money liberally applied to corrupt the existing political and economic systems, but that is not necessarily a good place to start as one might reflexively be accused of wielding a trope much favored by antisemites when discussing Zionist Jews, the group of which we are speaking. Alternatively perhaps, one might take an oblique approach by observing how the highly privileged and protected Zionists in question get rich living in America while having true loyalty to apartheid Israel, something that normally might be considered untenable if not borderline treasonous.
Recent reports suggest that there are upwards of 23,000 Americans serving in the Israeli Army (IDF), most of whom are presumably dual nationals with Israeli citizenship. Under existing law, they should all lose their US citizenship but that will not happen as Congress and the White House have both been bought. Indeed, they are being given a golden handshake by the US Congress with a new bill currently in Congress which would extend some US military benefits to the notional American citizens who are currently carrying out the Gaza genocide as members of the IDF. One such clown Congressman Brian Mast, who served in the IDF, even parades around Congress in his Israeli military uniform and no one says squat.
Beyond the Americans in the IDF, there have been several odd appointments at high levels in the US civilian bureaucracy, including the latest naming of a former Israeli Defense Department and UN Israeli Embassy employee whose husband still works at the embassy to a top position on the National Security Council. Merav Ceren will be the Director for the development of the relationship between Israel, Iran and the US. It is a highly sensitive position and one can only speculate on how she got a clearance, though it is presumed that she is a dual national, which in and of itself should have been a warning sign. Her appointment gives Israel an unusual advantage in internal policy discussions just as the Israeli government has launched a new campaign to pressure the American government to start a war with Iran rather than continue with negotiations toward a nuclear deal. Ceren previously worked at Senator Ted Cruz’s office in Washington, which may have been her stepping stone to the job as Cruz’s loyalty to Israel and all that pertains to it should be unquestioned and he is the recipient of millions of dollars in pro-Israel political “donations.” She also worked for the neocon Iran-hating Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. How she was named to the position she now holds should be considered in itself a huge security breach, one of many already experienced in Trump’s first hundred days, where loyalty to Israel trumps all other factors, as the expression might go.
The trajectory of Meyav Ceren reminds one of another Israeli woman dual national who truly stood out when it came to serving Israeli interests from inside the United States government. Sigal Pearl Mandelker might be worthy of the nickname “Queen of Sanctions” because she was the Department of the Treasury’s Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (OTFI) under the first Trump administration. She handed out the punishment and cranked up the economic pain up for countries like Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and Russia during her time in office from June 2017 until October 2019 when she finally resigned after being under pressure from people like me.
OFTI’s website proclaims that it is responsible for “safeguarding the financial system against illicit use and combating rogue nations, terrorist facilitators, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferators, money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security threats,” but it has from its founding been really all about safeguarding Israel’s perceived interests. Grant Smith notes how “the secretive office has a special blind spot for major terrorism generators, such as tax-exempt money laundering from the United States into illegal Israeli settlements and proliferation financing and weapons technology smuggling into Israel’s clandestine nuclear weapons complex.”
To be sure most of the Jews with whom I am in touch are appalled by that activism of the Mandelkers and the Cerens and even more so by what is happening in Gaza, Syria and Lebanon at the hands of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist enablers, but what we are talking about here is institutional and tribal Jewry which together have the distinction of being referred to as the Israel Lobby, which an increasing number of observers have to come to believe to be something like all powerful and the unofficial government of the United States in many relevant areas.
Ron Unz’s recent article recent article Trump vs. Harvard in a Political Wrestling Match examines the issue of Jewish supremacism and, among other factors, identifies the various mechanisms used by Jews to enhance their enrollment at top universities. He mentions in passing how Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner got into Harvard without having the level of academic achievement that normally would have been a prerequisite. It was possibly accomplished through an institutionalized “Harvard Price,” an under the table donation of several million dollars from the wealthy Kushner family. I personally recall attending an elite university in the 1960s and hearing Jewish classmates boast of how “they” comprised 40% of the first-year students. A friend of mine at Yale told me of similar boasting among the “Sons of Eli.” Forty per cent participation for 3 per cent of the population is certainly an astonishing rate of success.
Unz uses available educational data bases to demonstrate that the disparity was not due to greater intelligence or academic performance among the Jewish applicants. He concludes that “Based on these figures, Jewish students were roughly 1,000% more likely to be enrolled at Harvard and the rest of the Ivy League than white Gentiles of similar ability. This was an absolutely astonishing result given that under-representation in the range of 20% or 30% is often treated by courts as powerful prima facie evidence of racial discrimination.”
Based on my own contact with Jews in the academic world and in government, I would prefer to describe the Jewish success with universities as a product of gaming the system, i.e. producing incentives outside academia itself to make the candidates more attractive. Whether such maneuvering might be described as corruption of the process depends pretty much on where someone stands outside the system, but the fact is that it is far easier for a Jewish high school graduate to get into an elite university than it is for a comparably educated and intelligent white Christian. And if you throw into the hopper all the “minority” other applicant groups that get preferential treatment, white males who are not Jews are definitely at the bottom of list when acceptance time comes around.
Beyond cash incentives, one might also conclude that Jews are exceptionally good at self-promoting and on translating their largely fictional collective victimhood into a sympathy vote that gives them a considerable edge as they move through education and high-profile careers. The problem is that that aggressive self-promotion does not stop at the level of personal aggrandizement and opens the door to large scale group interference in both foreign and domestic government policies that run strongly contrary to the interests of most Americans. I am of course referring to groups like the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) which serve as lobbies and support structures for the apartheid Jewish state Israel, which is currently carrying out a genocide in Gaza, without any accountability or consequences as required by current US law under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA). President John F. Kennedy was trying to get such groups to register when he was assassinated in 1963.
Other Jewish national organizations are also on board in supporting Israel as are the numerous Christian Zionists, which means that killing tens of thousands of people in the Middle East is a matter of no consequence, except that once more the Israeli Jews must be and are widely portrayed as the victims. The US is complicit in the arming of Israel and the killing and actually condones it even though a majority of American voters do not support the Jewish state. Likewise, the Jewish dominated press and other media looks the other way as the slaughter goes on, as it no doubt will, and one expects that upwards of 2 million Palestinians will eventually be deported to whatever shithole is willing to accept them under pressure from the US. Otherwise, the “Justice” recommended by Israel’s Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who is now in the United States on a “visit,” will likely be pursued, i.e. a bullet to the back of the head of every Palestinian.
And then there is the issue of the “crime” of antisemitism, which is the only thing that the Justice Department seems to think is worth addressing, to the point where people who have done nothing beyond expressing their concern over what is going on in the Middle East are being arrested without any charges being filed and detained while being processed for deportation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has publicly announced that he has authorized the arrest and deportation of 300 students for their criticism of Israel. The US House of Representatives has obligingly passed a measure equating criticism of the racist, Jewish supremacist ideology of Zionism with what they describe as a hate crime “antisemitism.” Meanwhile the Israel Lobby and its politician choral society are constantly using the Jew-controlled media to sing about how Hebrew students fear going to school due to the presence of all the “antisemites.”
This is, of course, largely a convenient fiction largely created by the media, and it is rather Jews who have been beating up peaceful demonstrators. And it is extremist Jewish-funded groups that have been stirring the pot, going after anyone who is perceived as anti-Israeli. One of the groups, Canary Mission, has run a massive disinformation operation for years, publishing the names and photos of thousands of alleged pro-Palestine activists, while another group, Betar, openly encourages targeting of student activists and brags that it has “provided names of hundreds of terror supporters” to the Trump administration. Ross Glick, the head of Betar’s US branch, believes that “Foreign students on visas in the US shouldn’t have the right to free speech.” Jews, however, should be allowed to behave with complete freedom to include carrying out murder, war crimes, and human rights violations targeting those it sees as opponents.
To be sure, protesting against any of the horrors that Israel is engaged in is regarded to be one symptom of “antisemitism” which is ipso facto considered to be something like a capital offense, even though it is pretty much generated in America by the impunity and savagery with which Israel behaves towards the rest of the world. And the parameters of what might constitute a legitimate search for “antisemites” is expanding. The US State Department will now demand from foreigners wishing to travel to the United States information on their social networking sites. Those sites will be screened for anti-Israel content and the visas will be refused. This is an extension of the anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) policies now in place in 38 states in the US where a job or services will be denied to citizens if they will not sign a pledge or promise not to support the movement to boycott or punish Israel. The situation is even worse for those foreigners who are currently going through screening to become US permanent residents as it is the issue of one’s views of Israel alone that could easily determine who is allowed to become a future citizen and who is rejected.
Indeed, protecting Jews is a full-time job of the Trump Administration, even more so that under Genocide Joe Biden. Antisemitism comes up in speech after speech and fully ninety per cent of the discretionary Homeland Security Agency grants already go to Jewish groups or buildings, to the tune of more than $400 million. Interestingly, the government also appears to be constructing a data base of Jews to protect them further. The personal cellphones of dozens of current and former Barnard College employees rang last Monday evening with a text message that said it was from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, part of a review of the employment practices of Barnard. A link led to a survey that asked respondents if they were Jewish or Israeli, and if they had been subjected to harassment.
Another attack on free speech in America that is Israel related, apart from what is going on at the universities which are being destroyed from within by the government demands to protect Jews, is the role of how research institutes have traditionally been able to engage in fraternal discussions to seek action and share information with any country or government entity in the world. But researchers and university employees who engage in certain nonviolent protests or political expression over human rights conditions in Israel and Gaza may now risk loss of employment and other civil and criminal penalties, according to a new policy unveiled by the National Institutes of Health on April 21st. The agency, the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, touches virtually every corner of the scientific community but it will now be silent over what is happening in Gaza, where every hospital has now been destroyed by Israeli-American bombs.
So there you have it. Let’s stop making excuses for Israeli behavior that depicts Jews as the perpetual victims while seeking to falsely label Israel’s enemies as the war criminals and racists. We will leave those attributes to Israel itself. Better still, arch-Zionist Donald Trump should pick up the phone in the Oval Office and call Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to tell him that America has become tired and the game is over. America will no longer be sacrificing its own interests to support a genocide and no longer will be footing the bill and providing the weapons to carry out the slaughter. “Goodbye Bibi! And don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!”
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
Iran, US conclude third round of indirect talks in Oman
Press TV – April 26, 2025
The third round of indirect talks between Iran and the United States has concluded in Muscat, the capital of Oman, with both parties agreeing to continue consultations.
The discussions began on Saturday and were facilitated by Omani Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi.
As in the previous two rounds, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff led the negotiations.
Earlier in the day, technical-level talks between Iranian and American experts also took place in Muscat. The primary goal was to establish a framework for a potential agreement on Tehran’s civilian nuclear program.
Michael Anton, the State Department’s head of policy planning, led Washington’s expert-level delegation, while Iranian Deputy Foreign Ministers Kazem Gharibabadi and Majid Takht-e-Ravanchi led Tehran’s team. The expert-level discussions focused on details of expectations and demands.
Both delegations are set to return to their respective capitals for further consultations as part of the negotiation process.
Next round of talks to be held next Saturday: Oman FM
In a post on his X account, the Omani foreign minister said today’s talks between Iran and the US identified a shared aspiration to reach an agreement based on mutual respect and enduring commitments.
“Core principles, objectives, and technical concerns were all addressed,” Busaidi wrote.
He noted that the sides agreed to continue the negotiations “with a further high-level meeting” provisionally scheduled for May 3.
Iran insists on its peaceful nuclear right: Foreign Ministry spokesman
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei reiterated Tehran’s insistence on its legitimate right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes during the indirect talks with the United States.
In a post on his X account on Saturday, Baghaei said the Iran-US talks were proceeding in a “serious” atmosphere.
He noted that the parties exchanged views on terminating sanctions effectively, building confidence in the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program, and safeguarding Tehran’s right to civilian nuclear energy, facilitated by Oman.
Baghaei also dismissed claims from certain Western media outlets, emphasizing that Iran’s defense and missile capabilities were not raised in the talks and will never be a topic of negotiation.
The previous rounds of indirect talks between Iran and the United States were held in Muscat and Rome on April 12 and 19, respectively, and were similarly aimed at finding common ground on Tehran’s nuclear program.
A ‘Trump deal’? Juggling war, ‘easy war’ and negotiation
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 24, 2025
Trump clearly is in the midst of an existential conflict. He has a landslide mandate. But is ringed by a resolute domestic enemy front in the form of an ‘industrial concern’ infused with Deep State ideology, centred primarily on preserving U.S. global power (rather than on mending of the economy).
The key MAGA issue however is not foreign policy, but how to structurally re-balance an economic paradigm in danger of an extinction event. Trump has always been clear that this forms his primordial goal. His coalition of supporters are fixed on the need to revive America’s industrial base, so as to provide reasonably well-paid jobs to the MAGA corps.
Trump may for now have a mandate, but extreme danger lurks – not just the Deep State and the Israeli lobby. The Yellen debt bomb is the more existential threat. It threatens Trump’s support in Congress, because the bomb is set to explode shortly before the 2026 midterms. New tariff revenues, DOGE savings, and even the upcoming Gulf shake-down are all centred on getting some sort of fiscal order in place, so that $9 trillion plus of short-term debt – maturing imminently – can be rolled over to the longer term without resort to eye-watering interest rates. It is Yellen-Democrat’s little trip wire for the Trump agenda.
So far, the general context seems plain enough. Yet, on the minutiae of how exactly to re-balance the economy; how to manage the ‘debt bomb’; and how far DOGE should go with its cuts, divisions in Trump’s team are present. In fact, the tariff war and the China tussle bring into contention a fresh phalanx of opposition: i.e. those (some on Wall Street, oligarchs, etc.) who have prospered mightily from the golden era of free-flowing, seemingly limitless, money-creation; those who were enriched, precisely by the policies that have made America subservient to the looming American ‘debt knell’.
Yet to make matters more complex, two of the key components to Trump’s mooted ‘re-balancing’ and debt ‘solution’ cannot be whispered, let alone said aloud: One reason is that it involves deliberately devaluing ‘the dollar in your pocket’. And secondly, many more Americans are going to lose their jobs.
That is not exactly a popular ‘sell’. Which is probably why the ‘re-balance’ has not been well explained to the public.
Trump launched the Liberation ‘Tariff Shock’ seemingly minded to crash-start a restructuring of international trade relations – as the first step towards a general re-alignment of major currency values.
China however, wasn’t buying into the tariff and trade restrictions ‘stuff’, and matters quickly escalated. It looked for a moment as if the Trump ‘Coalition’ might fracture under the pressure of the concomitant crisis in the U.S. bond market to the tariff fracas that shook confidence.
The Coalition, in fact, held; markets subsided, but then the Coalition fractured over a foreign policy issue – Trump’s hope to normalise relations with Russia, towards a Great Global Reset.
A major strand within the Trump Coalition (apart from MAGA populists) are the neocons and Israeli Firsters. Some sort of Faustian bargain supposedly was struck by Trump at the outset through a deal that had his team heavily peopled by zealous Israeli-Firsters.
Simply put, the breadth of coalition that Trump thought he needed to win the election and deliver an economic re-balance also included two foreign policy pillars: Firstly, the reset with Moscow – the pillar by which to end the ‘forever wars’, which his Populist base despised. And the second pillar being the neutering of Iran as a military power and source of resistance, on which both Israeli Firsters – and Israel – insist (and with which Trump seems wholly comfortable). Hence the Faustian pact.
Trump’s ‘peacemaker’ aspirations no doubt added to his electoral appeal, but they were not the real driver to his landslide. What has become evident is that these diverse agendas – foreign and domestic – are interlinked: A set-back in one or the other acts as a domino either impelling or retarding the other agendas. Put simply: Trump is dependent on ‘wins’ – early ‘wins’ – even if this means rushing towards a prospective ‘easy win’ without thinking through whether he possesses a sound strategy (and ability) to achieve it.
All of Trump’s three agenda objectives, it turns out, are more complicated and divisive than he perhaps expected. He and his team seem captivated by western-embedded assumptions such as first, that war generally happens ‘Over There’; that war in the post Cold War era is not actually ‘war’ in any traditional sense of full, all-out war, but is rather a limited application of overwhelming western force against an enemy incapable of threatening ‘us’ in a similar manner; and thirdly, that a war’s scope and duration is decided in Washington and its Deep State ‘twin’ in London.
So those who talk about ending the Ukraine war through an imposed unilateral ceasefire (ie, the faction of Walz, Rubio and Hegseth, led by Kellogg) seem to assume blithely that the terms and timing for ending the war also can be decided in Washington, and imposed on Moscow through the limited application of asymmetric pressures and threats.
Just as China isn’t buying into the tariff and trade restriction ‘stuff’, neither is Putin buying into the ultimatum ‘stuff’: (‘Moscow has weeks, not months, to agree a ceasefire’). Putin has patiently tried to explain to Witkoff, Trump’s Envoy, that the American presumption that the scope and duration of any war is very much up to the West to decide simply doesn’t gel with today’s reality.
And, in companion mode, those who talk about bombing Iran (which includes Trump) seem also to assume that they can dictate the war’s essential course and content too; the U.S. (and Israel perhaps), can simply determine to bomb Iran with big bunker-buster bombs. That’s it! End of story. This is assumed to be a self-justifying and easy war – and that Iran must learn to accept that they brought this upon themselves by supporting the Palestinians and others who refuse Israeli normalisation.
Aurelien observes:
“So we are dealing with limited horizons; limited imagination and limited experience. But there’s one other determining factor: The U.S. system is recognised to be sprawling, conflictual – and, as a result, largely impervious to outside influence – and even to reality. Bureaucratic energy is devoted almost entirely to internal struggles, which are carried out by shifting coalitions in the administration; in Congress; in Punditland and in the media. But these struggles are, in general, about [domestic] power and influence – and not about the inherent merits of an issue, and [thus] require no actual expertise or knowledge”.
“The system is large and complex enough that you can make a career as an ‘Iran expert’, say, inside and outside government, without ever having visited the country or speaking the language – by simply recycling standard wisdom in a way that will attract patronage. You will be fighting battles with other supposed ‘experts’, within a very confined intellectual perimeter, where only certain conclusions are acceptable”.
What becomes evident is that this cultural approach (the Think-Tank Industrial Complex) induces a laziness and the prevalence of hubris into western thinking. It is assumed reportedly, that Trump assumed that Xi Jinping would rush to meet with him, following the imposition of tariffs – to plead for a trade deal – because China is suffering some economic headwinds.
It is blandly assumed by the Kellogg contingent too that pressure is both the necessary and sufficient condition to compel Putin to agree to an unilateral ceasefire – a ceasefire that Putin repeatedly has stated he would not accept until a political framework was first agreed. When Witkoff relays Putin’s point within the Trump team discussion, he stands as a contrarian outside the ‘licensed discourse’ which insists that Russia only takes détente with an adversary seriously after it has been forced to do so by a defeat or serious setback.
Iran too repeatedly has said that it will not be stripped naked of its conventional defences; its allies and its nuclear programme. Iran likely has the capabilities to inflict huge damage both on U.S. forces in the region and on Israel.
The Trump Team is divided on strategy here too – crudely put: to Negotiate or to Bomb.
It seems that the pendulum has swung under intense pressure from Netanyahu and the Jewish institutional leadership within the U.S.
A few words can change everything. In an about face, Witkoff shifted from saying a day earlier that Washington would be satisfied with a cap on Iranian nuclear enrichment and would not require the dismantling of its nuclear facilities, to posting on his official X account that any deal would require Iran to “stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program … A deal with Iran will only be completed if it is a Trump deal”. Without a clear reversal on this from Trump, we are on a path to war.
It is plain that Team Trump has not thought through the risks inherent to their agendas. Their initial ‘ceasefire meeting’ with Russia in Riyadh, for example, was a theatre of the facile. The meeting was held on the easy assumption that since Washington had determined to have an early ceasefire then ‘it must be’.
“Famously”, Aurelien wearily notes, “the Clinton administration’s Bosnia policy was the product of furious power struggles between rival American NGO and Human Rights’ alumni – none of whom knew anything about the region, or had ever been there”.
It is not just that the team is insouciant towards the possible consequences of war in the Middle East. They are captive to manipulated assumptions that it will be an easy war.
Smoke in Rome: What’s really cooking between Trump and Tehran?
While US negotiators trade smiles with Tehran, internal rifts and foreign pressure reveal just how fragile Washington’s position has become
By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | April 23, 2025
Last Saturday, the second round of US-Iran nuclear talks took place in Rome, following an initial meeting held a week before in Muscat, Oman. Both sides had described the talks as “constructive,” but that optimism quickly collided with a wave of conflicting signals from the Trump administration. Despite the encouraging tone, it remained unclear whether a new nuclear agreement was truly within reach.
At the outset of negotiations, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz – an outspoken Iran hawk – laid down a hardline condition: Iran must completely dismantle its uranium enrichment program if it wanted any deal with the US. But after the Muscat meeting, Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, who led the US delegation, struck a very different note. In an interview with Fox News, he suggested that Tehran might be allowed to maintain limited uranium enrichment for peaceful energy purposes – something that would have been a nonstarter just days earlier.
Witkoff emphasized the importance of strict verification protocols to prevent any militarization of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, including oversight of missile technology and delivery systems. Notably absent from his remarks? Any mention of “dismantlement.” This shift hinted that the administration might be considering a modified return to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – the very agreement that Trump tore up in 2018, branding it a “disaster.”
But the pivot didn’t last. Just one day later, Witkoff reversed course in a post on X, doubling down on the demand for full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear and weapons programs. So what triggered the rhetorical whiplash?
According to Axios, Trump huddled with top national security officials just three days after the Muscat talks to reassess the US strategy. In that meeting, Vice President JD Vance, Witkoff, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued for a pragmatic approach. Pushing Tehran to dismantle its entire nuclear infrastructure, they warned, would tank the talks. Iran had already made it clear that such sweeping concessions were off the table. Vance even suggested Washington should brace for some level of compromise.
But not everyone agreed. A rival faction – led by Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio – saw things differently. They argued that Iran’s current vulnerability gave the US a unique upper hand, one that shouldn’t be squandered. If Tehran failed to meet America’s terms, they insisted, the US should be ready to strike militarily or greenlight Israeli action.
The divide exposes a deeper strategic rift within the Trump administration. Between the maximalist view that Iran must be completely disarmed and the more flexible position that aims to curb weaponization while preserving peaceful enrichment lies a vast gray area. The lack of a unified message – or even basic consensus – risks leaving the US at a disadvantage against a seasoned and coordinated Iranian negotiating team.
In short, Trump finds himself in a difficult balancing act. On one hand, it’s clear he wants to avoid military escalation. The decision to send Witkoff – a figure known for his willingness to compromise – signals a genuine interest in diplomacy over saber-rattling. If hardliners had the upper hand in Washington, it’s unlikely the second round in Rome would have happened at all.
On Monday, April 21, Trump cautiously told reporters the talks were going “very well,” but warned that real progress would take time. His choice of words reflected a desire to stay flexible, while acknowledging the complexity – and risks – of negotiating with Tehran.
Optimism seems more palpable on the Iranian side. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the two sides had found significantly more common ground in Rome than in Muscat. His remarks suggest that momentum is building and that real progress may be on the horizon.
Araghchi’s itinerary also raised eyebrows. Before heading to Rome, he made a stop in Moscow, where he met with President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. He reportedly carried a personal message from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – what he called “a message to the world.” The West didn’t miss the symbolism: the visit was widely interpreted as a public reaffirmation of the Moscow–Tehran alliance. Retired US Army Colonel and former Pentagon advisor Douglas MacGregor noted on X that any major American military action against Iran would likely draw a response from Russia, Tehran’s strategic partner.
On that same day, President Putin signed a law ratifying a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Iran – further cementing political and economic cooperation. Against the backdrop of fragile US-Iran talks, the Moscow-Tehran axis suddenly looks more consequential. With these growing ties, Washington may find it harder to exert unilateral pressure on Iran.
Meanwhile, not everyone in Tehran is sold on the negotiations. Many Iranian officials remain skeptical of Trump, whose decision to unilaterally scrap the JCPOA in 2018 still looms large. Their distrust extends beyond Trump himself to a broader concern: that future US presidents may once again reverse course. If Obama’s deals were dismantled by Trump, why wouldn’t Trump’s agreements suffer the same fate?
Despite these tensions, major international outlets have confirmed that two more rounds of talks are planned: one in Geneva next week, and another in Oman the week after. The continued diplomatic activity points to a shared interest in keeping the conversation alive. For now, both Trump’s measured optimism and Iran’s cautious tone suggest that, at least in the near term, the risk of war has receded.
This de-escalation in rhetoric reflects a deeper truth: despite lingering mistrust and domestic political pressures, both sides see value in staying at the table. You don’t have to be a policy wonk to see that. But in Israel, the mood is far more anxious. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – never one to hide his skepticism about engaging Iran – has condemned the talks. For Tel Aviv, negotiations risk softening Tehran’s isolation and threatening Israel’s strategic position.
Still, Trump’s priority isn’t regional politics – it’s his legacy. He wants to be seen as the president who avoided war and brokered a deal the American public can get behind. In that light, Netanyahu’s objections may have to wait
Farhad Ibragimov, lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Featured Video
Roosevelt’s Partnership with Stalin
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The great ADHD swindle
By Daniel Ken | TCW Defending Freedom | May 20, 2023
Over more than two decades in the classroom I’ve taught thousands of children and teenagers: some were lovely and lots were hard-working. On the other hand, quite a number were disruptive and argumentative, and a number were violently opposed to learning. But I don’t think I’ve taught more than a handful of kids who could be properly described as having the symptoms of ADHD. And that handful could just as easily have had something else wrong with them. Because here’s the thing: despite the fact that the best part of a million children are medicated for the condition, ADHD doesn’t exist.
There’s no definitive medical test for it, experts can’t agree on what it actually means, and most of the symptoms disappear if the child in question has lots of exercise, good diet and, crucially, a set of clear behavioural boundaries, preferably set early in childhood and, for the boys at least, enforced by a stable adult male living at home. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Switzerland confirms US-Iran talks planned for Friday are cancelled
- Iran Beat Back The Greater Israel Project
- Roosevelt’s Partnership with Stalin
- Strategic Ambiguity (If We Must)
- Finland shreds nuclear weapons ban
- Kiev turns to ‘systematic killing’ of Zaporozhye plant staff – Russia’s nuclear chief
- Censored Lavrov article Politico refused to publish (FULL TEXT)
- Israel’s censor silenced 5,700 reports in 2025
- After US-Iran deal, Israeli minister threatens war on Syria ‘sooner or later’
- When the Iran War is over: Why the West Bank may be Netanyahu’s next front
- If Americans Knew
- What Ceasefire? Israel Has Now Killed Over 1,000 Palestinians in Gaza Since October
- U.S. Whole-of-Government Takeover by Israel
- Netanyahu’s Mouthpieces Turn on Trump, Revealing a Deeper Israeli Ingratitude
- Senate wants to force US to share sensitive intel with Israel
- Trump ended his idiotic Iran war. Good.
- Khanna Becomes First in Congress to Sign ‘Peace Pledge’ Promising to Reject AIPAC Funds
- Look who’s losing it over Trump’s Iran deal
- Israel has killed over 1,000 Gazans during 8-month “ceasefire” – Daily Update
- REVEALED: Former Top DEA Official Says Israel Spies on US Law Enforcement
- What would happen if US actually cut off military aid to Israel?
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Chile’s Relative Sea Level Was 3.2 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Beyond The Pitch: Why FIFA’s World Cup Is One Of Humanity’s Best Investments
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
Aletho News 