Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The coming war on Iran will be regional, perhaps international

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | September 2, 2025

It is unlikely that the anticipated continuation of the war on Iran, spearheaded by the Israelis but led by the United States, will be confined to a simple tit-for-tat missile trade-off as we saw earlier this year. The reason for this is simple: too much is at stake if this front again flares up.

Since the US-brokered ceasefire between “Israel” and Iran went into effect on June 29, the United States and the Zionist regime have scrambled to move around military equipment, engage in mass surveillance flights over Lebanon and the Persian Gulf. More recently, the US began an early withdrawal of its forces from the Ain al-Assad base and other installations inside Iraq.

The first point of entry to understanding what is currently brewing across West Asia is understanding the mentality at play on both sides of the divide.

On one side, we have the Zionist regime and its Western allies, who are the aggressors and believe themselves to be fighting what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls a “seven-front war”. Although the front in the Gaza Strip has pervaded public consciousness over the past 23 months, overshadowing the wars on Lebanon, seizure of territory in Syria, bombing of Yemen, and attack on Iran, it is very much part of this wider war.

From the Israeli-American perspective, their ongoing war carries the goal of eliminating what is known as the Axis of Resistance, the leader of which is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The thinking clearly is that this period in time has provided a unique opportunity to crush the regional resistance and with it, achieve regime change in Tehran.

In June, the Israelis clearly got ahead of themselves and believed that they could inflict a similar blow in Iran to the blow they inflicted on Lebanese Hezbollah back in September of 2024. In the first few hours of the Zionist Regime’s illegal attack on Iran, their media boasted of landing such a blow. However, to everyone’s surprise, within 15 hours, the Iranians were back on their feet and began firing bursts of ballistic missiles into central “Tel Aviv”.

Even the US strikes didn’t inflict any kind of kill blow that degraded Iran sufficiently, as it proved more than anything that their nuclear facilities could survive US strikes, even if they were badly damaged. The United States certainly poses a major threat to Iran, but the takeaway here is that the Zionist regime can’t take them on alone.

If there is another battle between Iran and the Israelis, the Zionist Entity is already low on interceptor missiles, and its arsenal would be severely drained within around a week or so. We also still do not know the extent of the damage inflicted by Iran’s ballistic missile strikes, due to Israeli military censorship. Simply put, they don’t even allow the public to know the true number of soldiers killed and wounded in Gaza, so forget the notion that they’d admit what Iran did to them.

Another major player here is Lebanese Hezbollah, which appears to be successfully rebuilding itself and is at an intelligence deficit compared to what they had built up over decades and utilized late last year. Yet, what the Israelis do understand is that in the event that a conflict with Iran arises where Hezbollah chooses to enter the fight on the ground, they may face an existential battle for their very survival.

If, and this evidently depends on varying factors, Hezbollah chooses to launch an all-out ground offensive as Iran fires ballistic missiles in bursts across occupied Palestine, it is plausible that the Lebanese party will inflict a total defeat on the Israeli ground forces and seize huge swaths of territory in the north of Palestine.

The Zionist regime is now claiming to be preparing for mission impossible in the Gaza Strip, amassing troops in order to try and occupy Gaza City, an operation that would take between two to five years to complete, according to Israeli military estimates. It would also be extremely costly for the Israeli ground forces and their military vehicles. If they do commit to this, it would leave them open on the northern front. There is, however, the possibility that this is all a bluff.

If the Israelis are bluffing, they could be preparing for an offensive against Lebanon instead. The thinking here would be to try and halt Hezbollah’s rebuilding process, setting it back even further, and could even involve a ground operation, likely using Syrian territory to invade the Bekaa Valley area.

Such a conflict would be existential for Hezbollah, especially as the US works with the Lebanese government to impose a seizure of its weapons. A repeat of what occurred a year ago would work only to advance the US-Israeli goal of seizing Hezbollah’s weapons, while a victory could at the very least liberate Lebanese territory and represent a massive blow to the disarmament agenda.

Therefore, if Iran is currently in the scope of the Zionists, it would make strategic sense for them to either attack Lebanon first or launch a major offensive at the same time it attacks Iran.

The US withdrawal of forces from Iraq is another major indicator of a regional escalation involving Iran, specifically because of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) and the potential they have to inflict enormous damage, given that they enter the fold of the war.

Iraq’s PMU is yet to be mobilized, and its role in the ongoing regional conflict has been minimal. The reason for this is that if some 230,000 men are mobilized, or even a portion of them, it is difficult to suddenly put a halt to their operations, and this will mean a dramatic regional escalation, the likes of which the United States will not be able to manage inside Iraq and will instead use their economic levers as a primary weapon of war.

Depending on how far such a conflict is going to go, there is even the possibility that it could go global. While there is currently no evidence to support this notion, there has been talk that the US naval deployment to the Caribbean, triggering a mass militia mobilization across Venezuela, could be connected. Additionally, China and Russia could use the opportunity of a major Iran-US war to carry out some of their long-desired goals, at a time when Washington has diverted its resources to West Asia.

There is again the possibility that another attack on Iran could look similar to what the world witnessed during what is dubbed the “12-day war”, yet the same stalemate outcome would only lead us back to square one again and beget yet another war. At some point, something will have to give.

The reason why the danger of an all-out regional conflagration appears high as of now is purely down to the Israeli-US refusal to end their genocide against Gaza, indicating that they seek total defeat of the Axis of Resistance and nothing less. Inevitably, one side must win and the other lose; there is currently no such thing as deterrence for either side, only who will triumph and carve out a new regional reality.

September 3, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US-Israeli scheme for Lebanon includes forced displacement, turning Beirut suburb into ‘refugee camp’: Report

The Cradle | August 27, 2025

There is a new US plan for a “clampdown” on Beirut’s southern suburb, which could potentially see the area come under the control of a foreign or Arab security force, according to a report released by Al-Akhbar newspaper on 27 August.

The southern suburb, a strong base of support for Hezbollah, was heavily bombarded by Israel during its brutal war on Lebanon last year. The suburb has been repeatedly hit by airstrikes since the ceasefire took effect.

According to Al-Akhbar, the plan aims to “treat the southern suburbs just like Palestinian refugee camps.”

The 1969 Cairo Agreement for years allowed Palestinian groups a degree of autonomy over refugee camps in Lebanon. Despite the agreement being declared null in the 1980s, the status of the camps has remained more or less the same.

However, Lebanese troops maintain checkpoints and a heavy presence around the camps. Palestinian camps in Lebanon have recently begun a symbolic disarmament process in line with the state’s efforts to monopolize control of weapons in the country.

The Al-Akhbar report frames the new US plan as part of Washington’s broader goal of disarming Hezbollah, which the Lebanese government vowed to achieve in a cabinet session in early August.

“The US proposal envisions checkpoints at all entrances [of the Beirut suburb], thorough searches of individuals and vehicles, and a tight control on goods, materials, and money flows. This mission would not be handed to the Lebanese army. Instead, the plan calls for a foreign security force, possibly an Arab one, to take on the task,” it said.

Al-Akhbar also said the plan falls in line with US efforts to “empty the southern border region.”

A recent report by Axios said there is a US plan for a “Trump economic zone” near the southern border, aimed at preventing Hezbollah from re-establishing its presence there. The report said this would happen with the help of Gulf financing.

During a press conference in Lebanon’s Presidential Palace on Tuesday, US envoy Tom Barrack confirmed plans for the economic zone.

“We have to have money coming into the system. The money will come from the Gulf. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are partners and are willing to do that for the south (of Lebanon) if we’re asking a portion of the Lebanese community to give up their livelihood,” Barrack said.

“We have 40,000 people that are being paid by Iran to fight. What are you gonna do with them? Take their weapon and say ‘by the way, good luck planting olive trees?’ It can’t happen. We have to help them,” he added, referring to Hezbollah members.

“We, all of us, the Gulf, the US, the Lebanese are all gonna act together to create an economic forum that is gonna produce a livelihood,” he went on to say.

This economic zone reportedly serves as an ethnic cleansing plan to remove residents of the southern border villages and prevent the return of those already displaced from there.

Lebanese MP and former head of Lebanon’s General Security Directorate Jamil al-Sayyed said in a post last week that “Envoy Tom Barrack has received the Israeli response to his mediation over the south.”

“The response included a ceasefire, the handing over of prisoners, and border demarcation, according to the following conditions: Lebanon must grant Israel the right to remain inside 14 villages and to fully or partially evacuate their residents. The villages Israel demanded in their entirety are: Odaisseh, Kfar Kila, Houla, Markaba, and Aita al-Shaab. The villages where Israel demanded to establish permanent military sites on their outskirts and forests are: Khiam, Ramiya, Yaroun, Aitaroun, Alma al-Shaab, Al-Dhayra, Marwahin, Maroun al-Ras, and Blida,” he added.

“If this news is true, and becomes official tomorrow or soon, it may be celebrated in our country as an ‘achievement’ similar to yesterday’s celebration over the symbolic handover of weapons in Burj al-Barajneh camp,” Sayyed went on to say.

August 27, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iraqi FM warns PMU, Lebanese Hezbollah cannot be disarmed by force

The Cradle | August 18, 2025

Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein stated on 18 August that efforts to pass a new law in the parliament to regulate the status of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) are coming at the wrong time, while at the same time emphasizing the government’s inability to disarm the resistance factions comprising the PMU by force.

“The timing of introducing the Popular Mobilization Forces law was wrong, and I was the only minister who expressed this within the cabinet before the draft law was sent to parliament, especially in light of the tense regional and international situation and the Iranian–American conflict,” Hussein said in an interview on Iraqi TV.

The new law would update an existing law regulating the PMU, transforming it into a fully independent security institution directly under the prime minister and bypassing the Defense and Interior Ministries.

The PMU was created in 2014 to recruit volunteers to fight against ISIS, which had just taken over Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, with covert support from the US and Peshmerga forces loyal to Iraqi Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani.

The PMU, which was comprised of multiple Shia armed factions, was incorporated into Iraq’s security forces with the passage of the first PMU law in 2016. The group was later expanded to include other ethnic groups, including Sunnis, Yezidis, Shabaks, and Christians.

The Coordination Framework coalition, a Shia political bloc supported by Iran, is pushing for the Iraqi parliament to include a vote on the new PMU law in its upcoming sessions.

In contrast, Foreign Minister Hussein argued that the PMU should be disarmed, but through dialogue rather than force.

“We need a rational dialogue with the factions to disarm, and this cannot be done by force, as this could lead to internal strife. Before the national dialogue, we need an inter-Shia dialogue between the Shia parties and leaders, but unfortunately, so far, there has been no dialogue in this regard,” Hussein added.

The US has also reportedly pushed for the PMU to be disarmed.

Hussein, who also serves as deputy prime minister, compared the issue of the PMU in Iraq to that of Hezbollah in Lebanon. The US is also pressuring the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah, which defended the country from Israel’s invasion last year.

“Hezbollah’s weapons in Lebanon cannot be disarmed except through dialogue, and the Iraqis cannot disarm the Popular Mobilization Forces by force. Centralization of decision-making is the problem in Syria, and decentralization may be the solution.”

The minister accused Iran of interfering in Iraqi affairs by promoting the law. “Most neighboring countries interfere in political, security, and military affairs, including Iran, which has significant influence,” he stated.

Hussein’s statements come amid interference from Washington, which seeks to block the law’s passage.

The US has warned Iraq against passing the new law, arguing it would entrench Iranian influence and empower armed groups “undermining Iraq’s sovereignty.”

US Chargé d’Affaires Steven Fagin and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio both raised these concerns in meetings and calls with Iraqi officials, pressuring parliament to halt the vote despite the bill already completing its second reading in July.

Iraq’s parliament has since avoided including the law on its agenda, facing opposition from Sunni and Kurdish blocs, while pro-Iran factions continue to push for its passage.

Shafaq News wrote on Monday that according to Iraqi MP Thaer Mokheef, “the real obstacle lies in US opposition, warning that Washington seeks to block the legislation and may attempt to reassert influence in Iraq.”

Among the groups represented in the PMU are Kataib Hezbollah, Asaib Ahl al-Haq, and the Al-Nujaba Movement – Iran-linked resistance factions involved in the attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria, which began after the start of the Gaza war and ended months later with the help of Iraqi government pressure.

Last year, the US launched heavy strikes on Kataib Hezbollah sites in Iraq in response to the killing of three soldiers in a drone strike on a US military base on the Syria–Jordan border.

August 18, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

The US-Israeli plot to partition Syria’s West

By Abdullah Suleiman Ali | The Cradle | August 13, 2025

“When you look at the map of Syria, I mean, it looks like a flat Rubik’s cube because of the way that the country is divided up, and what we are talking about is mainly the governance of the western part of the country.”– Senator James Risch during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on 13 February

It began with a seemingly offhand statement by US Senator James Risch, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, just weeks ahead of the March coastal massacres in Syria against the Alawite minority.

“My idea,” he expounded, “is we need to focus on this western part and continue to look at the others. But the first objective is if you do not get a handle on this you are not going to get a handle on the rest of the country.”

Testifying before the Committee on US policy post-former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, managing director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Michael Singh, responded:

“I think that we can focus on what is happening in western Syria, deal with the government there, while also trying to encourage and maybe facilitate this process of coming together among these groups.”

But these remarks have since crystallized into a structured, multi-front operation now moving steadily toward execution. The “Western Syria” project has now shed any ambiguity, emerging as a concrete blueprint that fuses sectarian engineering with foreign military coordination, aimed at carving out new realities on both sides of the Syrian–Lebanese border – under Tel Aviv’s supervision.

A plan spanning Syria and Lebanon 

The scheme extends deep into Lebanon, where an orchestrated campaign against Hezbollah is intended to disarm the resistance movement while redeploying armed Syrian factions from Lebanon to the coastal strip. The right-wing Israeli government, acting as both sponsor and chief architect, directs the plan through two named coordinators –General “Yael” and Captain “Robert.”

Marketed publicly as a mission to safeguard minorities, especially Christians, the plan’s hidden mechanism is to stage attacks on churches, monasteries, and heritage landmarks across the coast. These provocations are designed to inflame sectarian tensions, creating the pretext for an Israeli-led intervention.

One of the earliest signs emerged in Tartous, where internal security announced the arrest of a cell accused of plotting to attack the Mar Elias Maronite Church in Safita, not to be confused with the suicide bombing of the Mar Elias Greek Orthodox Church in Damascus in June. The revelation – delayed by three weeks – sparked suspicions of Israeli infiltration of Syrian security structures.

Internal Security Forces Chief in Tartous, Abdelal Mohammad Abdelal, said the plot was foiled in a “high-level security operation” after extensive surveillance and was based on “precise intelligence indicating that an outlaw group affiliated with remnants of the deposed regime was surveilling Mar Elias Maronite Church in the village of Khreibet, in the Safita countryside.”

However, many saw it as a calculated move to unsettle Christian communities and justify external involvement.

Two days before that announcement, partisan media channels circulated an unverified statement claiming the formation of a so-called “Christian Military Council” under the name Elias Saab – a figure absent from any credible public record.

The declaration spoke of organizing Christian fighters who had defended their communities against extremist factions like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), who are now integrated into the state’s security forces.

It called for uniting fighters from Mhardeh, Al-Suqaylabiyah, Sadad, Maaloula, and Tartous under one legal and military umbrella, documenting crimes against Christians for presentation to international bodies, ensuring their representation in any political settlement, and opposing partition while defending a unified, secular Syria.

While this narrative has circulated in partisan outlets, there is no independent verification of its authenticity or the council’s existence. Its sudden appearance, timed just before heightened tensions in the coastal region, has fueled speculation about its role as a manufactured proxy front to justify foreign involvement under the guise of ‘minority protection.’

The US-Israeli scheme takes shape

On 5 August, in the US capital, the government relations and strategic advisory firm Tiger Hill Partners announced it would serve as the official representative of the “Foundation for the Development of Western Syria.”

Specializing in government relations and strategic lobbying, Tiger Hill pledged to advocate for Christians, Druze, Alawites, Kurds, and “moderate Sunnis” while working with US policymakers to shape Syria’s political transition. The one-year contract, valued at roughly $1 million, was filed publicly and framed as a mission to ensure minority rights remain central to Washington’s Syria policy.

In late July, a coastal faction calling itself “Men of Light – Saraya al-Jawad” made its debut. The group’s statement attacked Abu Mohammad al-Julani (Ahmad al-Sharaa), Qatar’s emir, and Turkiye’s president, while offering thanks to Egypt, Israeli journalist Eddy Cohen, and notable expatriate Alawite, Druze, and Christian figures – including Sheikh Hikmat al-Hijri, Mazloum Abdi, and Patriarch John al-Yaziji. Although ridiculed for its unusual tone, its appearance dovetailed with coordinated moves behind the scenes.

That coordination became more visible on the 17 July, when the Tel Aviva Hotel in Israel hosted a closed meeting between government officials, Syrian Alawites, and Syrian Druze figures. The attendees included seven long-exiled Alawites and Druze linked to Sheikh Muwafaq Tarif’s circle – the Druze leader in Israel – both Syrian and Israeli nationals. A second meeting followed on the 21st–22nd, just before Saraya al-Jawad’s unveiling and the release of its operational footage.

An Alawite–Druze alliance

On 6 August, Eddy Cohen, an Israeli journalist and commentator on Arab affairs, announced on his Arabic-language Facebook page the preparation of an Alawite–Druze alliance in the US. Observers have paired this with an alleged leaked audio recording of a Syrian woman – said to be related to a former senior officer with Israeli ties – speaking to another participant in the Tel Aviv meetings.

In the recording, she reportedly described coordination between a secular Syrian expatriate network and Israeli intermediaries, noting specifically that one of the councils involved held shares in Tiger Hill. The recording also alleged plans to covertly deploy some 2,500 foreign fighters into Syria, dispersing them across Homs and the coastal region.

Despite the project’s determined momentum, domestic and external actors are moving to block it, even offering intelligence support to the Sharaa administration despite disputing its legitimacy. This counter-effort has already thwarted the Safita church attack and prevented a major bombing in Damascus.

A partition map in the making 

As one credible regional security source informs The Cradle:

“Israel seeks to exploit Syria’s sectarian and ethnic divisions to use minorities as political and military tools, serving its plan to partition the country and open two strategic corridors: an eastern one linking Suwayda to Hasakah, and a western one running from Syria’s coast to Afrin, securing multi-front influence and encircling the Turkish axis from within.”

“Western Syria” may remain in the shadows or step fully into the open, but its trajectory is unmistakable: a deliberate dismantling of Syria’s territorial cohesion, draped in the language of minority protection and enforced through foreign-backed militias and political fronts.

For Damascus, Beirut, and the wider region, this is no distant or hypothetical threat, but an active campaign already reshaping the map to the advantage of outside powers.

August 13, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The US wants Lebanon, Gaza and Iraq to disarm and will fail

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | August 7, 2025

The US Trump administration not only believes it can disarm Hezbollah, the PMU, and Hamas, but that they will all do so voluntarily. To add to this delusional approach, they continue to demonstrate that by abandoning their weapons, the people of the region will be subjected to endless instability.

Washington based think-tanks are pushing for the dismantlement of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance through disarmament, the policy being clearly designed to isolate the Islamic Republic in order to also force it into capitulation. However, the approach to achieving this goal is so incredibly out of touch that it may achieve the very opposite results.

Using its Arab Regime allies, particularly the Gulf States, to apply pressure, US envoy Steve Witkoff has attempted to demand of Hamas that it fully disarm. This has been combined with calls from the Pentagon and Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, for Iraq to dismantle the Popular Mobilization Forces and prevent them from integrating fully within the fold of Baghdad’s security apparatus. Then we have the attempt to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon, an effort led by US envoy Tom Barrack.

Starting with Gaza, the request in and of itself is simply not serious. The al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas would never simply disarm without any guarantees or processes to ensure the protection of the people of the Gaza Strip.

In fact, if we look at the resistance in its entirety in Gaza, they fight as one unit that is inseparable from the people’s popular will. Hamas is no longer just a political party, the al-Qassam Brigades armed wing of Hamas is now the resistance of a people suffering through a genocide.

Also, the Palestinian people have the example of the West Bank and what the situation looks like when the resistance is disarmed and abandons the struggle. When Israeli settlements expand, annexation orders are imposed, and ethnic cleansing begins, there will be nobody to even fight back.

The lessons taught to the Palestinian factions in Gaza were learnt in 1982. When the Israelis invaded Lebanon, killing around 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) eventually decided to hand over its weapons and its leadership to flee to Tunisia.

Almost immediately afterwards, a series of bloody civilian massacres took place against Palestinian refugees and the Shia Lebanese, killing thousands at a time when no considerable resistance force existed to fight back. Then, the Israelis occupied southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah was born in 1985 out of this experience, as an organic southern resistance which would eventually expel the occupiers in 2000. After the 2006 defeat inflicted on the Zionist regime, the Israelis dared not launch any major aggression against Lebanon for the best part of 17 years.

In the case of Iraq, the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) were formed in order to put down the Daesh insurgency and liberate the country from a wave of Takfiri death squads. It is a massive force today which exists as a protective mechanism that deters the return of such groups from the country.

Attempting to disband the PMU in Iraq is impossible by force and would lead to a civil war style situation, which could end up resulting in Iraqi groups securing even greater power and popular support inside of the country.

In the case of Lebanon, the fall of Syria’s former government and the way the US has so far handled the situation, has taught the diverse population valuable lessons. Even if the Lebanese leadership will work alongside the US in an attempt to seize Hezbollah’s weapons, it is clear to the populace that disarmament leaves Lebanon open to invasion from Syria and places the country at the will of the Zionist Entity.

If we look over to neighboring Syria, immediately upon the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the Zionists invaded and have been attacking at will inside Syria ever since, with no resistance whatsoever. The new regime in Damascus even works alongside the Israelis as they steal more of its land, instead choosing to allow their allied militias to butcher minority communities throughout Syrian lands.

Everything we have seen occur across the region over the past 22 months, with the full support of the United States, teaches the Arab public that capitulation spells the end of their nations and leaves them vulnerable to endless abuses.

It appears, however, that officials and pro-war think-tanks in Washington are not capable of grasping what the reality on the ground truly looks like and how this could very quickly spiral out of control; and not in the US’ favor. None of these groups which form the Axis of Resistance are going to abandon their own people by simply handing over their weapons, especially given the overtly stated intentions of their enemies.

August 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Strategy of surrender’: Hezbollah condemns Lebanese cabinet decision on disarmament

The Cradle | August 6, 2025

Hezbollah released a statement on 6 August strongly rejecting a decision taken by the Lebanese cabinet a day earlier regarding state monopoly over all weapons in the country.

The Lebanese resistance group vowed to “treat this decision as if it does not exist,” calling it a “grave sin.”

“The government of [Lebanese] Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has committed a grave sin by adopting a decision that strips Lebanon of the weapons of resistance against the Israeli enemy. This weakens Lebanon’s strength and position in the face of the ongoing American-Israeli aggression and grants Israel what it failed to achieve during its assault on Lebanon,” Hezbollah said.

“This decision clearly violates the national pact and contradicts the government’s ministerial statement,” which calls for taking “all necessary measures” to liberate all Israeli-occupied Lebanese territories, Hezbollah went on to say.

“Preserving Lebanon’s strength – and that includes the Resistance’s arms – is part of these necessary measures. Likewise, working to enhance Lebanon’s strength by arming and empowering the Lebanese army to expel the Israeli enemy and liberate and protect Lebanese land is also one of these essential measures,” it added.

“This decision undermines Lebanon’s sovereignty and gives Israel free rein to tamper with its security, geography, politics, and very future. Therefore, we will treat this decision as if it does not exist. At the same time, we remain open to dialogue, to ending the Israeli aggression on Lebanon, liberating its land, freeing its captives, rebuilding what was destroyed by the brutal assault, and engaging in discussions over a national defense strategy – but not under the weight of aggression,” the resistance group said.

“What the government has now decided is part of a strategy of surrender and a direct undermining of Lebanon’s sovereignty.”

“To our honorable people, we say: This is just a passing summer cloud, God willing. We are used to being patient—and to emerging victorious.”

Hezbollah also confirmed the withdrawal of its ministers from the session on Tuesday in rejection of the decision.

The cabinet session on 5 August lasted several hours. While the continuation of discussions on the issue of weapons was postponed until Thursday, the cabinet adopted a decision calling for state monopoly on weapons, without prioritizing the need for Israel to withdraw its forces and end attacks against Lebanon.

“The Lebanese army is tasked with developing an implementation plan regarding the weapons before the end of the year and presenting it to the Council of Ministers for discussion before the 31st of this month,” Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said on Tuesday night after the session, reaffirming Lebanon’s commitment to UN Resolution 1701 and the state’s monopoly on weapons by the end of the year.

Lebanese journalist Khalil Nasrallah referred to the decision as an attempt to set a trap … and impose the resistance’s disarmament as a fait accompli.”

“The Council of Ministers did not task the army with drafting a plan to defend Lebanon against the Israeli aggression; instead, it tasked it with drafting a plan to restrict weapons (Hezbollah’s weapons) to be presented to the Council of Ministers at the end of August, to be implemented before the end of the year. This is the level of ‘defensive’ thinking in Lebanon, and about Lebanon, among a group that embraced cowardice and made it their path,” he added.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem delivered a speech as the cabinet session took place, reaffirming the Lebanese resistance’s refusal to surrender its weapons.

Hezbollah says it is prepared to discuss incorporating its weapons into the state for a defensive strategy in which they could be used to defend the country from Israel.

The group also stresses that this is purely an internal matter, and that no such discussions can begin until Israel ends its attacks and withdraws from the five points it occupied in south Lebanon since last year’s ceasefire.

The Lebanese government has drafted a response to a recent US roadmap demanding, among other things, Hezbollah’s disarmament. The response prioritizes the need for Israel to withdraw its forces and end its near-daily attacks on Lebanon as a first step.

Washington and Tel Aviv have reportedly rejected Beirut’s terms, raising concerns over a potential military escalation.

Meanwhile, Israel has threatened to continue attacking Lebanon until the resistance is disarmed.

An 11-year-old boy was killed by an Israeli drone strike on Wednesday morning in the southern Lebanese town of Tulin.

August 6, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

The AMIA case: The untold story

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 27, 2025

On the morning of July 18, 1994, a bomb exploded at the headquarters of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) in downtown Buenos Aires, leveling the building and killing 85 people, with over 300 injured.

The attack occurred two years after the bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina, which left 22 dead and 242 wounded. Both attacks took place during the presidency of Carlos Menem, a government that was pivotal for Argentina as it marked a transition to neoliberalism, featuring mass privatizations and a partial dollarization of the economy.

But on the geopolitical front, the Menem administration is more remembered for the apparent “secret war” that unfolded within the country, involving intelligence agencies and subversive groups from various nations.

The most widely accepted version of the AMIA case goes as follows: To retaliate against the cancellation of a nuclear technology transfer agreement between Argentina and Iran, the Iranian government (then under President Akbar Rafsanjani) orchestrated an act of revenge, with operatives from the Lebanese Hezbollah carrying it out.

This narrative, elevated to “official truth,” was supported by intelligence reports from the U.S. and Israel. It led to Argentina designating Hezbollah as a terrorist organization and the rupture of previously friendly relations between Argentina and Iran.

But what if this popular version is wrong?

Recently, a former aide to Judge Juan José Galeano—who oversaw the investigation and trial from 1994 to 2005—revealed details that cast doubt on the established narrative. According to Claudio Lifschitz, Galeano’s former assistant and a former Argentine security official, no concrete evidence linking the Iranian government to the attack was ever found. On the contrary, Lifschitz claims that the evidence increasingly pointed toward elements within Argentina’s intelligence service, SIDE.

Lifschitz first entered the public eye in this case when he released a video recording of a meeting between Galeano and Carlos Telleldín, in which the judge allegedly offered money to the supposed supplier of the van used in the attack—in exchange for confessing that he had sold it to Mohsen Rabbani, the cultural attaché at the Iranian Embassy in Buenos Aires. According to Lifschitz, one of the key pieces of evidence that could exonerate Iran is the fact that SIDE had illegally wiretapped—without a court order—the Iranian Embassy and the Iranian Cultural Center in Buenos Aires, amassing thousands of hours of recordings without a single indication that any Iranians frequenting these places had prior knowledge of the attack.

The real mastermind, Lifschitz alleges, was Jaime Stiuso, deputy chief of SIDE’s counterintelligence division (Section 85) and the officer in charge of intelligence investigations for the AMIA case. According to Lifschitz, Telleldín had actually sold the van used in the attack to a SIDE agent. Furthermore, Stiuso—who had close ties to Mossad and the CIA—was allegedly responsible for constructing the accusation made by prosecutor Alberto Nisman that then-President Cristina Kirchner had sought to cover up Iranian involvement in the case.

The former Argentine intelligence agent claims he heard directly from Stiuso that Mossad was the real force behind the attacks—though it remains difficult to verify whether this conversation actually took place.

The case remains relevant today because it is being leveraged by Javier Milei’s government to justify closer ties with Israel, to the point where the Argentine president has labeled Iran as an “enemy state of Argentina.”

July 27, 2025 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism | , , , , | 1 Comment

US envoy says Hezbollah weapons ‘an internal matter’ during Beirut visit

The Cradle | July 21, 2025

US envoy Tom Barrack said while visiting Lebanon on 21 July that the issue of disarming Hezbollah is an “internal matter,” after months of pressure by Washington on the Lebanese state to secure a surrender of the resistance’s weapons.

“Disarming Hezbollah is an internal matter,” he said, adding that “ideas and assistance” are being offered to the Lebanese state.

“We are not forcing anyone to do anything … we are trying to help,” he added.

He stressed that Hezbollah “is a terrorist organization” in the eyes of the US, and that Washington does not engage in dialogue with it. “We have no skin in the game,” Barrack said.

He claimed Lebanon faces no “consequences” or “threat” if Hezbollah does not disarm, but that it will be “disappointing.”

When asked by a reporter about guarantees that Israel will withdraw its forces from Lebanon and end its attacks on the country, Barrack said, “We cannot compel Israel to do anything, can we?”

Barrack is in Lebanon to discuss with officials Beirut’s response to a US proposal for disarming Hezbollah.

Sources cited by Reuters in early July said that Barrack warned that Hezbollah must be disarmed by November or the end of this year at the latest – in exchange for a withdrawal of Israeli troops from the five points they occupied in south Lebanon after the ceasefire, in violation of the deal. Earlier this month, the US envoy warned that Lebanon risked being occupied by Syria’s extremist-dominated military if Beirut did not move quickly to disarm Hezbollah.

Barrack said during his last trip to Lebanon that he was “satisfied” with Lebanon’s response to the US roadmap, which is expected to be finalized and handed over soon.

Beirut has reportedly demanded that no timeframe for disarmament be set until Israel withdraws and ends attacks.

The resistance group has repeatedly rejected surrendering its weapons. As the government vows to achieve a monopoly over all weapons across Lebanon, Hezbollah says it is ready for internal discussions on the formation of a Lebanese defensive strategy, through which the group’s arms would be incorporated into the state for use in deterring Israel.

The Lebanese resistance group has refused any discussion on the matter until Israeli troops withdraw from Lebanon and end their attacks.

Israeli attacks on Lebanon have continued unabated. Tel Aviv has violated the ceasefire over 3,000 times. More than 200 people have been killed since the deal was signed in November 2024.

Twelve people were killed in an Israeli airstrike in the eastern Bekaa region of Lebanon last week.

Israel has threatened to continue escalating against Lebanon if Hezbollah is not disarmed.

Hezbollah MP Hussein Jachi said on Monday that Hezbollah “will not abandon its weapons for empty US promises.”

“We will not abandon our faith or our strength. We are ready for confrontation. There will be no surrender or submission to Israel, and Israel will not receive our weapons,” Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said on Friday.

“We know that confrontation is very costly, but surrender leaves us with nothing,” he added, noting that if the “threat is removed, we are ready to discuss the defense strategy and the national security strategy.”

July 21, 2025 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US envoy warns Lebanon: ‘Disarm Hezbollah or risk Syrian occupation’

The Cradle | July 12, 2025

Lebanon risks being invaded and occupied by Syria and Israel unless Beirut acts to disarm Hezbollah, US special envoy Thomas Barrack warned on 12 July.

Speaking to The National, Barrack, who is the US special envoy for Syria and ambassador to Turkiye, stressed Lebanon faces an existential threat” from the two US allies on its borders, while urging Beirut to act quickly to disarm Hezbollah.

“You have Israel on one side, you have Iran on the other, and now you have Syria manifesting itself so quickly that if Lebanon doesn’t move, it’s going to be Bilad Al Sham again,” he said, using the historical name for greater Syria, which included Lebanon and Palestine.

“Syrians say Lebanon is our beach resort. So we need to move. And I know how frustrated the Lebanese people are. It frustrates me,” he added.

In December, the former Al-Qaeda offshoot Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) conquered Damascus, bringing Syria under US, Israeli, and Turkish influence.

Syria’s new government, led by former ISIS commander Ahmad al-Sharaa, has reportedly demanded it be given the Sunni-majority city of Tripoli in northern Lebanon while relinquishing the Golan Heights as part of a peace deal with Israel.

Last month, Barrack presented Lebanese officials with a proposal that calls for reconstruction aid and an end to Israel’s attacks if Hezbollah gives up its weapons.

The war between Israel and Hezbollah ended in November with a US-brokered ceasefire. But Israel continues to carry out air strikes and assassinations throughout Lebanon. Israeli ground forces also occupy five points in the south of the country.

In response to the proposal, Lebanese authorities submitted a seven-page document calling for a full Israeli withdrawal from occupied Lebanese territory, including the Shebaa Farms, and pledging to dismantle Hezbollah’s arms in south Lebanon, but not nationwide as Israel is demanding.

When The National asked Barrack why Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has not publicly committed to a disarmament timetable, Barrack said: “He doesn’t want to start a civil war.”

“We don’t have the soldiers on the ground for the [Lebanese Armed Forces, LAF] to be able to do that yet because they don’t have the money. They’re using equipment that’s 60 years old,” he said.

“Hezbollah is looking at it saying, ‘We can’t rely on the LAF. We have to rely on ourselves because Israel is bombing us every day, and they’re still occupying our land,’” Barrack added.

On 6 July, Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem said the Lebanese resistance movement will not disarm or back down from confronting Israel until it ends its air strikes and withdraws from southern Lebanon.

“We cannot be asked to soften our stance or lay down arms while [Israeli] aggression continues,” Qassem told thousands of supporters gathered in Beirut’s southern suburbs on Sunday.

He was speaking during religious gatherings for Ashura, which commemorates the martyrdom of the Prophet Muhammad’s grandson, Imam Hussein, in 680 AD in Karbala, Iraq.

Lebanese President Aoun stated on Friday that Lebanon has no intention of normalizing relations with Israel.

US President Donald Trump is pressuring both Syria and Lebanon to sign the Abraham Accords, which saw the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco normalize relations with Israel in previous years.

July 12, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tom Barrack’s project to destabilize Lebanon

The Cradle | July 7, 2025

“A century ago, the west imposed maps, mandates, penciled borders, and foreign rule. Sykes-Picot divided Syria and the broader region for imperial gain-not peace. That mistake cost generations. We will not make it again.”

–Tom Barrack, US ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy to Syria

When US Envoy to Turkiye and Syria Tom Barrack made this declaration last month in Ankara, it suggested Washington was repudiating the colonial-era borders imposed on the Levant by Britain and France. But Barrack’s actual meaning was far more insidious: The Sykes-Picot agreement may be dead, but now the US intends to redraw the region’s frontiers to suit one purpose only – Israeli expansionism.

US envoy’s agenda: Redrawing the region by dismantling resistance

Lebanon’s fate remains tightly interwoven with that of Syria and occupied Palestine. Any imposed resolution to the so-called Israeli-Palestinian conflict will inevitably reverberate through both Damascus and Beirut, forcing their governments to make existential choices. Chief among these is the surrender of arms and capabilities, a demand embedded in the US-led effort to transform the region’s balance of power.

Enter Barrack, the Lebanese-American billionaire and close confidant of US President Donald Trump, now repurposed as a roving envoy to Lebanon and Syria. He has since positioned himself as a chief advocate of pulling both Syria and Lebanon into the Abraham Accords, a euphemism for normalizing ties with the occupation state.

Barrack met with top officials in Beirut today, where he was expected to peddle this political reconfiguration under the guise of regional peace.

Maximum pressure and the threat of force

Lebanon is at the sharp end of a US-Israeli campaign to disarm Hezbollah at any cost and within months. The escalation is not a reaction to local dynamics, but rather a consequence of Washington’s regional failures: from the quagmire in Ukraine to its inability to deter Iran or check Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.

With nothing substantive to offer, the US is leaning on coercion to twist arms at the top. Israeli military threats serve as a blunt instrument to corner Lebanese officials into signing off on the resistance’s disarmament – a fantasy the US is now aggressively chasing.

Trump, seeking a legacy boost, is betting on a high-stakes foreign policy gambit: force Lebanon – the last Levantine Arab state still tethered to the Axis of Resistance – into surrender, and break its last defensive stronghold against Israeli expansion.

A new kind of envoy, a new kind of threat

Barrack’s mission departs from the playbook of previous US envoys who, for all their meddling, took Lebanon’s fragility seriously. Not so today. Barrack, who also serves as US ambassador to Turkiye and envoy to Syria, represents a new breed of imperial proxy, unconcerned with sectarian fault lines or civil strife.

Washington now believes Hezbollah is vulnerable. The plan is to crush it politically, and if needed, militarily, even if that means weaponizing the Lebanese army against its own citizens. The Trump administration has made clear it will trade Lebanese stability for US-Israeli hegemony.

According to a Lebanese official cited by Anadolu Agency, Barrack handed Beirut a five-page proposal in June that centered on three main objectives. The first is the monopolization of all weapons under the Lebanese state’s control. The second involves enacting fiscal and economic reforms, including tighter border controls, anti-smuggling efforts, and boosted customs revenues. The third demands a reconfiguration of ties with Syria by demarcating borders and expanding trade.

No timeline is spelled out in the document, but US pressure suggests an expectation for full implementation by year’s end. Lebanon, the official claims, is drafting a unified response based on the ministerial statement and President Joseph Aoun’s inaugural address.

But Beirut has its own demands, including an end to Israeli violations, a full withdrawal from occupied territories, and the launch of reconstruction efforts in the south.

For now, Hezbollah’s official position remains undisclosed. Its response is expected to surface in the coming days, as Barrack returns to Beirut.

After meeting with President Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri in Beirut today, Barrack announced that he is “satisfied” with the Lebanese authorities’ response to Washington’s request regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah. At the same time, he warned that Lebanon “will be left behind” if it does not move in line with the ongoing regional changes. Barrack also stated that “Hezbollah is a political party, and it also has an armed wing. Hezbollah needs to see that there is a future for them, and that this path is not meant to be only against them, and that there is an intersection between peace and prosperity for them as well.”

Empty promises, no Israeli restraint

During his last visit, Barrack met Lebanon’s three top officials to pitch a phased disarmament plan, divided by time and geography. He hinted at possible US pressure on Tel Aviv to vacate recently occupied points. But when pressed, he admitted there were no guarantees that Israel would halt its aggression.

This is no peace deal. It is an ultimatum.

Barrack’s push marks the culmination of a decades-long campaign to dismantle the region’s anti-imperialist front. With Egypt and Jordan long co-opted, Syria’s Baathist era gutted, and Iraq’s factions fragmented, apart from Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned army, Hezbollah remains the last major armed deterrent to Israeli expansion.

Washington and Tel Aviv understand this. Disarming Hezbollah clears the path for diplomatic normalization not only with Beirut, but also with Syria’s so-called interim government under de facto President Ahmad al-Sharaa, a former ISIS chief who went by the nom de guerre Abu Mohammad al-Julani, now edging closer to normalization with Tel Aviv.

Capitulation without compensation

The US demands everything and offers nothing. There are no guarantees of Israeli withdrawal. No prisoner releases. No end to airstrikes or assassinations. Not even arms for the Lebanese army or funds for reconstruction.

Instead, Washington continues to throttle the army by blocking weapons transfers and targeting seized stockpiles, cementing its subservience.

Barrack’s so-called solution is a trap. It further strips Lebanon of sovereignty, invites more Israeli strikes across the south, the Bekaa, and even Beirut, and paves the way for sectarian fragmentation under the guise of national reform.

With some domestic factions parroting US-Israeli talking points, the threat is no longer just foreign. Western-backed, right-wing Lebanese elements are gaining narrative traction, openly adopting Tel Aviv’s discourse on resistance weapons. These forces could soon coordinate directly with the occupation state, becoming internal agents of destabilization.

Meanwhile, the proposal ignores the Palestinian refugee question, omits border security mechanisms, and offers no path to deter Israeli incursions. In effect, it sets the stage for a sectarian, security-driven partition of Lebanon.

Divide and conquer: Disarming in stages

Washington’s strategy is clear. It aims to isolate and disarm resistance factions one by one. Last month, the target was Palestinian groups. Now, Hezbollah. The aim is to prevent a unified front by cutting off cross-sectarian solidarity and picking off targets individually.

If these pressures are not absorbed and neutralized, the risks are existential. A major Israeli assault on Lebanon or a manufactured civil conflict is likely. At the same time, extremist groups are resurging in Syria under Sharaa’s watch, a man eager to appease Washington and Tel Aviv at all costs.

Hezbollah and its supporters face a stark choice. They must either surrender to foreign diktats or entrench their defenses and refuse to even entertain a debate on arms as long as threats persist.

This may be the gravest threat to Lebanon’s post-war existence. With the US shedding all pretense of neutrality and openly advocating for a new regional map, the country faces a binary future: resist, or be dismembered.

Lebanon’s salvation hinges on one truth. Only a united front behind the resistance can preserve its sovereignty and shield it from the vultures circling overhead.

July 7, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hezbollah: Israel poses strategic threat to region and beyond

Press TV – July 3, 2025

Sheikh Naim Qassem, the leader of Hezbollah, declared Israel not only an occupier of Palestine but a strategic threat to Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, the broader region, and global stability.

In a televised address on Wednesday, Qassem emphasized that Israel’s ideology, actions, and ambitions endanger Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, destabilizing both regional and global peace.

He noted that the regime’s ideology, behavior, and vision endanger both regional stability and global peace.

Qassem said that since the ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel took effect, the regime has not stopped its aggression and has violated the agreement more than 3700 times.

He stressed that the regime must adhere to the terms it agreed upon with Lebanon and stop its acts of aggression.

The Hezbollah leader said the movement will not be swayed by threats, nor will it accept surrendering its weapons to Israel.

Qassem firmly rejected calls for Hezbollah to disarm, asserting that Lebanon’s defense and sovereignty are internal matters, immune to external pressures.

“We will not submit to humiliation, abandon our land, or compromise under threats,” he stated, stressing that discussions about Hezbollah’s weapons are a domestic issue, with no role for Israel in dictating terms.

Qassem said Hezbollah’s resistance is a defense against a strategic threat impacting multiple nations, including Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.

Describing Israel as an existential danger, Qassem noted, “Israel’s threat is not limited to Muslims; it endangers Christians and Jews as well.”

He criticized the regime’s ideology and actions as a risk to global peace and called on those who avoid confronting Israel to resist on humanitarian grounds.

“Coexisting with an expanding, invasive danger is impossible,” he warned, emphasizing Hezbollah’s resistance as rooted in human, Islamic, and national values for future generations.

Lebanese state must address ongoing violations

In late June, Qassem stated that Israel’s continued aggression, including attacks on Nabatieh, the targeting of civilians in southern Lebanon, and strikes on the money exchange sector, is now the Lebanese state’s responsibility to address.

“The state must apply pressure and fulfill its duties,” he urged, rejecting claims that Hezbollah provides pretexts for Israeli attacks.

He cited Israel’s occupation of 600 km² of Syrian territory, destruction of capabilities, and attacks on Iran as evidence of unprovoked aggression.

“You must understand this cannot continue,” Qassem told the public. “Do you imagine we will remain silent forever? All of this has limits.”

July 3, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s war on Iran is not about nuclear weapons

It is, and has always been, about regime change and breaking the Axis of Resistance

By Robert Inlakesh | RT | June 19, 2025

The claim that has been adopted by the United States, Israel and its European partners, that the attack on Iran was a “pre-emptive” attempt to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, is demonstrably false. It holds about as much weight as the allegations against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in 2003 and this war of aggression is just as illegal.

For the best part of four decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been claiming that Iran is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Yet, every single attempt to strike a deal which would bring more monitoring and restrictions to Iran’s nuclear program has been systematically dismantled by Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in Western capitals.

In order to properly assess Israel’s attack on Iran, we have to establish the facts in this case. The Israeli leadership claim to have launched a pre-emptive strike, but have presented no evidence to support their allegations that Iran was on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Simply stating this does not serve as proof, it is a claim, similar to how the US told the world Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Back in March, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard testified before a Senate Intelligence Committee that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”

On top of this, Iran was actively participating in indirect negotiations with the US to reach a new version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. Donald Trump announced Washington would unilaterally withdraw from the agreement in 2018, instead pursuing a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign at the behest of Israel.

Despite the claims of Netanyahu and Trump that Iran was violating the Nuclear Deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report which stated Iran was in full compliance with the deal at the time.

If you trace back every conversation with neo-conservatives, Israeli war hawks and Washington-based think tanks, their opposition to the Obama-era Nuclear Deal always ends up spiraling into the issues of Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support for regional non-State actors.

Israeli officials frequently make claims about Iran producing a nuclear weapon in “years”, “months” or even “weeks,” this has become almost second nature. Yet their main issue has always been with Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who strive for the creation of a Palestinian State.

Proof of all this is simple. Israel, by itself, cannot destroy Iran’s vast nuclear program. It is not clear the US can destroy it either, even if it enters the war. An example of the US’ ineffectiveness at penetrating Iranian-style bunkers, built into mountainous ranges, as many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are, was demonstrated through the American failure to destroy missile storage bases in Yemen with its bunker-buster munitions, which were dropped from B-2 bombers.

Almost immediately after launching his war on Iran, Netanyahu sent out a message in English to the Iranian people, urging them to overthrow their government in an attempt to trigger civil unrest. The Israeli prime minister has since all but announced that regime change is his true intention, claiming that the operation “may lead” to regime change.

Israel’s own intelligence community and military elites have also expressed their view that their air force alone is not capable of destroying the Iranian nuclear program. So why then launch this war, if it is not possible to achieve the supposed reason it was “pre-emptively” launched?

There are two possible explanations:

The first is that the Israeli prime minister has launched this assault on Iran as a final showdown in his “seven front war,” with which he hopes to conclude the regional conflict through a deadly exchange that will ultimately inflict damage on both sides.

In this scenario, the desired outcome would be to conclude the war with the claim that Netanyahu has succeeded at destroying or has significantly degraded Iran’s nuclear program. He would also throw in claims, like we already see him making, that huge numbers of Iranian missiles and drones were eliminated. This would also make the opening Israeli strike, which killed senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and nuclear scientists, make sense. It would all be the perfect blend of propaganda to sell a victory narrative.

On the other hand, the assumption would be that Tehran would also claim victory. Then both sides are able to show the results to their people and tensions cool down for a while. If you are to read what the Washington-based think-tanks are saying about this, most notably The Heritage Foundation, they speak about the ability to contain the war.

The second explanation, which could be an added bonus that the Israelis and US are hoping could come as a result of their efforts, is that this is a full-scale regime change war that is designed to rope in the US.

Israel’s military prestige was greatly damaged in the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, and since that time there has been no victory achieved over any enemy. Hamas is still operating in Gaza and is said to have just as many fighters as when the war began, Hezbollah was dealt significant blows but is still very much alive, while Yemen’s Ansarallah has only increased its strength. This is an all round stunning defeat of the Israeli military and an embarrassment to the US.

As is well known, Iran is the regional power that backs all of what is called the Axis of Resistance. Without it, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would be significantly degraded. Evidently, armed resistance to Israeli occupation will never end as long as occupied people exist and live under oppressive rule, but destroying Iran would be devastating for the regional alliance against Israel.

The big question however, is whether regime change is even possible. There is a serious question mark here and it seems much more likely that this will end up on a slippery slope to nuclear war instead.

What makes the Israeli-US claim that this war is somehow pre-emptive, for which there is no proof at all, all the more ridiculous of a notion, is that if anything, Iran may now actually rush to acquire a nuclear weapon for defensive purposes. If they can’t even trust the Israelis not to bomb them with US backing, while negotiations were supposed to be happening, then how can a deal ever be negotiated?

Even in the event that the US joins and deals a major blow to the Iranian nuclear program, it doesn’t mean that Iran will simply abandon the program altogether. Instead, Tehran could simply end up rebuilding and acquiring the bomb years later. Another outcome of this war could end up being Israeli regime change, which also appears as if it could now be on the table.

Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »