Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

What If Iran Says No?

Is an end to fighting currently possible?

Ashes of Pompeii | March 10, 2026

Rumors persist that the Trump administration is actively seeking an off-ramp to the escalating conflict with Iran. The prevailing assumption within certain circles of the White House is that Tehran, having sustained serious damage from recent military strikes, would welcome a cessation of hostilities. This calculation, however, rests on a dangerous misreading of Iranian resolve, historical grievance, and strategic necessity. What if Iran says no?

The first and most fundamental obstacle is trust. Can Iran reasonably trust any promise made by Donald Trump? The historical record suggests otherwise. The unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, despite verified Iranian compliance, established a precedent of bad faith. Yet, the breach of trust goes deeper than past policy. The February 28 surprise attack was not merely a military strike; it was launched in the midst of ongoing peace talks. To strike while negotiating is the absolute most serious breach of diplomatic trust possible. It signals that words are meaningless and that force is the only language recognized by Washington. For Iranian leadership, any verbal assurance offered today carries the weight of tomorrow’s tweet. Diplomacy requires a foundation of credibility; that foundation has been systematically dismantled.

Second, the ideological makeup of the opposing governments creates a structural barrier to compromise. The current Israeli government is composed of extremist Zionists whose platform often rejects coexistence in favor of maximalist territorial and security demands. Simultaneously, Christian Zionists hold an important role in the Trump administration, viewing conflict in the Middle East through a theological lens that favors escalation over diplomacy. This alignment makes compromise with Iran inherently harder. For these factions, concession is not strategy; it is heresy. What demands could Iran make that would credibly constrain Israeli action? Binding security guarantees from the United States would be required, yet Washington’s ability to restrain its ally in moments of crisis is historically limited. Conversely, any Iranian demand for verifiable, long-term restrictions on Israeli military operations would likely be viewed in Jerusalem as an unacceptable infringement on sovereignty – a potential casus belli in itself.

Third, any serious Iranian negotiation would inevitably demand the removal of American military bases from the Persian Gulf. From Tehran’s perspective, these installations are not defensive outposts but forward operating bases for coercion and regime-change planning. Their presence is an existential threat. Yet for any American president, particularly one branding himself as a champion of strength, agreeing to withdraw forces from Bahrain, Qatar, or Kuwait would be politically untenable. It would be framed domestically not as diplomacy, but as retreat. Trump, who measures success in visible, declarative terms, could not sell a deal that requires abandoning strategic assets as a victory.

Fourth, Iran would demand the immediate and comprehensive lifting of sanctions. The economic toll of the pressure campaign has been severe, but capitulation without full relief would be seen as surrender. However, an immediate, total sanctions lift is a non-starter for the administration. It would undermine the central lever of U.S. pressure and invite fierce criticism from allies and domestic opponents alike.

And it is not worth even discussing the reaction to likely Iranian demands for reparations from America or Israel.

Underpinning all these structural obstacles is a profound cultural and emotional reality. Iran has raised the red flag of revenge. For Shiites, this is not merely political rhetoric; it is a religious imperative rooted in the tragedy of Karbala. Martyrdom and the justice due to martyrs cannot be so easily forgotten or forgone for political expediency. The rage in Iran for the February 28 attack is enormous, compounded by the perfidy of being struck during negotiations. A return to the status quo ante is not possible. The leadership that agrees to such terms risks being seen as weak, or worse, complicit in the betrayal of the faithful. And let us not forget, it is the son of the murdered Supreme Leader who has now been chosen as the new spirutual leader of Iran. This selection, in itself, can be seen as a slap in the face for Trump, who was demanding a say in the selection of the new leader.

The Trump administration appears to operate under the assumption that it holds total control over the escalation and de-escalation process. This is a critical miscalculation. Iran is not a passive recipient of U.S. policy but a strategic actor with its own red lines, domestic imperatives, and regional alliances. Tehran has demonstrated both the capacity and the will to act, and to retaliate when necessary. Diplomacy is a dialogue, not a dictate.

The central question, therefore, is not whether the United States can offer an off-ramp, but whether Iran can accept it. If the answer is no – and the points above suggest compelling reasons why it might be – then the conflict enters a more dangerous, protracted phase. Miscalculation risks increase. The assumption that pain alone will produce compliance ignores the role of pride, sovereignty, faith, and survival in strategic decision-making. Before celebrating a potential exit, policymakers must confront an uncomfortable truth: Iran has a say. And if Tehran chooses to say no, the path forward grows darker, longer, and far less certain. Added to this, Trump’s emotional, some would say vindictive, character would suggest that an Iranian refusal would lead him to escalate further.

Therefore this potential off-ramp may exist on a map in Washington, but in Tehran, the road ahead may still lead only forward, into not a storm, but a full blown global hurricane.

March 10, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on What If Iran Says No?

Trump Threatens to ‘Hit’ Iran ‘Twenty Times Harder’ Over Strait of Hormuz Oil Flows

Sputnik – 10.03.2026

US President Donald Trump warned Iran against disrupting oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, saying Washington would respond with far stronger military action.

“If Iran does anything that stops the flow of Oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far,” President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He added that the US could target sites that would make it “virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back, as a Nation, again,” while saying he hopes such a scenario “does not happen.”

Trump described the policy as “a gift from the United States of America to China, and all of those Nations that heavily use the Hormuz Strait.”

March 10, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Threatens to ‘Hit’ Iran ‘Twenty Times Harder’ Over Strait of Hormuz Oil Flows

Spare the hypocrisy: Baghaei slams Ursula’s support for US

Al Mayadeen | March 10, 2026

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei sharply criticized Ursula von der Leyen in a post on X, accusing her of hypocrisy and of supporting US and Israeli “crimes of aggression” against Iran.

In his post, Baghaei urged von der Leyen to “spare the hypocrisy,” accusing her of repeatedly taking stances that align with occupation, genocide, and atrocities, further accusing her of “laundering” US and Israeli war crimes against Iranians.

Baghaei also questioned the European Commission president’s silence over recent civilian casualties in Iran, stating, “Where was your voice when more than 165 innocent IRANIAN little angels were massacred in the city of Minab?”

The spokesperson highlighted the hypocrisy in von der Leyen’s speech, asking, “Why don’t you say anything when hospitals, historical sites, oil facilities, diplomatic police headquarter, firefighting stations and residential neighborhoods are wickedly targeted?”

“Silence in the face of lawlessness and atrocity is nothing less than complicity,” Baghaei wrote, urging von der Leyen to review the public responses to her own post to see what people “really think” about what he called the “whitewashing of criminals.”

The exchange comes as the US-Israeli war on Iran continues to escalate, with strikes on Iran killing hundreds of civilians since February 28.

40 people killed in one strike

The US-Israeli aggression against Iran continued on March 9, targeting the capital Tehran, as well as several cities and provinces across the country.

Iranian media reported that strikes in Tehran hit residential buildings in the Meydan-e Resalat area, with preliminary reports indicating the martyrdom of 40 people, including several children.

According to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in Tehran, a series of US and Israeli strikes also targeted the vicinity of Mehrabad International Airport, located west of the capital.

Air defense systems were repeatedly activated over the city to intercept drones and other hostile aerial targets, the correspondent said.

The governor of Tehran confirmed that some attacks struck residential areas and hospitals, stressing that despite the strikes, the capital remains stable.

190 minors, 200 women killed by US, ‘Israel’

Meanwhile, the head of the Iranian Emergency Organization revealed that 190 of those martyred since the start of the war were under the age of 18, while 700 wounded were also minors, including 60 children under the age of five.

He added that 200 females have been martyred, including an eight-month-old infant, while 1,402 women have been injured.

The official also reported damage to 29 hospitals, 41 health units, and 18 emergency centers.

March 10, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Spare the hypocrisy: Baghaei slams Ursula’s support for US

Iran War Supporters Invent a New and Absurd Justification: It Is All About China

By Cole Crystal – SYSTEM UPDATE – March 9, 2026

Before Operation Epic Fury began, the Trump administration spent very little energy trying to justify the looming war with Iran. The few defenses they did offer were banal platitudes, just echoes of the case for the Iraq War from more than twenty years ago: that Iran was weeks away from obtaining a nuclear device, that their ballistic missile program posed a significant threat to American assets and allies in the region, and that the Iranian people deserved liberation via regime change.

But not long after the bombing began, a new (admittedly more creative) justification emerged online and in the pro-Israel media that war supporters assume will be more persuasive to those doubting the wisdom of yet another Middle East conflict. The war with Iran, we are now told by many, is not really about Iran at all. It is, instead, all about China.

“Some argue Israel dragged the U.S. into war,” a post from The Free Press reads, “But this conflict is bigger than Israel and Iran — it’s about China.” Another article from The Spectator, a British conservative outlet, sang the same tune: “Trump’s ultimate target in this war is China.” Glenn Beck, on March 2, unveiled C.R.I.N.K., or “the new Axis Powers of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea,” as a way to “understand why Trump attacked Iran.” Fox News’ Jesse Watters told his audience last week that “we are killing two birds with one stone: we stop the number-one sponsor of terror, and we checkmate the Chinese.”

A viral graphic circulated by the Free Press about the motivations for the American-Israeli war against Iran.

At the very least, if China were really the motive, one would have expected the Trump administration to offer this theory — “this is the chance to counter America’s greatest geopolitical rival” — as a major justification to the American people. One would think they would be particularly motivated to do so, given the consensus of polling data showing that public support for this war is far weaker than for any American war in decades.

But Trump officials never mentioned China as a core motive. In fact, even now, the administration and its backers have hardly mentioned China. This is a theory invented out of whole cloth by Iran-war supporters and/or Trump supporters, grasping for some cogent reason why this new war is in Americans’ interests.

Late last week, Senator Lindsey Graham claimed that this conflict is “a religious war” waged by “radical Islamic terrorists.” On March 2, House Speaker Mike Johnson explained to a group of reporters that the United States “determined, because of the exquisite intelligence that [it] had, that if Israel fired on Iran,” then “[Iran] would have immediately retaliated against U.S. personnel and assets.” Therefore, the House Speaker insisted, because the U.S. would be attacked either way, it had to hit Iran with Israel. President Trump announced on Friday that the U.S. intends to select “GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s)” for the Iranian people, in order to make their country “economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”

These politicians, and many more inside and around the administration, are not talking about China. It has not been cited as a significant motivator for starting this war. Yet if China is really the reason, did the most prominent war supporters simply forget why they went to war, or did they decide it was best to present a false, pretextual case to the American people about why this war was necessary?

Admittedly, this new justification is, at least on the surface, cogent, even if pretextual. China is the most powerful geopolitical competitor to the U.S. No other country buys more sanctioned crude oil from the Iranians, and only Russia has worked more closely with Iran to beef up its military. In 2021, Iran signed a 25-year partnership with China that would reportedly bring $400 billion to Iran’s energy industry. Various weapons deals between the two countries have been reported in recent years, including one to purchase Chinese supersonic missiles that can sink American ships.

Still, none of these events really pertain to, let alone prove, this new claim — that this war with Iran is somehow really about China. At most, they suggest that China may be negatively affected, losing access to cheap oil and its investments. If simply being negatively impacted by this war is the standard for it being “about” another country, then this war is also about Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the rest of the Middle East.

Indeed, many countries could be harmed by the Trump-Netanyahu war in Iran. Japan’s economy could face severe consequences if oil is trapped in the Strait of Hormuz. The South Korean economy last week erased nearly half a trillion dollars, marking the largest drop in their stock market’s 46-year history. Is the war about both of these East Asian countries as well?

Further complicating this point is that China has not exclusively invested in or done business with Iran. Indeed, the People’s Republic has, at least publicly, invested more in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates. (That aforementioned $400 billion agreement between Beijing and Tehran still has not materialized.)

Nor is China the largest buyer only of Iran’s oil. It is also often the leading export destination for Iraqi, Kuwaiti, Omani, Saudi, and Qatari crude. Chinese money, in all its forms, is present across the Middle East, from port construction to the telecommunications industry. What’s more, the Chinese are filling gaps that have opened as a result of American reluctance or negligence.

American foreign policy in the Middle East, including wars, has far more often boosted Chinese interests than undermined them. When the United States in the mid-2010s refused to sell MQ-9 Reaper drones to the Saudis and Emiratis, China filled the gap by selling its CH-4 Rainbow and GJ-1 Wing Loong II models. After the United States invaded Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people, the Chinese were still the first to secure foreign contracts. (To this day, the Chinese are a dominant player in Iraq’s oil industry.) President Biden’s poor relations with the Saudis reportedly played a role in their consideration of settling contracts in Chinese yuan.

One would be forgiven for thinking that many of China’s relationships exist not because of an ideological competition with the U.S., but because capricious or draconian American policy often creates the conditions for Chinese success. This is no less true with Iran, as even the articles proffering this all-about-China theory acknowledge.

“Squeezed by decades of American sanctions and increasingly isolated,” the Israeli journalist Haviv Rettig Gur writes in The Free Press, “Iran turned to China as its economic lifeline.” This lifeline, moreover, “[is] the main reason the Islamic Republic has not gone bankrupt,” according to the conservative Hudson Institute, which is also pushing this about-China theory for the Iran war (see, for instance, its article titled, “The Iran Strike Is All About China”). In other words, the U.S. — not the Chinese — created the conditions for a competitor’s presence in the Middle East.

Theories like this one raise another problem. All of these arguments struggle to provide a comprehensive explanation of how China will be “devastated” by regime change in Iran, but they paint a fairly clear picture of how Iran became dependent on the People’s Republic. Of course, the U.S. gaining total control of the Middle East has implications for Chinese commerce and strategy, as these articles acknowledge. But no serious journalists or scholars have argued that China can currently project military power across the globe, with or without Iran.

Is that not why many of these ideologically aligned institutions warn about China’s nascent, but developing, blue-water navy? If one believes China will one day ‘imperialize’ like the U.S., Americans can wrest the Panama Canal from Chinese companies, attack China’s allies, and encircle the Chinese mainland — for now. Those kinds of actions could very well devastate China. (It would not be the first time Western powers have done something like it.) But Iran is hardly a necessary component of said devastation. If the U.S. really wants to wreck China, it does not need to pulverize Persia.

On top of all this, many of the videos and articles that have virally promoted this claim — that this war is about China, not Iran — seem to ignore the very foreign policy establishment that gave them this war. Mainstream American scholarship on China has been fairly clear: from a strategic perspective, the Chinese are perfectly happy to allow the United States to remain entangled in the Middle East because, by definition, it delays an American “pivot to Asia.” Bizarrely, some of these articles acknowledge this, making the Orwellian argument that the U.S. has to go to war with Iran in order to stop going to war in the Middle East.

And, of course, it would be difficult to ignore the lowest-hanging fruit. Far and away the most common thread that exists between those promoting this all-about-China theory is a devotion to Israel: the Free Press, the Hudson Institute, the Spectator, Fox News, etc. All of these institutions constitute the pro-Israel establishment in the U.S. and U.K. So, when Haviv Rettig Gur writes that Marco Rubio “struggled to explain” why the U.S. was at war with Iran, it is not because Rubio denied that Israel forced America’s hand. He, in fact, confirmed that Israel had compelled an American strike.

Apart from various reports that confirm Rubio’s initial account, such as in the New York Times and the Financial Times, Antony Blinken (his predecessor) recently described an identical story: that the Israelis tried to pressure former President Obama into war with Iran by claiming that if he failed to act, they would strike Iran alone. But, according to Rettig Gur, “It’s hard to take [Rubio’s] explanation at face value,” so the Secretary of State’s candor can be disregarded for another, entirely dreamed up claim. Rettig Gur continues, “If the trigger was simply an Israeli strike, America could have told the Israelis to sit tight. … Goodness knows the U.S. has the leverage to do it again.” That statement seems highly accurate. Unfortunately, some unclear entity — most likely China — prevented the United States from doing that.

Altogether, the claim that Trump went to war with Iran to fight China is more sensational than substantive. It entertains theories of 4D Chess when Yahtzee is a more apt comparison. The Trump administration is rolling the dice for Israel: it has already financed their genocide in Gaza, vaporized prayer circles in Yemen, destroyed Iranian nuclear facilities, granted Benjamin Netanyahu’s wildest wishes, and is now officially at war with Iran. For any hawks eager to embroil the United States in a head-to-head clash with the People’s Republic, the question is not if this latest war was about China — it is whether any of them will be.

Cole Crystal (@colecrystal) was producer and editor for SYSTEM UPDATE with Glenn Greenwald and now has the same title for this Substack. Before joining, he worked for media outlets in the United States. He graduated from Cornell University with a bachelor’s degree in government and online social movements.

March 10, 2026 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Sinophobia, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran War Supporters Invent a New and Absurd Justification: It Is All About China

Corporate Media Go All Out To Support The US-Israeli War on Iran

By Alan MacLeod | MintPress News | March 6, 2026

Corporate media of all stripes have rushed to support the U.S./Israeli attack on Iran, throwing objectivity and accuracy by the wayside in order to manufacture consent for regime change.

On February 28, the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack on Iran, bombing cities across the country, assassinating its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, and openly stating their goal was overthrowing the government.

Despite this, media have gone out of their way to present the actions as the U.S. protecting itself, describing them as “defensive strikes,” and to frame Iran as the aggressor. “Iran chooses chaos” ran the headline of the New York Times’ newsletter, portraying the Islamic Republic as the primary actor.

The Free Press used similarly Orwellian concepts. “War is Iranians’ best chance at peace,” presenting U.S./Israeli crimes as an act of mercy on its long-suffering population.

Meanwhile, under the new leadership of self-described “Zionist fanatic” Bari Weiss, CBS News has transformed itself into a mouthpiece for the Israeli Defense Forces, interviewing IDF Brigadier General Effie Defrin, and uncritically presenting Israel’s war as “aimed at preventing a wider global threat.”

Across the West, corporate media have employed the same tactics of using the passive voice and not naming the perpetrator when describing U.S./Israeli aggression. A perfect encapsulation of this was the BBC’s headline, “At least 153 dead after reported strike on school, Iran says,” that made it sound as if the children died in a lightning strike or a labor dispute, rather than that they were bombed by hostile foreign powers.

Israeli casualties were given more sympathetic coverage than their Iranian counterparts, while media regularly toned down the language used to describe Israeli actions to make them sound more reasonable, and did the opposite with Iran. The Washington Post, for example, wrote (emphasis added) “Israel urges evacuation of south Beirut suburbs; Iran threatens revenge on U.S. over warship.” Thus, Israel was treated as making a good faith attempt to reduce civilian casualties, while the Iranian response to their ship being attacked and sunk in international waters was presented as menacing.

Another common tactic of delegitimization media use is to describe the Iranian as a “regime” (e.g., Bloomberg, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, CNN, NBC News). The word “regime” immediately discredits a government, and cues the reader to oppose it. The phrase “Israeli regime” is virtually never used, unless in a quote from Iranian officials.

Earlier this week, large numbers of Israeli troops re-invaded southern Lebanon. Media attempted to find ways to present the operation as legitimate, including euphemistically using the phrase “cross over into Lebanon” to describe the invasion, or even blaming Hezbollah for the violence. CNN, for instance, wrote that, “Hezbollah is dragging Lebanon into the war on Iran,” and that “Hezbollah just restarted the fight that Israel was waiting to finish,” thereby flipping the realities of who was attacking whom.

There have also been a number of fawning profiles of Israeli leaders. “Benjamin Netanyahu’s long career was built on conflict avoidance—then, October 7 transformed and radicalized him,” wrote The Atlantic. In Britain, the coverage from some quarters was even more positive. “Netanyahu is the great war leader of our age” The Daily Telegraph stated, describing the prime minister as a “genius.”

The Daily Telegraph’s Monday front page headline read “Britain backs war on Iran,” with a picture of diaspora Iranians cheering on the bombing of their country. The reality, however, is far less jingoistic. A YouGov poll published the same day found that only 28% of U.K. citizens support U.S./Israeli actions, with 49% expressing their opposition to them. Nevertheless, BBC anchor Nick Robinson suggested, on air, that protests against the U.S./Israeli attacks should be banned across the U.K.

This sort of mentality should come as no surprise, given BBC leadership’s stated positions on Israel. The corporation’s Middle East editor, Raffi Berg, is a former CIA operative and Mossad collaborator who has a signed letter of recommendation from Netanyahu on his office wall.

Anonymous BBC employees speaking to Drop Site News claimed that Berg’s “entire job is to water down everything that’s too critical of Israel.” They went on to allege that he holds “wild” amounts of power at the British state broadcaster, that there exists a culture of “extreme fear” at the BBC about publishing anything critical of Israel, and that Berg himself plays a key role in turning its coverage into “systematic Israeli propaganda.” The BBC has disputed these claims.

If true, the sort of top-down pro-Israel bias at the BBC closely mirrors that of American outlets. A leaked 2023 New York Times memo revealed that company management explicitly instructed its reporters not to use words such as “genocide,” “slaughter,” and “ethnic cleansing” when discussing Israel’s actions. Times staff must refrain from using words like “refugee camp,” “occupied territory,” or even “Palestine” in their reporting, making it almost impossible to convey some of the most basic facts to their audience.

CNN employees face similar pressure. In the wake of the October 7 attacks, the company’s C.E.O. Mark Thompson sent out a memo to all staff instructing them to make sure that Hamas (and not Israel) is presented as responsible for the violence, that they must always use the moniker “Hamas-controlled” when discussing the Gaza Health Ministry and their civilian death figures, and barring them from any reporting of Hamas’ viewpoint, which its senior director of news standards and practices told staff was “not newsworthy” and amounted to “inflammatory rhetoric and propaganda.”

German media conglomerate Axel Springer, meanwhile – owner of outlets such as Politico and Business Insider – requires its employees to sign what amounts to a loyalty oath to support “the trans-Atlantic alliance and Israel.” The company fired a Lebanese employee who, through internal channels, questioned the requirement.

American newsrooms are also filled with former Israel lobbyists. A MintPress News investigation found hundreds of former employees of Israel lobbying groups such as AIPAC, StandWithUs and CAMERA working in top newsrooms across the country, writing and producing America’s news – including on Israel-Palestine. These outlets include MSNBC, The New York Times, CNN, and Fox News.

There are even ex-Israeli spies writing our news. Another MintPress report revealed a network of former agents of IDF intelligence outfit, Unit 8200, working in America’s newsrooms, including at CNN and Axios.

Therefore, with American newsrooms presided over and staffed in no small part by pro-Israel zealots, it is far from a surprise that their coverage closely mirrors the outlook and biases of Washington and Tel Aviv.

And now, with CNN, CBS News, and TikTok owned by CIA asset Larry Ellison, the IDF’s largest private funder and a close personal friend of Benjamin Netanyahu, we should only expect the propaganda to be dialed up to eleven.

March 10, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , | Comments Off on Corporate Media Go All Out To Support The US-Israeli War on Iran

Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war

By Trita Parsi | Responsible Statecraft | March 9, 2026

Trump’s “all over the place” press conference at his Miami resort on Monday appears to have had two key objectives: a) Calm the markets by signalling the conflict may soon be over because it has been so “successful,” and b) Prepare the ground for Trump ending the war through a unilateral declaration of victory.

Though ending a war that never should have been started in the first place — rather than fighting it endlessly in the pursuit of an illusory victory as the U.S. did in Afghanistan — is the right move, it won’t be as easy as Trump appears to think.

Tehran also has a vote — and there is little to suggest that it will agree that the war is over.

Tehran objects to what it would consider a premature ceasefire out of fear that it would only give the U.S. and Israel time to regroup, rearm, and then re-attack Iran. For the conflict to be ripe for a ceasefire, Tehran believes that enough cost must have been inflicted on the U.S., regional states, Israel, and on the global economy that all states conclude that starting the war was a mistake — and as a result, no state will seek to restart it.

Moreover, if the war ends now, Iran will be in a worse situation than it was before the start of the war. Much of its infrastructure has been destroyed, its missile capabilities have taken hits, its ability to export oil has been damaged, and most crucially, its prospects for sanctions relief have been obliterated. Indeed, who will and can help rebuild Iran under these circumstances?

This would leave Iran not only in a weakened position but also in a continuously weakening state. Which, in turn, would make another war of aggression by the U.S. and Israel more, not less, likely, since it is Iran’s perceived weakness that prompted Trump and Israel to see an opportunity for war.

As such, it appears likely that Iran will continue to target Israel, even if the U.S. declares victory and withdraws its military. Even GCC states may continue to be targeted. And Tehran will very likely try to keep the Straits of Hormuz shut. (At least for now, there are no signs that Tehran has lost its ability to do these things).

This will create a dilemma for Trump. It will be difficult for him to stay out while Iran and Israel continue to go at each other. But if he reenters the war, the hollowness of his declared victory will have been revealed. Markets will react negatively, and all the costs Trump is currently trying to avoid will likely intensify dramatically.

Iran, of course, does not want, nor can it afford, an endless war. But it will likely demand some significant steps in order to accept a ceasefire. This may include a commitment from Trump not to restart the war (though I don’t understand the value of such a commitment). But more importantly, it will likely require sanctions relief and release of its frozen funds abroad.

Trump will, of course, bark, but if the outcome is continued war, that will put a lot of pressure on him. Here, the role of some GCC states may prove crucial due to their willingness and ability to find an arrangement that could leave both Trump and Iran feeling that they “won.”

Whether Israel will allow that to happen, of course, is a different matter.

Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war

When Tel Aviv decides, Washington fights

By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | March 9, 2026

American taxpayers are still hemorrhaging from the made-for-Israel war in Iraq, a war audaciously offered as one that would “pay for itself.” Instead, it was paid in Iraqi and American blood, ruins and financed by American debt. The promised democracy was a broken state, regional chaos, and the afterbirth of terror and resistance that continues to metastasize across the Arab world. Marketed as a short, decisive campaign, Iraq became a two-decade-long disaster with no exit in sight. Trillions were burned on lies manufactured by Israel-first Zionists in Washington, while generations of Americans—many not even born when the invasion began—were conscripted into inheriting the debt, the interest, and the moral stain.

The real balance sheet of that war is etched into nearly 5,000 American tombstones and the endless corridors of veterans’ hospitals. Before that blood-soaked bill is even paid, the very same architect, using the same lies, has succeeded again in dragging the U. S. into another made-for-Israel war, this time against Iran. Iraq was not an aberration; it was a rehearsal. Yet, Iran doesn’t appear to be the final act on the Israeli menu. In recent weeks, former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett declared that Turkey is next. And it is the U.S., not Israel, that is expected to keep paying for wars, America neither needed nor chose.

The evidence of who set the clock of this war is unmistakable. The most revealing admission did not come from Tehran, Moscow, or Beijing, but from the U.S. State Department. In an unguarded moment, the U.S. Secretary of State admitted that the timing of this war was not an American choice. This became painfully clear when the State Department was caught unprepared to help evacuate tens of thousands of Americans from the war zone.

As U.S. ambassadors hurried to evacuate their staff and families, desperate citizens were told their government could not assist and were advised to arrange their own departures, after airports had already closed.

This is not a minor detail. It’s a government that is willing to sacrifice the well-being and security of its citizens by joining a war decided by someone else. It goes to the heart of sovereignty and democratic accountability. A nation that chooses to go to war prepares its people, its diplomacy, and its logistics. A nation that is dragged into war improvises and hopes for the best.

Iran, for its part, is not the caricature often presented by the American Secretary of War and Donald Trump. It is a country prepared for drawn-out conflict and strategic patience. During the nearly eight-year Iran-Iraq War, Tehran fought a grinding, no-win war against a better-armed adversary. Against the expectations of Western military analysts, Iran endured. In a grim irony, it even committed the greatest of all sins: purchasing weapons from Israel, falling into Tel Aviv’s cynical strategy to weaken both Baghdad and Tehran simultaneously. Israel was willing to arm its supposed arch-enemy as part of its broader calculus of exhaustion and division.

That history matters today. Iran has demonstrated, repeatedly, a willingness to absorb punishment, and extend conflicts over time. At the end of the day, and by all means necessary, Iran is unlikely to surrender. In a protracted war of attrition to bleed the world economy, Tehran could move to close the Strait of Hormuz, an oil blood line for world economies. Iran may be economically battered, and it has been for decades under severe sanctions, but that very weakness reduces its restraint. A country with little left to lose is more inclined to impose pain on others, including Western and neighboring welfare oil economies dependent on uninterrupted energy exports.

Meanwhile, regional instability in the Gulf and prolonged American entanglement create the perfect parasitic symbiosis for Israel: a state that flourishes in the shadows of regional chaos like a scavenger thriving on the scrap of a landfill.

President Trump has suggested escorting oil shipments in the Strait to keep the oil flowing. The macho bravado may play well on television or for the stock market, but history, old and recent, offers daunting realities. The same was attempted during the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s but failed. More recently, the U.S., the EU, and Israel combined failed to force a much smaller and poorer country—Yemen—to open the Red Sea. After months of bombardment, siege and naval pressure, Washington was forced into negotiations, and even then, Yemeni forces continued to block vessels linked to Israel until Gaza ceasefire.

The comparison is useful. The shorelines area under the Houthi control of the Red Sea (green map in the link) in the north of Yemen, is a much wider maritime passage. The Strait of Hormuz, by contrast, is so narrow in a clear day each shore is visible from the other. To borrow a simple image, in the Houthi area the width of the Red Sea is an Amazon River and where Hormuz is a stream. The narrowness of the Hormuz Strait makes control easier for Iran and exposes the vulnerability of U.S. naval ships. Before promising to escort commercial shipping, a responsible administration should ask a basic question: if a small, impoverished Yemen could not be subdued by the world’s most powerful militaries, how exactly will American warships be safer under the reach of fire in the narrower Strait?

There is another question Washington refuses to entertain: How will Americans feel when they realize they are risking lives, ships, and economic stability largely to advance Israel’s sole strategic objectives?

This is not an abstract question. It is a political and economic reckoning, purposefully delayed. Especially since Americans are still reeling from the cost of previous Israeli wars, and now, they are asked to take on a new national debt—$200 billion—to bankroll yet another war, especially made for Israel.

The made-for-Israel wars may have begun in Iraq but will not end with Iran. Israeli false flags are poised to provoke further escalations designed to entrap even states traditionally friendly to Tehran, such as Oman. For Israel, victory remains incomplete unless it drags Gulf Arab states into open confrontation with Iran, hardening divisions that may last generations. Iranian mistrust of the Gulf Arabs would likely endure even in the event of regime change. In this calculus, Israel “wins” not only on the battlefield, but by entrenching lasting hostility between Iran and the Arab world, ensuring a permanently fragmented region.

More than two decades ago, the illegal war against Iraq was cooked in the dens of the Pentagon by Israel-first ideologues and sold to the American public through the managed media, ruse and weapons of mass deception. The current war is, in some ways, even more brazen. It was exclusively designed in the war ministry offices of Tel Aviv, and Trump obliged.

This is not America’s war. The decision was made elsewhere, and timed elsewhere, fought on behalf of someone else to serve the strategic objectives of a foreign country. Washington has subordinated the American national interest to the tribal agenda of Israeli-firsters inside the Beltway. Simply put: Tel Aviv chooses the war, and Washington pays the bill.

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on When Tel Aviv decides, Washington fights

Top official: Iran ready for a long war with US, no more diplomacy

Press TV – March 9, 2026

The head of Iran’s Strategic Council on Foreign Relations says the United States has proved that it does not know the language of diplomacy, and that Tehran is ready for a long war.

“I no longer see any room for diplomacy. Because [US President] Donald Trump deceives others and does not keep his promises, and we experienced this in two rounds of negotiations. While we were negotiating, they attacked us,” Kamal Kharrazi said in an interview with CNN.

However, he noted that the economic pressure could increase to the extent that other countries take action to guarantee the end of the US-Israeli aggression against Iran.

“The Persian Gulf Arab countries and other countries must put pressure on the United States to end the war,” Kharrazi stated.

Noting that this war has created a lot of economic pressure on others, in terms of inflation and energy shortages, he said: “If it continues, this pressure will increase, and thereby others will have no choice but to intervene.”

The US and Israel started a fresh round of aerial aggression on Iran on February 28, some eight months after they carried out unprovoked attacks on the country.

The attacks led to the martyrdom of Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

The aggression was launched as Tehran and Washington had held three rounds of indirect negotiations in the Omani capital of Muscat and the Swiss city of Geneva and planned to open technical talks in Vienna, Austria.

Iran began to swiftly retaliate against the strikes by launching barrages of missiles and drone attacks on the Israeli-occupied territories as well as on US bases in regional countries.

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Top official: Iran ready for a long war with US, no more diplomacy

How Iran’s Toxic Rain Reveals US-Israel Discord

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 09.03.2026

The main Israeli goal is to cause as much chaos as possible and draw the US even deeper into the war, security expert Dr Simon Tsipis tells Sputnik.

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright accused Israel of bombing Iranian fuel depots, insisting the US targets no energy facilities.

Axios reports that the US was informed ahead of the Israeli attacks, but the huge scale of damage shocked Washington. The attack caused an environmental disaster with black acid rain in Tehran.

This situation reveals a divide between the allies, Tsipis said:

  • Israeli forces behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu want to trigger a full-scale war in the Persian Gulf
  • The US realizes it has been drawn into a project that has nothing to do with its own goals

“Israel has effectively set a trap for its long-time allies among American Christian evangelicals,” Tsipis says. “A strong opposition is growing within the US, openly declaring that the current course does not serve the nation’s interests.”

The US is taking most of the blame with Israel’s role forgotten, the pundit says.

“This creates enormous reputational risks for the US, turning it into a hostage of someone else’s strategy,” Tsipis says, “one that brings no benefit to the White House while forcing it to bear all the costs of supporting the conflict.”
Consequences:

  • A regional conflict escalates into a global threat
  • The US is caught in a strategic trap
  • US allies in Europe are caught in a deepening crisis
  • A rift is growing inside the US
  • The reputational damage will have long-term consequences for US influence in the world

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on How Iran’s Toxic Rain Reveals US-Israel Discord

Trump Admits He Is Destroying Iran For Israel

The Dissident | March 9, 2026

In an interview with the Times of Israel, Donald Trump – in his usual fashion- said the quiet part out loud, and admitted that his goal is to destroy Iran on behalf of Israel.

He said, “Iran was going to destroy Israel and everything else around it… We’ve worked together. We’ve destroyed a country that wanted to destroy Israel.”

Trump has admitted that his real goal is to “destroy Iran”, the real motive behind the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iranian civilian infrastructure.

As Mondoweiss noted , “ultimately, replacing the Islamic Republic is not the main objective, or even a desirable one. Rather, the goal in Iran is ethnic balkanization and a failed state. They don’t want to change the regime in Iran; they want to collapse the state itself. The purpose of military strikes is to disintegrate the state’s institutions, fueling ethnic tensions and secessionist movements, leaving Iran deeply divided and marred by civil war and sectarian violence — a parallel to 2015 Syria.”

However, despite admitting this, Trump is still lying.

Trump claimed that “Iran was going to destroy Israel”, but in reality, the only thing Iran was “destroying” was Israel’s bloodthirsty quest for Middle East dominance and the greater Israel project.

The bloodthirsty Neo-Con Senator Lindsay Graham, one of the lead architects of this war, who apparently coached Benjamin Netanyahu, “on how to lobby the president for action” admitted the real motive behind the war was to destroy all opposition to Israel, saying, “If we can pull this off, it would be the biggest change in the Mid East in a thousand years: Hamas, Hezbollah gone, the Houthis gone, the Iranian people an ally not an enemy, the Arab world moving towards Israel without fear, Saudi-Israel normalize, no more October the 7th”.

As the former UK diplomat, Craig Murray put it , “Iran has provided, directly and through proxies, the only military opposition to the creation of Greater Israel. This war is for Greater Israel.”

In reality, Trump is attempting to destroy Iran and turn it into a failed state because it was the last thing standing in the way of Israeli dominance over the Middle East and the greater Israel project.

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Trump Admits He Is Destroying Iran For Israel

Iran’s latest move in the GCC countries was a stroke of genius

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 9, 2026

After just a week into Donald Trump’s war, there is very little to report which should or could please the U.S. president. Much of America’s infrastructure in the Middle East has been destroyed with U.S. soldiers now housed by hotels in GCC countries as there is nothing left of their bases. The stocks that these countries have as part of their air defence systems is almost depleted as military chiefs argue about how quickly they can be replaced (some THAAD and Patriot systems are being shipped from Japan and South Korea) and Iran is hitting Israel harder and harder each day.

Of course, due to the new draconian rules which Israel has imposed — that no military strikes that Iran succeeds in carrying out can be ‘reported’ on by journalists or even citizens who wish to post it on social media — as well as the comically corrupt, partisan way U.S. news outlets are covering the war, very little bad news gets seen by the public, if any.

Under this set up, it is hardly surprising that Trump went to war, given that he must have factored in a great deal of support from U.S. media, whom he claims to despise. In this regard, we can conclude that media itself is complicit in war crimes, given that it has played a huge role in the decision to go to war and also the day to day reporting of events on the ground.

A good example of the few points of the war which are reported, but done in such a distorted way, is the news that Iran has stopped its bombing of GCC Gulf states. This has been presented as a victory by the U.S. and a climb down by Iran. The truth though is that it is a considerable victory for Tehran as what is not being reported or even examined is the deal that Iran has struck with those countries. None of those countries will allow any kind of military activity now by U.S. forces there, which means the thousands of U.S. soldiers in hotels in these GCC countries might as well head back home as their role there is redundant. Of course it’s unlikely that Trump will move them out as such an event will be captured by many on social media and will look like a great defeat. But some analysts are going further and speculating that there is more bad news for Israel and the U.S. with this latest move. Not only has Iran insisted on no activity at all in these countries by U.S. forces but they have also said that when the war is over, all the bases must be completely shut down.

Sadly, the gesture didn’t hold for long as it is rumoured that Iran’s elite guard was angered by Trump’s response and so the missile attack on the GCC countries continued.

Against a backdrop of rumours spreading throughout the middle east that Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar were considering jointly to completely pull out their investment in the U.S., this move, even as a gesture, couldn’t have come at a worse time for Trump.

His media machine is working overtime in spewing out so many fake news reports, like the recent one that the U.S. has total air superiority over Iran, that it will be interesting to see how this is spun in the coming days. But there is nothing but lies from the Trump camp and as a complicit western media scrum is happy to pump out these lies, people are obviously turning to social media or international news channels in the global south, like CGTN and Russia Today. For many Americans, they are simply too dumb to know how to even question the narrative. Where is the video footage to support these preposterous claims that American has air superiority over Iran? Within 24 hours of Trumps B2 bombers hitting nuclear sites in Iran last year in June, media were given video clips of the satellite imagery. So far, the claims by Trump’s people about air superiority, have not been matched with any evidence. None the less U.S. media reports it more or less like it is fact.

It’s a similar story with the claims about the U.S. navy sinking 20 Iranian vessels. Where’s the evidence? If we are to take into account completely defenceless ships like the unarmed frigate that was sunk in international waters after it returned from a joint exercise with India, it would seem that America is on the losing side. Not even Japanese naval strikes in the WWII would blow up enemies’ ships and not then pick up survivors. The Americans left 80 sailors to drown, the same seamen who posed with photos days earlier with Prime Minister Modi, who, it should be pointed out often claims that India is the “guardian of the Indian ocean”, a patently absurd claim. Many believe Modi sold the Iranians out and disclosed its position to the Americans, leaving many to question just how much he can be trusted with his present allies. Will Russia still sell its oil to India after such a betrayal?

It’s clear that the Iran war is already WWIII in many respects. Certainly each side has its partners and media have made much of Russia’s intelligence support to Iran pointing out American positions, while China has given Iran considerable military support both in state of the art radar systems and ground to air missile systems. The sinking of the Iranian ship shows us all the depth of the desperation of America, that it needs to go as far as hunting for Iranian ships thousands of miles away and sinking them, even if they are unarmed as this ship was. Does that look like the act of a confident aggressor on a victory role? Hardly.

It isn’t just that America can barely hold the high moral ground for even a brief, ephemeral media moment, but more that the number of shocking tactical errors by Trump are piling up and having an impact. The failure to see that killing the supreme leader, who has been replaced by a hard liner who has always wanted Iran to have a nuclear deterrent, was a major act of stupidity. Nearly all U.S. wars follow the same pattern of America underestimating its enemy and overestimating its own capabilities and this one is no exception. The move to bring GCC states closer to Iran and turn them against the U.S. is smart and what we could expect from Iran who has had years to prepare for this attack and has been given so many free lessons by America’s blunders — the best one being the June attack which resulted in Iran upping its game and identifying all the weak spots which needed work. The biggest miscalculation probably of all is going to war in the first place believing that regime change would be inevitable in days and therefore no longer-term plans, in terms of military stocks, need to be addressed. America is about to run out of ammo. For the GCC countries, it’s quite possible that the deal might be reinstated in the coming days as a new truth emerges from the war. While Donald Trump tells reporters on Air Force one that Iran was responsible for bombing its own school, GCC leaders will have to wake up to a new reality which is summed up by Henry Kissinger. “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran’s latest move in the GCC countries was a stroke of genius

Possible Scenarios for the Middle East

By Yuriy Zinin – New Eastern Outlook – March 9, 2026

The US and Israeli aggression against Iran has pushed the Middle East to the verge of exploding. It has ignited regional media discourse, which presents various assessments of the situation and its consequences.

According to a major regional portal, Middle East Online, these assessments can be divided into two categories. One group tends to support the idea of Israel’s overwhelming superiority and its control over the region’s key institutions. They also believe the predictions of the Lebanese astrologer Layla Abdel Latif. The other group offers alternative scenarios, including those pointing to an Iranian victory and the collapse of the Trump-Netanyahu alliance.

Who is to blame for the war and how long it will last

Two main themes are of particular interest to commentators: who is responsible for this operation and how long will the confrontation between the two antagonistic sides last? One of the mediators, Omani Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al-Busaidi, speaking on CBS television, revealed that Iran had accepted the zero enrichment condition and was ready to move its stockpiles outside its territory. However, this effort was in vain; Washington did not hear it.

It is clear that the adversaries’ balance of potential and military arsenals are disproportionate and favor the aggressors. Nevertheless, according to many experts, technological superiority does not guarantee a swift victory for the US. Trump left Tehran no chance for retreat, and Iran is acting in accordance with the logic of attrition, not traditional doctrine. Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles and drones, as well as the use of allies on Arab bridgeheads, allows it to open several fronts and turn the war against it into a costly and prolonged endeavor. Therefore, Tehran is betting on dragging things out until the military pressure becomes a political burden for its opponents.

Western intelligence services were too slow

Analyzing the situation, an Arab newspaper claims that Western intelligence services failed to properly assess Iran. Their attack plans were based on the assumption that “decapitating” the leadership would deprive Tehran of the will to launch retaliatory strikes. But events have shown that these intelligence agencies overlooked the quiet restoration of Iran’s potential, which began in 2025.

In addition, Iran’s opponents did not take into account the fact that, in Islamic tradition, the killing of a spiritual leader is often perceived not as his end, but as a transition to martyrdom. Usually such losses do not disorganize society but, on the contrary, mobilize it and give it strength.

Many analysts believe that Iran has demonstrated its ability to overcome this shock and recover institutional cohesion, having formed a temporary tripartite leadership including reformers, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and the bureaucratic religious elite. Despite limited capabilities compared to the US, Iran retains significant regional influence. At the same time, some fear that an Iran weakened by the US and Israel could strategically destabilize the countries that rely on Tehran for security purposes.

Countries in the region reject US military involvement

This war was unleashed by Washington for the sake of Israel and for goals that are not accepted by the countries of the region, concludes the Arab As-Sabil newspaper. Washington ignored all calls, efforts, and negotiations aimed at preventing it. According to analysts, this places Arab states at the epicenter of pressure, requiring high political acumen in matters of national security demands in order to avoid being drawn into axes that could lead to a larger confrontation. America’s investment in its military assets has actually damaged regional stability and the interests of the countries of the region. Military assets, including bases and partnerships, have become nothing less than a curse for the countries in the region and a cause of undermining its security.

“Trump’s noble mission for the future” – rhetoric repeated at the White House – is nothing more than a grand gamble based on the assumption that overseas power is capable of changing history. This may provoke unforeseen reactions from other international powers, which perceive such behavior as a dangerous American unilateral approach to the demands and fate of global energy and logistics.

Not just a war, but a deep transformation

Regional analysts find that part of society is shocked as the predictions they hear in the evening are irrelevant by the morning, with multiple new scenarios spawning. Today a massive new war looms in the region. This war is not a traditional conflict between two sides, but rather a brief moment that will determine the region’s landscape for decades to come. An Arab author fears that it is not just a clash; it is a deep strategic transformation that is turning the region into a quagmire where blood, chaos, and miscalculation are constant.

Yuri Zinin, PhD in History, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of International Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation

Follow new articles on our Telegram channel

March 9, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Possible Scenarios for the Middle East

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »