Trump faces MAGA rift over possible US role in war on Iran
Al Mayadeen | June 18, 2025
A sharp divide is emerging within Donald Trump’s MAGA base over the war on Iran, with some of the president’s most vocal allies, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, commentator Tucker Carlson, and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, openly questioning whether he is abandoning his “America First” foreign policy.
Following a week of deadly strikes and Trump’s abrupt departure from the G7 summit in Canada, these conservative voices are warning that a deeper US role in the Middle East could fracture the coalition that helped propel Trump to power.
Trump, who has long campaigned on non-interventionism, is now facing backlash from within his movement.
On X, Charlie Kirk wrote, “No issue currently divides the right as much as foreign policy,” adding that he feared a “massive split among MAGA” could disrupt their progress. He and others warned that any perception of Trump backing US military involvement could unravel his core message and political future.
Trump flew back to Washington unexpectedly this week amid rising tensions, and issued a dramatic social media warning, “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” claiming the US knows the location of Iran’s Leader Sayyed Khamenei, but does not intend to target him, “for now.”
These remarks have reignited speculation that Trump may support direct US military action, such as supplying “Israel” with bunker-buster bombs to target Iranian nuclear facilities. However, the State Department and US military have already ordered the voluntary evacuation of nonessential personnel from select diplomatic sites in the region.
Meanwhile, Senator Lindsey Graham is urging Trump to go further. “If that means providing bombs, provide bombs. If that means flying with Israel, fly with Israel,” Graham said on Face the Nation, arguing that now is the moment for Trump to help eliminate Iran’s nuclear program.
MAGA figures accuse Trump of breaking his anti-war promise
Trump’s consideration of a broader US role is facing strong resistance from the same voices who once championed him as a disruptive force in US foreign policy.
Tucker Carlson, long a loyal supporter, warned that Trump is veering dangerously close to betraying the voters who backed him for staying out of foreign wars. “You’re not going to convince me that the Iranian people are my enemy,” Carlson said on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast.
Carlson also aimed at pro-Trump media allies like Sean Hannity, challenging them to hold Trump accountable for his foreign policy stance. Trump responded to the criticism by calling Carlson “kooky” and reiterating that “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!”
Furthermore, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene sided with Carlson, saying she shared his anti-interventionist principles. She posted, “Foreign wars, intervention, and regime change put America last, kill innocent people, make us broke, and lead to our destruction,” adding that “That’s not kooky. That’s what millions of Americans voted for.”
Kirk: MAGA youth voted for peace, not another war
Charlie Kirk, while still supportive of Trump, has echoed concerns about mission drift, noting that younger Trump voters were especially drawn to his record of avoiding new wars. “This is the moment that President Trump was elected for,” Kirk said on Fox News. But later added: “There is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East.”
He continued, “The last thing America needs right now is a new war…Our number one desire must be peace, as quickly as possible.”
In a similar event, in April, some MAGA-aligned podcasters expressed doubts about looming tariffs and market disruptions. Earlier, Trump criticized Biden’s decision to let Ukraine use US long-range weapons but stopped short of advocating a full aid cutoff, another move that drew rebukes from his isolationist flank.
While these disputes have not derailed Trump’s base, the war on Iran marks one of the clearest tests of whether his coalition can stay united if he edges closer to military engagement abroad
Iranian strike on Weizmann wipes out years of Israeli war research
Al Mayadeen | June 17, 2025
A recent Iranian missile strike has inflicted extensive damage on the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, central occupied Palestine, a facility long considered a cornerstone of the Israeli occupation’s scientific and military-industrial infrastructure.
According to The Marker, a daily business newspaper published by the Haaretz Group in “Israel”, several buildings within the institute sustained direct hits, with one key laboratory complex entirely destroyed by fire.
The targeted site housed advanced research in life sciences, artificial intelligence, and molecular biology, areas that have directly supported the Israeli entity’s development of surveillance, targeting, and weapons systems used in attacks across the region.
Described by Israeli media as the “scientific and military brain” of “Israel”, the Weizmann Institute has played a pivotal role in the research and development of technologies underpinning airstrike coordination systems, drone warfare capabilities, and battlefield medical technology, all of which have been deployed in repeated assaults on civilian populations in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, and most recently, Iran.
One of the laboratories destroyed was run by Israeli Professor Eldad Tzahor, a veteran in the Department of Molecular Cell Biology. Israeli Professor Eran Segal, whose AI lab was also directly hit, noted that millions of dollars’ worth of equipment was damaged beyond recovery due to water and structural damage. Segal’s lab had reportedly contributed to algorithmic systems used in battlefield decision-making and real-time surveillance, tools that have aided the Israeli entity’s strikes in Gaza and elsewhere.
Photos released by Israeli media showed scorched interiors, collapsed lab floors, destroyed electrical systems, and structural devastation, the result of what sources described as a precision strike.
Not a random target: A symbol of militarized science
While Israeli officials have downplayed the implications, The Marker acknowledged the strike was “not random,” but a calculated attack on a facility used for military power through scientific research.
Media reports also framed the operation as direct payback for the assassination of Iran’s nuclear scientists.
Experts say the institute’s deep ties to the Israeli security apparatus have made it a legitimate military target in Iran’s eyes, particularly given its support for advanced weapons technologies used to target civilians.
Israeli Professor Sharel Fleishman, whose lab was not impacted, admitted the losses are irreplaceable. “Life sciences labs rely on materials that are gathered and preserved over many years. When a lab is destroyed, and with it all those materials, it’s irreplaceable,” he said.
Another Israeli researcher, Professor Oren Schuldiner, told The Marker: “It’s as if the lab evaporated into thin air.” Schuldiner noted that rebuilding the affected laboratories and their capabilities will take at least two years.
The destruction of the Weizmann Institute sends a clear message from Tehran, analysts say: the Israeli occupation’s institutions cannot continue to serve dual roles as research centers and military enablers with impunity.
Trump Attacks Tucker Carlson Over Opposition to Iran War, Says He Decides What ‘America First’ Means
By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | June 16, 2025
President Donald Trump is lashing out against popular conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson. The acrimony emanates from Carlson’s strong opposition to the White House’s indirect military support for Israel’s war against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Trump declared he invented “America First” and he decides what it means while making his case for the potentially catastrophic war of aggression against Tehran.
On Monday, the president demeaned the influential pundit. Trump told reporters “I don’t know what [Carlson] is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.” In an interview with The Atlantic magazine this weekend, Trump was asked about Carlson’s comments against the war.
Trump responded “Well, considering that I’m the one that developed ‘America First,’ and considering that the term wasn’t used until I came along, I think I’m the one that decides [what it means]. For those people who say they want peace—you can’t have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don’t want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon—that’s not peace.”
“America First” is a political slogan which has seen a phenomenal resurgence in the wake of Trump’s first presidential campaign. It has been used by politicians in both major parties and dates back more than a century ago. It originated as a rallying cry for neutrality during the First World War and was used as part of President Woodrow Wilson’s 1916 reelection campaign. The following year, Wilson betrayed his supporters by ordering American forces into the war and imposing conscription. Since then, the antiwar, nationalist slogan has been deployed by non-interventionists, particularly on the right, exemplified best by Pat Buchanan.
Despite Trump’s continued insistence otherwise, his own intelligence agencies confirmed this year that there is no evidence Tehran is building a nuclear weapon nor has there been any suggestion that a political decision has been made to abrogate Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s fatwa against pursuing weapons of mass destruction.
On Friday, following Israel’s surprise bombing attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, residential areas, and military sites, Carlson released a newsletter denouncing US involvement in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war. It begins by quoting from Trump’s first inaugural address, “From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first.”
The newsletter then reads, “Now that [Netanyahu] and his war-hungry government have executed their long-awaited assault, [Trump] faces a legacy-altering decision: to support or not to support?”
Carlson insists, “The United States should not at any level participate in a war with Iran. No funding, no American weapons, no troops on the ground. Regardless of what our “special ally” says, a fight with the Iranians has nothing to offer the United States. It is not in our national interest.”
The newsletter continues, with Carlson warning the consequences of supporting Israel will include future blowback terrorism against “the West” and “thousands of immediate American deaths, all in the name of a foreign agenda.” He concluded that a preferable option would be to “drop Israel” and “let them fight their own wars.” Carlson emphasized that because of the massive US military and financial aid to Tel Aviv, Trump is already “complicit in the act of war.”
Diplomacy as deception: The West’s war on Iran was pre-planned
By Hamid Bahrami | MEMO | June 16, 2025
As bombs rain down on Iranian cities and missiles arc across the skies of the Middle East, we must speak plainly: this is not merely a war between Israel and Iran. It is a war against sovereignty, waged by an Israeli-Western coalition that has long sought to dismantle any state in the Global South that dares to chart an independent course.
Iran is not the aggressor in this conflict. It is defending itself, legally, historically, and strategically from a premeditated assault. The airstrikes Israel launched on 13 June were not acts of deterrence; they were the execution phase of a long-orchestrated operation aimed at crippling Iran’s infrastructure, destabilising its political system, and ultimately returning it to the kind of failed state once imposed on Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Each of those nations was de-developed under the guise of humanitarian intervention or nuclear containment. Iran is now in the crosshairs of the same playbook.
The deception runs deep. In the lead-up to the strikes, Western officials and Israeli intelligence deliberately projected calm signalling to Tehran and financial markets alike that diplomacy would continue as scheduled. Negotiations in Oman were a trap. While diplomats discussed terms, war rooms in Tel Aviv and Washington finalised strike packages. It was a bait-and-strike strategy, the diplomatic equivalent of ambush warfare.
Israel’s justification for the attacks, its supposed fear of Iranian nuclear capability, collapses under scrutiny. Nuclear talks had resumed. Iran remained a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. And yet, Israel, a nuclear state that refuses to join the NPT, launched strikes that violated international law and killed dozens of civilians, including scientists and infrastructure workers.
Even more cynically, Tel Aviv has recycled a familiar accusation to justify civilian casualties: that Iran uses “human shields.” This baseless claim was used repeatedly in Gaza, where hospitals and apartment buildings were levelled on the pretence of targeting militants. Independent investigations have exposed the hollowness of these claims. Israel’s propaganda is less about evidence than about immunizing itself from consequence.
Despite years of Israeli terrorism, including the 13 June decapitation strikes that killed top Iranian commanders such as IRGC Chief Hossein Salami, Chief of General Staff Mohammad Bagheri, and missile-program leader Amir Ali Hajizadeh—Tehran has responded with calculated and disciplined force. Iran’s retaliatory strikes have been tightly focused on military bases, infrastructure, and command centers, avoiding civilian neighbourhoods and essential public services. In contrast, Israel has repeatedly struck residential buildings. Iran’s measured and purposeful response is not a weakness; it is a strategic posture rooted in moral strength and operational precision.
Some analysts have suggested that Israel expected internal dissent within Iran to paralyze the state’s response. This was a fatal miscalculation. While Iran is home to deep ideological divisions, foreign attack unites Iranians across the political spectrum. Even critics of the Islamic Republic now rally to its defence, because the threat is existential. In the face of foreign aggression, factionalism yields to nationalism.
The bigger threat now lies ahead. While headlines speak of “Israeli requests” for American support, the truth is that the United States has been involved from the outset. B-2 bombers were repositioned to Diego Garcia months ago. Joint U.S.–Israeli strike planning began under the pretext of nuclear containment. The deployment of bunker-busting bombs, diplomatic cover at the UN, intelligence sharing, and regional base access—all point to a war co-authored by Washington. They are simply waiting for Iran’s retaliatory capacity to be sufficiently degraded before launching a broader campaign.
Make no mistake: this is not a regional conflict. It is a US–Israel war, aided by Arab authoritarian regimes like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan. The West have lent support, whether through intelligence, logistics and approval. Iran is being isolated and encircled not because it poses a nuclear threat, but because it has refused to submit.
But Iran has deterrents of its own. The global economy cannot ignore the energy risks that come with escalating war in the Persian Gulf. Already, oil prices are surging. Tehran knows that its geopolitical power isn’t limited to missiles. Economic leverage, especially when energy prices are high, can shift political calculus in Washington, Brussels, and Riyadh.
There is also a deeper hypocrisy at play. Israel continues to possess a clandestine nuclear arsenal while Iran, still technically within the NPT framework, is sanctioned and threatened for the potential of one. This double standard is untenable. There are only two realistic futures in the region: either Israel is disarmed, or Iran becomes nuclear-armed. The era of unilateral vulnerability is over.
Iran now reassesses its participation in the NPT and reevaluates the assumption that international law provides any meaningful protection when facing nuclear apartheid. If the international community is serious about peace, it must begin not with limiting Iran’s defences, but with dismantling Israel’s offensive capabilities.
Finally, this war must be recognized for what it is: a strategic campaign to eliminate resistance in the Global South. From Baghdad to Tripoli, from Damascus to Tehran, the message has always been the same, those who seek autonomy must be brought to heel. Iran’s independence goal is not just political; it is existential. And every sovereign nation, every citizen with a memory of colonialism or foreign subjugation, should see themselves in its struggle.
What’s happening today is not merely a war on Iran. It is a war on independence, dignity, and the right of nations to choose their own futures.
Zenith of Western asymmetric warfare in Iran and Ukraine
By Drago Bosnic | June 16, 2025
Achieving strategic advantage over your opponents has been at the center of every conflict in human history. In modern times, this is accomplished with long-range strike systems and weapons of mass destruction. However, countries that are at a disadvantage in that regard can opt for asymmetric methods to achieve similar or sometimes even more efficient results. Ever since the advent of nuclear weapons, direct conflicts between global powers have been avoided, as all sides understand there would be no winners in such a war (or at least they did until recently).
Thus, the importance of intelligence services and other forms of non-kinetic warfare grew exponentially. The ability to infiltrate your opponent’s state apparatus is of the utmost importance, while maintaining plausible deniability adds to the strategic depth of defense, as the attacker can simply deny the involvement of its special services.
The political West has been at the forefront of such operations for years, targeting all of its opponents through asymmetric means, particularly through proxies. This is especially true for Russia, which still has major issues with the Kiev regime agents infiltrating the country and conducting operations of strategic importance. The latest attacks on Russian strategic aviation are a testament to that. It should be noted that Moscow’s services have been quite successful in detecting Western agents as they have decades of experience in doing so.
However, Ukrainian operatives are a different story. Namely, the vast majority of Ukrainians speak fluent Russian and can easily blend in virtually anywhere in the country. They can also obtain Russian citizenship, meaning they could be largely under the radar for years. It’s exceedingly difficult to uncover such plots, particularly if they’re being conducted over the course of several years.
This also holds true for other countries of the multipolar world, including Iran, which has been heavily infiltrated by foreign agents, as evidenced by the sheer number of assassinations and so-called decapitation strikes on top Iranian commanders. It’s still unclear how exactly Israel managed to create such a large network of its agents within Iran, but their operations have had a strategic impact on the ongoing conflict.
The Mossad had very close ties with the SAVAK, former Iranian secret police and intelligence service during the Shah era, so it’s quite possible that the Israelis maintained contacts with their Iranian associates even after 1979. They could’ve easily played the role of sleeper agents who were activated by Israel at the moment of the strike. In addition, new operatives could’ve infiltrated Iran from neighboring countries, particularly Azerbaijan which maintains a close partnership with Israel.
Apart from being a major client for the Israeli Military Industrial Complex (MIC), which was instrumental in Baku’s takeover of native Armenian lands in Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), Azerbaijan also has irredentist ambitions toward northwestern Iran, where a homonymous area has more ethnic Azeris than the South Caucasus country itself. The regime in Baku certainly sees the ongoing events as a perfect opportunity to achieve its goals, which could be a major factor in Israeli operations.
Numerous observers have also pointed out the many similarities between the actions of the Kiev regime and Israel, as both have been conducting these asymmetric hybrid attacks deep within Russia and Iran, respectively. The drones that were used in attacks on Moscow’s long-range aviation and Iranian air defenses operate in a virtually identical manner, targeting strategic assets from within.
There are two possibilities in this case. Either the Mossad is involved in training the SBU and/or GUR, or they’re all connected into a much larger network run from Washington DC and London. The latter is much likelier, as both SBU and GUR have strong ties with the CIA and MI6, respectively. In other words, the US-led political West is conducting these operations in an attempt to secure a strategic advantage over its rivals.
This is also done through so-called “international” organizations such as the UN, OSCE, IAEA, etc. For instance, after the start of the special military operation (SMO), Russian military intelligence uncovered that OSCE, which is supposed to be a neutral organization monitoring the ceasefire, was actually helping the Kiev regime target Russian forces by giving the former access to its cameras along the frontline. Moscow promptly ordered OSCE personnel to leave after this.
Some sources are reporting that the IAEA also did something similar in Iran, by giving Israel information on the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists. If true, this could explain how the Mossad was so effective in eliminating them virtually on the first day of the attack. In addition to scientists, a large number of high-ranking Iranian military officers were eliminated within the country. This is perfectly in line with the political West’s doctrine of so-called “decapitation” attacks that aim to paralyze the chain of command in a targeted country.
Many of the most prominent warmongers in Washington DC have been calling for such strikes, even against opponents like Russia. And indeed, in the last several years, there have been a number of assassination attempts against top-ranking Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin himself. Once again, this was done through proxies such as the Neo-Nazi junta.
In some cases, this could’ve also worked, as evidenced by disturbing revelations regarding the mysterious death of the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian. The aftermath of Raisi’s death has been disastrous for Iran and its Axis of Resistance. By the end of last year, Syria fell to NATO’s terrorist proxies, while Hezbollah’s long-time leader Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated, followed by a number of high-ranking Iranian and pro-Iranian figures at around a similar time.
The strategic consequences of these events cannot be overstated, meaning that the idea they were purely accidental is extremely unlikely, to put it mildly. By the time Israel attacked Iran, the geopolitical situation in the Middle East shifted dramatically in Israel’s favor. This made launching strategic attacks much easier, as it didn’t have to worry about Syrian air defenses.
Mossad operatives on the ground used not only drones, but also missiles (such as the “Spike NLOS”). Worse yet, it seems they didn’t even have to stay in the country to launch these strikes, as both drones and missiles were controlled remotely, which is yet another indicator of the same modus operandi used by the Kiev regime. Military sources indicate that Israel also used portable electronic warfare (EW) systems to disrupt Iranian air defenses, making it far easier for its missiles to reach targets within Iran.
As previously mentioned, this sort of deep infiltration also enabled Israel to assassinate top-ranking personnel. Reportedly, this includes General Mohammad Bagheri, the Chief of the Iranian General Staff; Hossein Salami, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and David Sheikhian, commanding officer of the IRGC’s air defenses. Many other senior military leaders were also killed.
Although Israeli strikes were far more efficient than those launched by the Kiev regime, it’s impossible not to draw parallels with high-profile assassinations of numerous Russian public and military figures, including Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the late commander of Russian NBC Protection Troops, who was killed in a terrorist attack back in mid-December. It should be noted that he was investigating US involvement in biological warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine and was in no way connected to military operations against the Neo-Nazi junta forces.
Thus, the only logical conclusion is that his assassination was certainly not conducted by the SBU of their own volition. Namely, such operations require significant resources that would be reserved for important operations to undermine the Russian military. The only thing that was undermined is the investigation into the Pentagon’s massive biowarfare program.
The Kiev regime conducted many similar attacks on Russian scientists, including Daniil Mikheev, a coordinator of new unmanned systems for the Ministry of Defense; Konstantin Ogarkov, an employee of a defense research institute in Voronezh; Igor Kolesnikov, an engineer at a design bureau in the Tula oblast (region); Sergei Potapov, a cybersecurity defense specialist from Nizhny Novgorod; Valery Smirnov, one of the leading experts in programs for radio-electronic protection of strategic facilities.
In January 2024, a car with officers from the electronic intelligence headquarters in the Bryansk oblast was blown up, while on the night of April 17-18, Evgeny Rytnikov, the head of the design bureau of the Bryansk Electromechanical Plant, the developer of the now legendary “Krasukha” EW systems, was also killed. Such assassinations are a testament to the terrorist nature of the Neo-Nazi junta, as all these people were non-combatants.
Among the prominent Iranian scientists killed by Mossad were Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, Dr. Ahmad Reza Zolfaghari, Dr. Abdolhamid Minuchehr, Dr. Amir Hosein Fekhi and Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi. Once again, it’s impossible not to draw parallels, despite the fact that Israeli strikes were far more strategically consequential.
Still, the main conclusion is that the political West continues to use its proxies to wage war on several countries simultaneously, while also maintaining plausible deniability.
The only way to counter such attacks is for the targeted countries to enforce tighter control over communications, as well as enlarge their intelligence apparatus. While these measures could be seen as “totalitarian” (and will no doubt be presented as such by the mainstream propaganda machine), there’s simply no other way to blunt the blade of the political West’s modern asymmetric hybrid warfare.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
What if Iran Closes the Hormuz Strait?
Sputnik – 16.06.2025
With the Israel-Iranian conflict in full swing, oil producers and oil consumers alike are wondering: could Iran resort to shutting down maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and if so, how it might affect oil prices?
Oil could hit $130 per barrel, or even $300, if Iran does close the strait, warns Dr. Tilak Doshi from the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center.
It is very likely that such high prices would not be “favored by the US administration, and they will try to arrive at a resolution of the war as soon as possible,” he notes.
“Historically, in 2008, oil prices briefly reached $147 per barrel without any major geopolitical conflict, driven solely by financial speculation and tight supply-demand dynamics,” muses energy economist Dr. Kazi Sohag.
“During the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo, triggered by the Yom Kippur War, oil prices increased by 300%, demonstrating how quickly markets can react to political shocks,” he adds.
Even without the strait’s closure, targeting Iran’s oil export and refining facilities could push prices to $80 or even $90, predicts Marc Ayoub, energy policy researcher.
“If things continue like they are currently, we would stay on the same norm, and we might reach a level or a ceiling of $80 per barrel maximum,” he elaborates.
“And also, if Israeli Kareesh or Leviathan are targeted as well, we might see increases for up to $5, between $5 and $10. That means we might reach… $90 or something.”
Italy and Germany on the War Front
By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | June 16, 2025
Italy and Germany are at war not only against Russia in support of Ukraine, but also against Iran in support of Israel. This is demonstrated by documented facts. These facts are ignored by the political-media mainstream.
The Italian B350ER aircraft – a new-generation aircraft for espionage, target recognition and communication operations – operates in the Black Sea together with similar US aircraft to spy on Russian territory and assist Ukrainian forces to strike Russian targets with unmanned drones and explosive vessels. Italy is thus not only supplying weapons to Kiyv but is actively participating in this and other ways in the NATO war against Russia. Even more direct is Germany’s participation in the war: it has permanently stationed a 5,000-strong Bundeswehr brigade in Lithuania, equipped with 2,000 tanks and other military vehicles.
“With this combat-ready brigade,” states German Defence Minister Pistorius, “we are taking on a leadership responsibility within the Alliance here on NATO’s Eastern Flank”.
Thus, NATO has deployed its forces on the borders with Russia’s Kaliningrad Oblast and Russia’s ally Belarus. At the same time, two other NATO countries — the United Kingdom and Canada — are deploying their ++forces in Estonia and Latvia, which also border Russia. These forces are like a candle lit in a powder keg. According to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, if NATO forces suffer losses in a clash with Russian forces on the border, all other NATO countries would have to intervene on their side against Russia. The Trump Administration’s role is becoming increasingly equivocal, as it states that it wants to agree with Russia on a diplomatic solution to end the war. Yet, it is helping Ukraine to continue the war against Russia, either directly through military operations such as those in the Black Sea, or indirectly through NATO, which, under US command, is bringing its military forces ever closer to Russia.
As part of the same strategy, Germany and Italy play a significant role in supporting Israel in the Middle East. After the USA, Germany is the second-largest supplier of weapons to Israel. So far, Israel has received six Dolphin-class submarines from Germany, manufactured by ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems. These submarines have been modified to launch nuclear attack missiles. According to an agreement in 2022, Germany will supply Israel with three more Drakon-class submarines, which are larger than the previous models and can launch even more powerful nuclear missiles. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that possesses nuclear weapons, and, as it has not joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is not subject to any control. Iran, having joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has civil nuclear facilities that are subject to UN Atomic Energy Agency controls.
US aerial tankers headed to Middle East – media
RT | June 16, 2025
The US has reportedly deployed more than 30 aerial refueling tankers across the Atlantic toward the Middle East, Military Watch Magazine reported on Monday. The outlet has described the buildup as “unprecedented,” claiming it could suggest broader US involvement in the ongoing Israeli-Iranian war.
West Jerusalem and Tehran have entered the fourth day of open hostilities. Last Thursday, Israeli forces launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets, killing senior military officials and scientists and prompting retaliatory missile barrages on Israeli cities such as Tel Aviv and Haifa.
The US has expressed support for the Israeli strikes, with President Donald Trump calling them “excellent.” He has also warned that Washington could become directly involved in the conflict if American interests are threatened but has yet to announce any plans to involve US forces.
However, according to flight tracking data, the US has already started deploying KC-135 and KC-46 aerial refueling tankers to the Middle East. Military Watch Magazine has suggested that the aircraft may be intended to support Israeli Air Force operations or refuel US fighters and bombers if Washington expands its role in the conflict.
The report also claims that tankers from other Western countries have participated in Israeli aerial refueling efforts, while the US is believed to have provided intelligence, satellite targeting data, and missile defense support.
On Sunday, Axios reported that Israeli officials had asked the US to directly take part in the military operation, specifically requesting assistance in striking Iran’s Fordow enrichment facility. However, US officials cited by the outlet said the request was declined, with one stating that the Trump administration is not considering any such involvement.
Nevertheless, Tehran has claimed that Washington’s support for West Jerusalem has made the US complicit in Israel’s aggression against Iran. Sources within the Iranian military have also reportedly indicated that Tehran’s response to Israeli strikes would “spread to all areas occupied by this [Israeli] regime and related US bases in the region in the coming days.”
In response, Trump has warned that any Iranian attack on US forces would trigger a military response, writing on his Truth Social platform that “if we are attacked in any way, shape, or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the US Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before.” He also insisted that the US “had nothing to do with the attack on Iran” and called on Tehran to return to negotiations.
Middle East in Crisis – 2
Netanyahu’s war on Iran has no future
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | June 16, 2025
An unnoticed undercurrent of the Israel-Iran war is that three Christian nations in Europe — UK, France and Germany — have joined the fray with alacrity on the side of Israel.
Strange, isn’t it, that these European countries comprising the so-called E-3 have a well-established exclusive path of dialogue with Iran but are joining Israel’s warpath? It’s a Crusade, stupid!
The three ‘Crusader nations’ share Israel’s obsession to check the rise of a Muslim nation as an emerging power in the Middle East that could radically transform its geopolitical alignments. Simply put, destroying the Islamic regime in Iran is the real objective of Israel’s war — and of the three Christian nations from Europe.
Reportedly, Israeli fighter jets which attacked Iran used the British air base in Cyprus; British refuelling planes are on deployment in Syrian-Iraqi airspace for use of Israeli fighter jets; French president Emmanuel Macron, as defender of Roman Catholicism openly vows that he will act to prevent Israel’s defeat; Germany, the fountainhead of Protestantism, has also similarly positioned itself behind Israel.
However, on the other hand, what emerges from the hour-long phone conversation between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday is that they will work together to advance the path of dialogue with Iran, the current conflict situation notwithstanding. The Kremlin readout stresses that Putin forcefully denounced the Israeli aggression.
Such a line-up of the principal actors signals that Israel’s best bet lies in killing the war itself as a strategic error and create a ‘new normal’? But will Tehran allow Netanyahu to get away with murder? That’s the million dollar question. Putin will have to use all his persuasive power during the planned visit to Iran — ie., if it still goes ahead.
The Israeli thinking behind its assassination of the IRGC leadership and military commanders stemmed out of the foolish miscalculation that Tehran lacks a political will to resist aggression. The Israeli objective is on the one hand to create conditions for a regime change in Iran and on the other hand to derail any form of US-Iran constructive engagement.
All through, terror has been the chosen weapon for Israel and the western powers to undermine and weaken Iran. But a point has been reached where a containment of Iran is no longer feasible. Logically, Iran’s neighbours in the Muslim world should have rallied in support of Iran but that’s too much to expect, given their limited sovereignty to act independently.
Nonetheless, Iran will not capitulate. Iran’s sense of national pride and honour as a civilisation state will prompt it to circle the wagons and wage a protracted war until victory. From the early days of the revolution, the Islamic republic which was founded on the principles of justice and resistance on the bedrock of nationalism and independence, got attracted to Mao’s concept of ‘protracted people’s war’ to keep predator nations at bay. That strategy paid off during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988).
Saddam Hussein too, like Netanyahu, miscalculated that Iran was a hopelessly weakened nation in the civil war conditions with its economy in virtual collapse, army in disarray, state formation yet to crystallise, and with no allies in the region to lend a helping hand. But as it turned out, Iran fought an 8-year war defiantly to a stalemate, undeterred by the lavish support extended to Saddam by the Western powers and their regional allies.
The US even equipped Saddam’s army with chemical weapons to stop the human-wave–attack tactics of Iranian fighters, but of no avail — although, an estimated quarter million Iranians sacrificed their lives.
At some point, in a very near future, Israel will also meet the fate of Saddam, having miscalculated Iran’s grit to resist. Netanyahu also estimated that Iran is a much weakened country compared to last year due to the setbacks taken by the Axis of Resistance. Such naïveté underestimates the potency of resistance at the very core of Shi’ism.
Last week, the resistance forces that were supposedly vanquished from the face of the earth regrouped and began firing missiles at Israel — from Syria, of all places! On May 4, Houthis fired a ballistic missile at Tel Aviv hitting the perimeter of the main terminal of Ben Gurion Airport! Reports suggest that Hezbollah has restored its supply routes from Iran.
What Israel fails to grasp is that resistance movements do not die if their raison d’être remains. Israel is, in reality, in very deep crisis fighting on multiple fronts amidst a cascading domestic political crisis and an economy that requires drip feeding by Washington.
As the US’s capacity to influence events in the Middle East keeps diminishing, Israel’s unviability as a nation propped by the Jewish Lobby in the Beltway appears sharper in focus. Already, there is resentment within the US about bankrolling Israel and fighting its wars.
On the contrary, the rise of Iran is inevitable — with a population base 10 times bigger than Israel’s, vast mineral resources, a self-sufficient agricultural sector and broad-based industry, innovative progress in technology, big domestic market, highly strategic location and trained manpower.
Iran’s stamina is of a long distance runner, as Iran-Iraq war showed, whereas, Israel’s forte is as sprinter on a 100 metre track. Make no mistake, Israel, a small country with a population of 8 million people will get hollowed out in a protracted war.
In the current scenario, what goes against Israel critically is that while President Donald Trump tried and failed to stop Netanyahu on the warpath, he is not going to deploy American forces to fight Israel’s war.
Trump has an evangelical base in US politics and is on friendly terms with wealthy Jewish donors, but has nothing in common with the Crusader nations of the Old World — be it on Ukraine or Iran. In both cases, actually, he tends to view the paradigm through the America First prism where he sees immense potential to generate wealth through business links with Russia or Iran.
Besides, Trump is far too smart a politician to risk the future of his MAGA movement whose core tenet is the total rejection of all interventionist ‘forever wars’. Trump knows only too well that American public opinion is staunchly opposed to Middle Eastern wars.
The replacement of Mike Waltz as NSA on May 1 (a known Israeli proxy who found himself in the top echelons of Trump administration) and the subsequent purge of the entire pack of ‘Iran hawks’ in the National Security staff under him, signalled that Trump is wary of Netanyahu’s diabolical plots to derail his negotiations with Iran through back channels. (here and here)
During their phone conversation on Saturday, according to the Kremlin readout, Trump and Putin agreed to prioritise the “negotiating track in Iran’s nuclear programme… Trump noted, the team of US negotiators is ready for resuming work with Iranian representatives.” Clearly, a military confrontation with Iran does not figure in Trump’s calculus.
That being the case, Netanyahu’s bombastic rhetoric apart, Israel’s best interests lie in ending this futile war in the quickest way possible. Conceivably, that is also the preference of the IDF. A protracted war on its own steam with a clutch of crusader nations in tow as cheer leaders is not something that can save Israel from destruction.
Curiously, Trump in his latest Truth Social post on Sunday after the conversation with Putin advised Israel “to make a deal” with Iran! Does that fit into Netanyahu’s war mongering? And Trump went on to burnish his own credentials as a peacemaker president!
Trump concluded predicting that “we will have PEACE, soon, between Israel and Iran!” Succinctly put, Trump has no intentions whatsoever to risk American lives by fighting Netanyahu’s wars.
Obviously, “PEACE, soon” will be Russia and Iran’s preference too, as serious negotiations can be resumed and agreement reached that would herald a US-Iran normalisation and the lifting of American sanctions. But does that suit Netanyahu?
The paradox is, Israel has no future in a protracted war with Iran, but an inconclusive end to this war will pose the high risk for Netanyahu of a cascading demand for a regime change in Israel. Loss of power means loss of parliamentary immunity from prosecution that Netanyahu hitherto enjoyed from corruption charges against him and his family members, and a possible imprisonment.
Read more: Iran Attack: Netanyahu Gambles Big, Rediff.com, June 14, 2025
Putin holds phone conversations with Israeli PM and Iranian president
RT | June 13, 2025
Russian President Vladimir Putin has held phone conversations with his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the escalation in the Middle East following the Israeli strike against Iran.
Israel launched a major attack on Iran overnight targeting nuclear facilities and various military installations. The strikes continued into the day, inflicting considerable material damage and casualties on Iran’s top military leadership and, reportedly, high-profile nuclear scientists.
“The Russian president expressed his condolences to the leadership and people of the Islamic Republic of Iran in connection with the numerous human casualties, including civilians, resulting from the Israeli strikes,” the Kremlin press service said in a statement on Friday.
Russia “condemns Israel’s actions, which violate the UN Charter and international law,” Putin stressed, according to the statement. At the same time, the Russian leader expressed a readiness to mediate and to “continue to contribute to the de-escalation of the conflict between Iran and Israel.”
Putin also underscored the importance of “returning to the negotiation process and resolving all issues related to the Iranian nuclear program exclusively through political and diplomatic means.” The ongoing escalation “is fraught with the most disastrous consequences for the entire region,” he warned.
The Israeli attack comes after five rounds of US-Iranian talks about Tehran’s nuclear program that effectively stalled and failed to produce any tangible result. The sixth round of negotiations was expected to take place in Oman on Sunday.
Iran has vowed to retaliate for the attack, insisting that it “cannot have been carried out without the coordination and authorization of the United States.” US President Donald Trump claimed he knew about the impending strikes beforehand, describing them as “very successful.” Trump also suggested Tehran brought the attack upon itself through its alleged reluctance to strike a nuclear deal.
“We gave them a chance and they didn’t take it. They got hit hard, very hard. They got hit about as hard as you’re going to get hit. And there’s more to come. A lot more,” he said, commenting on the attack.
Western hypocrisy: ‘Israel’ bombs Iran, Tehran told not to retaliate
Al Mayadeen | June 13, 2025
Top Western leaders have called for restraint in the wake of the ongoing Israeli aggression on Iranian territory. Brutal strikes targeted military, nuclear, and civilian infrastructure and led to multiple casualties. Yet, while urging de-escalation, these leaders have largely avoided condemning “Israel’s” violation of international law, choosing instead to direct their diplomatic pressure on Tehran not to retaliate.
The double standard is stark: while Iran has consistently operated within the framework of international law and the UN Charter, the Israeli entity has carried out cross-border aggression with impunity. Under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran has a recognized legal right to self-defense, a point conspicuously absent from most Western statements.
Europe avoids accountability for ‘Israel’
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called the situation, not Israeli attacks, “dangerous” and appealed for restraint from “all sides”, despite Iran being the target of the aggression. Kallas, who reportedly spoke with Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar shortly after the attack, did not denounce the strikes or the violations of Iranian sovereignty.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed the vague language, urging parties to “exercise maximum restraint, de-escalate immediately, and refrain from retaliation.” The call placed the burden on Iran to avoid a response, while the Israeli entity’s unlawful actions were met with silence.
On his part, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani both stressed the need for “diplomacy”, but neither condemned the unilateral Israeli aggression. Tajani stated, “There is no solution but a diplomatic one. Actions and reactions are dangerous,” drawing false parity between attacker and victim.
Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron convened a special defense meeting but offered no criticism of “Israel’s” blatant breach of international norms.
Australia and NATO echo the US line
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, speaking from Fiji, framed the issue around Iran’s nuclear program rather than the illegal nature of the Israeli strike. “We are very conscious of the threat that Iran becoming a nuclear state would represent,” he said, further aligning with Washington’s narrative. Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs updated travel advisories, urging Australians to leave “Israel” and the occupied Palestinian territories.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, while warning of escalation, also avoided assigning blame, waving the “de-escalation” card for vague purposes.
“De-escalation is now the first order of the day,” he said, reflecting a Western consensus that implicitly tolerates Israeli militarism while expecting Iranian restraint.
Walking a delicate line
Former US President Donald Trump confirmed that he had been briefed ahead of the strikes and stated, “Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb. We are hoping to get back to the negotiating table,” again shifting the narrative away from Israeli accountability.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the United States had no involvement in the strikes but issued a warning to Tehran, “Israel took unilateral action against Iran,” and any retaliation must not target US interests.
“We are not involved in strikes against Iran, and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,” Rubio said in an official statement. “Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense, Rubio added, although it was “Israel” that always initiated attacks against the Islamic Republic.
“Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel,” Rubio said, without addressing whether Washington would defend “Israel” in the event of Iranian retaliation, departing from traditional US messaging that often emphasizes unwavering support for the Israeli regime. This support came directly from the US president himself, who rushed to “Israel’s” rescue.
‘Both sides’ should avoid further destabilization
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled the attacks “concerning” but urged all sides to reduce tensions, stopping short of condemning the aggression.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who received a direct call from Netanyahu, affirmed “Israel’s” so-called right to “self-defense” and echoed longstanding Western concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. He, too, urged both sides to avoid further destabilization, without acknowledging who initiated the escalation.
Tehran maintains right to self-defense
Iranian officials have underscored that the Islamic Republic has not initiated the war and that its actions have consistently adhered to international law. Tehran has emphasized that its right to respond is enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, asserting that “Israel’s” continued violations of international law, coupled with Western silence, further undermine the credibility of global institutions.
The widespread Western calls for restraint, directed almost exclusively at Iran, highlight a longstanding hypocrisy: that Israeli violations of international law are tolerated, while Iranian sovereignty and legal rights are dismissed or ignored.
It is worth noting that this is happening as Oman was planning to host the sixth round of US‑Iran nuclear talks this Sunday in Muscat.
Tehran and Washington have held five rounds of talks since April to carve a new nuclear deal to replace the 2015 accord that Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018.
Iran has always reiterated its commitment to diplomacy while upholding its commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, while the West has manipulated the agency to serve geopolitical goals.
It is worth noting that Iranian media outlets on Thursday published a series of documents that reveal covert coordination between IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and “Israel”, a collaboration Iranian officials say was designed to politicize the agency’s oversight of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
Featured Video
Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
China and India have ‘low intellectual potential’ – top Zelensky aide
RT | September 13, 2023
The people leading India and China lack the ability to predict the long-term consequences of their policies, a senior aide to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has claimed.
Mikhail Podoliak pointed to what he called “the problem of the modern world,” singling out India and China, in an interview with Ukrainian media on Tuesday.
“The problem with these countries is that they do not analyze the consequences of their own moves. These countries, unfortunately, have low intellectual potential,” he said.
Podoliak suggested that even though India has a lunar exploration program, it “does not mean that this nation understands what the modern world precisely is.”
The dismissive remarks were in the context of Beijing and New Delhi’s refusal to support Kiev in its conflict with Moscow. Podoliak complained that India, China and Türkiye were “profiting” from the war by maintaining trade with Russia.
“Technically, it is in their national interests,” he acknowledged, before presenting his view of what would benefit China in the long-run.
“China should be interested in Russia disappearing, because it is an archaic nation that drags China into unnecessary conflicts,” he claimed. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
papasha408 on Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given… papasha408 on Is Israel About to Return to G… Bill Francis on NSW Premier Admits New “Securi… Richard Ong on Israeli forces arrest writer a… Bill Francis on How reporting facts can now la… Gemma on Israel’s diamond industr… Bill Francis on Victoria Moves to Force Online… papasha408 on The Empire of Lies: How the BB… loongtip on US Weighs Port Restrictions on… Bill Francis on Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate… Sheree Sheree on I was canceled by three newspa… Richard Ong on Czech–Slovak alignment signals…
Aletho News- The new German totalitarianism
- Stanislav Krapivnik: Massive Escalation – Attack on Putin’s Residence
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- Dayton At 30: US Betrayal Old And New
- UNRWA head slams ‘outrageous’ Israeli law to cut water, energy to agency’s facilities
- Trump Says Hamas Will Be Given a ‘Short Period of Time’ to Disarm
- Is Israel About to Return to Genocide? Three Scenarios for What Comes Next
- Netanyahu Aligned Think Tanker: Somaliland Offered To ‘Absorb’ One Million Palestinians
- The DOJ is flaunting the law on the Epstein Files. Why isn’t Pam Bondi in handcuffs?
- The Epstein Saga: Chapter 4, Good Old Robert
- If Americans Knew
- Gaza health officials report outbreaks of water-borne illnesses, flu – Not a ceasefire Day 82
- TCN Warns – “ISRAEL FIRST: U.S. May Attack Iran Again”
- Hamas calls on Israel to allow impartial investigation into 7 October attacks
- Indiegogo Withholds $51K In Donations From MintPress in Financial Censorship Crackdown
- Gaza races to preserve what remains of its 5,000-year-old archaeological legacy
- Gaza health official says miscarriages surge as births fall by 40%
- Leahy Law Requires Ban on Aid to Israeli Police Unit for Killing Two Palestinians Who Surrendered
- Israel blocks entry of eye drops for blind people in Gaza
- I did not understand I grew up in a concentration camp until I left Gaza
- One excavator, 10,000 bodies, a sea of rubble: inside Gaza’s effort to retrieve and bury its dead
- No Tricks Zone
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
- Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue Warns “Germany Won’t Make It” If Winter Turns Severe
- Merry Christmas Everybody!
- Two More New Studies Show The Southern Ocean And Antarctica Were Warmer In The 1970s
- Der Spiegel Caught Making Up Reports About Conservative America (Again)
- New Study: 8000 Years Ago Relative Sea Level Was 30 Meters Higher Than Today Across East Antarctica
- The Wind Energy Paradox: “Why More Wind Turbines Don’t Always Mean More Power”
- New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
- Dialing Back The Panic: German Physics Prof Sees No Evidence Of Climate Tipping Points!
Aletho News 