Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The art of the recycled deal: Trump and the outcome Israel cannot tolerate

By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | June 17, 2026

There are many lessons to be learned from the latest made-for-Israel war on Iran. The first and most damning is that the war resolved the very crisis it created. Donald Trump celebrated the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the lifting of the blockade against Iran. Two conditions that were fully in place before Benjamin Netanyahu dog walked Trump into this war. The agreement that concluded the war took us back to exactly where we stood before America spent $200 billion, and where Americans continue to pay Israeli surcharge tax at the pump and grocery stores.

As for Iran’s nuclear program, the arithmetic does not lie. The 400 kilograms of 60-percent enriched uranium that Iran possessed were zero before Trump — pressured by his largest Israel-first donors — tore up the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran had fully complied not only with the IAEA non-proliferation agreement, which Israel has never signed nor accepted, but with the additional protocols governing verification and monitoring of its civilian nuclear program.

Trump canceled the deal anyway, not because it failed America, but because it did not satisfy Israel’s veto.

The deepest irony is that Iran’s nuclear knowledge and capabilities are more advanced today than when Trump discarded the JCPOA. Any new agreement — even one stricter in structure than the original — is therefore being negotiated from a fundamentally weaker position than the one that existed in 2018. No treaty can unlearn what Iran already knows.

On Monday, June 15, Trump heralded the end of war bragging that Iran agreed not to develop nuclear weapons. In a leaked copy of the supposed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), item 8 states: “The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons ...” The word reiterates is not incidental. It is a direct reference to Article III of the 2015 JCPOA, which Trump most likely never read, where Iran had already affirmed: “… that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons.” Same commitment. Same language. Different signatures. Twelve weeks of a war that went nowhere to get here.

From “There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” to celebrate an MoU to reopen a Strait that was open before $200 billion and countless American and Iranian lives were squandered. Trump’s triumph is much ado about nothing.

He canceled an existing deal that took years to negotiate, inflicted economic hardship on ordinary Iranians, and allowed Iran’s nuclear advancement to leap forward. It is, in the most literal sense, like redefining water as H2O. The molecule did not change. Only the dressing did. Israel’s war took Trump back to the starting point, at twice the cost to American taxpayers.

The same special-interest group that pushed Trump to cancel the JCPOA, lobbied him long before the 2024 election. Israel-first donors poured hundreds of million into his campaign as a down payment for this war. Netanyahu visited Trump seven times in thirteen months, manipulating, and scheming for another made-for-Israel war.

This war should also carry a lesson for the Arab Gulf states that long believed American military bases were a guarantee of their security. Instead, they found themselves sidelined and never consulted on a war waged, directly or indirectly, from their own soil, ultimately in service of an Israeli agenda. Foreign military presence does not deliver security. It delivers dependency. Lasting regional stability is built through regional cooperation, on terms beneficial to the region.

More importantly, the region must now reckon with a pattern it can no longer afford to ignore: wherever Israel goes, instability follows. The so-called Abraham Accords brought Israel into the Gulf. What followed was bombs, drones and economic ruins never seen since the Second World War.

I have lived in the Gulf. The only pop people could hear was the backfire of an aging car exhaust. In the last three months, friends shared recordings of ballistic missiles splitting the sky and drones buzzing overhead. Israel did not bring a defense shield; it brought a target. Its presence is a magnet for unrest. It is a carcass attracting wasps.

In fact, Israel is an agent of disorder and a parasite nurtured by chaos. It wraps itself in the language of partnership, mutual benefit, and shared values, deceiving others into believing the arrangement is reciprocal when it is entirely one-directional.

Israel’s record speaks for itself: a genocide in Gaza, ethnic cleansing across the West Bank, 1.3 million internal refugees in Lebanon, the occupation of Syrian land following Assad’s fall, destabilization operations in northern Iraq and Sudan.

In Iraq, the American invasion and regime change did not satisfy Israel’s insatiable lust for total chaos. It targeted Iraqi scientists and waged war against knowledge itself. The blueprint, in this view, has not changed for Iran. Israel’s dissatisfaction over the MoU with Tehran is not that it fails to produce a non-nuclear Iran, but that it fails to wipe out knowledge. Its broader objective is the suppression of scientific and technological development across the region. Israel seeks neighbors unable to think independently, consume, not produce, import rather than innovate. It wants to maintain a monopoly over nuclear capabilities and control over regional scientific advancement.

Israel brought ruins to the U.S., too. The made-for-Israel Iraq war helped detonate the financial crisis of 2008, saddling future American generations with trillions in accumulated debt that has never been fully reckoned with. A war that Trump condemned, criticizing Democratic leadership for failing to impeach George W. Bush who “got us into the war with lies.”

The cost of current Trump’s made-for-Israel war on Iran requires no economist to explain. It arrives uninvited in every American home, at the meat counter, in every grocery bill, every gas receipt, every price that keeps rising without explanation. They may not realize its extent, yet. By the time they do, the damage to the U.S. economy, as in 2008, will be too deep to reverse.

To undermine potential peace with Iran, the ungrateful Israel-first loyalists like Ben Shapiro, Mark Levin are already panicking and challenging Trump’s MoU. Israel will activate the constellation of media outlets controlled by Israel-first billionaires to shape what Americans see, read, and are permitted to question. The once-respected 60 Minutes, under a new Israel-first boss, Bari Weiss, allows Netanyahu to handpick his own interviewer. Who knows, maybe he submits his own questions, too.

Now, Netanyahu and American Zionists have sixty days to sabotage a final deal with Iran. Israel will mobilize its donors, lobby Congress, and if that fails, resort to what it has perfected. A false flag operation against American forces in the region, or another assassination in Lebanon.

A conflagration ensues, and once again, it will be fought with American money and American lives. Because a Middle East free of American military entanglement is the one outcome Israel cannot tolerate — a prospect more threatening than any Iranian nuclear centrifuge.

June 17, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on The art of the recycled deal: Trump and the outcome Israel cannot tolerate

Lebanon is now part of Iran’s deterrence doctrine

Lebanon is now central to Iran’s deterrence strategy, with pressure on allies treated as pressure on Tehran itself.

By Peiman Salehi | The Cradle | June 17, 2026

“We are consolidating an Iranian equation in the region, one in which Iran will no longer exercise restraint in the face of any aggression or disorder. It will cost the Americans some pain and expense, but they will get used to it.” – Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary National Security Commission

Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary National Security Commission, was describing a policy already underway rather than offering a warning.

Lebanon is where that policy is now being tested, and where much of what western analysts thought they understood about Iranian strategic behavior is being quietly dismantled.

A policy already in motion

The most persistent misconception about Iran’s intervention in the defense of Lebanon is that it is driven by ideology – by revolutionary solidarity with Hezbollah, by commitments that rational statecraft would eventually subordinate to national interest.

This reading is not simply incomplete. It mistakes the symptom for the diagnosis. What is unfolding is a deliberate reconfiguration of Iran’s deterrence architecture, one in which the security of key regional partners is no longer a separate file that adversaries can negotiate away in isolation, but a constituent element of Iran’s own national security perimeter.

Something else is also being overlooked. The confrontation over Lebanon marked the first time the Islamic Republic entered a direct military confrontation, primarily in defense of a key ally. The decision points to a broader evolution in Iranian strategic thinking, one whose implications extend far beyond Lebanon.

The limits of strategic patience

For years, Tehran operated under what officials and analysts described as strategic patience. The approach prioritized responses to direct attacks on Iranian territory, personnel, or core interests, while absorbing pressure across other fronts. This framework shaped Iran’s posture through successive crises, from the assassination of Qassem Soleimani to repeated Israeli strikes on Iranian assets across the region.

The approach was internally consistent, but over time its costs became clearer. Acts of restraint were increasingly read as openings to test the next front, while each separately negotiated file encouraged further compartmentalization.

Tehran’s takeaway, formed incrementally, was that this pattern was being used to press its positions rather than stabilize them.

Iranian decision-makers have since drawn a conclusion from that experience, and it is now reflected in their posture. Reuters reported in March that Iran had informed intermediaries as early as mid-March that any ceasefire arrangement must include a halt to Israeli operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon – linking the end of the broader war to a front that Washington insists is a separate matter.

Six regional sources confirm the linkage. One was explicit: “Iran is prioritizing Lebanon; it will not accept Israeli violations in Lebanon like what happened after the 2024 ceasefire.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated the same principle publicly, arguing that a ceasefire between Iran and the US constitutes a comprehensive ceasefire across all fronts, and that any violation on one front is a violation across all fronts.

Washington finds this inconvenient. That, from Tehran’s perspective, is precisely the point.

Reputation as deterrence 

The underlying logic is not difficult to follow, and it is not unique to Iran. Great powers derive influence not from military capability alone, but from reputation – specifically, the reputation for honoring commitments when doing so is costly.

This is why NATO remains the organizing principle of US security strategy in Europe despite its expense and its complications. It is why Washington maintains military installations across five continents that serve no immediate operational purpose.

The function is primarily reputational. Presence signals commitment, and commitment deters. Iranian strategists have reached a similar conclusion regarding their own regional position.

If Tehran abandons Hezbollah under sustained pressure – military, diplomatic, or economic – the signal sent to every other partner would be unmistakable, with Iranian guarantees no longer seen as reliable under sustained pressure.

In a region where Iran is constructing an alternative security architecture, that signal would be more damaging than any battlefield setback.

This is less about Hezbollah as an individual actor and more about the network of relationships of which it is a part. Surrendering one component under pressure does not stabilize the structure. It shows adversaries how much pressure to apply to the next one. Arab states of the Persian Gulf, watching from the sidelines, are drawing their own conclusions about what kind of power Iran is becoming.

From demonstration to leverage

Those conclusions are shaped by more than alliance politics. In two consecutive confrontations, Iran held its ground against the combined military pressure of the US and Israel – the two most powerful militaries operating in the region. That outcome is not lost on anyone in the neighborhood.

Iran has now demonstrated, in practice rather than theory, that it can absorb strikes and continue functioning as a regional actor. The New York Times (NYT), not an outlet inclined toward flattering Tehran, acknowledged that Iran has emerged from this period as one of the powers shaping West Asia’s future. Whatever one thinks of its politics, that assessment is difficult to dismiss.

The Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz reinforce this shift. What once functioned largely as a latent deterrent is now being used more directly. When oil prices jumped sharply on reports that Iran–US negotiations were breaking down, the market was pricing in a reality that policymakers in Washington have spent years avoiding: Iran’s geographic position is a permanent feature of any regional settlement, not a variable that military pressure can eliminate.

Roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supply moves through waters that Iran can reach. This leverage derives from geography and is now being used with a level of deliberateness that was less visible a decade ago.

Writing the next regional order

The Lebanon question cannot be separated from the broader contest over who writes the rules of the next regional order.

For decades, the US set those rules through military presence, alliance structures, and the credible threat of overwhelming force. Iranian officials increasingly assess that this period is shifting – not due to a collapse of American power, but because the conditions that once sustained its dominance no longer exist in combination.

Iran’s objective is to ensure that the next order is not written exclusively on American or Israeli terms, and that Iran participates as a power with recognized interests in shaping what comes next.

In that context, Lebanon becomes a test case. It is where Iran seeks to demonstrate that its red lines are enforceable, that its commitments to partners carry weight, and that the equation described by Rezaei is policy rather than posture.

The ceasefire remains fragile, with negotiations continuing through Qatari and Pakistani intermediaries, while escalation carries risks that Tehran does not dismiss. The direction, however, is no longer ambiguous.

Beyond patience 

Strategic patience remains, but has been superseded by a broader framework.

In its place is a doctrine in which compartmentalization by adversaries is met with deliberate integration by Tehran, in which an attack on a partner is treated as an attack on the order Iran is building, and in which the costs of sustained pressure are designed to accumulate rather than dissipate.

Iran has demonstrated that it can fight. It controls a chokepoint that the global economy cannot ignore. And it has shown it is willing to act before its own territory is directly targeted.

That combination – military credibility, geographic leverage, and a willingness to move early in defense of allies – is what a regional power looks like.

Lebanon is where Iran is making that case.

June 17, 2026 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Comments Off on Lebanon is now part of Iran’s deterrence doctrine

Iran announces plan to link electricity grid with Qatar, transfer up to 1,000 MW of power

The Cradle | June 17, 2026

Iran is planning to connect its electricity grid with Qatar and announced on 16 June that work on the matter is in its “final stage,” reviving a years-old agreement with the Gulf state in the aftermath of the brutal US-Israeli war against the Islamic Republic.

Iranian Energy Minister Abbas Aliabadi said on Tuesday that “the connection between Iran and Qatar will begin soon.”

He added that “studies are in the final stage, and we are beginning the implementation phase.”

Aliabadi also said Tehran was “studying” power grid connection with other Gulf countries, according to Tasnim News Agency.

The minister affirmed that this would happen “in the near future.” The deal will involve a transfer of up to 1,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity.

Talks on the matter had been taking place between Tehran and Doha in December 2023.

The two countries had previously signed an electricity memorandum of understanding (MoU) under the late Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi’s government.

The new announcement comes several days after Qatar denied a Washington Post report that said the Gulf state cut a “secret” deal with Iran to avoid further retaliatory strikes.

“Any suggestion that operational decisions relating to energy production were – or have ever been – made in coordination with Iran, for Iran’s benefit, or to influence the course of the conflict is entirely unfounded,” Qatar’s International Media Office said on 12 June.

The Washington Post had cited western and regional officials as saying that Qatar approached Iran at the start of the war, following Tehran’s major strike on the key Ras Laffan energy facility.

“Seeking to protect its economic crown jewel, Qatar approached Tehran … to present a mutually beneficial arrangement: Iran would refrain from hitting Ras Laffan, and Qatar would halt gas production unilaterally – a move that would send energy prices soaring and put economic pressure on the US and Israel to shorten the war,” the sources said.

After the Iranian strike on Ras Laffan, Doha said the attack caused $20 billion in losses and wiped out 17 percent of the Gulf state’s gas export capacity.

Iran largely refrained from attacking the country in the days that followed, although some drone attacks and explosions were reported.

Tehran said during the war that many attacks on the Gulf were actually Israeli “false-flags” aimed at inflaming tensions.

Political commentator Tucker Carlson also reported in early March that Qatar and Saudi Arabia detained Mossad agents who were planning bombings, implying that the foiled attacks were designed to be pinned on Iran.

Tehran’s announcement on the electricity agreement with Qatar coincided with a Bloomberg report that said Qatar is planning to rapidly increase liquefied natural gas (LNG) production once the Strait of Hormuz reopens, aiming to restore up to 80 percent of its export volume within two months.

June 17, 2026 Posted by | Economics, False Flag Terrorism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Iran announces plan to link electricity grid with Qatar, transfer up to 1,000 MW of power

Pax Iranica? The end of uncontested U.S. military hegemony

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | June 17, 2026

Anyone would be skeptical about the sustainability of the “peace” taking shape in the Middle East from the Memorandum of Understanding to be signed between Iran and the United States in a few days. It is plausible that it may not even be signed. And even if it is signed, considering that it involves a gradual, phased unfolding of a peace process that would last at least two months, it is hard to believe that everything will go as intended by the parties and the Pakistani mediators.

Nevertheless, in the terms that this “peace” is presented and which have been accepted by the U.S., we are facing an overwhelming victory for Iran. Even if the diplomatic process is derailed, nothing will change the fact that the U.S. accepted peace with Iran on terms unilaterally favorable to the Persians, leaving Tehran in a much stronger position than before the war began.

First of all, the U.S. failure should be seen as obvious and rests on a very simple assessment: Washington failed to achieve any strategic objective in the conflict with Iran: the “regime” was not overthrown, the nuclear program was not destroyed, military capabilities were not eliminated, support for the Axis of Resistance was not liquidated, and finally, it was not possible to reopen the Strait of Hormuz by force.

The U.S. committed the most basic error of any conflict: misjudging the balance of power. And in this, naturally, the U.S. was led into error by Israel and its allies within the U.S.. From the start, reports indicate that the Pentagon opposed military action against Iran, for good reasons.

Even considering the tactical and operational dimensions, the U.S. was unable to impose itself as intended. The U.S. failed to achieve air superiority over Iran and resorted to launching missiles from outside Iranian airspace. Most times the U.S. penetrated Iranian airspace, they encountered anti-aircraft systems capable of shooting down even F35s. The U.S. also could not take advantage of its regional military bases, which were harassed and operationally neutralized by barrages of missiles and drones, complicating U.S. logistics and forcing them to use increasingly distant bases. Iran also managed to force U.S. aircraft carriers to keep their distance, with one returning to port for maintenance. Furthermore, the U.S. demonstrated that it is not yet ready to face a war in which drones play a central tactical role. But perhaps the most significant embarrassment was the fact that Iran forced the U.S. to confront its own industrial shortcomings—the U.S. expended large quantities of Tomahawks, Patriots, and other types of offensive and defensive missiles, which are produced at a trickle. The fact that U.S. missile stocks plummeted rapidly without any objective being achieved was certainly decisive for U.S. reluctance to restart the conflict.

There was also the poorly explained situation involving the destruction of several aircraft and helicopters in an alleged attempt to rescue a downed pilot (a pilot who was simply never seen again and was not even reliably identified). The fact that the ceasefire came just days after this alleged rescue operation suggests that the story is very poorly told and that perhaps that was a failed special forces operation to seize Iran’s enriched uranium.

That is precisely why reducing the issue to “control of the Strait of Hormuz” is nothing short of amateurish, since control over the Strait itself was only possible because Iran surprised the U.S. tactically through its ability to present challenges for which the U.S. had no answers and to deny the U.S. certain important military advantages on that terrain.

Naturally, control of the Strait of Hormuz had a significant impact on the conflict, making it more complex and a global issue. Carrying out attacks against Arab Gulf countries rather than just U.S. and Israeli targets followed the same logic of demonstrating power and turning the conflict into a broader, more complex problem. This stance alone forced Qatar to concede and seek a separate peace and rapprochement with Iran.

Now, if pointing out the U.S.’s inability to achieve its objectives, as well as its tactical difficulties, is not enough to demonstrate its defeat by Iran, then the imbalance of the Memorandum of Understanding, which represents a draft peace treaty, is certainly sufficient proof.

The Memorandum is scheduled to unfold in three phases. The first immediate result is the end of military actions on all fronts and the end of the U.S. naval blockade. The situation in Lebanon is already extremely uncertain due to the “Joker factor” that is Israel. But the end of the naval blockade, which is already a reality, has left the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian control, and even if Iran does not charge a “toll,” it is already charging a “service fee” to authorize ship transit.

The next phase, lasting 30 days and beginning after the Memorandum is signed, involves a U.S. promise not to increase its military presence around the Persian Gulf, the return of $12 billion in frozen assets to Iran, the immediate removal of sanctions on Iranian oil, gas, and petrochemical exports, confirmation of joint management of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran and Oman, and a U.S. promise to pressure Israel to withdraw from Lebanon. In return for all this, Iran promises not to seek to develop or acquire nuclear weapons.

And in the final phase, expected to last at least 60 days, the return of the remaining $12 billion in frozen assets, the granting of $300 billion for the reconstruction of Iran (equivalent to reparations), and the beginning of the process of removing all remaining sanctions. In return, Iran promises to agree to discuss its uranium enrichment.

In short, Iran’s obligations under this Memorandum are minimal, while the commitments undertaken by the U.S. are disproportionate. Why take on all these commitments and accept all these conditions if the U.S. “won“—as Trump says—and could “destroy Iran at any moment”?

The reality is that between an international oil crisis, low missile stockpiles, the resilience of the Iranian population, and difficulty dealing with hypersonic missiles and drones, the U.S. suddenly found itself in a potential quagmire capable of causing infinitely greater harm than any conceivable benefit. Perhaps finally aware of the mistake of starting this conflict, with very low popularity, hosting a World Cup, and worried about a myriad of internal and external crises, Trump seems eager to get rid of the “Iranian issue.”

What is proven here is that although the U.S. remains a military superpower, it is possible to defeat them under certain specific conditions and with sufficient preparation. We are not saying here that any country could defeat the U.S. in a war, but that regional powers of a certain scale, immunized against color revolutions and with years of military preparation and investment in technologies capable of negating the potential of the U.S. Navy and its air superiority, can defeat them in a defensive war.

Having recently gone through the “unipolar moment” of uncontested U.S. superiority in the post-Cold War era, whose highest expression was the rapid destruction of Saddam Hussein’s regime, clearly the world is no longer the same, which in itself is proof that we are in a phase of geopolitical transition toward multipolarity.

Weakened in the Middle East, Iran is left in control of the Strait of Hormuz. Its ability to simultaneously confront all the Arab Gulf countries has been proven, and Israel’s inability to defeat Iran without U.S. help has been as well. This opens up for the Middle East the possibility of a regional pax Iranica, though much water will yet flow under this bridge.

Israel, however, remains a problem. Driven by a messianic ideology and accustomed to being treated with privileges derived from the influence of its diaspora, Israel does not appear willing to respect the terms of the Memorandum, nor to give up trying to establish a Greater Israel by force of arms. It is the Israeli factor that makes it difficult to fully realize a peace agreement between Iran and the U.S..

June 17, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Pax Iranica? The end of uncontested U.S. military hegemony

Terms of Iran-US MoU revealed: Bloomberg

This “leaked” information has been challenged as incomplete by the Iranian side

Al Mayadeen | June 17, 2026

Bloomberg News has published details of the memorandum of understanding reached between Tehran and Washington, whose central provision stipulates that both countries and their respective allies will declare an immediate and permanent end to military operations on all fronts upon signing the agreement, including in Lebanon.

According to the text cited by Bloomberg, both sides committed to refraining from hostile acts, threats, or the use of force against one another. The memorandum also includes mutual pledges to respect sovereignty and territorial integrity and to avoid interference in each other’s internal affairs.

The agreement further stipulates that Tehran and Washington will enter formal and direct negotiations on a comprehensive settlement after receiving guarantees regarding the implementation of key provisions. The parties aim to conclude a final agreement within 60 days, with the possibility of an extension, before it is ultimately endorsed through a binding UN Security Council resolution.

Naval blockade to be lifted, shipping to resume

The memorandum includes immediate measures concerning military and maritime issues. The United States has pledged to lift its naval blockade on Iran upon signing the agreement and to refrain from obstructing or interfering with Iranian maritime activities.

In return, Iran will work to restore shipping through the Strait of Hormuz within 30 days, taking into consideration the removal of any remaining logistical or security obstacles.

Bloomberg also reported that Washington committed to withdrawing its forces within 30 days of signing a final agreement. Until then, both parties have agreed to maintain the status quo, whereby Iran retains its current nuclear program while the United States refrains from imposing new sanctions or increasing its military presence in the region.

Roadmap for sanctions relief and economic recovery

On the economic front, the memorandum establishes the foundations for broad financial and sanctions-related arrangements.

According to Bloomberg, Washington committed to releasing frozen Iranian funds and assets and issuing immediate exemptions for Iranian crude oil exports, petrochemical products and related banking services from sanctions restrictions upon signing the agreement.

The United States also pledged to lift sanctions on Iran according to an agreed timetable as part of a final settlement.

The memorandum further states that Washington will cooperate with regional partners to develop a mutually agreed plan for Iran’s economic rehabilitation and development. Bloomberg reported that the plan guarantees funding of no less than $300 billion, with implementation mechanisms to be determined during the 60-day negotiation period.

Nuclear issues deferred to final agreement

Regarding the nuclear file, Iran reiterated in the memorandum that it will never produce nuclear weapons.

However, both sides agreed that the fate of Iran’s enriched nuclear materials and all remaining nuclear-related issues would be deferred to the forthcoming comprehensive negotiations and addressed as part of the final agreement.

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Terms of Iran-US MoU revealed: Bloomberg

The Straight of Hormuz is Open for Iranian Business… Oil is Moving and Iran is Getting Paid

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | June 16, 2026 

Let’s give Donald Trump credit for one thing… He kept his word and lifted the US blockade on Iranian ships and Iran is going to town with its oil tankers moving in and out of the Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz.

This does not mean that the MOU with Iran, which is supposed to be signed in Geneva on Friday, will hold, but it is a step in the direction of de-escalation. So the question we ought to ask is why did Donald Trump blink and accept the proposal that Iran proffered way back in April?

I think there are several reasons, but the principal one is that the US is running out of oil, which means Trump will not be able to artificially suppress the price of gasoline. US strategic oil reserves have fallen to their lowest level since 1983, reports CNN. The decline comes amid continued drawdowns to mitigate the impact of the conflict with Iran. Reserves have dropped to 340.3 million barrels, last seen during the Reagan administration, which was still building the stockpile. US daily consumption is 20 to 21 million barrels in 2026, which means the reserve can supply 17 days of gasoline, which falls on July 1st.

Donald Trump may be in mental decline, but he still retains enough smarts to understand that an oil shortage and soaring prices of gasoline in July is politically untenable.

Another factor is that US installations and aircraft in the Persian Gulf took a helluva beating last week. The US attacks on Iranian installations in the Strait of Hormuz on June 9 and 10 provoked a fierce Iranian response that hit targets in Iraq (CIA-bases supporting the Kurds), Kuwait (the Ali Al Salem airbase, Camp Buehring in northeastern Kuwait, as well as a makeshift operations center near the civilian port of Shuaiba), the Prince Saud Airbase adjacent to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the Mowaffaq Al Salti Airbase in Jordan. The attacks were devastating and reportedly employed some new Chinese missiles supplied to Iran.

Then there is the pressure from Gulf Arabs to end the attacks on Iran. Iran, backed by China, Russia and Pakistan, engaged in intense diplomacy with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The UAE, who has been a thorn in the side of Iran and Saudi Arabia and has been identified as an ally of Israel, sent a delegation to Iran on 9 June. Reuters reported that the UAE had agreed to release billions of dollars for Iran — two regional sources put the figure at $10 billion (including more than $3 billion already delivered), while two other sources put it at $20 billion, with the funds agreed in exchange for Iran halting attacks on the UAE. However, the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs categorically denied those reports, stating the allegations were “entirely false and unfounded” and that no frozen Iranian funds had been released, transferred, or facilitated through the UAE. What is undisputed is that the UAE sent a high-level delegation to talk to the Iranian government.

A high-level Qatari delegation arrived in Tehran on Wednesday, June 10, to hold talks on bilateral relations, regional developments, and diplomatic efforts to end the conflict between Iran and the United States. The delegation arrived at midday and the visit came after Trump accused Iran of stalling and said Tehran must now “pay the price.” AFP, citing an informed diplomat, reported the Qatari negotiating team had traveled to Tehran following consultations with American officials to help narrow remaining differences between the two sides.

A senior Pakistani source with access to information about Pakistan’s role in mediating the talks between the US and Iran, reported that Pakistan, with the encouragement of China and Russia, was making progress in its talks with the Saudis and the Qataris to stop hosting US military bases in their respective countries. These talks coincided with Saudi Arabia denying the US the use of its airspace to attack Iranian targets during Project Freedom.

Will the deal be signed on Friday? I remain skeptical simply because of the enormous Zionist backlash being visited on Donald Trump by angry Israeli officials and US politicians beholden to AIPAC. However, as I write this Monday night, the deal appears intact.

Why hasn’t Donald Trump released the text of the MOU? Two possible explanations (and I’ll be interested in what you think is the most plausible): 1) There are still areas of disagreement between Iran and the US and they are still trying to work out a compromise, 2) Trump does not want to provide the details beforehand fearing that the Zionist backlash could derail the Friday signing ceremony in Geneva. The diplomatic roller coaster is running full blast… It will be a wild ride until Friday.

Video interviews

June 16, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on The Straight of Hormuz is Open for Iranian Business… Oil is Moving and Iran is Getting Paid

Time for Trump to Tell Benjamin Netanyahu to Go Away!

Netanyahu always says “What you own belongs to me”

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • June 14, 2026

In addition to the regular lethal American and Israeli attacks on Iran, last week alone the Israeli military killed 13 Gazans and 13 Lebanese. Gaza is now 70% Israeli occupied, contrary to what was agreed upon in the ceasefire arrangement, as is much of south Lebanon. More than 1,000 Gazans have been murdered by Israel since the temporary ceasefire was declared in October 2025. And one might add to the toll the constant aggression in south Syria, where Israel is creating an army base presence to be followed by settlers that creeps ever closer to the capital Damascus. It is an encroachment that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his band of war criminals intend to turn into a component of “Greater Israel” together with Gaza and Lebanon.

Armed Jewish settlers are meanwhile devastating what remains of the Palestinian West Bank, destroying farms and livelihoods as well as entire villages. Taybeh, the last Christian village, was made uninhabitable last week after weeks of raids killing livestock, poisoning water and cutting down olive trees. If a Palestinian tried to intervene he was beaten and in some cases killed. Churches and Mosques on the West Bank are routinely desecrated and non-Jews in religious attire or trying to enter a holy site are frequently spat upon particularly in Jerusalem. The Israel Defense Force (IDF), meanwhile, regularly stands by and watches the displays of wanton brutality and does nothing. Lest there be any confusion regarding what is coming, the Knesset has now authorized $51 million to build more than 60 new completely illegal settlements on Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.

What all these places have in common apart from the cruel Israeli hand is that the United States, often in the form of Trump personally, has been a guarantor of the ceasefires as well as the source of the so-called but utterly dysfunctional Board of Peace, has done nothing to stop the slaughter. Rather, it is continuing to provide Israel with weapons, money and political cover. It is therefore complicit in the war crimes. Here at home, Trump is promoting the Israeli program by supporting the criminalization of anyone who speaks up against the crimes against humanity being committed by his “best friend” Bibi, choosing to destroy freedom of speech rather than allowing any exposure of Israel’s crimes. This is reminiscent of June 8th 1967, when Israel attacked the USS Liberty, killing 34 American crewmen and injuring 172 more. A cover-up followed to protect Israel, coordinated by President Lyndon B Johnson, a hideous excuse for a human being who would likely have found it pleasant to have a chat about “values” with Trump.

If there is one thing that is most definitely true it is that the United States gains absolutely nothing in either the national interest nor in the well being of the average American from the bondage to Israel and Netanyahu. If opinion polls mean anything, the public in the US has figured that out and has turned sharply against the Jewish state and now favors both the Palestinian cause and the drive to end the totally meaningless war against Iran. That means that it is past time for the United States to cut the tie that binds with Israel and look to its own interests. That is necessary even if Congress and President Donald Trump continue to push in the opposite direction to complete their subjugation by the Israelis, which now includes a planned fusion of the US and Israeli defense and intel bureaucracies.

If we have learned anything from all of the above and more, there is one thing true about the President Donald Trump administration and that is its particular incompetence at foreign relations, i.e. how it deals with other nations, and, by extension, how it mismanages national security. Part of the blame surely belongs to Trump himself as he has little or no empathy for other human beings unless they are either capable of doing him harm or profiting him personally, as do Netanyahu and the Jewish billionaires. And he also has a tendency to change direction spontaneously and without much concern for the actual issues that might be important to his audience. All that matters is whatever he happens to think will make him look good at any given moment, which recently has manifested itself as plastering his own name on public buildings. Responding to a recent journalist’s question about the rising inflation rate, he answered that he “Loved the inflation!” It was like saying “Goodbye midterms!”

Witness for example how on Thursday last week Trump announced in the morning that he would be attacking Iran that night to seize its major oil export facility on Kharg Island as part of a plan to cripple the country’s ability to sustain energy shipments. By 2 o’clock in the afternoon, however, he had called off the planned attack due to his perception that the US and Iran are now on the verge of an agreement to end the fighting and settle the various issues that have created the conflict in the first place. The mediating Pakistani Prime Minister did, for what it’s worth, confirm a possible peace agreement on Friday even though knowledgeable observers immediately commented that the claim was unsustainable as no negotiations were actually going on between parties and Iran has denied any such progress over key issues. As of Saturday, nothing was confirmed but Trump again asserted that there would be a “signing” of a “memorandum of understanding” as a first step to a peace agreement on Sunday, presumably to coincide with his birthday. Most observers however continue to argue that a weak-kneed and vulnerable Trump, though desperate to disengage from a disastrous Iran war, is only staying with it due to intense pressure from Israel and its domestic US lobby which may be prepared to employ “Epstein” blackmail on the president to maintain American participation in the conflict. If Trump were even to consider withdrawing from his ring of fire around Iran Israel would immediately take whatever steps are necessary to blow-up the agreement and resume fighting, be it by way of a false flag to drag the US back in or possibly exploiting the “Iran has a nuke” lie.

So it would be wise to accept that Donald Trump is a ship without a rudder and interactions with most of the Middle East will continue to be driven by Israel while bilateral talks elsewhere with major players like Russia and China appear to have dried up completely. Appointing real estate billionaires Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner as personal presidential representatives, both of whom are inexperienced and ardent Zionists, certainly did not improve prospects for what passed for negotiations with anyone. No one can trust Trump.

Israel’s reach far exceeds the country’s size and real power. A recent “friend” of Trump is Argentine Prime Minister Javier Milei, who, surprise-surprise, is also a great friend of Israel, having made the usual obeisance trip to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem during a State Visit to Israel shortly after being elected. Raised a Catholic, Milei reportedly wanted to convert to Judaism but decided not to as its “no work on Saturday” rule would have interfered with serving as prime minister. Not content with taking all the Middle East, Israel’s Jews are also looking farther afield. Patagonia in Argentina has reportedly been particularly targeted by Israeli buyers with the assistance of the Milei regime which helped get around environmental restrictions. Israelis are also buying up numerous properties in Cyprus as well as in Greece, nearby states which would be convenient as refuges if Israel finally provokes one too many of its neighbors and it finds itself on the receiving end of a nuke. Benjamin Netanyahu’s resident American spy Jonathan Pollard reportedly has mentioned both Turkey and Egypt as “next” to feel the wrath of Zion after Iran is finished off. Either army could easily defeat the chickenshits in the Israeli army who are better at raping and torturing than they are at fighting.

But one story that has caught some attention illustrates clearly the Israeli manic desire to steal other peoples’ property, most particularly land, no matter what it takes to carry out the theft. As is always the case, they are not held accountable for their criminality by Donald Trump who has his own soft spot for stealing the property of others and chooses to cut corners, witness the grandiose plans for a Trump Riviera luxury development on the beachfront of Gaza. And then there are the current shenanigans on an island off Albania which is being multi-billion dollar “developed” by daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner using United Arab Emirates (UAE) cash to become a major resort for the rich and famous. Kushner got the money as a benefit derived from his family connection and fortunately a lot of Albanians are mad as hell about the deal that was struck and are demonstrating!

But the story out of the United States and Canada as well as over the weekend in London tops many of the Trump/Israeli tricks due to its sheer audacity and criminality. Amnesty International UK is demanding the British government stop a real estate event scheduled to take place in London that includes companies openly advertising the sale of land in Israeli settlements in the illegally occupied West Bank.

The ‘Great Israeli Real Estate Event’ is a traveling roadshow that has held events in Canada and the United States and has now been planning for the sale in London on Sunday. The events are organized by Israeli real estate firm called My Home in Israel. It sells land to prospective buyers through a team of US-based real estate agents with the sales normally taking place in synagogues or other Jewish-owned and operated buildings. There have inevitably been protests against the sales in cities like Los Angeles and New York, where the “lots” have been promoted to the local Jewish communities. The lots being sold include considerable sections located in illegal settlements on the Palestinian West Bank, land that has been stolen from its owners. The Amnesty International report published last week in opposition to the London show exposed Israel’s state-led ethnic cleansing campaign in the West Bank – “documenting the displacement of at least 5,910 Palestinian Bedouin and herding community members since 2023, the demolition of over 3,400 homes and structures in [Palestinian West Bank] Area C, and an unprecedented surge in state-backed settler violence and land grabs.”

So there you have it, whatever Israel wants Israel takes without any concern for those who die or lose their homes in the process. And the United States government sits by and watches as Netanyahu spins lie after lie. Well, enough is enough. America is hated almost as much as Israel for its behavior and if it continues there will be severe consequences. Time to show Netanyahu the door and tell him and his supporting cast of AIPAC and Jewish billionaire buddies to get the hell out.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

June 15, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Time for Trump to Tell Benjamin Netanyahu to Go Away!

Israel Fails to Sabotage Islamabad Accord… At Least for Now

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR21 | June 14, 2026 

Well, when news broke that Israel had bombed the southern suburb of Beirut on Sunday afternoon, the Iranians started gearing up for promised retaliation only to be dissuaded by a Donald Trump bribe. Iran and the US reportedly were closing in on an agreement based on Iran’s 14-point plan when the Israeli strike in Lebanon threw everything into chaos. Iran quickly started ramping up for a renewed missile strike on Israel, but Donald Trump rump reportedly offered Iran financial incentives to not attack Israel.

Iranian media outlet Mehr reported that a 14-point memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran calls for the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets during a 60-day negotiation period, with half of that — $12 billion — required to be made available to Iran before negotiations even begin. The MOU also reportedly includes immediate and permanent cessation of war on all fronts including Lebanon, a US commitment not to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs, lifting of the naval blockade within 30 days, and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian arrangements.

Trump essentially offered Iran a bribe to not attack Israel. Hedeclared on Truth Social that the US deal with Iran was “now complete,” authorizing the toll-free reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the immediate removal of the US.naval blockade, instead of waiting 30 days. He also agreed that Iran could receive the $12 billion as soon as the ceasefire agreement was signed on Friday.

With that change, the Supreme National Security Council of Iran confirmed the achievement of an agreement between the United States and Iran:

“The Islamic Republic of Iran, under the leadership of its martyred leader, has completed its success over the American-Zionist enemy and, under the guidance of the Supreme Leader of the system (may God protect him), with the support of the entire nation and the diligent efforts of Islam’s warriors, after a difficult and intensive several months of negotiations and based on the resolution of the Supreme National Security Council, finalized the text of the Memorandum of Understanding regarding negotiations to end the war (negotiations in Islamabad) between Iran and the United States on the evening of June 14.

According to the agreements reached, the war and military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon, will end immediately and forever from tonight, and the naval blockade against Iran will be immediately and fully lifted. The signing of this Memorandum of Understanding will be officially carried out on Friday, June 19. Negotiations for the final agreement will be postponed until the other party fulfills its obligations in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding. The Islamic Republic of Iran highly values the efforts of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the government of Qatar.”

But before you start popping champagne corks you must understand that Trump administration officials — mostly unnamed — are painting a different picture of the agreement. For example, asenior U.S. official rejected Iran’s claim that it would receive $12 billion in frozen assets unconditionally before the start of the 60-day negotiations, describing the assertion as “a spin,” Axios reports:

This is completely not true. This is a pay-for-performance deal, and no frozen funds will be released without the Iranians implementing their commitments,” the official said.

The point is simple… Major differences remain between the US and Iran regarding the details of the proposed MOU. Even if those details are eventually ironed out and a letter signed on Friday with both sides confirming their mutual agreement to the 14 prinicipals spelled out in the final MOU, this will mark the start of a negotiations process that will last at least two months, if not longer. And, at any time in the succeeding days, a US or Israeli violation of the MOU will likely lead Iran to renew its attacks on Israeli and/or US military targets.

June 15, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Israel Fails to Sabotage Islamabad Accord… At Least for Now

Araghchi: US Responsible for Implementing MoU with Iran

Al-Manar | June 15, 2026

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has stressed the US’ responsibility regarding the implementation of the MoU with Iran as well as a complete halt to the Israeli regime’s attacks against Lebanon.

Araghchi made the remarks in his separate phone calls with Turkish, Iraq, and Egyptian counterparts Hakan Fidan, Fuad Hussein, and Badr Abdelatty.

He reviewed the process and provisions of the Islamabad understanding and lauded the positions and role of Turkey, Iraq, and Egypt in supporting the establishment of a ceasefire, reducing tensions, and diplomatic efforts to achieve stability and security in the region.

All sides emphasized the continuation of close consultations on regional developments and strengthening diplomatic efforts to maintain peace and stability.

Iran and the United States, after announcing a ceasefire on April 8, 2026, began negotiations with the mediation of Pakistan to definitively end the war.

The text of the memorandum of understanding that was signed, the foundation of which was Iran’s 14-point proposals at the very beginning of the ceasefire, was reviewed multiple times over the past 60 days in the capitals of the two countries.

Despite all the pressures, the violation of the ceasefire, and the repeated changes of position by the United States, Iran persisted in its stances.

After signing the MoU text, the two countries will put a series of intensive negotiations on their agenda over the next 60 days in order to reach a comprehensive agreement on the disputed issues.

June 15, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Araghchi: US Responsible for Implementing MoU with Iran

US must cut military, intelligence assistance to Israel to protect Iran deal: Ex-Trump official

Press TV – June 15, 2026

A former official in US President Donald Trump’s administration says cutting US assistance to Israel could help strengthen the agreement between Tehran and Washington, amid the Tel Aviv regime’s continuous attempts to sabotage regional peace.

Joe Kent, who left the administration after disagreements over the United States’ joint unprovoked aggression against Iran alongside the regime, made the remarks in a post on X on Monday.

He welcomed the prospect of the conclusion of a memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington that could be followed by an agreement.

Kent said the durability of any agreement with Iran could be improved if the United States reconsidered its military and intelligence support for the regime, saying that Israeli officials have opposed efforts to achieve a diplomatic settlement.

The former Trump administration official said Washington should seek to eliminate factors that could prompt the US to resume the aggression “on Israel’s terms.”

A day earlier, Iran’s Foreign Ministry had announced that the MoU had been finalized and would be officially signed in Switzerland on Friday.

On April 7, Trump announced a ceasefire in the aggression, which had begun targeting the Islamic Republic on February 28 amid widely-reported Israeli instigation.

The announcement came amid decisive and successful Iranian retaliation and after the Islamic Republic announced closure of the Strait of Hormuz to enemies and their allies.

Following the announcement, though, the Israeli regime would keep violating another ceasefire in Lebanon, despite Tehran’s insistence that cessation of aggression should encompass all fronts.

Kent also advocated reducing the US military footprint at bases in the Persian Gulf’s littoral states.

“We should also quietly get our troops out of the bases in the [Persian] Gulf that can be reached by Iran,” he wrote.

Iran’s retaliation featured strikes on American outposts in the Persian Gulf’s coastal states that had allowed their territories to be used as launchpads for attacks on the Islamic Republic.

June 15, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on US must cut military, intelligence assistance to Israel to protect Iran deal: Ex-Trump official

With one strike, Netanyahu tries to kill two peace deals

Netanyahu knew exactly what he was doing when he defied Trump’s red line and struck Beirut this morning

By Trita Parsi | June 14, 2026

It’s important to understand that, contrary to Donald Trump’s quip to Barak Ravid that Netanyahu has “no f***ing judgment,” the Israeli Prime Minister knows exactly what he is doing: With a set of strikes at the Dahiyeh neighborhood in Beirut, he is trying to kill both the pending US-Iran peace deal and the fragile peace between Israel and Lebanon that would come with it.

There is a further strategic dividend. Netanyahu is also seeking to preempt Iran’s attempt to establish a new regional deterrence equation—one in which attacks on Beirut, and potentially on Lebanon more broadly, would trigger a direct Iranian response against Israel. By striking now, he is not merely targeting an adversary; he is challenging the emergence of a regional order that would constrain Israel’s freedom of military action.

Netanyahu even posted a video on his Twitter bragging about the attack.

The exchange of fire between Israel and Iran last week was about far more than retaliation. After Israel defied President Trump and struck Beirut’s Dahiyeh neighborhood, Iran responded by attacking Israel directly—the first time Tehran had launched strikes on Israel in response to an Israeli attack on Lebanon. Israel defied Trump once more and retaliated against Iran, prompting another Iranian response, after which Israel confined its next strike to southern Lebanon rather than Beirut.

The cycle reflected Iran’s attempt to establish a new regional equation: that attacks on Lebanon would no longer be cost-free for Israel, but would carry the risk of direct Iranian retaliation. For the first time in decades, a major regional power was seeking to place hard-power constraints on Israel’s freedom of military action beyond its borders.

Having reestablished its own deterrence, Tehran was now attempting to establish extended deterrence to its partners as part of a broader effort to rebuild its forward-defense posture. Israel, unsurprisingly, viewed this as a direct challenge to its long-standing freedom of maneuver and moved quickly to prevent the new doctrine from taking hold.

Of course, extended deterrence can not be established through a single exchange of fire. At a minimum, it would require several rounds of action and reaction before either side accepted it as a new reality. And even then, it would never be foolproof. Tehran understands that its purpose cannot simply be to eliminate Israeli strikes on Lebanon, but to force Israeli leaders to think twice before authorizing them by attaching a new and significant cost: the likelihood of direct Iranian retaliation.

It was therefore clear that Netanyahu had not abandoned the fight. Yet for several days, even as Hezbollah and Israel continued to exchange fire, he refrained from striking Beirut’s southern suburbs and testing Iran’s new red line.

But today, just hours before President Trump was expecting Iran to sign a memorandum that would end the U.S.-Iran war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Netanyahu crossed both Tehran’s and Trump’s red line: keeping Beirut out of the conflict.

Netanyahu clearly timed this for maximum impact. With a single set of strikes, Netanyahu may have advanced two goals at once—torpedoing Trump’s peace deal and preventing the emergence of a new deterrence equation that would impose meaningful constraints on Israel’s military operations in Lebanon.

A diplomat involved in the talks told Fox News that: “This is a clear attempt by Israel to sabotage the President’s deal and drag the United States back into war.”

Trump, meanwhile, is once again reportedly “pissed off” at Netanyahu. In a Truth Social post, the president declared that the strike on Beirut “should not have happened,” while pointedly questioning whether it was a proportionate response to Hezbollah’s latest attack on Israel.

“Israel has the right to defend itself against threats,” Trump wrote, “but the attack it was responding to was very small and meaningless. Nobody was hurt, injured, or killed, and it should not disrupt this important process.”

The statement was notable not merely for its criticism of Netanyahu, but for what it implied: that Israel’s strike was neither militarily necessary nor diplomatically prudent at a moment when a potential breakthrough with Iran appeared within reach.

Washington is frustrated by Tehran’s insistence that Trump rein in Israel, even as American officials believe Iran has failed to similarly restrain Hezbollah. It is equally frustrated that a deal it urgently wants with Iran is now being held hostage by Israel, ironically at the request of the Iranians, since it is Tehran that insists that any ceasefire must be region-wide and prevent Israel from having the ability to restart the war.

That frustration is understandable. But Washington must also recognize a basic reality: the only way to delink a U.S.-Iran agreement from the Israel-Lebanon conflict is to delink the United States itself from Israel’s recurring resort to military escalation.

As long as Israel retains the capacity to drag the United States back into conflict, Tehran will see little reason to separate diplomacy with Washington from the wars Israel chooses to start and pull the US into.

Indeed, the principal reason Tehran insists on a region-wide ceasefire is to deny Israel the ability to draw the United States into yet another war with Iran itself.

If Trump were to clearly establish that the United States would neither participate in nor defend an unjustified Israeli military escalation, Tehran might no longer see the need to link a U.S.-Iran accord to the Israel-Lebanon front.

Such a calculated distancing from Israel would serve American interests in any case. But the need for it has rarely been more apparent than it is today.

June 14, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on With one strike, Netanyahu tries to kill two peace deals

Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi

Glenn Diesen | June 13, 2026

Trita Parsi discusses the efforts to have him deported for criticising the Iran War, and also comments on Pakistan’s Prime Minister arguing a peace agreement will be signed within the next 24 hours.

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

Follow the Substack of Trita Parsi: https://tritaparsi.substack.com/

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Patreon:   / glenndiesen  

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

June 13, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Trita Parsi: Iran War Ends Today? Threats of Deporting Trita Parsi

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »