Kremlin responds to prospect of NATO nuclear-capable jets on Russian border
RT | June 27, 2025
Russia sees Estonia’s willingness to host nuclear-capable NATO aircraft as a direct threat to its security, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday.
Responding to recent remarks made by Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur welcoming such deployments, Peskov warned that the presence of F-35 fighter jets in the Baltic region would be considered a serious provocation. He criticized Tallinn’s stance as “absurd,” adding that relations with Moscow “can hardly get any worse.”
Pevkur told local media that F-35s, which are capable of being equipped with nuclear weapons, “have already been in Estonia and will soon return again in rotation,” and expressed the country’s readiness to accommodate allied forces using such aircraft.
The Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have hosted NATO fighter rotations since joining the military bloc in 2004. Their airspace is patrolled by allied aircraft due to limited domestic capabilities. NATO’s eastern expansion has long been a point of contention for Russia, which accuses the West of breaking post-Cold War assurances.
During this week’s NATO summit in The Hague, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer confirmed the planned purchase of at least 12 F-35A jets, thus restoring the UK’s airborne nuclear deterrent for the first time since the 1990s.
Although the US, UK, and France are the only official nuclear powers within NATO, American nuclear weapons remain stationed in several non-nuclear allied countries. Moscow claims that US-led training of NATO pilots for nuclear missions violates the spirit of non-proliferation agreements.
Citing the need to counter rising threats from NATO near its borders, Russia deployed tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus and held joint drills with Belarusian forces last year.
Trump hits back at Medvedev
RT | June 23, 2025
US President Donald Trump has cautioned the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev against “casually” talking about nuclear weapons. The comment came after the former Russian president suggested that several unnamed countries were prepared to provide Iran with weapons of mass destruction.
On June 22, the US bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan and claimed that its warplanes had severely degraded the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. The attack was preceded by massive air raids against Iran by Israel.
In a post on his Truth Social platform on Monday, Trump wrote: “Did I hear Former President Medvedev, from Russia, casually throwing around the ‘N word’ (Nuclear!), and saying that he and other Countries would supply Nuclear Warheads to Iran?”
The US head of state asked for immediate confirmation or rebuttal, insisting that “the ‘N word’ should not be treated so casually.”
Trump went on to boast about America’s superior military capabilities, both air- and sea-borne, citing the weekend bombardment of Iran as proof.
In a series of X posts on Sunday, Medvedev claimed that a “number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.” The Russian official stopped short of naming those nations but suggested the American bombardment had done nothing to stop the “enrichment of nuclear material – and… the future production of nuclear weapons” by Tehran. Medvedev asserted that Iran’s leadership will emerge “even stronger” in light of Washington’s actions.
With the “vast majority of countries around the world [opposing] the actions of Israel and the United States,” President Trump “can forget about the Nobel Peace Prize,” as he “has now pushed the US into another war,” he concluded.
On Monday, Medvedev responded to Trump, stressing that “Russia has no intention of supplying nuclear weapons to Iran because, unlike Israel, we are parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.”
However, the ex-Russian president added that “other countries might – and that’s what was said.”
He urged Washington to refrain from “arguing over who has more nukes,” emphasizing that the New START arms-control treaty, which was signed by Moscow and Washington on Medvedev’s watch, is still in force.
“The question is: what comes next?” he concluded.
Speaking during a meeting in Moscow on Monday with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, Russian President Vladimir Putin characterized the US attack on Iran as an “unprovoked aggression” in breach of international law, for which “there can be no justification.”
Middle East in Crisis – 5
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | June 23, 2025
The former President and Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev who is one of the most authoritative voices at the Kremlin, wrote on the Telegram channel on June 23 a critique on the Middle East crisis following the US attack on Iran’s three key nuclear sites of Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.
Medvedev listed ten points, which, taken together, messaged that Russia’s stance on the developing situation around Iran has markedly shifted to one of proactive mode marked by profound scepticism and deep concern about President Donald Trump’s intentions.
As recently as on June 4, Trump had sought Putin’s help to advance the US-Iran negotiations on the nuclear issue and Putin, in good faith, agreed to help. Indeed, the Iranian government spokesperson had disclosed on June 12 that preparations were under way for a visit by Putin to Tehran.
But on June 22, Trump ordered air strikes on Iran’s three nuclear sites without taking Putin into confidence. Such surreptitious behaviour may be nothing new to Washington in inter-state relations but it caused embarrassment to the Kremlin. Medvedev’s comments show it when he ridicules Trump’s triumphalism about the air strike.
The ten points Medvedev listed under the heading What did the Americans achieve with their night strike on three points in Iran? underscore that Russia’s stance on the developing situation around Iran has shifted to one of unequivocally distancing itself from the US approach going forward. The 10 points are:
- The critical infrastructure of the nuclear cycle, apparently, was not damaged or was damaged only slightly.
- The enrichment of nuclear materials, and now we can say directly – and future production of nuclear weapons — will continue.
- A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear weapons.
- Israel is under attack, explosions are thundering, people are in a panic.
- The United States is drawn into a new conflict with the prospect of a ground operation.
- The political regime of Iran is preserved, and with a high degree of probability it has become stronger.
- The people are consolidating around the spiritual leadership, and even those who did not sympathize with him.
- Trump, who came as a peacemaker president, started a new war for the United States.
- The absolute majority of countries in the world are against the actions of Israel and the United States.
- With such success, Trump will never see the Nobel Peace Prize, even despite all the venality of this nomination. A good start, congratulations, Mr. President!
On the whole, Medvedev’s assessment is in sync with the swathe of opinion among neutral observers, including Western analysts, about the state of play. However, Points 2 and 3 stand out as particularly noteworthy in their prognosis that inexorably, Iran has now been pushed into a path of making a nuclear bomb and, more importantly, Tehran can expect help in this direction from “a number of countries (who) are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear weapons.”
This is the first time that Russia has explicitly spoken about Iran’s likely ‘nuclearisation’. That in itself is a paradigm shift. Medvedev has approvingly presented it in a marked departure from Russia’s stated affirmations in the past that Iran’s nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. Russia has been historically a cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime.
Three things have changed. First, the US itself has become a proliferator. In Europe, the US’s allies freely fly its planes fitted with nuclear bombs during exercises. German pilots have familiarised themselves with such planes. In Asia-Pacific, AUKUS actually involves transfer of nuclear weapon technology to Australia which is technically an NPT member.
Second, when it comes to Iran, a key ally of Russia, the US aggression has crossed Iran’s “big red line” — to borrow the words of foreign minister Abbas Araghchi — which leaves Tehran with no alternative but to act in self-defence. Besides, in the ‘rules-based order’ imposed by the US on Iran, its ally Israel, a non-NPT member country, has a fully-developed clandestine nuclear weapon programme and is estimated to have a stockpile of some 200 nuclear missiles but all of that Trump blithely ignores.
Third, things have come to such a pass today that smaller countries must nuclearise in the quickest way possible, which is their only iron-clad guarantee to preserve their sovereignty and territorial integrity from the US in the chaotic international situation today. North Korea’s success in pushing back US pressure is due to its nuclear deterrent capability. What is absolutely galling is that Trump has not even cared to seek a mandate from the UN Security Council and has gone to war with Iran without getting the Congress’ approval.
Evidently, Medvedev’s commentary pooh-poohs the pious hopes in Washington and Tel Aviv about forcing a ‘regime change’ in Iran. Medvedev assertively proclaims that not only has Iran’s political system become stronger but “people are consolidating around the spiritual leadership” including elements that “did not sympathise with him” previously.
Russia shares the prevailing opinion in the world community that by embracing a military confrontation with Iran, Trump has added to the US’ growing isolation in the world community.
An intriguing point here is that in Medvedev’s prognosis, the US is being drawn into a new conflict abroad “with the prospect of a ground operation.” He didn’t explain how this may happen. Iran, which is almost the size of Europe, is a big country and has approximately 610,000 active duty personnel plus 350,000 reserve and trained personnel that can be mobilised when needed. Then, there is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) which has approximately 125,000 personnel and a voluntary militia, Basj, under it with a further a further approximately 90,000 active personnel.
Even a limited US commando operation is fraught with high risk. The ballad of Operation Eagle Crew — undertaken in April 1980 in an attempt to rescue the US hostages — ended tragically. Of eight helicopters sent into Iran, two became disabled and a third was blown into a C-130 cargo plane by a fierce desert sandstorm, killing eight American servicemen whose bodies, left behind, were later paraded before Iranian television cameras. The Carter administration, humiliated by the failed mission and loss of life, expended great energy to have the bodies returned to the US. Trump is unlikely to risk such escapades.
In geopolitical terms, the seismic shift in the Kremlin thinking can be a game changer for Iran which must be regretting that it declined a Russian offer to include a provision for mutual security assistance in times of war in the two countries’ recently concluded treaty of strategic partnership, similar to what Russia has with DPRK. Also, Putin disclosed last week that Russia had offered to jointly develop an integrated air defence system jointly with Iran (that could access Russian satellite data) but Iran showed no interest. Curiously, he revealed that Tehran was yet to ask for any help, either!
That was on June 19. But on June 22 Trump struck and a terrible beauty was born. It appears that Khamenei ordered Araghchi who was busy parleying with Europeans to go East and meet Putin.
Anyway, at a meeting with Aragchi in the Kremlin today, Putin used exceptionally strong words to condemn the US attack on Iran which he called a “completely unprovoked act of aggression against Iran … without foundation or justification.”
Putin added, “Russia has long-standing, strong, and trustworthy relations with Iran, and we are committed to supporting the Iranian people through our continued efforts… Your visit provides us with an important opportunity to discuss these sensitive issues in depth and to explore ways we might work together to navigate the current situation.” (The Kremlin readout is here.)
Will Russia’s entry deter Trump on his warpath? That is the million dollar question in the coming days. If Trump persists with such belligerence in cahoots with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, a protracted war of attrition will ensue that will most certainly bring in China at some point with which Iran has a strong mil-to-mil relationship.
No justification for attack on Iran – Putin
RT | June 23, 2025
Israeli and US hostilities against Iran are groundless and unjustifiable, Russian President Vladimir Putin has told Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
The top Iranian diplomat, who landed in Moscow and met with the Russian president on Monday, said earlier that the visit was needed for “closer, more precise, and more serious consultations” with Russia, in the wake of the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
During the meeting at the Kremlin, Putin described the attacks on Iran as “an unprovoked aggression,” for which “there can be no justification.”
The actions of Israel and the US are “illegitimate” and violate international norms, he added.
The Russian leader noted that he was glad to see Araghchi in Moscow, saying that his visit would allow Russia and Iran “to discuss these pressing issues and jointly think about a way out of the current situation.”
Araghchi agreed with Putin’s assessment, saying that “Russia today stands on the right side of history and international law.”
By striking targets in Israel, Iran is defending its sovereignty in a legitimate way, the diplomat stressed.
Israel and the US explained their attacks on Iran by claiming that Tehran was on the brink of obtaining a nuclear weapon. The Iranian authorities have repeatedly insisted that that they are not working on a bomb, while defending their right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program.
Moscow blasts US redo of ‘Iraqi weapons of mass destruction’ stunt
RT | June 22, 2025
Russia has sharply condemned the United States for its airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, calling the attacks “irresponsible, provocative and dangerous,” and warning they risk pushing the Middle East toward a large-scale war with potentially catastrophic nuclear consequences.
Speaking at an emergency session of the UN Security Council on Sunday, Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia accused Washington of violating the UN Charter, international law and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
“The United States has opened a Pandora’s box, and no one knows what consequences may follow,” Nebenzia said, noting that by targeting IAEA-supervised nuclear sites, Washington has “once again demonstrated total disregard for the position of the international community.”
Nebenzia drew a pointed comparison to the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, when then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell presented false evidence to “justify the invasion of another sovereign state, only to plunge its people into chaos for decades and not find any weapons of mass destruction.”
“Many today feel a strong sense of déjà vu,” he said. “The current situation is essentially no different: we are once again being urged to believe in fairy tales in order to once again bring suffering to millions of people living in the Middle East.”
Russia argued that Tehran has not been proven to be pursuing a nuclear weapon, echoing earlier assessments by US intelligence that were dismissed by President Donald Trump as “wrong.” Nebenzia accused Washington of fabricating a narrative to justify the use of force and of undermining the decades-long diplomatic framework built around Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The Russian envoy also criticized what he described as the hypocrisy of Western nations that had for days called for “restraint” in the same Security Council chamber, yet failed to condemn Washington for joining Israeli strikes – and even blamed Iran for the escalation.
“We are witnessing an astonishing example of double standards,” he said. “Iran has been and remains one of the most thoroughly inspected states under the NPT, but instead of encouraging such an attitude, it receives bombardments of its territory and civilians by a state that refuses, in principle, to sign the NPT.”
Nebenzia warned that the US strikes undermine the authority of the IAEA and the global non-proliferation regime, and that continued escalation could return the world to an era of uncontrolled nuclear risk.
“This is an outrageous and cynical situation, and it is very strange that the Director General of the IAEA did not say a word about it. Neither has he ever called on Israel to join the NPT,” Nebenzia added.
Calling for urgent action, Russia – joined by China and Pakistan – submitted a draft Security Council resolution demanding an immediate and unconditional ceasefire and a return to diplomatic talks on Iran’s nuclear program.
Col. Jacques Baud: America Bombs Iran’s Nuclear Facilities
Glenn Diesen | June 22, 2025
Colonel Jacques Baud is a former military intelligence analyst in the Swiss Army and the author of many books. Colonel Baud discusses America’s attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and the deception surrounding this war of aggression. International law, treaties and institutions are all undermined in the effort to destroy Iran and restore American hegemony.
US Strikes on Iran Reckless Breach of Sovereignty – Russian Foreign Ministry
Sputnik – 22.06.2025
MOSCOW – The Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites as a reckless move that violates the Islamic Republic’s sovereignty, international law and the UN Charter.
“The reckless decision to bomb the territory of a sovereign state, whatever the arguments, runs counter to international law, the UN Charter, the UN Security Council Resolution,” the ministry said.
It is of particular concern that the attack was carried out by a permanent member of the UN Security Council, the ministry said, adding that the UN’s core body had to interfere.
“The UN Security Council should naturally take action. Confrontational behavior of the US and Israel has to be rejected collectively,” the statement read.
“We call for an end of aggression and urge efforts that will create conditions for a return to a political and diplomatic path,” the statement said.
The ministry also called on Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to report impartially on the Iran attacks at the UN atomic agency’s board of governors’ meeting on Monday.
Europe’s risky war on Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’
By Anatol Lieven | Responsible Statecraft | June 16, 2025
The European Union’s latest moves (as part of its 17th package of sanctions against Russia declared in May) to target much more intensively Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers and other vessels illustrate the danger that, as long as the Ukraine war continues, so will the risk of an incident that will draw NATO and the EU into a direct military clash with Russia.
The EU sanctions involve bans on access to the ports, national waters and maritime economic zones of EU states. Ships that enter these waters risk seizure and confiscation. It does not appear that Washington was consulted about this decision, despite the obvious risks to the U.S.
As part of this strategy, on May 15, an Estonian patrol boat attempted to stop and inspect a tanker in the Gulf of Finland. Russia sent up a fighter jet that flew over the Estonian vessel (allegedly briefly trespassing into Estonian waters), and the Estonians backed off — this time. In January, the German navy seized a Panamanian-flagged tanker, the Eventin, in the Baltic after its engines failed and it drifted into German territorial waters.
Sweden has now announced that starting on July 1 its navy will stop, inspect and potentially seize all suspect vessels transiting its exclusive economic zone, and is deploying the Swedish air force to back up this threat. Since the combined maritime economic zones of Sweden and the three Baltic states cover the whole of the central Baltic Sea, this amounts to a virtual threat to cut off all Russian trade exiting Russia via the Baltic — which would indeed be a very serious economic blow to Moscow.
It would also threaten to cut off Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad, which is surrounded by Poland, from access to Russia by sea.
This is the kind of action that has traditionally led to war. The Swedish assumption seems to be that the Russian navy and air force in the Baltic are now so weak — and so surrounded by NATO territory — that there is nothing Moscow can do about this. However, it is very unlikely that the Swedes would take this step unless they also believe that in the event of a clash, Washington will come to Sweden’s defense — even though the EU and Swedish decisions were made without U.S. approval and are not strictly covered by NATO’s Article 5 commitment.
And despite all the hysterical language about Russia being “at war” with NATO countries, these moves by the EU and Sweden are also based on an assumption that Russia will not in fact lose its temper and react with military force. European policymakers might however want to think about a number of things: for example, what would the U.S. do if ships carrying U.S. cargo were intercepted by foreign warships? We know perfectly well that the U.S. would blow the warships concerned out of the water and declare that it had done so in defense of the sacred rule of free navigation — in which the EU also professes to believe.
EU leaders, and admirals, should also spend some time on Russian social media, and read the incessant attacks on the Putin administration by hardliners arguing precisely that Moscow has been far too soft and restrained in its response to Western provocations, and that this restraint has encouraged the West to escalate more and more. Such hardliners (especially within the security forces) are by far the greatest internal political threat that Putin faces.
It is important to note in this regard that moves to damage Russia’s “shadow fleet” have not been restricted to sanctions. In recent months there have been a string of attacks on such vessels in the Mediterranean with limpet mines and other explosive devices — developments that have been virtually ignored by Western media.
In December 2024, the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major sank off Libya after an explosion in which two crewmembers were killed. The Reuters headline reporting these attacks was rather characteristic: “Three tankers damaged by blasts in Mediterranean in the last month, causes unknown, sources say.” Unknown, really? Who do we think were the likely perpetrators? Laotian special forces? Martians? And what are European governments doing to investigate these causes?
If the Russians do sink a Swedish or Estonian warship, the Trump administration will face a terribly difficult decision on how to respond to a crisis that is not of its own choosing: intervene and risk a direct war with Russia, or stand aside and ensure a deep crisis with Europe. The U.S. administration would therefore be both wise and entirely within its rights to state publicly that it does not endorse and will not help to enforce this decision.
Washington also needs — finally — to pay attention to what the rest of the world thinks about all this. The overwhelming majority of senators who are proposing to impose 500% tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy have apparently not realized that one of the two biggest countries in this category is India — now universally regarded in Washington as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. And now America’s European allies are relying on U.S. support to seize ships providing that energy to India.
The U.S. administration would also be wise to warn European countries that if this strategy leads to maritime clashes with Russia, they will have to deal with the consequences themselves. Especially given the new risk of war with Iran, the last thing Washington needs now is a new flare-up of tension with Moscow necessitating major U.S. military deployments to Europe. And the last thing the world economy needs are moves likely to lead to a still greater surge in world energy prices.
European governments and establishments seem to have lost any ability to analyze the possible wider consequences of their actions. So — not for the first time — America will have to do their thinking for them.
Anatol Lieven is Director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He was formerly a professor at Georgetown University in Qatar and in the War Studies Department of King’s College London.
Iran-Israel War: China Refuses to React, and That’s the Strategy
GVS Deep Dive | June 17, 2025
As Israel and Iran edge closer to full-scale war, one major power is choosing silence over escalation: China. Despite being Iran’s largest oil customer and a self-declared counterbalance to U.S. dominance, Beijing has refused to take sides.
In this GVS Deep Dive, we examine:
🔹 China’s muted response to Israel’s airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites
🔹 President Xi Jinping’s cautious diplomacy at the Central Asia Summit
🔹 Trump’s Truth Social posts warning 10 million Iranians to evacuate Tehran
🔹 The G7’s pro-Israel stance and growing Western military buildup in the Gulf
🔹 Why China sees wars like this as disruptions—not opportunities
🔹 And how China’s “smart diplomacy” and non-intervention policy are reshaping the rules of global power
While the West fuels chaos, China plays the long game. But the real question is: Can it afford to stay out if this war explodes into something bigger?
Najma tweets @MinhasNajma
Najma Minhas is Managing Editor, Global Village Space. She has worked with National Economic Research Associates (NERA) in New York, Lehman Brothers in London and Standard Chartered Bank in Pakistan. Before launching GVS, she worked as a consultant with World Bank, and USAID. Najma studied Economics at London School of Economics and International Relations at Columbia University, NewYork. She tweets at @MinhasNajma.
Israel risking ‘nuclear catastrophe’ – Moscow
RT | June 17, 2025
Israel’s ongoing strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities pose unacceptable threats to international security and risk plunging the world into a catastrophe, Russia’s Foreign Ministry has said.
Israel began bombing Iran on Friday, claiming Tehran is nearing the completion of a nuclear bomb. Iran has dismissed the accusations as groundless and retaliated to the Israeli military operation with waves of drone and missile strikes.
“The ongoing intensive attacks by the Israeli side on peaceful nuclear facilities in Iran are illegal from the point of view of international law, create unacceptable threats to international security and push the world towards a nuclear catastrophe,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement published on Tuesday.
The conflict’s escalation risks the further destabilization of the entire region, the ministry added, urging the Israeli leadership to “come to its senses and immediately stop raids on nuclear installations.”
The harsh reaction to Israel’s attack on Iran from most of the international community illustrates that the Jewish state is only supported by countries acting as its “accomplices,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
Israel’s backers pressured the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board to push through last week’s “biased anti-Iranian resolution” on Tehran’s nuclear program, which “gave West Jerusalem a free hand, and led to this tragedy,” according to the ministry.
Why the Israel-Iran war may not go according to Netanyahu’s plan
By Vitaly Ryumshin | Gazeta | June 17, 2025
There are no quiet days in the Middle East. Armed conflict is a constant presence, but this time the stakes are higher. Israel has found itself in direct confrontation not with a proxy or insurgent group, but with Iran – its principal geopolitical adversary and a likely future nuclear power.
Strictly speaking, the Israel-Iran war did not begin on June 13. The two countries exchanged direct strikes as far back as April 2024. For decades before that, they waged what is commonly known as a “shadow war,” primarily through intelligence operations, cyberattacks, and support for regional proxies. But now, at Israel’s initiative, the conflict has escalated into open warfare.
Unlike the largely symbolic strikes of the past, this new phase targets strategic infrastructure, decision-making centers, and even cities. The tempo and scale of the exchanges mark a sharp escalation. With every new volley, the flywheel of war spins faster.
Still, this will not resemble the Ukrainian conflict. Iran and Israel do not share a border, so ground operations are unlikely. What we are witnessing is an air war – a remote conflict defined by long-range strikes and missile exchanges. The side that exhausts its military and political capital first will be the one that loses. Victory here is less about territory than stamina and strategic patience.
Who is likely to break first remains uncertain. Iran has the largest missile arsenal in the Middle East. Israel, however, enjoys unwavering US support. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to believe that sustained pressure will destabilize what he calls the “ayatollah regime,” forcing it to collapse under external and internal strain.
But Netanyahu himself is politically vulnerable. His government has been marred by scandals and internal dissent. A prolonged and inconclusive conflict could easily threaten the survival of his cabinet.
The ideal outcome for Israel would be a swift, decisive campaign, similar to its past clashes with Hezbollah. In those instances, air superiority and rapid operations forced the enemy into submission. Statements from Israeli officials suggest that this remains the objective: a two-week operation designed to cripple Iran’s offensive capabilities.
However, there is one crucial difference: Iran is not Hezbollah. Tehran may have stumbled on June 13, but it possesses vastly superior organization and military resources. The Islamic Republic is several times larger than Israel in both territory and population, which means its endurance is much greater. Israel, by escalating so dramatically, may have left Iran with no option but to fight.
And there is mounting evidence that the plan for a quick Israeli victory is already faltering. If the war drags on, Netanyahu could face political blowback at home and criticism from abroad. In my view, that is the most likely scenario.
Netanyahu is not the only leader with something to lose. Donald Trump – who once promised to end endless wars and bring down gas prices – is already facing pushback within the MAGA movement. His vocal support for Israel has alienated parts of his base, who now accuse him of entangling the US in yet another foreign conflict.
So Trump faces the same dilemma as former President Joe Biden. Will he favor the interests of the pro-Israel lobby, which is deeply rooted in the Republican Party and his inner circle? Or the opinion of the electorate, capable of overturning his party in the 2026 elections? And if he chooses Israel, will he be ready for the consequences?”
Trump has promised to lower gas prices for Americans. He also claimed he would resolve the Middle East crisis. If Iran accelerates its nuclear program in response to Israeli aggression, that will spell the end of Trump’s Iran policy, which began with the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal in 2018.
Meanwhile, in Moscow, the situation is being watched with interest. Rising oil prices would benefit Russia economically. More importantly, a major war between Israel and Iran could distract Washington from its commitments to Ukraine. Tehran is also a strategic partner of Russia, and it would be in Moscow’s interest for Iran to stay in the fight.
Yet questions remain about how much Russia can or will do. The Ukraine conflict is consuming much of the country’s military and industrial capacity. Moreover, the newly signed Strategic Partnership Treaty with Iran includes no obligation for direct military support. It simply states that neither party will aid an aggressor.
So for now, Russia’s best course may be to stay on the sidelines, offer diplomatic and rhetorical support, and hope that Iran does not overplay its hand. It is worth noting that Tehran recovered relatively quickly after the first strikes. Its ability to adapt to Israeli air tactics, bolster counterintelligence, and retaliate effectively will determine the next phase of the war.
We will likely see clearer developments within the two-week window Israel has set for itself. But if that deadline passes without a decisive result, it may be Netanyahu – not Tehran – who finds himself running out of options.
This article was first published by the online newspaper Gazeta.ru and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Ritter’s Rant Ep. 5: Grossi’s got to go
The IAEA’s incestuous relationship with Israel has destroyed its credibility
Scott Ritter | June 16, 2025
Featured Video
U.S. Naval Blockade & Ground Invasion of Iran?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Major rabbi says non-Jews are donkeys, created to serve Jews
By Khalid Amayreh, in occupied East Jerusalem | The People’s Voice | October 18, 2010
A major Jewish religious figure in Israel has likened non-Jews to donkeys and beasts of burden, saying the main reason for their very existence is to serve Jews.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, spiritual mentor of the religious fundamentalist party, Shas, which represents Middle Eastern Jews, reportedly said during a Sabbath homily earlier this week that “the sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews.”
Yosef is considered a major religious leader in Israel who enjoys the allegiance of hundreds of thousands of followers. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Russian security chief issues warning to four NATO states
- Seyed M. Marandi: U.S. Naval Blockade & Ground Invasion of Iran?
- The Iran War Exposes the Emptiness of American ‘Strength’ in East Asia
- Europe’s Drone Pipeline to Ukraine Could Soon be in Russia’s Crosshairs – Analyst
- EU spied on Orban for years – former Slovak minister
- Fact-Checking the “Placebo Control” Fact Checkers
- An Open Letter To President Donald Trump (My Response) | Candace
- Arms industry given direct influence over university courses
- Another Trump Flip Flop: From ‘Kill FISA’ to ‘Clean Renewal’
- AIPAC ‘slimeball’ Eric Swalwell leaves the stage
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
Aletho News 