Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Larak Corridor: Iran’s Rial Gate With No US, No Israel, and No Way Around

By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | April 1, 2026

While MOW Secretary Pete Hegseth was telling other nations to “step up” in the Strait of Hormuz, Donald Trump was already backing away, insisting its security was “not for us.” In between those contradictions, Washington dumped a fog of conflicting slogans on the public—slogans that never looked like strategy so much as panicked improvisation. That confusion is not a sideshow to the war, but the political static masking a brutal reality. While the White House and its zionist neocon war camp lurch between bluff and retreat, Iran has been moving with cold discipline, quietly building what Iranian reporting calls the Larak Corridor and what maritime trackers have identified as a tightly managed lane through the Qeshm-Larak gap inside Iranian waters.

Around Larak, Tehran is no longer just reacting to an illegal war launched against it. It is turning battlefield pressure into procedure, selective access, and proposed law, using a controlled corridor and a wider Hormuz management plan to show that the old fantasy of automatic Western command over this chokepoint is breaking down in real time. The truth of the war is not found in the bombast coming out of Washington; instead you will find it in the places where power is actually shifting, and right now, one of those places is a narrow strip of water off Larak, where Iran looks calmer, more deliberate, and more in command of events than the people who thought they could bomb it into submission.

The Day Hormuz Moved on Iran’s Terms

The Strait of Hormuz has not been shut, and that is exactly why what Iran has done matters more. What has emerged around Larak is not a crude blockade but a controlled passage system, a wartime checkpoint laid across one of the most important arteries of the world economy. Iranian reporting most often calls it the Larak Corridor. At the same time, the broader phrase Larak-Qeshm Corridor is best understood as a geographic description of the lane running through the narrow gap between those two islands inside Iranian waters.

Names are not cosmetic here. Western and trade coverage tend to speak of a route between Qeshm and Larak. Iranian coverage roots it in Larak itself, in Iranian-managed waters, under Iranian rules. That is the quiet shift the war has produced. For decades, the story of Hormuz was told from the deck of a U.S. carrier. Today, one of its key arteries is being renamed and reorganised from a small island most Western audiences have never been asked to think about.

Iran appears to be building a differentiated transit regime, not a universal shutdown. That means the market consequence is not simply “less supply,” but a more political energy map in which some buyers and shippers face privileged access while others face delay, denial, or sharply higher costs.

That is the part of the story that cuts through the propaganda. A total closure would have been easy to denounce and easy to rally against. A selective corridor is harder to attack because it allows Tehran to say that passage has not ended, only the assumption that ships can move through Iranian waters during an illegal war on Iran without submitting to Iranian conditions.

This is why Larak matters. It is where Iran stopped merely threatening the map and started administering it.

The lane at Larak

The outlines of the new lane are now visible. The Larak Corridor is not a return to normal traffic. It is a filtered, low-volume, politically segmented route for approved movement. Trade and maritime analysis has traced authorised vessels through the five-mile gap between Qeshm and Larak, close to the Iranian coast and under a web of Iranian surveillance and intervention capacity. Iranian and Arabic reporting has described a safe corridor around or between Larak and Qeshm, never a full reopening of the strait, even though yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that the Bahman pier on the eastern side of Qeshm Island was attacked, according to a statement from Hormozgan governor’s office relayed by Iranian state-affiliated media ISNA. Qeshm overlooks the Clarence Strait in the Strait of Hormuz and is referred to by the locals as “Kuran”,  Iran’s main launchpad for its asymmetric naval warfare. In early March, the Israeli/US war machine had targeted a desalination plant on Qeshm Island, leaving 30 villages without water.

That low-volume point changes everything. The lane exists in deliberate contrast to prewar patterns. UN-linked reporting put pre-crisis traffic through Hormuz at roughly 130 ships a day. Against that baseline, the authorised trickle through Larak is not evidence of restored normality but a clear indication that normality has been replaced by a rationed flow that Iran alone can modulate.

The lane also stratifies states. Some governments have secured negotiated passage, some ships have moved after prior coordination and documentation, and others have been turned back or discouraged from approaching in the first place. The result is not an open sea but a tiered system in which diplomatic posture, sanctions alignment, and wartime behaviour shape access to one of the world’s central energy routes.

Calling this a blockade is comfortable for Western officials, but it is wrong. A blockade denies passage to provoke a fight. The Larak Corridor functions more like a wartime border crossing, granting passage conditionally, keeping discretionary power in Iranian hands, and making political hierarchy visible on the water.

Force became law

The story becomes more serious once you see that Tehran is not leaving this system in the realm of ad hoc force, but instead the Islamic Republic of Iran is building a legal scaffold around it.

Parliamentary reporting confirms that Iran’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee has approved an eight-point Strait of Hormuz Management Plan. The plan is built around eight clear pillars: securing the strait, ensuring ship safety, addressing environmental risks, establishing financial arrangements with a rial-based toll system, banning American and Israeli vessels from passage, asserting Iran’s sovereign authority and that of its armed forces, cooperating with Oman on the legal framework, and prohibiting entry to any state that participates in unilateral sanctions against Iran.


Iran’s Strait of Hormuz Eight Pillars Management Plan

A parallel description from Xinhuanet states that the measure gathered more than 250 signatures and outlines four immediate objectives: ensuring shipping security, charging environmental polluters, collecting fees for guidance services, and establishing a regional development fund funded by the toll regime. Those details matter as they show that Tehran is not marketing this as a simple wartime levy, but as sovereign administration over safety, environmental protection, navigational management, revenue, and regional development.

It is crucial to be precise. The plan is not yet fully enacted into law. Committee approval is significant because it codifies the logic of the corridor and signals an intention to turn military practice into statute, but Iranian reporting makes clear that key elements are still in the phase of initial measures and continued drafting. That does not weaken the argument. It actually strengthens it. The turning point is not when the last procedural stamp is applied, but when a state under attack openly decides to legislate the war’s new realities into its domestic legal order.

The Oman clause is one of the plan’s sharpest edges. Iranian reporting says Oman must be present in the legal regime and coordination structure because the southern side of the strait is Omani. At the same time, a parliamentary voice emphasised that in matters of toll collection “the essence of the matter is in Iran’s hands,” and that Iran is the party positioned to collect fees, while Oman’s place is in cooperation and coordination, not revenue capture.

In other words, Tehran is regionalising the legal façade without diluting operational control. Omani decrees from 2025 ratifying broader cooperation and legal-judicial accords with Iran give this move a pre-existing legal context, making the Hormuz framework look less like a unilateral edict and more like a hard extension of bilateral agreements into wartime management.

This is what it means for force to become law. Iran is not simply blocking ships. It is regulating them, invoicing them, and giving itself the legal language to defend that behaviour once the guns fall quiet.

Islands’ sovereignty and the human layer

Strip Larak from its geography and you miss half the story. Hormuz cannot be seen as just another free-floating blue line on an analyst’s map. It is a dense, lived space of islands, coastlines, fishing ports, naval outposts, and communities that have grown up under the shadow of foreign fleets and sanctions.

For half a century, the world has been taught to treat the islands of Abu Musa and the Tunbs as footnotes, little “disputed” specks on the map. In reality, they, along with Qeshm and Larak, sit inside a network of surveillance and reach that allows Iran to watch, shape, and, when necessary, squeeze movement at the mouth of the Gulf. The Larak Corridor is not a freakish one-off. It grows out of a sovereignty geography that has been quietly undermining the fiction of an “American lake” in Hormuz for decades.

There is a human layer that rarely makes it into Western press. Iran’s maritime posture is not only the work of admirals in Tehran, but it also rests on coastal communities, port workers, pilots, and the broader ecosystem that includes the Naval Basij, the volunteer maritime defence network you researched earlier. That network, with its small craft, its local knowledge, and its political symbolism, has always been part of how Iran thinks about defending the strait, not simply by hardware but by socialised resistance.

For people living on those coasts, the corridor is not a theoretical legal innovation. It is one of the few visible signs, in the middle of bombardment and assassination, that their state can still impose some order at the place where global power once promised them none. Seen from there, the Larak Corridor looks less like opportunism and more like a resilient country insisting that sovereignty is not an abstract word but something that can be exercised in a specific channel of water under fire.

The Gulf pays for the war

The political brilliance of the Larak move is in who gets billed for it: not Washington first, not Tel Aviv first, but the Gulf order that enabled this war and is now trapped in its consequences.

Gulf governments were not properly warned, their objections were ignored, and Europe was largely marginalised from the decision-making that triggered the regional blowback they are now paying for.

That one sentence punctures the comforting story that the old security architecture still works. Some Gulf capitals had urged Washington not to attack Iran. Some tried to keep a distance from the opening salvo. Europe itself was treated less like a partner than a spectator told to brace for impact.

The cost has not been theoretical. Freight risk exploded. Insurance premiums climbed. Cargo timetables turned into contingency plans. The “guarantee” on offer from Washington turns out to be a package in which Gulf states host bases, bankroll weapons, and then absorb the retaliation and economic shock once the trigger is pulled.

The evidence of fatigue is patchy but real. Saudi Arabia has intensified direct contacts with Iran. Regional diplomacy has tried to put some sort of brake on escalation. At the same time, influential Gulf voices still speak of the need to degrade Iranian capabilities, not simply to stop the war. That tension is important as it shows a region caught between fear of Iran and a growing recognition that the American-led order is no longer a stable shelter.

Larak turns that contradiction from an argument into a daily experience. Every tanker that has to negotiate with Tehran, every nervous call from an insurer, or every investor wondering whether to avoid Gulf exposure. All of it drives home the same lesson. A war on Iranian sovereignty will not remain confined to Iranian soil or to the screens of Western news shows. It will leak into ports, pipelines, desalination plants, stock exchanges, and households across the Gulf.

From a pro-peace, pro-sovereignty perspective, that is the real indictment. The architecture that claimed to keep the region safe has delivered a crisis that no one can turn off without Iran’s involvement.

Beyond the dollar and toward the Global South

Although it may sound like a speculative slogan about some future yuan world, it is a description of an experiment already underway. Iran’s proposed Hormuz management plan speaks in the language of rial-based tolls and financial arrangements. Broader analysis around the corridor connects that direction of travel to non-Western settlement channels and to the wider de-dollarisation agenda now running through BRICS and the Global South.

The point is not that the petrodollar disappears tomorrow. It is that under bombardment, and with its conventional military apparatus under fire, Iran is still moving a slice of energy trade onto monetary rails where Washington’s sanctions power is weaker.

Hormuz is doubling as a testbed for de-dollarized energy payments.

China’s experiment with yuan-settled LNG from Qatar in 2023 showed that Gulf energy can clear outside dollar channels when states choose to build the infrastructure. Iran’s 2023 agreement with the UAE to use the dirham in bilateral trade, while imperfect because of the dirham’s peg, still represents a deliberate shift into regional banking circuits that cost Washington more to police. Meanwhile, BRICS has been advancing alternative payment mechanisms and settlement systems designed precisely to chip away at dollar centrality.

The Larak Corridor slots into this picture with unnerving ease. It rewards states willing to engage with Tehran rather than join the sanctions chorus. It opens space for deals denominated in rial, dirham, or yuan. It demonstrates that a Global South state under open attack can still exert leverage over the physical and financial pathways through which the world’s energy moves.

Tehran is not claiming a clean victory over the dollar. What it is doing is more subversive. It is using the war to erase the assumption that Washington can both close and reopen Hormuz at will, militarily and financially. Every transaction that clears outside Western rails, every ship that goes through a lane managed on Iranian terms, is another chip knocked out of a system that has long treated Gulf energy as an American instrument first and a regional lifeline second.

That is why the story of Larak is not simply a regional shipping story, but rather a frontline in the contest over who writes the rules of the global economy.

The old order is cracking

What has happened at Larak is not the final victory of a new world, but it is one of the clearest signs that the old one is cracking in real time.

For decades, the script ran on autopilot. The United States secured the sea lanes. The Gulf monarchies supplied the fuel. The dollar priced it. Everyone else adjusted. The war on Iran was supposed to be another scene in that familiar play. Instead, it exposed how much of it had become theatre.

Iran’s answer didn’t need to be polite, and it was never meant to be. It was disciplined, coercive, and grounded in the one thing Washington cannot replace with rhetoric, the geographic reality of where Hormuz actually lies. Tehran avoided the trap of a universal shutdown and built a mechanism that punishes enemies, rewards accommodation, and keeps the region inside a rolling uncertainty that no press conference in Washington can dispel.

That is why the phrase differentiated transit regime carries so much weight in this war. It captures the fact that what is happening off Larak is not chaos. It is governance under attack. It is a sovereign state, bombed and sanctioned, insisting that it still has the right to decide who crosses its doorstep and on what terms.

For people in the Gulf, it is about whether their ports can stay open, whether their desalination plants keep running, and whether their economies can withstand another cycle of manufactured crisis. For people in Iran, it is about whether anything in their immediate environment still belongs to them after decades of war, sanctions, and threats of regime change.

Seen from that angle, the Larak Corridor is not a provocation. It is a verdict. Peace will not come from pretending the old arrangement can simply be restored. It will come, if it comes at all, when the region and the wider world accept the reality written into the water off Larak. A Gulf built on assaults against Iranian sovereignty cannot remain prosperous, stable, or truly sovereign itself. Not now, and not in the long term.

Iran’s navy has been battered. Its cities have been hit. Its leaders have been hunted. Yet at the most critical chokepoint on earth, the war machine that promised to reopen the map still cannot make Hormuz move on its own terms.

Sovereignty, once attacked, does not always retreat. Sometimes it answers by redrawing the map and forcing those who lit the fire to live with the new lines.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , | Comments Off on The Larak Corridor: Iran’s Rial Gate With No US, No Israel, and No Way Around

Iran accuses adversaries of false flags to strain Turkey ties

Al Mayadeen | March 31, 2026

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi categorically denied reports claiming that Iranian missiles had been launched toward Turkish territory, describing them as “completely baseless.”

During a phone call with his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan, Araghchi warned of attempts by regional adversaries to undermine the atmosphere of peace and friendship between the two neighboring countries.

Araghchi also discussed the repercussions of the ongoing US-Israeli aggression against Iran, reaffirming Tehran’s commitment to the principles of good neighborliness and respect for Turkey’s national sovereignty.

The Iranian foreign minister expressed his country’s full readiness to cooperate in verifying any such claims.

In his remarks to Fidan, Araghchi stressed the need for the international community to condemn US and Israeli aggression targeting schools, universities, energy infrastructure, and residential areas. He added that “the American rhetoric openly threatening to attack Iranian production facilities constitutes a criminal threat and a clear disregard for international law and humanitarian principles.”

He concluded by emphasizing that US violations require a decisive response from all states and governments to prevent further escalation and to stop aggressive powers from violating the resources of the region’s peoples and destroying their infrastructure.

It is worth noting that the Turkish president has repeatedly affirmed that his country will not be drawn into the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

Araghchi calls on Caspian states to take a firm stance against aggression

In the same context, Araghchi told his Azerbaijani counterpart Jeyhun Bayramov that Iran is taking defensive measures against the aggressors’ military bases and installations located in countries across the region.

He further noted that the countries bordering the Caspian Sea must adopt a firm position regarding the recent aggression on certain coastal areas of the Caspian Sea.

Iran warns against potential false-flag attacks framing Iran 

The Islamic Revolution Guard Corps lately condemned the drone strike targeting the residence of the president of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region in Duhok, Nechirvan Barzani, describing it as an “act of terrorism” linked to recent attacks against Iranian officials.

Earlier, Iranian officials and sources repeatedly warned of false flag attacks, indicating that “Israel” and the United States have been intending to expand false flag operations to target regional actors and frame Iran for the attacks.

On March 15, late Iranian Secretary of the National Security Council Ali Larijani warned of a potential large-scale false flag attack on United States soil allegedly designed to frame Iran. In a post on X, Larijani claimed, “I’ve heard that the remaining members of Epstein’s network have devised a conspiracy to create an incident similar to 9/11 and blame Iran for it.”

Shahed-136 drone copied into LUCAS

Earlier on March 15, the spokesperson for Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters warned neighboring countries and Muslim populations in the region that Iran’s enemies have replicated the Shahed-136 drone, renaming it the LUCAS drone and using it to strike illegitimate targets across the region.

The statement accused “Israel” and the United States of resorting to deception after their failures on the military and political fronts against Iran. By copying the Shahed-136 drone, the spokesperson said the “enemy aims to carry out attacks while falsely attributing them to Iran.”

“This malicious tactic is designed to sow doubt, direct accusations at the Islamic Republic of Iran, and create division between Iran and its neighbors,” the statement said, adding that such actions seek to discredit what it described as the lawful defensive measures of the Iranian Armed Forces.

Larijani emphasized that Iran “fundamentally opposes such terrorist schemes,” underlining that the country has no conflict with the American people. “We have no war with the American people,” he wrote, asserting that Iran is merely defending itself against aggression launched by the United States and “Israel”. He added that Iran “stands tall in doing so in order to teach the aggressors a lesson.”

‘Israel’ working to expand false flag operations across Middle East 

On March 8, a regional security source told Al Mayadeen that “Israel” is working to expand false flag operations across West Asia and in several European countries, citing what the source described as confirmed intelligence information.

According to the source, recent attacks targeting Cyprus, Azerbaijan, and Riyadh were carried out by “Israel”.

The source also said there is “reliable information” suggesting that similar security and military operations could occur. These incidents, the source said, may be falsely attributed to Iran or to the Axis of Resistance.

Separately, an informed official in Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence warned on March 7 of a potential Israeli scheme to target the Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied al-Quds in an attempt to blame Iran and Resistance movements.

According to the Iranian Tasnim News Agency, the official said the alleged plan could involve a false flag operation using drones or missiles aimed at the mosque compound.

March 31, 2026 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran accuses adversaries of false flags to strain Turkey ties

Marandi: Yemen joins the war – Red Sea could be blocked next – Saudi regime at risk

Glenn Diesen | March 29, 2026

Seyed Mohammad Marandi discusses the ongoing escalation in the Iran War—and why Yemen’s sudden entry could be a game-changer. Marandi is a professor at Tehran University and a former advisor to Iran’s Nuclear Negotiation Team. (Some of the video is lagging due to the ongoing bombing of Tehran). Recorded 29.03.2026.

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

March 29, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Marandi: Yemen joins the war – Red Sea could be blocked next – Saudi regime at risk

Pakistan to Host US-Iran Talks

Sputnik – March 29, 2026

US-Iran talks may take place in Islamabad in the coming days, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said.

All parties have expressed confidence in Pakistan’s mediating role, he added, noting that China “fully supports” the initiative.

Earlier on Sunday, foreign ministers from Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Egypt arrived in Pakistan to discuss potential ways to permanently resolve the current conflict in the Persian Gulf.

The ministers also discussed various proposals for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for global oil and liquefied natural gas trade.

The proposals include establishing a management consortium and charging fees, sources say.

Pakistan, which shares a border with Iran, has leveraged its strong ties with both Tehran and Washington to position itself as a key diplomatic channel in the conflict.

March 29, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Pakistan to Host US-Iran Talks

AWACS’ Destruction is a Major Loss for US Military – Ex-DoW Analyst

Sputnik – 29.03.2026

The destruction of a US E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft in Saudi Arabia by an Iranian missile strike is a serious blow to the US military, former US Department of War analyst Karen Kwiatkowski tells Sputnik.

The US has a limited number of E-3 aircraft, which are based on aging Boeing 707 airframes, and the next-generation replacement for E-3 is not yet available
The loss of even one of E-3s puts a strain on the remaining aircraft as they are forced to operate longer. It demoralizes the crew, stresses systems, and “increases the consumption rate of surveillance capability and information management”.

Other E-3s now have to prioritize their own defense, which may reduce the radar, surveillance, and command effectiveness they supply.

With many of the important US long-range radars in the region being knocked out by Iranian strikes, the strain put on E-3 aircraft will only get worse, with further losses among them threatening to “narrow and pressure the information space for theater commanders and US and Israeli forces”.

Due to E-3’s distinctive and well-recognized function and appearance, Kwiatkowski adds, its destruction creates concern in the US because it doesn’t look like “winning,” and that claims of Iran losing its fighting capability were premature.

“One month into a ‘well planned 4 day operation’ is revealing many predictable operational and logistical crises, as well as a noticeable reduction in the tactical and operational choices for US and also Israeli theater commanders,” she says.

March 29, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on AWACS’ Destruction is a Major Loss for US Military – Ex-DoW Analyst

Israel’s Iran Strategy Uses US Military & Gulf States as Its Pawns

By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | March 29, 2026

While most honest analysts will conclude that the decision made by the White House came as a result of pressure from the Israelis or that this is a war that is being fought for Tel Aviv’s interests, many fail to see any clear strategy at play.

In order to understand the strategy behind the US-Israeli assault on the Islamic Republic, you must first remove the notion that the United States is in the driving seat to any significant extent.

Almost immediately after the 12-Day War in June of 2025, the Israeli leadership was already preparing for the next round. On July 7, Axios News even reported that officials in Tel Aviv believed that US President Trump would give them another green light to attack.

Meanwhile, the most influential Zionist think tanks in Washington DC, the likes of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), were openly discussing the necessity of a new round of confrontations.

These think tanks facilitated discussions and published pieces in which they made it clear that while the next round was inevitable, it had to be the last round, and that the US’s involvement would be important in deciding outcomes.

Understanding the Israeli Strategy

It is no coincidence that senior Israeli officials, all the way from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to opposition leader Yair Lapid, have all recently publicly endorsed the “Greater Israel Project”.

This is not simply posturing, this is their goal. But how does this fit into the Iran war? Well, it will begin to make sense when the context is all provided.

Firstly, the Greater Israel Project’s strategy is grounded in an academic article published by a former Israeli intelligence officer and journalist, Oded Yinon. The plan did not advocate for the physical expansion of the Israeli State’s borders over every nation between the Euphrates River and the River Nile, but instead opted for an approach that would transform Israel into a regional empire.

In order to achieve this goal of a “Greater Israel”, it would first necessitate the collapse of all the region’s sovereign States, which would instead be broken up into warring sectarian and ethno-regimes.

The purpose of achieving the disintegration of the surrounding nations is a simple concept to understand. If they are all divided, economically weak, and lack the military capabilities to stand up to Israel, it makes it easy for the Israelis to control them.

Take, for example, the Kurdish Regional Government in northern Iraq, or the semi-autonomous zone in southern Syria’s Sweida Province, now carved out by Israeli-backed separatists.

Syria and Iraq are perfect examples of what happens when a nation is torn apart and sectarianism, or ethno-supremacist ideologies, are spread through deliberate propaganda campaigns.

Although Secular Arab Nationalism failed in the region, the chief proponent of it, former Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser, was indeed correct in his analysis as to why it was a net positive for the region.

A united Arab World would undoubtedly be far stronger than the simple modern nation-states of the region, whose borders were drawn up by European colonial powers.

For the Israelis, they had always sought to impose this long-term solution upon West Asia, of a “Greater Israel”, but were previously seeking to do it in a slow and methodical way, opposed to a ruthlessly violent one.

Part of this way of thinking was centered around the idea that Israel maintained a “deterrence capacity”, meaning that their military power was capable of deterring any significant strategic threat from rising against it.

On October 7, 2023, the Qassam Brigades of Hamas crippled this strategy and debunked the notion of their “deterrence capacity”. A few thousand Palestinian fighters managed to overcome the most militarily advanced army in the region, bursting through the gates of their concentration camp, despite the world’s most advanced surveillance systems being present in the area.

The Palestinian groups themselves appear to have been genuinely surprised by how easily they were capable of achieving their goals. Not only did they inflict a blow on the Israeli military and seize captives, but they also managed to collapse the entire Israeli southern command, all with light weapons.

To Israel, the message was clear: The Arab populations of Jordan and Egypt had taken to the streets, some even pouring across the Jordanian border. The weakest link in the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance had dealt the Israeli military its most embarrassing defeat. Deterrence was dead, and former Secretary General of Hezbollah, Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, was proven correct: “Israel is weaker than a spider’s web”.

The decision to commit genocide was therefore ordered. Israel believed it had to show the Arab World what it was truly capable of, as a means of asserting its control. In the cases of the Arab populations in Jordan, Egypt, and even the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem, the fear tactics appeared to have worked. Then they made an irreversible mistake.

In September 2024, they assassinated Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, a move that completely changed the thinking of Iran and its allies. Now, the message had been received loud and clear; preparations for the last war had to be made. Up until then, the Axis of Resistance had been attempting to close the chapter of the Gaza genocide; now, they understood that destroying Gaza wasn’t the end goal of Israel.

Israel had decided it would accelerate its national project of gradual expansion, meaning that the Islamic Republic of Iran had to be deposed. A failure to overthrow the Iranian government would represent an existential threat to this project.

Israel’s Iran War Strategy

As I have been writing in the Palestine Chronicle for the past eight months, the only viable strategy that the Israelis could hope to use, in order to see any gains, is one where Iran’s civilian infrastructure is the primary target.

That means: taking out power stations, desalination plants along with other key water facilities – less than 3% of Iran’s water needs come from desalination – while blowing up oil and gas facilities, bombing factories, destroying agricultural lands, inflicting costly environmental catastrophes, and attempting to cripple the Iranian State’s ability to function. In other words, a policy that replicates the Gaza model on a much wider scale, impacting a nation of 92 million people.

Tel Aviv’s goal here is a long-term regime change operation, one that will happen gradually following the war itself. Israel knows that destroying Iran’s military capabilities was never going to be possible. Yes, they may have some successes, but totally crippling their missile and drone programs through strikes alone won’t work.

Therefore, they seek to try and force Tehran to expend a large portion of its missile arsenal, making it more difficult for them to start a new war in the near future following the conflict’s conclusion.

If you look at Syria, for example, the government of Bashar al-Assad did not collapse during the war. Instead, the Syrian State slowly eroded from the inside, due to its isolation and the US-EU’s maximum pressure sanctions.

In the end, the Syrian State was largely bought out and was so corrupt that there was little left. When Ahmed al-Shara’a marched into Aleppo and then Damascus, he did so without any fight, although there were some exceptions where a few units resisted.

Now, Damascus is open for Israeli citizens, the leadership in Syria meets with Israeli officials face-to-face, and has even set up a joint normalizing mechanism between both sides. Therefore, using the long game strategy against Iran makes the most sense in Israel’s strategic thinking.

Then there comes the convenient side effect of the strategy, which begins to explain how the US leadership is not in the driver’s seat at all. That being the weakening of the Persian Gulf Arab nations.

Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are experiencing untold economic devastation as a result of this war. The reason for this, evidently, is that they all host US bases and have permitted a large presence of American military and intelligence personnel inside their countries.

Oman, and to a lesser extent Qatar, have been the only Gulf nations that appear to be pushing back against the true culprits in this war, the Israelis and US. Muscat in particular has blasted the “security arrangements” in the region and condemned normalising efforts with Tel Aviv, pointing their fingers in the right direction.

Bahrain and especially the UAE have gone in the opposite direction. They are only increasing their pro-Israeli and anti-Iran rhetoric, which comes as little surprise given that both have normalized relations with the Zionists. Riyadh, on the other hand, appears to be on a separate trajectory, with its rhetoric being diplomatic, while its actions suggest it is hostile towards Iran.

The Israelis, despite their efforts to normalize ties with the Gulf States, do not want strong nations to exist anywhere in West Asia under their accelerationist approach to achieving an Israel Empire. This appears to be something that the leadership in Abu Dhabi and Manama have not proven intelligent enough to figure out.

That is why the Israeli leadership had started to announce their next targets, following Iran, were the leaderships in Turkiye and even Pakistan. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is not a threat in the way that Iran is, but he does command one of the most powerful military forces in the region and rules over a developing economy, working towards transforming itself into a key global trade hub.

Alone, the idea that Turkiye would begin to build an economic or defence alliance with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or Egypt, poses a direct threat to the Greater Israel Project. In Syria, we see a similar thing; although Ankara does not present a clear and present military challenge to the Israelis as a result of its influence in Damascus, it acts as a potential competitor, a nation that may seek to curtail Israeli expansionist plots.

The GCC countries, which are in alliance with one another, maintain immense economic power. As we see today, if the Strait of Hormuz is disrupted, the entire world is impacted. Back in 1973, these Persian Gulf Arab States exercised that power temporarily. One thing to keep in mind with the Israelis is that they never forget history and are infamous for holding grudges.

So, the dismantlement of the Gulf Arab nations’ economies, or at the very least, the weakening of these countries, is viewed as a positive development in Tel Aviv. As for the US, this war is similarly disastrous, but Israel fails to care less.

This war has destroyed US power projection, making it open to its top chosen adversaries – Russia and China – in a number of other arenas. Donald Trump personally has business ties in the Gulf, which don’t benefit from this conflict, so even on a personal level, it isn’t exactly a victory. The entire Western World, allying itself with the US and Israel, is suffering economically, and as a result, this will mean social unrest is possible, even if it takes time to come to fruition.

An embarrassment has already been dealt to the US military, which is being made to look like a paper tiger, as Mao Zedong once called it. Its future in the Gulf region may have just been ruined, along with those billions, or trillions as Trump believes, of investments – from Gulf States – may no longer materialize. The entire White House Security Doctrine, published last year, has been torn up and set on fire.

In terms of soldier casualties, the Trump administration is evidently hiding the true figure, but it goes without saying that this isn’t good news. NATO has been forced to flee Iraq. The US has even lifted sanctions on Moscow and a limited number of sanctions on Iranian oil. There is simply nothing that the US stands to gain from this war, even if it were to somehow pull off a victory; at this point, it would prove pyrrhic.

With all of this being said, what the Israelis are doing is making a massive gamble. A series of risks that appear so far to be backfiring, as Tehran appears to have pre-empted the conspiracies set against it. The final results of the war are not yet in, but the odds appear to be on the side of Iran.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

March 29, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Israel’s Iran Strategy Uses US Military & Gulf States as Its Pawns

Iran reports 500 US casualties in strikes on covert US military sites

Al Mayadeen | March 28, 2026

Iran’s Armed Forces announced on Saturday that they inflicted heavy casualty losses on US military personnel after striking two covert sites used to shelter US troops, both in Dubai.

The spokesperson for Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, Lieutenant Colonel Ebrahim Zolfaghari, stated that the strikes resulted in casualties affecting more than 500 US soldiers and officers, with approximately 400 at the first site and over 100 at the second.

He confirmed ambulances were seen transporting the dead and wounded for hours following the operations.

Tehran issued a warning to US President Donald Trump and US military commanders in the wake of the strikes, declaring that the region had become “a graveyard for their soldiers” and that the United States has no option but to yield to Iran’s will or face inevitable consequences.

Dubai, al-Kharj targeted in coordinated strike

Zolfaghari also announced in a separate statement that the two secret locations were identified and struck using a combination of missiles and drones in precise operations.

He added that an IRGC strike on the US troop deployment site at Al-Kharj base in Saudi Arabia on Friday destroyed one refueling aircraft and severely damaged three others, rendering all four completely inoperable.

At the same time as the Dubai strikes, Zolfaghari revealed that a warehouse storing Ukrainian anti-drone systems, present in Dubai to support the US military, was also destroyed in a combined operation carried out by the IRGC’s aerospace and naval forces.

21 Ukrainian personnel were reported to have been at the site at the time of the strike. “There is no confirmed information regarding the fate of the Ukrainian personnel present at the site, who are likely to have been killed,” Zolfaghari said.

March 28, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Iran reports 500 US casualties in strikes on covert US military sites

US-Israeli aggression on Iran triggers review of GCC countries’ investment pledges to Washington

Press TV – March 26, 2026

As the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran enters its fifth week, the (Persian) Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are reassessing massive overseas investment commitments, particularly those directed toward the United States, amid severe economic fallout from Iran’s retaliatory strikes against US bases in the region and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

The war was initiated by Washington and Tel Aviv’s unprovoked aerial aggression against Iran late last month. The conflict has sent shockwaves through the Persian Gulf region, choking off vital oil and gas revenues that underpin GCC economies and forcing sovereign wealth funds to prioritize domestic needs over foreign pledges.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly touted eye-popping investment deals with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar — totaling trillions of dollars — as the cornerstone of his economic vision for the United States.

These pledges, secured during high-profile trips and announcements, were meant to fuel American tech startups, investment firms, defense contractors, and major businesses.

However, sources familiar with internal discussions indicate growing alarm in the Trump administration that GCC allies may be unable to deliver on these promises as the war exacts a heavy toll, Politico reported on Thursday.

“What has really concerned observers is that Persian Gulf states have signaled they are only weeks away from potentially repatriating tens of billions of dollars in US-based investments to address urgent domestic and defensive requirements,” one source noted.

Such moves would prove highly destabilizing to Washington’s plans, limiting capital flows at a time when US markets are already facing uncertainty.

The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran has drastically curtailed revenue for GCC financial institutions, while Iran’s precision strikes on critical infrastructure, energy facilities, and high-profile sites in places like Dubai and Doha have halted tourism and disrupted economic activity.

The Persian Gulf’s role as a hub for global capital has been severely compromised by the US and Israeli war of aggression that began on February 28, which included the assassinations of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, along with several senior officials and military commanders, as well as hundreds of civilians.

The Iranian armed forces have responded by launching almost daily missile and drone operations targeting locations in the Israeli-occupied territories as well as US military bases and assets across the Persian Gulf region.

They have also blocked the strategic Strait of Hormuz to oil and gas tankers affiliated with the adversaries and those cooperating with them.

A senior executive at an asset management firm with substantial Persian Gulf backing stated that companies are now seeking capital alternatives outside the region due to the ongoing disruptions.

Economists and analysts, including Adnan Mazarei, a former deputy director at the International Monetary Fund, have long questioned the realism of these Arab pledges to the US.

“Those pledges are now becoming harder to deliver on,” he observed, especially as countries must allocate resources to restore missile defenses and repair war-damaged sites.

Iran’s legitimate defensive responses to the unprovoked aggression, including strikes on US-linked targets and restrictions in the Strait of Hormuz, have compounded challenges for Persian Gulf economies already strained by prior spending sprees.

March 26, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on US-Israeli aggression on Iran triggers review of GCC countries’ investment pledges to Washington

War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis

Al Mayadeen | March 23, 2026

The war on Iran could disrupt the flow of Gulf capital across global markets, raising concerns about broader financial stability, according to economist Mohamed El-Erian, writing to the Financial Times.

While much attention has focused on energy markets and the resumption of oil production and shipments, El-Erian argued that an equally important issue is how the war may affect the Gulf’s relationship with international capital markets in the short term.

The six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, have become major global financial players over decades, investing heavily across international markets.

El-Erian noted that there is a risk of a temporary shift in capital flows as Gulf countries face increased domestic financial demands amid the war, even if their long-term investment role remains intact. Such a shift could impact global interest rates and the distribution of funding, given the world’s growing reliance on GCC capital.

Before the US-Israel war on Iran, GCC countries had already established themselves as influential forces in global finance, not only as energy suppliers but also as major hubs for transport, tourism, and liquidity.

The region generated a current account surplus exceeding $800 billion over the past four years and has deployed its financial resources across global markets, including public and private investments.

GCC’s growing role in global finance

El-Erian highlighted the growing presence of global financial institutions in the Gulf, where sovereign wealth funds, offices, pension funds, and banks actively manage and allocate capital internationally.

Over time, GCC countries have expanded their investment strategies, now playing a leading role in sectors such as artificial intelligence, life sciences, and robotics.

However, the war on Iran has caused a near “sudden stop” in the energy sector, creating short-term revenue pressures. Governments are expected to increase spending to shield populations from the impact of the war, even as some expenditures decline.

El-Erian emphasized that GCC countries are not uniform, noting that outcomes will depend on financial reserves, revenue recovery speed, and the balance between domestic spending and international investments.

He also warned that any disruption in global capital flows comes at a difficult time, with advanced economies facing large deficits and rising debt issuance, alongside major financing needs driven by technological shifts such as artificial intelligence.

The result is sustained high borrowing costs, which could affect countries, companies, and households, while amplifying financial risks and exposing new vulnerabilities.

Despite the challenges, El-Erian said the GCC will recover its energy exports and maintain its role as a global financial and logistical hub, but stressed that temporary shifts in capital flows must be considered in assessing the broader economic impact of the Iran war.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | Comments Off on War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis

Attacks on enemy energy facilities not over yet, strikes ongoing: Iran

Al Mayadeen | March 19, 2026

The spokesperson for the Iranian armed forces, Khatam al-Anibya Central Headquarters, Lieutenant Colonel Ebrahim Zolfaghari, warned on Thursday that Iran’s strikes against energy infrastructure in the region are not over.

He stressed that further strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure would trigger an even stronger response that would target enemy assets and those of the allies of Iran’s enemies. Zolfaghari warned that future responses would not stop until adversary energy assets are “completely destroyed”.

SAMREF refinery in Yanbu under attack

On Thursday, an aerial attack targeted the Saudi Aramco-operated SAMREF refinery in Yanbu, an industry source told Reuters, in the latest escalation in the Gulf following US-Israeli strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure.

The SAMREF refinery, a joint venture between Saudi Aramco and Exxon Mobil, was struck in the Red Sea port city of Yanbu. The source claimed the attack caused minimal impact, with no immediate reports of significant disruption to operations.

It is worth noting that Gulf states have largely maintained limited and tightly controlled disclosures regarding attacks on critical infrastructure and US-linked military assets on their territory. Official statements have overstated the interception of incoming missiles and drones, often highlighting high success rates, while offering little detail on damage or operational disruption. The United Arab Emirates has even claimed that debris from interceptions hit its facilities and caused huge plumes of smoke to rise in al-Fujairah, instead of admitting that its defenses failed to intercept drones.

On Wednesday night, Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Defense also reported that it successfully intercepted ballistic missiles targeting assets in Riyadh. Meanwhile, footage taken by migrant workers in the area showed multiple direct impacts.

Numerous energy facilities and assets in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar were struck overnight.

Iran responds in kind to all

Iranian officials have repeatedly said that security can either be achieved for all or for none, emphasizing that insecurity in Iran will lead to insecurity across the region.

The attacks on US-linked energy facilities follow a series of US-Israeli strikes targeting Iran’s energy infrastructure, including the strategic South Pars gas field. In response, Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IGC) issued evacuation warnings for multiple oil and gas facilities across Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, explicitly naming the Yanbu refinery among its targets.

Yanbu has emerged as a critical export hub since Iran effectively shut down the Strait of Hormuz for US-Israeli-linked vessels and products earlier in the war. The waterway, through which roughly a fifth of global oil supply typically passes, has long been a cornerstone of international energy flows.

With Hormuz disrupted, Yanbu and the UAE’s al-Fujairah port became key alternative outlets. However, Fujairah has also come under repeated attacks in recent days, forcing suspensions of operations.

Targeted assets

QatarEnergy reported that Iranian missile strikes on the Ras Laffan industrial city, home to the country’s primary liquefied natural gas processing facilities, caused “extensive damage”. A nearby vessel was also damaged in an attack in the morning.

UAE authorities halted operations at the Habshan gas facility following the alleged interception of a drone attack.

An oil refinery in Kuwait was targeted in a drone strike this morning, sparking a “limited” fire, according to state media. The fire at the Mina Al-Ahmadi refinery was reportedly contained, and there were no reports of injuries, according to the Kuwait News Agency. The oil refinery is located about 500 kilometers south of Kuwait City. It is one of the largest oil refineries in the region, with a petroleum production capacity of 730,000 barrels per day.

With key export terminals under mounting strain and alternative routes repeatedly disrupted, the escalation led by Trump and Netanyahu appears to have further compounded, rather than resolved, the very crisis their initial aggression set in motion, deepening instability across global energy markets.

March 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Attacks on enemy energy facilities not over yet, strikes ongoing: Iran

US dragged by Israel into ‘unlawful war’ with Iran – Gulf state

RT | March 19, 2026

The US has been drawn by Israel into an “unlawful war” against Iran and needs help to disengage, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi has said.

In an opinion piece published in The Economist on Wednesday, the Middle East nation’s top diplomat called on US allies in the region to “tell the truth” about the conflict and admit that Washington “has lost control” of its own foreign policy. “There are two parties to this war who have nothing to gain from it,” he wrote, referring to the US and Iran.

The US maintains close security and defense partnerships with six Gulf states – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman – and has a significant military presence in the region, including bases and naval facilities.

The escalation has had economic and security consequences for these states, with Iran retaliating against targets on their territory. Gulf officials have reportedly complained they were not consulted or warned before the US and Israel launched the campaign against Iran on February 28.

Albusaidi, who acted as a mediator in nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran, wrote that the parties had twice come close to a deal in nine months, noting that the airstrike campaign began immediately after the most substantive talks.

”Israel and America again launched an unlawful military strike against the peace that had briefly appeared really possible,” he wrote, adding that Iran’s retaliation was “inevitable.”

He argued that Washington’s greatest mistake was “entering a war that is not its own,” adding that Israel seeks regime change in Iran, while US interests lie in ending nuclear proliferation and securing energy supplies.

The US leadership must “decide where its national interests really lie, and act accordingly,” Albusaidi wrote. He acknowledged that while returning to talks may prove difficult for both sides, renewed negotiations, potentially mediated by the Gulf states, may provide a path forward.

Tehran has described the negotiations as a US-Israeli deception operation. Former US National Counterterrorism Center head Joe Kent said that Israel and allied media figures ran a “misinformation campaign” to push Washington toward war with Iran, according to his resignation letter published on Thursday.

Former Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal, also blamed the conflict on Israel, claiming that Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu “somehow convinced” US President Donald Trump “to support his views.”

March 19, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on US dragged by Israel into ‘unlawful war’ with Iran – Gulf state

Why Trump’s anti-Iran naval coalition in Strait of Hormuz is doomed to fail

By Wesam Bahrani | Press TV | March 18, 2026

US President Donald Trump believes that involving many countries in a naval coalition would force Iran to surrender under international pressure, or at least agree to a ceasefire and enter negotiations with those countries without preconditions.

The last thing Trump expected was for what he thought would be a short, hours-long confrontation to stretch into days and weeks, and then turn into a full-fledged war of attrition.

This is a scenario he neither anticipated nor has the personal capacity to bear, given its potentially disastrous consequences for his country and the world.

It has become clear that Iran had long prepared for this all-out confrontation and that its leadership was certain it would happen at some point. Turning it into a prolonged war of attrition, both geographically and over time, appears to be a central pillar of the Iranian strategy to exhaust the US, the Zionist regime, and their regional and international allies.

Very quickly, by the end of the first week of the illegal and unprovoked war on Iran, Trump’s vision began to turn into a nightmare. His plan to overthrow the Islamic Republic (in other words, “regime change”) with a first strike failed, as did his far-fetched ambition to gain control over a quarter of global oil production and influence its routes and prices.

He now faces the urgent need to manage the global economic fallout of this failure. Iran has effectively gained control over a maritime route through which roughly a quarter of the world’s oil supply passes. By the third week of the war, oil prices had risen above $100 per barrel.

In his first statement to the Iranian people and the world, the new Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, summarized this challenge in two striking phrases that sent shockwaves through the White House.

“The will of the people is to continue effective and deterrent defense,” and “the option of closing the Strait of Hormuz must remain on the table,” he declared.

This clearly signals a willingness to pursue a prolonged war of attrition that threatens the global economy, especially that of the United States and its allies.

Faced with this difficult situation, rising war costs, and growing tensions not only between the US and the Zionist regime but also within the Trump administration, as reported in American and Hebrew media, Trump has turned to his allies for help.

He initially claimed that several countries would send warships to cooperate with the United States in keeping the Strait of Hormuz open and secure.

He expressed hope that countries such as China, France, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom would deploy naval forces to ensure the safety of this vital shipping route. He also called on countries that benefit from West Asian oil to contribute forces to secure maritime navigation.

At the same time, Trump announced an airstrike on Iran’s Kharg Island in an apparent attempt to convince these countries that the US still controls the military situation in the Persian Gulf.

Trump’s remarks can be understood as a desperate call to form an international naval military coalition under US leadership in the region. The implications, motivations, and objectives behind this call can be summarized as follows:

First, the United States appears to have lost the ability to control and manage the war on its own, especially after failing to claim victory. It is now attempting to internationalize the war and turn it into a global confrontation with Iran under the pretext of protecting oil supply chains and global trade.

Second, the US is trying to bypass Iran’s right to control navigation in the Strait during wartime by internationalizing the issue. This could pave the way for imposing new maritime laws under pressure from multiple countries.

Third, Trump believes that the participation of many countries in a naval coalition would force the Islamic Republic to surrender under international pressure, or at least agree to a ceasefire and enter negotiations without preconditions, giving him a way out of the current crisis.

Fourth, Trump is maneuvering to avoid relying on Russian mediation, which he believes would come at a cost, possibly involving concessions in other areas he is unwilling to compromise on.

Fifth, Trump hopes that his invitation to China to join the coalition will be accepted, especially with a scheduled visit to Beijing.

Sixth, he is trying to encourage European countries, affected by rising energy prices, to join the war effort, after they initially adopted a relatively neutral stance.

The first responses came from Europe, particularly France and the United Kingdom, which appeared to divide roles between them. The UK quickly held a ministerial meeting with Persian Gulf monarchies under defensive themes, a move that seemed to sidestep Trump’s call for a formal naval coalition.

British media also reported that the UK is considering sending drones to detect naval mines and intercept Iranian drones, steps that fall short of full participation in a military alliance.

France, meanwhile, took a different approach. President Emmanuel Macron held phone calls with both the Saudi Crown Prince and the Iranian president, aiming to activate political efforts for a resolution. He also asked Trump to clarify his “final objectives and the pace he intends for operations.” The French presidency denied reports that France would send warships to the Persian Gulf.

Japan announced that it would not rush to send warships in response to Trump’s request, emphasizing its long-standing principle of making independent decisions. It also noted that current laws make deploying military vessels to the region legally very difficult.

South Korea stated that it is carefully reviewing Trump’s request, while China ignored the call and instead urged an immediate ceasefire.

Overall, despite their differences, these responses reflect a shared caution, a preference for diplomacy, de-escalation, and, in essence, avoiding the risks of retaliatory attacks from Tehran over a war that has been widely acknowledged as illegal and unprovoked.

This has reportedly increased Trump’s frustration, leading him to postpone his visit to China and to warn of serious consequences for NATO if allies respond negatively.

Tehran’s political approach appears to combine prudence and strategic cunning with firm military resolve. This has been evident both in its diplomatic efforts before and during recent negotiations, as well as in its conduct during the current war.

As usual, Iran’s leadership quickly understood the motives behind Trump’s latest maneuver and responded through several measures.

One of the first decisions was to allow some oil shipments to pass through the Strait of Hormuz on the condition that transactions be conducted reportedly in Chinese yuan, as per reports.

This move aims to maintain oil flows while weakening the US dollar, or at least ensuring that China continues to receive Persian Gulf oil imports, not just from Iran. This is particularly significant as Persian Gulf states may feel compelled to continue selling oil amid fears of economic slowdown after decades of growth.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi shifted responsibility back onto the United States by stating that Iran has not closed the Strait of Hormuz and that the real reason ships are not sailing is the insecurity caused by American aggression.

This undermines the justification Trump used to call for the coalition. Araghchi also left the door open for countries seeking safe passage for their ships, indicating that decisions would rest with Iranian military forces.

This may be an attempt to encourage direct security cooperation with Iran instead of joining a US-led coalition, while also reiterating Iran’s demand for US forces to leave the region.

Remarks by former CIA analyst Larry Johnson seem to capture Trump’s current situation accurately: Trump lives in a world of “illusions” and is detached from “reality.”

In reality, he is sliding toward madness.

Wesam Bahrani is an Iraqi journalist and commentator.

March 18, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Trump’s anti-Iran naval coalition in Strait of Hormuz is doomed to fail

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »