Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

US presses Iran nuclear threat narrative despite IAEA’s denial

RT | June 21, 2025

US ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea stated at a UN Security Council meeting on Friday that Iran must be stopped from developing a nuclear bomb, despite IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi recently saying the agency found no evidence that Tehran is pursuing such a weapon. Analysts say Washington’s narrative resembles past efforts to justify regime change in the Middle East.

Last week, Israel launched airstrikes on Iran, citing an imminent threat that Tehran would make a nuclear weapon. Iran, insisting its nuclear program is peaceful, retaliated with strikes on Israeli targets. The Israeli assault came days after the IAEA reported that Iran had enriched uranium to 60% – which is short of the 90% required for weapons.

However, since the strikes started, Grossi has claimed that his agency had no proof that Iran was actually trying to build a nuclear weapon, stressing that enriched uranium alone does not constitute a bomb. US intelligence agencies also maintain there is no evidence Iran is pursuing nuclear arms. Nevertheless, President Donald Trump has claimed Iran was “very close” to acquiring a bomb and warned the US could intervene if it doesn’t agree to scrap its nuclear program.

Shea declared the US “continues to stand with Israel” and backs its campaign against “Iran’s nuclear ambitions.” She insisted that the US “can no longer ignore that Iran has all that it needs to achieve a nuclear weapon,” lacking only a decision from its supreme leader.

Some analysts say US rhetoric on Iran echoes President George W. Bush’s 2002 claims about Iraqi WMDs, which led to a US invasion despite no stockpiles being found. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon told journalist Tucker Carlson this week that the entire operation against Iran “that came out of nowhere” is in fact an attempt by the US “deep state” to orchestrate regime change in Iran.

“We have a system that has its own national security policy… that is the fight we have to take on today,” Bannon stated, suggesting that Trump should not succumb to pressure from US war hawks and involve American military in the conflict. Tucker Carlson also said that while he supports Trump, he fears the consequences if he yields to pressure and joins the Israeli strikes. “I think we’re gonna see the end of the American empire,” he warned, criticizing Washington hawks for dragging the country into another war.

Journalist Steve Coll told NPR this week that using US intelligence to justify strikes mirrors the Iraq war narrative. He noted that while Israel calls its attacks preemptive, the objective remains vague.

“[Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu has spoken of regime change and urged Iranians to rise up – just like George H.W. Bush did in 1991 with Iraq,” Coll said. “There’s no sign of a planned invasion, yet talk of toppling Iran’s government persists.”

Other observers, including former US President Bill Clinton, suggested Israel’s “undeclared war” on Iran may also be driven by another goal – Netanyahu’s desire to stay in power. Shea made a notable slip during her UN remarks, initially blaming Israel for “chaos and terror” in the Middle East before correcting herself to attribute it to Iran. RT’s Rick Sanchez and journalist Chay Bowes called her words a “Freudian slip” while discussing the situation in an episode of Sanchez Effect on Friday, with Sanchez adding, “She accidentally said the truth out loud.”

June 21, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

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.

June 21, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

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.

June 21, 2025 Posted by | Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Net Zero’ Is Collapsing in U.S. States

By Steve Goreham – Master Resource – June 16, 2025

From New York to California, state renewable electrical power dreams are collapsing. Power demands soar, while the federal government cuts funding and support for wind, solar, and grid batteries. Renewables cannot provide enough power to support the artificial intelligence revolution. The Net Zero electricity transition is failing in the United States.

For the last two decades, state governments have embraced policies aimed at replacing coal and natural gas power plants with renewable sources. Twenty-three states enacted laws or executive orders to move to 100% Net Zero electricity by 2050. Onshore and offshore wind, utility-scale and rooftop solar, and grid-scale batteries were heavily promoted by states and most federal administrations.

The New York State Climate Action Scoping Plan of 2022 called for 70% renewable electricity by 2030 and 100% by 2040. But 49.7% of the state’s electricity came from gas in 2024, up from 47.7% in 2023. A January executive order issued by President Trump halted federal leases for construction of offshore wind systems. New York, nine other east coast states, and California were counting on offshore wind in efforts to get to 100% renewable electricity, but new offshore wind projects are now halted.

Wind and solar have benefited from federal tax credits, loans, and outright grants since 1992. But the Trump administration is now working to slash federal government support for these technologies. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB) passed the House of Representatives on May 22. The bill eliminates Production Tax Credits and Investment Tax Credits for renewable systems that begin construction later than 60 days after passage of the bill or for projects that do not complete construction by year end 2028. The bill also halts the sale of tax credits from renewable projects. If the Senate passes the bill, these measures will choke off green energy projects that have relied on federal funding for decades.

Wind and solar advocates attack the OBBB, warning that the bill would create a “nightmare scenario” for US clean energy. These same advocates claim that wind and solar are the lowest-cost generators of electricity but also demand that huge federal subsidies must continue.

Along with federal cutbacks, the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution now drives the nation’s power system, interrupting the renewable electricity transition. Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, and other giant firms are building new data centers and upgrading existing data centers to power AI. AI processors run 24-hours a day for months to enable computers to think like humans. When servers are upgraded to support AI, they consume 6 to 10 times more power than when used for cloud storage and the internet. Data centers consumed 4% of US electricity at the start of 2024 but are projected to consume 20% within the next decade.

Artificial intelligence drives a massive increase in electricity demand. For years, state legislators forced grid operators to close coal and natural gas power plants as part of a transition to renewables. More than 200 coal-fired power plants were closed. But now, many states face a shortage of generating capacity. Virginia has the highest concentration of data centers in the world, with power consumption forecasted to triple by 2040. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas estimates that Texas electricity demand will soar from a record 85.5 gigawatts in 2023 to 218 GW by 2031.

In December, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation concluded that that over half of North America risks power shortfalls in the next decade from surging demand and coal and gas plant retirements. Grid operators are now stepping back from the transition to wind and solar. Coal-fired power plant closures have been postponed in Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, and other states. Nuclear plants are being restarted in Michigan and Pennsylvania. But the big winner will be natural gas.

More than 200 gas plants are planned or under construction. Gas facilities can be brought online in about three years, compared to ten years for nuclear plants. Gas plants can be built near cities, often on former power plant sites, and require fewer new transmission lines than needed by wind and solar systems.

The latest trend is BYOP (bring your own power). AI firms are building their own gas plants to power data centers. Gas turbine manufacturer capacity is now sold out for years. The gas share of electricity production will rise from 43.6% of US consumption in 2024 to much higher levels. The AI power demand and the push for gas are destroying state plans for a transition to green electricity.

California, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Texas, and other states are installing grid-scale batteries to try to compensate for wind and solar intermittency. Huge lithium batteries are intended to store excess wind and solar output when the wind blows and the sun shines and then release electricity when wind and solar output is low. But lithium batteries are unproven technology that is prone to spontaneous ignition, creating huge fires that are difficult to extinguish and which endanger residents.

In the last two years, California suffered four grid battery fires, each at facilities less than five years old. The Otay Mesa storage facility near San Diego burned for more than a week and reignited three times. The Moss Landing battery facility, located south of Santa Cruz, caught fire in January. Forty percent of Moss Landing, one of the largest grid-scale battery facilities in the world, was destroyed in the fire. Residents have sued to prevent the restart of Moss Landing. New York also had three grid battery fires in the last 18 months. Battery fires release toxic gases, force evacuations and school closures, and disrupt communities.

In addition, grid batteries are very expensive. To back up a wind or solar facility for 24 hours requires batteries that cost about ten times as much as the wind or solar system itself. But without grid batteries, wind and solar cannot replace coal, gas, or nuclear generation and still provide reliable power.

The cost of wind, solar, and batteries is hurting the renewable electricity transition. Electricity rates in California, the epicenter of green energy, have risen 116% in the last 16 years, more than three times the national average increase of 33%. California’s residential electricity prices are now over 30 cents per kilowatt-hour, the second highest in the nation. Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island complete the top five for the highest US power costs—all states with aggressive green electricity goals.

The Net Zero electricity transition, endorsed by many states for more than a decade, is failing in the United States. Wind, solar, and batteries suffer from the offshore wind cancellation, federal subsidy cuts, inability to meet the demand of the artificial intelligence revolution, grid battery fires, and high cost. A green energy breakdown is underway. States will be forced to return to sensible energy policy.

———————

Steve Goreham is a speaker on energy, the environment, and public policy and author of the bestselling book Green Breakdown: The Coming Renewable Energy Failure.

June 20, 2025 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

Israel received 14 weapon shipments from US, Germany since start of Iran war

The Cradle | June 20, 2025

Fourteen military cargo planes have arrived in Israel since the start of Tel Aviv’s brutal war against Iran, the Israeli Defense Ministry confirmed.

According to the ministry, the shipments are part of a broader flow of 800 military cargo planes that have arrived in Israel since the start of the genocidal war against Gaza in October 2023.

The ministry stated the shipment is “part of efforts to strengthen operational continuity and support all the IDF’s needs, both for achieving the goals of the war and for improving readiness and stockpiles.”

Most of these planes originated from the US, while the rest came from Germany.

The ministry confirmed that the latest shipments, which arrived on 19 June, are carrying equipment for Israel’s defense systems, which are being used to intercept Iran’s retaliatory ballistic missile strikes against Israeli targets.

Military cargo planes are expected to continue arriving in the coming weeks, the Israeli Defense Ministry added. It said that these shipments are part of a joint effort involving the Defense Procurement Administration, procurement delegations in the US and Germany, the Israeli army’s Planning and Force Build-Up Directorate, and the Israeli Air Force.

The US has continued to funnel massive amounts of weapons and military equipment into Israel, and has deployed warships and fighter jets to the region to help the Israeli army in its attempts to shoot down Iranian missiles.

Middle East Eye reported on 14 June that before the Israeli attack on Iran last Friday, the US covertly delivered about 300 Hellfire missiles to Israel.

Since the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza began, Washington has delivered over 90,000 tons of armaments and military equipment.

“The US is a partner in the Israeli aggression against Iran, even if it does not participate publicly,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on 20 June.

Over the past few days, there has been widespread anticipation over a potential decision by US President Donald Trump to directly enter the war against Iran – particularly for joint strikes on the Fordow nuclear facility.

“Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Trump said on Thursday.

Reports in Hebrew media have said Trump may be trying to deceive the Iranians, and could be planning to enter the war much sooner.

Iran’s ambassador to the UN said in Geneva on 18 June that Tehran will “respond seriously and strongly” if Washington directly enters the Israeli war.

The Islamic Republic had previously warned that all US bases in the region were within its reach and would be targeted if Washington launched an attack against the country.

June 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

Mohammad Marandi: Iran Prepares for War with America

Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi and Prof. Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | June 19, 2025

Seyed Mohammad Marandi is a professor at Tehran University and a former advisor to Iran’s Nuclear Negotiation Team. Prof. Marandi discusses the US preparations to enter the war directly, and Iran’s preparations to fight the US. Trump will only accept Iran’s surrender, yet he does not appear to have the means to achieve this objective. What will happen if US strikes are ineffective and US military assets in the region are attacked? The only path forward now is reckless escalation.

June 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

TV Networks Face Advertising Apocalypse After Trump Admin Mulls Pharma Restrictions

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | June 17, 2025

Last week independent Senators Bernie Sanders (VT) and Angus King (ME) introduced legislation that would ban pharmaceutical companies from promoting prescription drugs directly to consumers – including through television, radio, print, digital platforms, and social media.

Today, Bloomberg reports that the Trump administration is now ‘discussing policies that would make it harder and more expensive for pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to patients.’

Although the US is the only place, besides New Zealand, where pharma companies can directly advertise, banning pharma ads outright could make the administration vulnerable to lawsuits, so it’s instead focusing on cutting down on the practice by adding legal and financial hurdles, according to people familiar with the plans who weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

The two policies the administration has focused in on would be to require greater disclosures of side effects of a drug within each ad — likely making broadcast ads much longer and prohibitively expensive — or removing the industry’s ability to deduct direct-to-consumer advertising as a business expense for tax purposes, these people said.

If this happens, it would mark a major victory for Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr., who says he believes Americans consume more drugs than people in other countries due to the ability of US drug companies to directly advertise to consumers.

While running for president, Mr. Kennedy said he would issue an executive order removing pharmaceutical ads from television, citing overmedication and industry influence on news coverage.

Advertising Apocalypse

As we noted last week, the move would mark a sweeping shift in the U.S. advertising landscape, where pharmaceutical companies are among the largest spenders. Prescription drug brands accounted for roughly 13 percent of all ad spending on linear television in 2025, totaling approximately $2.18 billion so far this year, according to iSpot data. In 2024, the industry spent $3.4 billion on traditional TV ads between January and August alone, according to ad-tracking data.

Since 1997, when the Food and Drug Administration relaxed disclosure requirements for DTC ads, pharmaceutical companies have increasingly leaned on consumer advertising to drive demand. Under current rules, companies need only disclose a drug’s “most important” risks during commercials.

The result has been a media environment saturated with pharmaceutical messaging. Drug ads made up 24.4 percent of all advertising minutes on evening news broadcasts across major networks — including ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and NBC — through May of this year, according iSpot. On CBS Evening News, pharmaceutical companies appeared in more than 70 percent of commercial breaks, per Kantar Media.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

Israel’s war on Iran is not about nuclear weapons

It is, and has always been, about regime change and breaking the Axis of Resistance

By Robert Inlakesh | RT | June 19, 2025

The claim that has been adopted by the United States, Israel and its European partners, that the attack on Iran was a “pre-emptive” attempt to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, is demonstrably false. It holds about as much weight as the allegations against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in 2003 and this war of aggression is just as illegal.

For the best part of four decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been claiming that Iran is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Yet, every single attempt to strike a deal which would bring more monitoring and restrictions to Iran’s nuclear program has been systematically dismantled by Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in Western capitals.

In order to properly assess Israel’s attack on Iran, we have to establish the facts in this case. The Israeli leadership claim to have launched a pre-emptive strike, but have presented no evidence to support their allegations that Iran was on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Simply stating this does not serve as proof, it is a claim, similar to how the US told the world Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Back in March, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard testified before a Senate Intelligence Committee that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”

On top of this, Iran was actively participating in indirect negotiations with the US to reach a new version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. Donald Trump announced Washington would unilaterally withdraw from the agreement in 2018, instead pursuing a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign at the behest of Israel.

Despite the claims of Netanyahu and Trump that Iran was violating the Nuclear Deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report which stated Iran was in full compliance with the deal at the time.

If you trace back every conversation with neo-conservatives, Israeli war hawks and Washington-based think tanks, their opposition to the Obama-era Nuclear Deal always ends up spiraling into the issues of Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support for regional non-State actors.

Israeli officials frequently make claims about Iran producing a nuclear weapon in “years”, “months” or even “weeks,” this has become almost second nature. Yet their main issue has always been with Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who strive for the creation of a Palestinian State.

Proof of all this is simple. Israel, by itself, cannot destroy Iran’s vast nuclear program. It is not clear the US can destroy it either, even if it enters the war. An example of the US’ ineffectiveness at penetrating Iranian-style bunkers, built into mountainous ranges, as many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are, was demonstrated through the American failure to destroy missile storage bases in Yemen with its bunker-buster munitions, which were dropped from B-2 bombers.

Almost immediately after launching his war on Iran, Netanyahu sent out a message in English to the Iranian people, urging them to overthrow their government in an attempt to trigger civil unrest. The Israeli prime minister has since all but announced that regime change is his true intention, claiming that the operation “may lead” to regime change.

Israel’s own intelligence community and military elites have also expressed their view that their air force alone is not capable of destroying the Iranian nuclear program. So why then launch this war, if it is not possible to achieve the supposed reason it was “pre-emptively” launched?

There are two possible explanations:

The first is that the Israeli prime minister has launched this assault on Iran as a final showdown in his “seven front war,” with which he hopes to conclude the regional conflict through a deadly exchange that will ultimately inflict damage on both sides.

In this scenario, the desired outcome would be to conclude the war with the claim that Netanyahu has succeeded at destroying or has significantly degraded Iran’s nuclear program. He would also throw in claims, like we already see him making, that huge numbers of Iranian missiles and drones were eliminated. This would also make the opening Israeli strike, which killed senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and nuclear scientists, make sense. It would all be the perfect blend of propaganda to sell a victory narrative.

On the other hand, the assumption would be that Tehran would also claim victory. Then both sides are able to show the results to their people and tensions cool down for a while. If you are to read what the Washington-based think-tanks are saying about this, most notably The Heritage Foundation, they speak about the ability to contain the war.

The second explanation, which could be an added bonus that the Israelis and US are hoping could come as a result of their efforts, is that this is a full-scale regime change war that is designed to rope in the US.

Israel’s military prestige was greatly damaged in the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, and since that time there has been no victory achieved over any enemy. Hamas is still operating in Gaza and is said to have just as many fighters as when the war began, Hezbollah was dealt significant blows but is still very much alive, while Yemen’s Ansarallah has only increased its strength. This is an all round stunning defeat of the Israeli military and an embarrassment to the US.

As is well known, Iran is the regional power that backs all of what is called the Axis of Resistance. Without it, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would be significantly degraded. Evidently, armed resistance to Israeli occupation will never end as long as occupied people exist and live under oppressive rule, but destroying Iran would be devastating for the regional alliance against Israel.

The big question however, is whether regime change is even possible. There is a serious question mark here and it seems much more likely that this will end up on a slippery slope to nuclear war instead.

What makes the Israeli-US claim that this war is somehow pre-emptive, for which there is no proof at all, all the more ridiculous of a notion, is that if anything, Iran may now actually rush to acquire a nuclear weapon for defensive purposes. If they can’t even trust the Israelis not to bomb them with US backing, while negotiations were supposed to be happening, then how can a deal ever be negotiated?

Even in the event that the US joins and deals a major blow to the Iranian nuclear program, it doesn’t mean that Iran will simply abandon the program altogether. Instead, Tehran could simply end up rebuilding and acquiring the bomb years later. Another outcome of this war could end up being Israeli regime change, which also appears as if it could now be on the table.

Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK joining US-led Israeli war on Iran would be illegal, says Attorney General

MEMO | June 19, 2025

The UK’s participation in a potential US-led attack on Iran on behalf of Israel could be unlawful, according to legal advice issued to Prime Minister Keir Starmer by Attorney General Lord Hermer. The warning, reported in The Telegraph, sharply limits Britain’s ability to support military action and presents a political headache for Starmer, who is under pressure to back Washington while avoiding another illegal war reminiscent of Iraq.

Hermer, who was recently appointed as Attorney General and is a close ally of Starmer, has issued legal advice stating that any UK military involvement must be strictly limited to defensive actions, namely protecting allies, rather than participating in direct offensive operations against Iran. One official who reviewed the legal opinion remarked: “The AG has concerns about the UK playing any role in this except for defending our allies.”

This caution comes as speculation grows that US President Donald Trump may order strikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure, using American stealth bombers and joint US-UK bases such as Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. While the UK retains sovereign control over the base, any US offensive would require British authorisation.

The legal advice presents a major political dilemma for Starmer. A committed Atlanticist, the UK prime minister has signalled strong support for US-Israeli interests, but any attempt to bypass legal scrutiny in backing a unilateral military campaign may undermine his government’s legitimacy at home and abroad. Comparisons are already being drawn to Tony Blair’s controversial decision to join the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, a war widely deemed illegal by international legal experts and condemned for bypassing the UN Security Council.

Israel’s unprovoked bombing campaign inside Iran, has killed over 300 civilians. Israel’s own justification—that its strikes are defensive—is not accepted under international law unless there is an imminent threat. Any UK participation in such operations could therefore violate its obligations under the Geneva Conventions and customary international law.

Meanwhile, the British government appears to be stepping back from immediate escalation. “We want to de-escalate rather than escalate,” a No. 10 spokesperson said. Foreign Secretary David Lammy has flown to Washington for urgent talks, while Defence Secretary John Healey is said to be reviewing contingency plans for RAF involvement.

Starmer’s government has authorised the deployment of six additional Typhoon fighter jets to Cyprus, with preparations underway to expand UK capacity in the Gulf. However, sources say no final decision has been made regarding the potential use of Diego Garcia.

The warnings come as Trump threatens what he described as a “very big” response to Iran’s missile attacks on Israel. Iran, in turn, has vowed to resist any foreign aggression, rejecting calls for surrender.

Legal experts say the Starmer government must avoid repeating the mistakes of the Iraq war. Any military action outside the bounds of self-defence or without UN Security Council approval is illegal.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Recycled Blatant Lies: US & Israel Push for Regime Change in Iran – Expert

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 19.06.2025

The United States and Israel are in “open rebellion against international law and the UN Charter,” according to Professor Alfred de Zayas, author of 10 books including “The Human Rights Industry” and “Building a Just World Order.

The US and Israel are pushing a “primitive, vulgar pretext” to justify aggression against Iran, Professor Alfred de Zayas told Sputnik.

The former UN Independent Expert on International Order underscored that for them, facts are irrelevant.

“Blatant lies, propaganda and demonization of Iran suffices to create an atmosphere that would dupe the American people and the world into ‘tolerating’ an invasion,” he stressed.

Both the IAEA and US intelligence admit there’s “zero evidence” Iran is building a bomb, he reminded.

Furthermore, military force is expressly prohibited under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

“If there is a violation of the Non Proliferation Treaty, Iran can be excluded from the benefits of the NPT, but under no conditions can there be aggression,” according to the expert.

Same Playbook, Different Target

Disregarding international law and the UN Charter, the US and Israel are recycling the 2003 tactics – false WMD claims – that were used to justify regime change in Iraq, said Alfred de Zayas.

In 2003, at least Jacques Chirac of France and Gerhard Schroeder of Germany refused to participate in the illegal war. Now, even more countries, like France and Germany, are on board with this, the pundit remarked.

Mainstream Media Complicit

“The media bears considerable responsibility for this tragedy that may yet develop into World War III,” the pundit warns.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli nuclear sites to face ‘crushing blows’ – Iranian source to RT

RT | June 19, 2025

Iran intends to continue its military response against Israel and could target its nuclear infrastructure, a senior Iranian security official has told RT.

In an exclusive statement to the head of RT’s Tehran bureau, the official, who chose to remain anonymous, said that Iranian armed forces will maintain missile and drone operations throughout the day, specifically targeting “the occupied territories and Israeli garrisons.”

The official said Iran’s response follows “the Quranic advice on retaliation,” and warned that Iranian forces would respond “to any extent and wherever the regime attacks Iranian soil.” He noted, however, that based on “Iran’s moral principles,” there would be no attacks on hospitals.

“The Zionist regime’s claim that Iran attacked one of the hospitals in the occupied territories is completely false,” the official stressed, referring to reports of the Soroka hospital being struck in the city of Be’er Sheva in southern Israel.

He also stated that Tehran’s response will be escalated in light of the Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. “Since the [Israeli] regime has attacked our nuclear facilities, our armed forces will subject their nuclear facilities to crushing blows,” the official said.

Since launching its assault last week, Israel has hit several Iranian nuclear facilities, including sites in Natanz, Isfahan, Fordow and near Tehran. Between nine and 14 nuclear researchers have been reported killed in the attacks.

Without naming the US directly, the Iranian official also warned that “if another country directly enters into war with us, it will provide much more accessible targets for the Iranian armed forces to destroy.”

US President Donald Trump has hailed Israel’s attacks on Iran as “excellent” and has urged Tehran to surrender unconditionally. He has also warned that the US could become directly involved in the conflict if any American targets are hit by Iran.

Last Friday, Israeli forces began carrying out strikes on Iran, claiming Tehran is nearing the completion of a nuclear bomb. Iran dismissed the accusations and retaliated with waves of drone and missile strikes on the Jewish state.

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, has since also refuted Israel’s claims, stating that the watchdog has found no evidence that Iran has been making a “systematic effort” to produce a nuclear weapon.

June 19, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

A catalytic event

By Přemysl Janýr | June 19, 2025

Bombing from the air will not bring about the overthrow of the regime, but rather its consolidation. We have seen this in Germany, Japan, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen. The only way to overthrow a regime is by a color revolution or a ground military campaign, if one is lucky.

And Israel isn’t up to it in Iran.

I don’t think he didn’t know. Just like he didn’t know in advance what the Iranian missiles would cause.

If Israel went ahead with the operation anyway, it means it has a plan in reserve. That is to use the US military for a ground campaign.

The fact is, however, that neither the American public nor the president are particularly keen on that. Just as they have not been keen before World War I and World War II or the Vietnam War, just as they have not been keen to destroy seven countries in five years. It always needed, as the neocons say, a catalytic event: the sinking of the Lusitania, the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Tonkin incident, the 9/11 attacks.

If Israel went ahead with the operation anyway, it means it has a catalytic event in reserve.

We can only speculate about it for now. Or infer from the few indistinct hints and signals.

These could be, for example, the meanwhile buried news of Iran’s foiled assassination attempt on Donald Trump, later of Iranian terrorists dropped into the US and equipped with a surface-to-air missile to shoot down Trump’s plane. Netanyahu recently reiterated Iran’s intention to take out Trump.

The shooting down of Trump’s plane would indeed be such an ideal catalytic event. If Israel kills Ayatollah Khamenei before, it would be Iranian retaliation beyond any doubt. It would convince Americans – Trump supporters and opponents alike – of the necessity of the Iranian campaign, while removing the erratic eccentric repeatedly meddling with Israel.

And workable. Experts with access to the necessary information and equipment will surely find a way for such a missile to bypass defense systems. And singling out Iranians who will happily fire it and die in the ensuing firefight is also tried and tested.

It’s speculation, of course. Quite possibly, there will be another catalytic event, perhaps the sinking of an American ship, more successful than that of the Liberty, an attack by pro-Iranian militias on an American base, or something else.

But that Israel would go headlong into it I think is out of the question.

The Czech original: https://www.janyr.eu/123-katalyticka-udalost

June 19, 2025 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »