Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

NATO’s “Nordic model” brings Arctic confrontation closer to Russia’s nuclear bases

By Uriel Araujo | November 6, 2026

As Washington shifts Europe’s conventional defense burden onto its allies, the Nordic countries are emerging as a blueprint for NATO’s future – raising questions about Arctic militarization, Russia’s nuclear deterrent, and regional escalation.

Last week, Finnish researcher Matti Pesu argued in Foreign Affairs that the Nordic countries offer a practical path forward for NATO. His proposal, typical as it is of many Western analyses, deserves some attention.

Finland and Sweden, the alliance’s newest members, have deepened defense coordination with Norway, Denmark, and Iceland. Joint air patrols, shared logistics, and intelligence sharing have reached unprecedented levels.

Pesu presents this “Nordic model” as a prototype for NATO 3.0: an alliance in which Europeans take primary responsibility for conventional defense while the United States retains nuclear deterrence and strategic leadership.

This is less about American “withdrawal” than burden-shifting: European states would supply more troops, equipment, infrastructure, and funding – while remaining under the American nuclear umbrella.

One could interpret this as the Europeanization of the costs and risks of “containing” Russia, without a corresponding Europeanization of strategic decision-making.

Pesu himself notes that Nordic military integration would advance the US National Security Strategy’s objective of maintaining favorable regional balances of power. The Nordic “cluster” thus serves wider American strategic goals.

The Arctic dimension carries particular weight: Pesu acknowledges that Finland allows American signals-intelligence aircraft to monitor the Kola Peninsula, where much of Russia’s sea-based nuclear deterrent is concentrated.

Finland’s accession has thus expanded the Alliance’s intelligence and operational access to areas central to Russia’s nuclear forces. From Moscow’s perspective, NATO surveillance and military infrastructure near the Kola Peninsula constitute a strategic threat.

I commented elsewhere on how the Gulf of Finland could become a flashpoint for new conflict between NATO and Moscow – following Finnish and Swedish accession. The same logic now extends into the High North.

Pesu further proposes that subregional “clusters” could act even if NATO itself is paralyzed: these groupings would offer a “hedge”, enabling frontline allies to respond together.

This raises questions about escalation control: if, say, Nordic, Baltic, or Black Sea clusters undertake coordinated operations independently, a confrontation might develop before the alliance as a whole has agreed on its political objectives. Larger members could then face pressure to support actions they never authorized.

Pesu outlines a strategy for organizing NATO’s entire frontier with Russia into interoperable military clusters: a Nordic-Arctic grouping in the northwest, a Baltic-Polish cluster in the center, and a Black Sea cluster in the southeast.

From a Russian strategic perspective, this could be perceived as the consolidation of a continuous NATO military frontier stretching from the Arctic to the Black Sea.

The danger is that it would institutionalize greater military integration along Russia’s western and northern periphery – while potentially allowing regional coalitions to act without NATO-wide political consensus.

Russia then would face not merely an enlarged NATO, but a network of interoperable clusters capable of coordinating airpower, missile systems, intelligence gathering, naval operations, and troop movements along multiple fronts.

A March 2026 SIPRI study explicitly warns that Nordic enlargement and new military capabilities could undermine crisis stability by bringing NATO’s precision-strike systems closer to Russian strategic assets.

Another SIPRI analysis identifies inadvertent escalation, including nuclear escalation, as a significant risk in Northern Europe. In a security dilemma, Moscow’s countermeasures could themselves provoke further NATO deployments, perpetuating an increasingly dangerous cycle.

The Greenland question exposes a deeper contradiction here: the September agreement between Washington, Copenhagen, and Nuuk basically expanded American military access – while (formally) recognizing Danish sovereignty.

Pesu treats this as an opportunity to restore cooperation. Yet Washington is simultaneously asking European allies to assume greater responsibility for their own security and asserting exceptional strategic interests in territories belonging to those allies.

The Nordic countries, it turns out, are being asked to strengthen their capacity to “deter Russia” while accommodating an American administration that has itself openly challenged the sovereignty of a NATO member.

In any case, the biggest omission in NATO 3.0 discussions such as this is any serious consideration of diplomacy. There is little attention to arms control, confidence-building measures, military-to-military communication, or negotiated regional security arrangements.

One may recall that Finland and Sweden were long associated with different forms of neutrality or military nonalignment. They are now being presented as models for a more deeply militarized NATO – and a more NATOized Europe, increasingly “encircling” Moscow.

The “Nordic model” is no longer simply “adapting” to NATO; NATO is actually being encouraged to adapt to the Nordic model.

This way, the Arctic itself is becoming integrated into the alliance’s broader confrontation framework. Moreover, conventional military operations in this region take place close to strategically important nuclear assets.

Consequently, the consequences of a miscalculation could be far greater than those of an ordinary regional conflict.

Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.

November 6, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , | Comments Off on NATO’s “Nordic model” brings Arctic confrontation closer to Russia’s nuclear bases

Using nuclear weapons, the US-Israeli alliance still can’t beat Iran

By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | November 5, 2026

While it is true that conventional weapons cannot penetrate Pickaxe Mountain Nuclear Site, there is no guarantee that using a nuclear weapon will actually yield results. Instead, the fall-out is the only thing that is certain.

The United States, at the behest of their Israeli partners, are speculated to be weighing the nuclear option against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In recent weeks, US President Donald Trump has continued to make threats against Tehran, claiming that he will even deploy the Mother of All Bombs (MOAB).

However, the target that the Trump administration and Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu appear the most obsessed with, is the facility located under Pickaxe Mountain, near the Natanz Nuclear Facility. Satellite imagery suggests that there has been significant activity at the site, at least according to US media.

All the talk of bombing this site, which Trump himself has publicly threatened to do, is predicated on the concept that Iran’s highly enriched Uranium is located at this underground facility. Based upon this assessment, there’s only one way to go about destroying that target. A MOAB is not a bunker buster munition, it is an airburst weapon, therefore officials in Washington can’t be seriously considering this as their weapon of choice.

Conventional weapons have failed to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and underground missile facilities, meaning that the only natural last option is a tactical nuclear weapon.

Yet, there are a number of problems with this strategy, beyond the obvious implications of using nuclear weapons in the first place. The first obvious issue is that the US and Israelis don’t actually know with any degree of certainty that Iran is storing its enriched uranium at this site, at best it is an educated guess.

The next issue they face is that tactical nuclear weapons have never been used in combat, yet alone against this specific kind of target. While hypothetically the force of the weapon would destroy the underground facility, it is also possible that the mountain will absorb a lot of the shock, meaning that what will be felt will be like an earthquake, but not necessarily enough to destroy the infrastructure.

Another major issue that the US has is that they have no idea how deep the infrastructure is actually buried underneath the mountain range. They estimate that the nuclear facility could be buried around 80-100 meters, but have no blueprints and are again guessing. No nuclear inspectors have gained access to it to inspect, so there is no way of telling for sure. It is also unknown precisely where the US, or the Israelis, would have to strike in order to have any hypothetical success.

Let us assume that the US or their Israeli partners use the nuke and still fail to destroy the facility, or that Iran’s nuclear material is not even located there, would it be worth it to deploy such a weapon? Iran has built these facilities and its missile cities, with the threat of nuclear weapons in mind, meaning that they are more than likely prepared for such an eventuality also.

The response that would come to a nuclear attack on Pickaxe Mountain would then be enormous, killing any hope of a negotiated settlement in the short term, ensuring a long and bloody war. As we have seen demonstrated since the Israeli attack on Iran in June of 2025, conventional weapons cannot destroy Iranian underground missile facilities, meaning that they would then have to use countless nuclear weapons if they hoped to penetrate them. It would then be a doomsday scenario, and every front would ignite in a way that cannot be anticipated. In addition to this, the use of these weapons is not even guaranteed to achieve their goals.

Overall, the US-Israeli alliance is not actually attacking Iran over the nuclear weapons issue; they have attempted to inflict regime change. Using nuclear weapons against nuclear sites will do nothing to achieve the overthrow of the Iranian government.

For every offensive action that Washington carries out at the behest of Tel Aviv, Tehran has an answer for it. If there was a quick and simple road to victory, Netanyahu and Trump would have already taken it.

Using nuclear weapons would be a ridiculous and reckless mistake, with potential far-stretching consequences that span much further than the scope of this article. While the third round appears inevitable, the outcome will ultimately have to be a US retreat from the region. First, it is clear that the Zionist regime must be dealt a strategic defeat in order for that to be allowed to happen.

November 5, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Using nuclear weapons, the US-Israeli alliance still can’t beat Iran

US-‘Israel’ alliance faces growing rupture after midterms

Al Mayadeen | November 5, 2026

The 2026 US midterm elections have exposed a deepening political crisis in Washington’s longstanding relationship with “Israel”, as Democratic victories, declining public support, and statements from senior Republican officials raise questions about the future of American military assistance and diplomatic backing, Bloomberg reports. 

Michigan elected Abdul el-Sayed as the country’s first Muslim senator on Tuesday. His campaign included a pledge to end US military aid to the Israeli occupation and characterized its war on Gaza as genocide. His victory came despite the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) reportedly spending $30 million against him.

In Georgia, Senator Jon Ossoff secured reelection, reinforcing the growing presence of Democrats critical of American weapons transfers to “Israel”. Ossoff was among the first Senate Democrats to oppose offensive weapons sales in 2024, a position that has since gained support across much of his party’s caucus.

The electoral developments reflect a broader transformation in American political attitudes toward the occupation and the military campaign in Gaza.

According to a March NBC News poll cited in the original report, only 13% of Democrats held a positive view of “Israel”. The figure was comparable to the share among young American voters overall, regardless of political affiliation.

Minority of GOP support Israeli regime

The trend also extends into Republican ranks. A Pew Research Center survey published in October found that only slightly more than a quarter of young Republicans supported the Israeli government.

For decades, successive US administrations maintained bipartisan backing for the Israeli occupation, providing military financing, advanced weapons, and diplomatic protection. The changing political landscape now threatens the assumption that this support will remain unaffected by electoral competition.

Bloomberg reports that Michael Allen, managing director and partner at Beacon Global Strategies, said the developments had put “Israel” in a precarious position.

“For the foreseeable future I think they’re in a lot of trouble,” he said, pointing to the political developments following the Israeli elections.

AIPAC influence faces mounting electoral resistance

El-Sayed’s election carries significance beyond his victory in Michigan. It challenges the influence of pro-“Israel” lobbying organizations that have traditionally sought to shape congressional positions and electoral outcomes.

The reported $30 million campaign against him illustrates the financial resources deployed against candidates advocating restrictions on military assistance. His victory, however, demonstrates that opposition to unconditional support for “Israel” is gaining electoral ground despite substantial lobbying pressure.

The growing divide within the Democratic Party is particularly consequential as Democrats prepare to assume commanding majorities in both chambers of Congress.

Although legislative efforts to restrict arms transfers remain unlikely to become law under the current administration, a larger bloc of lawmakers opposing military assistance could increase scrutiny of weapons sales, military financing, and Washington’s diplomatic protection of “Israel”.

The shift also presents a longer-term challenge. Younger voters are increasingly approaching the issue differently from previous generations, potentially reshaping the foreign policy positions of both major parties.

Trump and Vance signal Republican reassessment

The political pressure has also reached the Republican leadership with US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly described himself as the most pro-“Israel” president in US history, announcing on Tuesday that Washington would end its annual $3.8 billion in military assistance to “Israel”.

Speaking to Fox News, Trump said the arrangement would end this year, arguing that “Israel” had become sufficiently successful to operate without direct American military financing.

He also acknowledged the domestic political implications, describing the issue as “almost too easy a target.”

US Vice President JD Vance reinforced the significance of the announcement in a social media post published after the Republican electoral losses. He identified the need to “change our relationship to Israel” as central to the party’s efforts to regain control of Congress and the White House in 2028.

Vance is widely expected to seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2028, making his intervention particularly significant.

The remarks suggest that maintaining unconditional support for “Israel” is increasingly being viewed as an electoral liability, even within Republican political circles.

Nomi Bar-Yaacov, associate fellow at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, described the election results as a rejection of Netanyahu’s government.

“It is a clear vote of no confidence in the outgoing Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,” she said, Bloomberg reports. “This marks a huge, huge shift in the US-Israel relationship.”

Netanyahu faces political fallout as aid agreement comes under scrutiny

The developments in Washington coincide with Netanyahu’s struggle to retain power following the inconclusive October 27 elections in “Israel”.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog is expected to decide whether Netanyahu or his principal challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, will receive the first opportunity to form a government.

Opposition figures have already used the American election results to challenge Netanyahu’s political position.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid argued that the results eliminated the possibility of a unity government led by Netanyahu. Liberal opposition leader Yair Golan said they demonstrated “just how toxic Netanyahu is among both Democrats and Republicans.”

Avishay Ben Sasson-Gordis, head of US-“Israel” research at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, described the situation as a major political emergency.

“Politically, this is a five-alarm fire,” he told Bloomberg.

He argued that Trump’s announcement demonstrated how politically damaging “Israel” had become, potentially sending negative signals to its regional rivals.

‘We made a deal that we’re stopping’

The financial implications remain uncertain. Earlier this year, Netanyahu reportedly expressed interest in gradually reducing dependence on US military assistance over the following decade. In June, American and Israeli officials announced negotiations over a new agreement expected to take effect in 2028, focusing on joint investment in research, development, and weapons production.

Trump told Fox News, “Netanyahu and I have made a deal … We made a deal months ago that we’re stopping — and they’re fine with it. They’ve become a very successful country. They don’t need it. And we won’t be paying anymore.”

However, the announcement appears to have caught Israeli government officials off guard.

Two Finance Ministry officials told Bloomberg that they and their counterparts in the Ministry of War were surprised by the reported agreement. Two Foreign Ministry officials separately said they had not been informed of any changes to the existing memorandum of understanding. All four requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

The apparent discrepancy raises questions about the agreement’s status and whether Washington is preparing to alter the financial foundations of its relationship with “Israel”.

November 5, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on US-‘Israel’ alliance faces growing rupture after midterms

GOP’s Crushing Midterm Loss Could Reshape US Political Landscape – Analyst

Sputnik – 05.11.2026

The Republicans suffered one of their worst defeats in decades, driven by the US administration’s catastrophic decision to unleash aggression against Iran, says Dmitry Suslov, deputy director of the Center for European and International Studies at Russia’s Higher School of Economics, speaking to Sputnik.

He warns that the GOP’s midterm fiasco will have serious political blowback, chiefly by weakening Trump’s standing at home and abroad.

Domestically, the US is certainly in for an extremely fierce political struggle, Suslov cautions.

  • The US could be plunged into a series of never-ending government shutdowns, especially next year
  • A budget crisis could blow up as investigators launch probes into every corner of GOP activity
  • Secretary of War Pete Hegseth will “undoubtedly face impeachment proceedings,” and his future remains uncertain

Suslov suggests that US foreign policy as a whole will not change, though the Democrats will most likely try to throw a wrench in the works by passing bills to tie Trump’s hands.

When it comes to the Ukraine conflict, the GOP’s painful midterm rout will have far-reaching implications, the expert points out.

  • Ukraine and Europe will now see Trump as “a lame duck,” and Zelensky will undoubtedly grow ever more insolent, relying on Democrat backing
  • Trump’s ability to apply coercive measures on Ukraine will be far more limited
  • For Russia, a Democrat win spells rapidly fading hopes for better ties with the US once the Ukraine conflict ends — and a growing threat of fresh sanctions

That leaves Russia with no incentive to make concessions on Ukraine in exchange for future US economic cooperation — now appearing to be an increasingly remote prospect, Suslov concludes.

November 5, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , , , | Comments Off on GOP’s Crushing Midterm Loss Could Reshape US Political Landscape – Analyst

Midterm loss gives Congress power to rein in US war on Iran

Al Mayadeen| November 5, 2026

Tuesday’s midterm elections have left US President Donald Trump facing a Congress with the constitutional means to restrain the US war on Iran, while strengthening Tehran’s hand in negotiations over its memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Washington.

Retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski and Mohammad Marandi, professor of English literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran, reached that assessment on Al Mayadeen’s The Grand Standoff on Wednesday.

They tied the Republican losses to Trump’s abandoned promises to end wars and prosecute the “Epstein class,” the economic toll of the war on Iran, and a growing American backlash against Israeli influence in Washington.

Marandi called the result “a major turning point,” though he stressed that the war is far from over.

Congress holds the power to act

The Congress to be seated in January 2027 “was elected to stop the Iran war,” Kwiatkowski argued, and it has several levers to do so. House appropriators can freeze funds not yet disbursed, she explained, while the Senate can pass binding resolutions and refuse a declaration of war, which the Constitution requires.

She noted that Trump has already exceeded the 60-day limit on military action and dismissed his move of halting at day 58 and restarting the clock as “a joke.” A non-binding Senate resolution criticizing the war passed this summer by only a vote or two, she recalled, but a Senate majority now opposed to it could bar him from acting and censure him.

Kwiatkowski cautioned that change will not come overnight, since AIPAC has lobbied lawmakers of both parties for decades. She pointed out that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer still avoids admitting the war was fought for “Israel,” even though Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and War Secretary Pete Hegseth have acknowledged that Netanyahu wanted it.

Marandi stressed that the vote also raises the political cost of escalation. A renewed attack would be seen as illegitimate because Americans voted against the war, he predicted, adding that “the price would be much heavier for him and his allies” than before the election.

‘Israel,’ AIPAC take the hit

Both guests named “Israel” as the election’s biggest loser.

Marandi pointed out that Vice President JD Vance himself conceded “Israel” was a key factor in the Republican defeat, since all four reasons Vance cited link directly or indirectly to it.

Kwiatkowski judged Vance’s reading correct but suggested he is trying to distance himself from a sinking Trump, and doubted he would act on it after helping Trump attack anti-war conservatives.

Winning Candidates refused AIPAC money and used the word genocide, Kwiatkowski observed, singling out incoming senators Talarico of Texas and El-Sayed of Michigan, who both voiced moral revulsion at US taxpayer money funding a genocide in Gaza. “That is a slap in Netanyahu’s face,” she said, adding that candidates who defy AIPAC and still win will encourage others to follow.

Marandi cited polls showing young Jewish Americans oppose genocide, apartheid and ethnic cleansing, and credited Americans with waking up “despite being the most propagandized people in the world.” He warned against naivety about the Democratic leadership, though, noting that Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries backed Biden’s policy on Gaza.

A president unlikely to change course

Kwiatkowski rejected Trump’s claim that election results would have been different had he been on the ballot, describing the vote as a referendum on his executive-centered rule.

She also doubted he would adjust, arguing that “the Trump who is 80 years old is irrational” and that only Congress and sustained public pressure can constrain him.

In her view, he is more likely to pick a fight with a Democratic Congress over Ukraine, where Democrats want to keep funding Kiev and maintain tariffs on Russia.

Iran prepares for war

Marandi warned that a US attack could come at any moment. Iranian forces are on full alert, three US aircraft carriers are in place, and “the nights will be very dark” as the weekend approaches, he said.

He added that the Axis of Resistance is active on all fronts, from Lebanon to Sanaa and from Iraq to Tehran, and extended congratulations to Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Palestine for helping shift opinion in the United States.

Iran, he continued, will keep tightening the noose in the Strait of Hormuz and demand full US compliance with the MOU. Tehran would shorten the implementation timeline and is ready to “sugarcoat the MOU,” but it will not withdraw its seven demands or allow the substance to change.

He contended that Iran is now in a much stronger position and Trump a much weaker one, noting that Jimmy Carter, whose comparison Trump has long feared, “looks far more successful” in hindsight.

Carter’s shadow over Trump

The discussion turned to the anniversary of the 1979 seizure of the US embassy in Tehran, which Marandi argued Americans are taught to see as the origin of the US’ conflict with Iran, as though the takeover were an irrational act with no cause. Iranians view it differently, he explained, because it followed decades of US interference.

Washington overthrew Iran’s government in 1953, installed the Shah and helped build the SAVAK secret police. During the revolution, the army killed protesters across the country, including on Black Friday in Tehran, and Carter phoned the Shah the next day to reaffirm his support.

After the revolution, Marandi continued, the embassy supported separatist groups and kept contact with officers who might carry out a coup. The decision to admit the Shah to the United States then revived fears of a repeat of 1953, and that was what pushed Iranians to take the embassy.

He hoped that Americans, now more politically aware because of the war, would come to understand that history better.

Kwiatkowski saw the same continuity in Washington’s present-day aims, arguing that US goals toward Iran have barely changed since Carter and still amount to making Iran “kneel before the hegemon.”

She called it a long war, but affirmed that “Iran is winning it.”

November 5, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Midterm loss gives Congress power to rein in US war on Iran

Midterms Were ‘Vote of No Confidence’ in GOP, But Iran Has No Illusions About Democrats – Marandi

Sputnik – 05.11.2026

Tuesday’s crushing midterm defeat for Republicans was a “good sign” showing “that the American people are pushing the elites” and “putting pressure on them,” but the Democrats’ victory won’t bring positive changes to US foreign policy, Tehran University professor and prolific political commentator Mohammad Marandi has told Sputnik.

“The Democratic Party is not a party of peace,” Marandi emphasized, pointing out that Democrats were in charge when Israel unleashed its bloody campaign in Gaza in 2023, and initiated or greenlit the bombings, dirty wars and proxy conflicts in Libya, Syria and Yemen, as well as the crisis in Ukraine.

As far as Iran is concerned, the change of power in Congress “doesn’t mean the war is over.” The US “may attack Iran at any time. But it does mean that the regime in Washington, the political establishment in Washington, recognizes that the American people are sick and tired of war,” Marandi said.

“The working assumption is that the United States will carry out aggression,” Marandi emphasized.

“The [pro-Israel lobby] will not give up, and they are the ones who are still in charge,” Marandi said. He warned, however, that any new war will be “much more costly” for the US and Israel, both politically and militarily.

“Any attack on Iran will be met with a decisive response, and that will lead to a global economic calamity.”

Israel will inevitably also work to try to rope the US into a new conflict, because they can’t fight alone, the observer noted.

Israel “needs, for example, the refueling planes of the United States. That would mean US involvement…And that, of course, would mean the involvement of the Arab regimes in the region…because the United States uses their bases, airspace and jet fuel,” Marandi said.

“Iran is both prepared for a very decisive battle in the coming days or weeks, and they’re prepared for a very long-term conflict as well,” with the government putting a wartime economy in place, Marandi said.

The military has received “a very large budget,” with the country traditionally having “the smallest military budget in the region” for decades.

The military is building “new underground cities,” expanding existing missile city and command and control infrastructure, developing new missiles, drones, and producing so much equipment they’re running out of places to store them, Marandi said.

The Islamic Republic is ready to fight through the remainder of the current US administration’s term, if necessary, and will not relent, Marandi stressed. The US will have to come to the negotiating table in the end.

November 5, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Midterms Were ‘Vote of No Confidence’ in GOP, But Iran Has No Illusions About Democrats – Marandi

Did Israel lose the midterms?

Trump is paying a heavy price for joining Benjamin Netanyahu’s war on Iran

RT | November 4, 2026

The view from Washington is clear: President Donald Trump’s decision to wage war on Iran cost the Republican Party the midterm elections. RT looks at how Benjamin Netanyahu’s war became Trump’s problem and whether Israel will bear any costs.

The Republican Party suffered an unequivocal wipeout in Tuesday’s midterm elections, handing Democrats their largest House majority since Bill Clinton entered the White House in 1993, along with a majority of at least ten seats in the Senate. Democrats flipped Senate seats in Texas, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kansas, Iowa, Ohio, and Maine, while Trump-backed gubernatorial candidates Vivek Ramaswamy and Greg Abbott lost in Ohio and Texas respectively – states Trump won comfortably in 2024.

All of this is a dramatic about-turn from 2024, when Trump and the GOP won a decisive mandate after promising to lower costs and keep the US out of foreign wars.

Did Israel cost Trump the elections?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the White House five times between Trump’s inauguration and the start of ‘Operation Epic Fury’ this February. The Israeli leader consulted Trump’s closest neoconservative allies, among them the late Senator Lindsey Graham, for advice on how to persuade Trump into war with Iran, and when the war began, an army of pro-Israel podcasters and influencers reassured Trump’s base that it would be easily won and would have no impact on the midterms.

“I think in the midterms this will be kind of a mild footnote,” conservative journalist Will Chamberlain predicted in April, two months into the war. “Whatever happens in the midterms, it doesn’t appear that Iran’s going to drive anything one way or another,” pro-Israel radio host Mark Levin told podcast host Ben Shapiro in September.

Shapiro, who like Levin has spent years lobbying for war with Iran, claimed that Trump’s unpopularity in the run-up to the elections was “not because of this stuff.”

Trump entered the war with no clear victory conditions or exit plan and, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, at the direct behest of Israel. Although the war is the least popular American military adventure since Vietnam, Pew Research ranked foreign policy the sixth-most important issue among midterm voters, with the economy in first place. Trump and the GOP could likely have survived an unpopular war had the closure of the Strait of Hormuz not driven gasoline prices to record highs, undermining his campaign trail promises to reverse the sky-high costs of the Biden years.

What’s the view on the right?

To many in Trump’s original MAGA base, the war was a catastrophic unforced error that directly cost the Republicans the elections. “Trump launched an unpopular and pointless war. Gas prices are too high. People can’t afford groceries. Trump abandoned the American First message. This is why Republicans are getting crushed. It’s very simple,” podcast host Matt Walsh wrote on X.

“Tonight is a massacre because of Iran,” right-wing influencer Scott Greer posted, adding that “denying that is pure cope.”

“President Trump, and it’s hard to even understand why, continues to do whatever Netanyahu tells him to do,” former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene told RT. “We will continue to see this war go on.”

The pro-Israel right has shirked responsibility for the loss. “The vast majority of us are utterly unaffected by that war,” Levin said on election night. “If we lose… it’s not because of the Iran war.” Neoconservative influencer Joel Berry blamed the loss not on Trump’s war or high gas prices, but on “a sophisticated foreign demoralization campaign” that drew attention to these issues, and on Republicans going “socialist on economics and soft on abortion.”

In Tehran, the prognosis is [dis]similar. “I think the war of aggression against Iran played the key role in Trump’s defeat,” University of Tehran professor Mohammad Marandi told RT. “The Iranian resistance and resilience and steadfastness against Trump and Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby… it has turned the tide against Trump.”

“While there is a uniparty of sorts [in Washington],” Marandi continued, “ordinary people felt that this is the only way that they could make their views known. It was a bad defeat for Trump and for Zionism.”

Did Israel lose its bet?

In pressuring Trump into attacking Iran, Netanyahu succeeded where he had failed with George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Trump, the Israeli prime minister remarked last year, “is the greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House. No American president has ever done more for Israel. And it’s not even close.” 

Pro-Israel donors spent around $123 million on Trump’s 2024 campaign, with Israeli-American megadonor Miriam Adelson coughing up the lion’s share at $106 million, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

Since then, Trump has purged anti-Israel voices – including Greene, Rep. Thomas Massie, former National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent, and a host of formerly loyal media allies including Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones – from his MAGA movement, and given Netanyahu the war he wanted for decades, but at a cost to West Jerusalem.

American sympathy for Israel vis-a-vis the Palestinians is at an all-time low, more than half of all Americans want military aid to Israel cut off or decreased, and 71% of Americans told Ipsos in April that they want nothing to do with Israel’s various Middle Eastern conflicts. Tens of millions of dollars in donations from the US’ powerful Israel lobby failed to prevent candidates such as Senators-elect Abdul el-Sayed in Michigan and Representatives-elect Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York, Adam Hamawy in New Jersey, and Donavan McKinney in Michigan from winning on an explicitly anti-Israel message.

A Democrat-dominated Congress may be slightly less compliant to Netanyahu’s demands, but regardless of whether the GOP won or lost on Tuesday, the Israeli leader is currently fighting to form a coalition after losing his majority in last week’s parliamentary elections, and may not be in power in January.

A graphic showing AIPAC's donations to member of the US House of Representatives, compiled by ChamberLight

A graphic showing AIPAC’s donations to member of the US House of Representatives, compiled by ChamberLight

Moreover, the Israel lobby remains a potent force in American politics, and its influence transcends party lines. Hakeem Jeffries, who will assume speakership in January, is among the 354 of 433 sitting members of the House who have received funding from AIPAC, while el-Sayed will be the only Senator not to have taken money from AIPAC or another pro-Israel group such as J Street or the Republican Jewish Coalition.

AIPAC spent $120 million on this year’s midterms, and 245 of 267 candidates – 92% – backed by the group won their races on Tuesday, according to data from ‘Who Funds my Rep?’

“It doesn’t matter whether it’s the Democratic Party or the Republican Party,” Marandi told RT. “Both parties are utterly corrupt and bound to the ‘Epstein Class’, as I would call it. The issue isn’t so much who replaces whom, but that the mood among ordinary Americans has shifted. If the elites don’t take this into account, they will get into trouble.”

Did Iran win the elections? 

Whether or not Iran benefits from the Republican loss depends largely on what Trump does next. The midterms may have rendered Trump a lame duck and dealt the GOP a generational defeat, but the president still retains the power to wage war, and that’s exactly what some of his most vocal ‘Israel-first’ allies want him to do.

There is “nothing to lose now,” pro-Israel influencer Laura Loomer wrote on X. “Time for President Trump to deal with Iran once and for all. Just do it.”

“Trump still has time to topple the [Iranian] regime and be remembered as one of the greatest US presidents,” Israeli analyst Dr. Eli David posted.

Trump has strongly suggested that he could restart the war after the midterms, telling supporters at a rally last week that “you’ll see Iran in a couple of weeks.” Speaking to Fox News on Wednesday, the president said that “in a short period of time, we have to do something large” against Iran, and that this would likely involve a “heavy hit.”

Should Trump go down this route, he is on a clear countdown timer. The new, Democrat-controlled Congress will be sworn in on January 3. Although Democrats have voted on several resolutions this year aimed at preventing Trump from waging war against Iran, these have all been destined to fail with Republicans in charge of both houses of Congress. Now, voters expect even their AIPAC-funded Senators and Representatives to follow through and rein in Trump’s war powers.

“If Trump chooses to attack Iran now,” Marandi told RT, “Democrats and some Republicans will be under some pressure to stand up to Trump, whether their funders like it or not.”

Tehran is not holding out hope for a course correction in Washington, but Tuesday’s election taught both parties a lesson that will reverberate for years to come: picking a fight with Iran is economically unviable, domestically unpopular, and political suicide for whoever is in the White House.

The bottom line

Trump and the GOP paid the ultimate price for agreeing to fight Benjamin Netanyahu’s war, with only the most die-hard Israel-firsters in the Republican camp suggesting that anything else was to blame for the shellacking the party received on Tuesday.

For Israel, the results are less clear. Netanyahu, or whoever succeeds him, may never get another American president as amenable as Trump. However, the Israelis still have a powerful lobby in Washington that will get to work on the new Congress, just as it has done for decades, to make extricating the US from the Iran war as difficult as possible.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Did Israel lose the midterms?

How Iran defeated Trump’s Israel First GOP

By Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone | November 4, 2026

Trump launched a failed war on Iran for Israel last February, as his NSC director and Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted. Now, the war has come home.

Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz became a vice grip around the neck of Trump and the GOP, especially in the heartland, where diesel prices are 70% higher than a year ago, and farmers have been forced to leave crops in the ground. 74% of Americans told pollsters the failed Iran war was a crucial or major factor in their vote tonight, and over 60% said they were voting against the Republicans because of it.

Democrats won senate races in Kansas and Nebraska, agro producer states where Republicans always roll to victory like a big wheel through a corn field. They also flipped a seat in Iowa, which Trump won by 12 points in 2024, giving them control of the senate.

A Democrat has taken the seat of Lindsey Graham, the late neocon who advised Netanyahu on how to manipulate Trump into the war, resoundingly defeating his sister in South Carolina. In this deep red Southern bastion, a Democrat has not won a senate race since the days of Fritz Hollings, a now-extinct brand of conservative populist who opposed the Gulf war and railed against the neocons.

Trump’s promise of $15 billion in aid to farmers getting hammered by surging diesel costs failed to stop the bleeding. And it’s now another cost of the war.

The GOP strategy of hanging Hasan Piker and his pro-Palestine politics like an albatross around the neck of Democrats was also doomed from the start, as most swing state voters had never heard of the podcaster. Worse, the ploy reminded them how fanatically Israel-centric the Republicans had become under Trump. The Democrats had much more success weaponizing Jeffrey Epstein as a symbol of Trump’s corruption whose ghost subtly invoked malign Israeli influence over the US government.

Hours before polls closed, Trump issued a desperate pledge to end $4 billion in annual aid to Israel. He seemed determined to repeat the con he pulled off in Dearborn, MI at the end of 2024, where he promised to end the Gaza genocide that Biden and Harris backed. Later that night, after the Democrats took the Senate, Trump gave up any pretense of independence and declared: “If people ever got tired of me in the US, I’ll move to Israel and become prime minister.”

Where the “special relationship” with Israel was once a matter of bipartisan unity among party elites, it’s become a polarizing wedge issue and a poison pill for any president. Trump was expected to launch a third assault on Iran immediately after the midterms, but his inner circle is now positioned in a circular firing line, with the neocons who served as Netanyahu’s proxies – Mark Levine, Mark Dubowitz, Ben Shapiro et al – blaming everyone but themselves for the Blue Wave, while pleading to remain in Trump’s good graces.

Tomorrow, Zionist forces will pull back and retrench. Schumer, Jeffries and presidential prospects like Josh Shapiro will become their next line of defense, and possibly their last reliable one in a party whose base is now passionate about ending America’s attachment to Israel.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on How Iran defeated Trump’s Israel First GOP

Desperate For A Renewed Iran War, Israel Dusts Off The WMD Deception.

Just As It Did In Iraq And Syria , Israel Has Launched A New WMD Deception.

By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | November 4, 2026

Israel, increasingly desperate to have the U.S. launch a new war on Iran, has dusted off the WMD deception sharing clearly manipulated “intelligence” with the U.S. claiming that Iran is planning on using chemical weapons.

Even the New York Times acknowledged that “Some American officials see the Israeli intelligence as part of a pressure campaign by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to persuade the Trump administration to return to major combat operations against Iran” and that several Gulf State countries that Israel shared the “intelligence” with “doubted that Iran was developing plans to use chemical weapons and believe Israel is trying to push the United States and its partners to return to a more intense phase of the war.”

“For some American officials, the talk of chemical weapons threats from Iran has evoked the flawed U.S. intelligence in 2002 about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction”, the paper added.

In fact, it was Israel, that played a large role in collaboration with its neo-conservative allies in the Bush administration to cook up that WMD deception used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Journalist Bob Dreyfuss in 2003 reported that, “feeding information to the Office of Special Plans (OSP)”, the special unit created in the Pentagon to launder the deception “was a secret, rump unit established last year in the office of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel. This unit … which has not previously been reported–prepared intelligence reports on Iraq in English (not Hebrew) and forwarded them to the Office of Special Plans” adding, “This secretive unit,… may well have been the source of the forged documents purporting to show that Iraq tried to purchase yellowcake uranium for weapons from Niger in West Africa, according to the former official”.

The Guardian reported at the time that the OSP “forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon’s office in Israel, specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam’s Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorize,” adding, “The Israeli influence was revealed most clearly by a story floated by unnamed senior US officials in the American press, suggesting the reason that no banned weapons had been found in Iraq was that they had been smuggled into Syria. Intelligence sources say that the story came from the office of the Israeli prime minister”.

The LA Times in 2005 reported that “A former senior Israeli military intelligence official asserted Thursday that the nation’s spy agencies were a ‘full partner’ to the United States and Britain in producing flawed prewar assessments of Iraq’s ability to mount attacks with weapons of mass destruction”.

Similarly, Israel played a key role in cooking up the “red line” comment used to justify the covert dirty war on Syria.

When Obama said that his “red line” for intervention in Syria would be the use of chemical weapons on rebels from the former Assad government, the journalist Charles Glass reported that a former US ambassador to the Middle East told him that this was seen as an “open invitation to a false-flag operation”.

The “red line” comment “started with Israeli officials, who used the phrase in private discussions with their American counterparts”, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal at the time.

In 2013, when the red line was crossed in Ghouta, Syria, where rockets containing Sarin were launched, killing hundreds – likely from rebel-controlled territory – it was Israel that “shared” the dubious intelligence reports blaming Assad’s forces for the attack.

Journalist Seymour Hersh reported at the time that “A former senior intelligence official told me that the Obama administration had altered the available information – in terms of its timing and sequence – to enable the president and his advisers to make intelligence retrieved days after the attack look as if it had been picked up and analysed in real time, as the attack was happening,” adding, “One high-level intelligence officer, in an email to a colleague, called the administration’s assurances of Assad’s responsibility a ‘ruse’. The attack ‘was not the result of the current regime’, he wrote.”

This was backed up by Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic, who reported that, “Director of National Intelligence James Clapper interrupted the president’s daily briefing to tell him that the intelligence on Syria’s use of sarin gas was ‘not a slam dunk’” adding that this was a “carefully chosen term” referring to when “CIA Director George Tenet infamously told President George W. Bush that intelligence leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq was a ‘slam dunk.’”

According to the Guardian at the time, “The bulk of evidence proving the Assad regime’s deployment of chemical weapons – which would provide legal grounds essential to justify any western military action – has been provided by Israeli military intelligence”.

Hacked emails later showed that at the time, Samantha Power, then US ambassador to the United Nations, thanked the ambassador of Israel to the UN, Ron Prosor, for sharing “technical information … of significant value in dealing with the Syrian chemical arsenal.”

“‘For my non-technical brain, this is extremely helpful,’ she wrote. ‘I know that these options are being worked aggressively,’ she continued — a reference to her ongoing crusade to enforce Obama’s ‘Red Line’ policy by bombing Syria and assisting the Al Qaeda-led armed opposition”, journalist Wyatt Reed reported.

Desperate for Trump to carry out regime change in Iran, Israel yet again is dusting off the same deceptive playbook in order to have the U.S. carry out the final war on the “clean break” hit list.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Desperate For A Renewed Iran War, Israel Dusts Off The WMD Deception.

US Elections Offer Choice Between ‘Bad and Worse’ as Both Parties Serve War Lobby – ex-UN Expert

Sputnik – 04.11.2026

Both parties are “beholden to the military-industrial complex and to the AIPAC lobby,” and “the problem with the American two-party system is that most of the time it is a choice between bad and worse,” Alfred de Zayas, a retired independent UN expert and prolific commentator, told Sputnik, commenting on the results of Tuesday’s midterms.

“Both Republican and Democratic candidates advocate war over diplomacy, support Wall Street over Main Street, and promote Israel over Palestine. Very few address the needs of the American people, the key issues of education, public health, taxation, infrastructure and job-creation,” the observer stressed.

While de Zayas has little hope that the new Democrat-controlled Senate, led by Senator Chuck Schumer, will bring positive changes, he nevertheless welcomes Republicans’ loss of Congress. He believes the result will limit Trump’s ability to pursue his agenda following his “disappointing” failure to resolve the Ukraine crisis, which he traces to Democratic policies, and the decision to launch a new war against Iran.

De Zayas fears a range of potential “Apocalyptic scenarios” for Iran moving forward, including the potential use of nuclear weapons and the conflict’s escalation into a global crisis, unless the US and Israel agree to a diplomatic climbdown. “In such desperate situations, either one takes the offensive and unleashes World War III, or one accepts reality, cuts one’s losses and resigns.”

While the UN has “been ineffective” on Iran, Gaza and other crises, it’s nevertheless needed now “more than ever” to prevent them from spiraling.

“We need an international peace conference,” de Zayas urges. “This is the moment for the Global Majority, for BRICS, the SCO, the OIC, the Non-Aligned Movement to appeal to all parties to exercise restraint.”

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Comments Off on US Elections Offer Choice Between ‘Bad and Worse’ as Both Parties Serve War Lobby – ex-UN Expert

Ghalibaf warns US government not to betray voters who rejected war

Al Mayadeen| November 4, 2026

Americans rejected war at the ballot box, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said on Wednesday, warning Washington that any attempt to defy that verdict would meet a forceful Iranian response.

Writing on X after Democrats won the Senate in Tuesday’s midterm elections, Ghalibaf said voters moved by “conscience or the cost of living” had said “NO TO WAR,” a message he stressed Iran endorses. Should the US government betray its own public’s will to serve “international paymasters and blackmailers,” he cautioned, it would discover that Iran’s refusal “comes with a Nightmare.”

Trump, for his part, acknowledged that the war on Iran had weighed on Republicans. “Iran was a piece of it,” he told The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday night when asked whether the war had shaped the outcome.

He nonetheless stood by his decision to launch the aggression. “I did the right thing. I would have done it again,” he said. He argued that soaring fuel prices, a consequence of the war, had hurt his party more than the war itself and rejected the idea that the losses were a verdict on his presidency. “The biggest issue is that I wasn’t on the ballot,” he insisted.

Democrats take Congress

The Associated Press called the Senate for Democrats late Tuesday. They gained seven seats, many in states Trump carried comfortably in 2024.

James Talarico defeated Trump-backed Ken Paxton in Texas, giving the party its first Senate win there since 1988, and Adam Hamilton became the first Democrat elected to the Senate from Kansas since 1932. Democrats also flipped seats in North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Iowa and Maine, where Troy Jackson unseated Susan Collins.

Democrats later secured the House as well. AP’s latest count puts them at 220 seats to Republicans’ 128, past the 218 needed for a majority, with 25 seats gained so far.

Counting continues in several races.

War, prices drove the vote

According to the NBC News Exit Poll, about 74% of voters described the US war on Iran as a crucial or major factor in their congressional vote.

In the same poll, 79% said inflation was causing hardship for their families, and 62% held Trump responsible for high prices. His approval rating stood at 38%, the lowest for a sitting president on Election Day since 2008.

Voters felt the war most directly at the pump. Gas averaged $4.16 a gallon on Monday, up from $2.98 before the war began.

Trump has nonetheless left the door open to renewed escalation. Hours before polls closed, he told the Financial Times that the US had no immediate plans to bomb Iran but was “locked and loaded if we need to go.”

His remarks came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinted at an attack later this week. Reports also said Washington had told Gulf states to prepare for a short, intense campaign after the vote.

Since the US and “Israel” launched the aggression on February 28, the war has cost the US military at least $47.1 billion, according to a CENTCOM estimate that excludes extensive damage to US bases. The Pentagon has admitted to at least 21 US soldiers killed.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on Ghalibaf warns US government not to betray voters who rejected war

Broke Princes: Saudi Arabia’s Powder Keg

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – November 3, 2026

November 3, 2026 Posted by | Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Comments Off on Broke Princes: Saudi Arabia’s Powder Keg

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »