Tag: iran

America Needs a Regime Change

The American people need the Iran war like a fish needs a bicycle. For our politicians and permanent bureaucrats, it’s a different story.

The political class, adrift after the Soviet Union fell, needed a new animating mythos. Neoconservatives taught them to experience preemptive war against tinpot tyrants as a civilizational crusade. The Middle East – where America’s “greatest ally” faced existential threats – offered the ideal stage for the clash between order and barbarism.

Here was the role of a lifetime: to call the shots on a world-historical mission that cast unilateral hard power as virtue. No wonder they cling to it, even after every failed​ regime-change war.

President Donald Trump’s vow that he would never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon was one of the few moments to draw bipartisan applause during his recent State of the Union address. So what if the geopolitical center of gravity now lies in the Indo-Pacific? On February 28, our leaders reached for another bloody encore in the desert, another stab at playing Wyatt Earp.

Like every functioning addict, America’s ruling class has enablers. Defense contractors monetize its messiah complex, the media industry mythologizes it, and a pro-Israel advocacy network leverages it by converting Israeli geopolitical ambitions into U.S. military imperatives.

When Israel decided to attack Iran, it should have been a time for choosing. Instead, the Trump administration treated U.S. participation as inevitable. The only choice we had was the timing. We could either join Israel’s opening blow or wait until Iran retaliated against U.S. forces before initiating hostilities. America’s terms of entry into the Iran war demonstrate “alliance entrapment,” regardless of whether Secretary of State Marco Rubio conceded it or not.

The first rule of a war of choice is to sell it as a necessity. In the absence of a direct attack on the homeland, the White House has cycled through several rationales. These include preventing an “imminent” nuclear threat (of which no public evidence has been produced), destroying Iran’s missile arsenal, liberating Iranians from tyranny, protecting Israel, and demanding the Islamic regime’s “unconditional surrender.” Ultimately, it settled on an official justification that is nearly verbatim from a memo by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies – a leading Iran-hawk think tank created to “enhance Israel’s image in North America.”

Since the war began, thirteen U.S. troops have been killed and 381 wounded, while the reported death toll across the Middle East is now in the thousands. If Trump opposed the 2003 Iraq War, why is he sacrificing blood and treasure in a strategically unwinnable regime-change operation? It appears that he objected to the outcome of that war and not the ideology that led to its failure. The “axis of evil” morality play always seduces those desperate to feel consequential.

The loudest case for Trump’s pursuit of glory in Iran was made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. After all, dismantling the Shia theocracy and its proxy network would shift the regional balance of power in Israel’s favor. Media mogul Rupert Murdoch and “some conservative commentators” also reportedly pushed the President toward war. Given who the White House is now lionizing, it would be safe to infer that the latter includes big-name neocons Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro.

Contrary to what the Murdoch media entities and neocon cheerleaders claim, American tactical victories have not translated into functional success. Iranian missiles and drones still regularly strike U.S. bases, energy facilities, and civilian areas in our allied Gulf states. The Islamic regime remains intact and it has effectively closed off the Strait of Hormuz. Many of our Asian partners are reeling from the consequent oil and gas supply disruption.

Corroding Pax Americana is a small price for the ruling class to feel like history’s heroes. As the hostilities grind into a war of attrition, Taiwan and our other allies fear that the ongoing diversion of U.S. military forces from the Indo-Pacific will create an opening for Chinese adventurism.

But at home, defense industry-funded think tanks are marketing the conflict as if it closes that opening. Analysts from the Hudson Institute, for example, claim that the Iran war is the first act of a grand strategy to weaken China. They exaggerate China’s ties with Iran and overlook the U.S. military’s inability to conduct protracted wars in multiple theaters. This enabling narrative flips what is a strategic self-own into a 4D chess move.

Keep reading

After talks fail, IDF planning for return to war, Trump mulls strikes on Iran — reports

All three major Hebrew TV networks reported that the IDF is gearing up for renewed conflict with Iran after the ceasefire talks between the United States and the Islamic Republic collapsed, in what appeared to be a coordinated leak by defense officials on Sunday.

The reported preparations came less than a week after a two-week ceasefire brokered by Pakistan went into effect, and a day after negotiations in Islamabad between the US and Iran failed to produce a deal to permanently end the war in the Middle East.

Earlier on Sunday, the Ynet news site reported that IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir instructed the military to move to a “heightened state of readiness” and to prepare for a resumption of hostilities with Iran.

Then Channel 12 news reported in the evening, without citing any sources, that the IDF was not only gearing up for renewed conflict with Iran, but also preparing for a potential Iranian surprise attack on Israel.

The Kan public broadcaster, meanwhile, cited a “senior defense official” as saying that “Israel is interested in renewing the war against Iran,” after the war ended “too early, without sufficient pressure being applied on Iran regarding the nuclear issue and ballistic missiles.”

Keep reading

Trump Declares US Blockade on Strait of Hormuz After No Deal Reached With Iran

President Trump declared on Sunday that he was ordering the US Navy to impose a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, and the US military announced it would begin blocking all ships leaving or traveling to Iranian ports starting at 10:00 am Eastern Time on Monday morning.

Trump’s declaration came after US and Iranian officials held about 20 hours of talks in Pakistan that didn’t result in a deal. He said that the US and Iran were at an impasse on the nuclear issue, as Washington is still demanding that Tehran commit to zero nuclear enrichment. Another major sticking point is the fact that Israel has refused to enact a ceasefire in Lebanon and has continued major airstrikes on the country that have massacred hundreds of civilians since the US-Iran truce started.

“So, there you have it, the meeting went well, most points were agreed to, but the only point that really mattered, NUCLEAR, was not. Effective immediately, the United States Navy, the Finest in the World, will begin the process of BLOCKADING any and all Ships trying to enter, or leave, the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“At some point, we will reach an ‘ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO IN, ALL BEING ALLOWED TO GO OUT’ basis, but Iran has not allowed that to happen by merely saying, ‘There may be a mine out there somewhere,’ that nobody knows about but them. THIS IS WORLD EXTORTION, and Leaders of Countries, especially the United States of America, will never be extorted,” he added.

Keep reading

On Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) and Iran

The question on everyone’s mind is if Iran will agree to give up its 440 kilograms of enriched uranium. President Trump recently proclaimed on his Truth Social account that this material lies underneath the rubble of last June Operation Midnight Hammer attack, though no one else seems to believe this assertion.

Benjamin Netanyahu claimed in February that the Iranian’s not only still had their hands on the material, but would soon enrich it to weapons grade and use it to attack the US and Israel.

Several of my friends—including a couple of Israeli friends—have written to assure me that the US and Israel must obtain this material at all costs, as they believe the Iranians will certainly fashion it into a nuclear weapon and go on the offensive with it.

A few months ago, one of my favorite pen pals assured me that the Iranian regime is an irrational actor and will not recognize or be constrained by the Cold War doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).

It’s a fascinating twist of history that the current negotiations are taking place in Islamabad, Pakistan, because the same proclamations were made about Pakistan when it was working to acquire an atomic bomb. A Grok query about this episode yielded the following.

Pakistani rhetoric supporting Palestinian causes and its self-image as a defender of the Islamic world led Israeli officials to view a nuclear Pakistan as a potential supplier to Arab states or terrorists hostile to the Jewish state. As early as 1979, Prime Minister Menachem Begin warned allies of the “threat posed by Pakistan’s nuclear program.” Israeli intelligence, Mossad, responded with covert operations. Between 1979 and 1981, suspected Mossad-orchestrated sabotage targeted European suppliers of centrifuge technology and dual-use equipment to Pakistan, including parcel bombs and assassinations of key intermediaries. Israeli planners even considered direct military action: in the mid-1980s, the Israeli Air Force reportedly rehearsed strikes on Pakistan’s Kahuta enrichment facility using F-15s and F-16s, possibly with Indian assistance or basing. U.S. intelligence reportedly tipped off Pakistan about these plans, averting escalation, as Washington balanced its alliances. Assassination plots against A.Q. Khan himself were allegedly prepared but never executed.

Despite these multifaceted efforts—diplomatic pressure, sanctions, intelligence sharing, and covert sabotage—Pakistan achieved nuclear capability by the mid-1980s and conducted overt tests in May 1998. The program succeeded through clandestine procurement, Chinese assistance, and domestic resilience. U.S. and Israeli actions delayed progress but were undermined by competing strategic interests: America’s Afghan priorities and Israel’s logistical limits against a distant target. Today, Pakistan maintains an estimated 170 warheads.

Keep reading

‘Bibi Sold It As Easy’: How A Vance-Netanyahu Call Exposed Chinks In US-Israel Alliance Over Iran War

As the Iran war grinds on with no clear endgame, a private phone call between US Vice-President JD Vance and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has blown the lid off quiet but consequential differences between the two allies.

Far from routine diplomacy, the exchange reflects growing unease in Washington over how the conflict was initially framed and how realistic the expectations were. It also highlights a deeper question now shaping the war effort: whether early assumptions about Iran’s internal fragility and the prospects of regime change were misjudged.

According to sources cited by Axios, Vance directly challenged Netanyahu’s pre-war projections, particularly around the likelihood of internal upheaval in Iran.

“Before the war, Bibi really sold it to the president as being easy, as regime change being a lot likelier than it was,” a US source told Axios. “And the VP was clear-eyed about some of those statements.”

Keep reading

Benjamin Netanyahu declares campaign against Iran is ‘not over’ and there is ‘more to do’ – while US-Tehran peace talks take place in Pakistan

Benjamin Netanyahu has declared that Israel‘s campaign against the Islamic Regime is ‘not over’ as US-Iran peace talks are underway in Pakistan. 

Speaking in a televised address on Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister also said ‘we still have more to do’ to ensure Iran doesn’t achieve a nuclear weapon. 

‘But we can already say clearly – we have historic achievements,’ he affirmed. 

‘They wanted to strangle us, and (now) we are strangling them. They threatened us with annihilation, and now they are fighting for survival,’ Netanyahu added, as he noted that the war against Tehran had also weakened Iran’s leadership and its regional allies. 

Netanyahu’s remarks came as US and Iranian negotiators held talks in Pakistan on Saturday to try to end their six-week war. 

The talks in Islamabad were the first direct US-Iranian meeting in more than a decade and the highest-level discussions since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The Strait of Hormuz, a major transit point for global energy supplies that Iran has effectively blocked but Trump has vowed to reopen, is crucial to negotiations between the sides during a two-week ceasefire agreed last week.

Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency said the waterway remains among the main points of ‘serious disagreement’ in talks between Iranian and US delegations in Islamabad.

The American military said two of its warships had passed through the strait, and conditions were being set to clear mines, while Iran’s state media denied any US ships had transited the waterway.

Keep reading

How Russia and China became the winners of Trump’s Iran war… with NATO, Europe and US losing out

After 40 days and 40 nights of fighting in the Middle East, both sides claimed victory as they entered into a fragile two-week ceasefire, the durability of which is still highly uncertain.

‘Total and complete victory,’ Trump insisted in a telephone interview with AFP after the ceasefire was announced on Tuesday. ‘100 per cent. No question about it.’

‘Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield. A capital V military victory by any measure,’ defence secretary Pete Hegseth chimed in, adding: ‘Iran begged for this ceasefire, and we all know it.’

But as the dust begins to settle, it is not entirely clear that the United States or Israel have accomplished their military objectives in Iran, or emerged better off since before the war.

The Islamic Republic, while severely militarily weakened, still retains a large quantity of undamaged missiles, and the regime has been destabilised but is still intact.

And despite Trump’s repeated demands for Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or a ‘whole civilisation will die’, the vital waterway through which 20 per cent of the world’s oil and gas is transported is still shutdown.

The two sides are also arguing about the terms of the accepted 10-point peace deal, with the White House insisting it bars Iran from having enriched uranium – a key tenet the regime denies. 

So amid this shaky pause in hostilities, which countries have emerged truly victorious, and who are the losers?  

Keep reading

US-Israeli Strikes on Iran’s Universities Signal Higher Ed No Longer Off-Limits

Throughout their war on Iran, the U.S. and Israel broke many norms of military engagement, such as systematically targeting academic institutions in Iran. Universities became a major casualty, and explicit acknowledgements by Israeli leaders and some U.S. public figures clarified that these institutions were not collateral damage, but rather, intended targets. There are no definitive figures as to the number of higher education institutes targeted, but Iran’s science minister, Hossein Simaei Saraf, has said more than 30 universities have been bombed.

“It is truly unbelievable that in the 21st century, in the age of human rights, in the age of international law and international humanitarian law, civilian locations and civilians are being targeted,” Simaei Saraf told reporters upon inspecting the ruins of the Laser and Plasma Research Institute at Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran on April 4.

“It is regrettable that our adversary has gone back to the Stone Age rather than us coming from the Stone Age,” he said, a reference to Donald Trump’s infamous threat against Iran. Simaei Saraf added that the international community is deprived of Iran’s human potential when the country’s scientific centers become targets in military campaigns.

Founded in 1960 as the National University of Iran, Shahid Beheshti University (SBU) is known for its robust law, literature, and architecture departments. The U.K.-based QS World University Rankings has ranked Shahid Beheshti University 214th in Asia among 1,534 universities listed regionally. Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a former presidential candidate and leader of the 2009 Green Movement who has been under house arrest since 2011, is an SBU alumnus.

The most shocking incident in this string of attacks was the bombing of Tehran’s Sharif University of Technology, often referred to as Iran’s MIT. In the early hours of April 6, U.S.-Israeli airstrikes on the southern parts of the iconic campus destroyed several buildings, including the Philosophy of Science Group, High-Performance Computing Center, and Information and Communication Technology Center.

Keep reading

War for Fusion – From Iran’s Front Lines to a Boston Scientist’s Murder

“BLOOD, FUSION, and POWER” asked whether the Brown University mass shooting and the killing of MIT fusion scientist Nuno Loureiro were random crimes or signs of a bigger battle over fusion. This battle is really about who will control future energy and military power, and why those choices are being made far away from the American people.

Under Barack Obama, the United States quietly moved tens of billions of dollars in funding, equipment, and scientific work toward the France based ITER fusion project and away from American labs, weakening U.S. facilities while feeding a foreign run “global collaboration.” Even some Democrats and budget experts warned that ITER was turning into a money pit that trapped U.S. fusion funding inside a structure controlled overseas. Taxpayers were never plainly told that money meant for American labs and jobs was being shifted so a multinational body in southern France could decide how it would be spent.

France sells ITER as a peaceful science and climate project, but it is also a tool of French power. Hosting the world’s flagship fusion experiment makes France the gatekeeper of a critical energy technology. China is an official partner, shipping giant components to the French site and embedding its engineers there while using what they learn to boost their own “artificial sun” projects at home. Iran, although blocked from formally joining ITER by a U.S. veto, has locked itself into a sweeping 25 year strategic deal with China covering energy and technology, and has sought scientific cooperation with Europe in nuclear adjacent fields. On paper, ITER is neutral; in reality, France, China, and Iran are tied together through energy, technology, and strategy. The current war involving Iran’s proxies only underlines the point. Any serious solution has to look at those backing and supplying Tehran, not just the fighters on the ground.

This creates a sharp problem inside NATO. France enjoys the full benefits of the alliance and American security guarantees, yet hosts a fusion project closely tied to Chinese industry and sits in a European environment that looks for ways to keep trade and energy links with Iran alive. How can a country claim to protect NATO and U.S. interests while deepening its energy and technology ties to Beijing and standing at the center of a system that helps the very powers arming Iran’s war?

At the same time, there are still no clear answers about why someone killed one of America’s top fusion scientists. Police and media reports identify the suspected gunman, Claudio Manuel Neves Valente, a former Brown physics student later found dead in an apparent suicide, as the man likely responsible for both the Brown University shooting and Loureiro’s killing. Yet officials have not provided a convincing motive and have said they have no public evidence linking the attack directly to Loureiro’s research. The official story stops right where the real questions begin, and what the public is being asked to accept, without full explanation, does not make sense.

All of this unfolded as President Donald Trump pushed in the opposite direction, toward bringing fusion power and investment back under American control. In 2025, his administration advanced an “America First” investment and industrial approach, tightening focus on strategic sectors such as advanced energy and technology and supporting moves toward a national fusion roadmap aimed at a strong domestic industry.

Keep reading

Iran Appointed to UN Program for Women’s Rights, Disarmament, and Terrorism Prevention

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been nominated to the U.N. Committee for Program and Coordination, which shapes policy on women’s rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention. The nomination was backed by ECOSOC members, including the UK, Spain, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia, Switzerland, Austria, and Finland.

This is part of a broader pattern. In February 2026, an Iranian regime official took her seat as a full member of the UN Human Rights Council’s Advisory Committee, contributing to discussions on gender perspectives and gender-based violence, while Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister addressed the council’s high-level opening session.

Iran was previously removed from a comparable body in 2022, when ECOSOC voted 29 to 8 to remove it from the Commission on the Status of Women following its violent crackdown on protesters after the death of Mahsa Amini. It is now being nominated back onto similar bodies.

Keep reading