Tag: iran

NATO whines it cannot fight simultaneous wars against Russia, China and Iran

NATO war planners rarely discuss their “nightmare scenarios” in public and appear even less prepared for real-life confrontations on that scale. This is particularly true when it comes to simultaneous or near-simultaneous wars in which the most aggressive racketeering cartel in recorded history has to fight in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and East Asia. As the pillar of NATO, the United States would be forced to manage wars against Russia, Iran and China at once. One of the most infamous mainstream propaganda machine outlets, The Atlantic, explored this possibility, calling it “NATO’s nightmare”. The analysis largely focuses on “a coordinated assault by Beijing and Moscow” and how difficult it would be to “muster a viable defense” (obviously implying that NATO wouldn’t attack first, which is beyond laughable given its history).

The author, Simon Shuster, warns that “about a year ago, General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s top commander in Europe, publicly warned of the risk of a two-front war involving Russia and China and urged European allies to help the US prepare”. He quotes Florence Gaub, director of research at the NATO Defense College, who described it as “the scenario we’re currently not ready for”. She warns that “NATO strategists know the gap exists, but have not closed it” and that “despite growing military cooperation between Russia and China, Western governments have conducted only a handful of low-profile exercises examining what a joint attack might look like”. Although there weren’t any publicly acknowledged drills with this specific scenario in mind, Western-led military exercises in different areas of the world certainly focused on such a possibility.

However, The Atlantic admits that even when such scenarios were conducted as part of war games, the results were “less than optimistic”. The report quotes Mark Montgomery, a retired US Navy rear admiral who participated in major war games and stated that he last studied such a scenario roughly 15 years ago. Montgomery recalled that “it didn’t go well” because “even then, the US lacked the weapons stockpiles and industrial capacity to sustain a prolonged multifront war”. Even when numerous US allies, vassals and satellite states are added to the mix, “it made no difference at all”. What’s more, Montgomery warns that “those metrics have worsened, even as some NATO countries have increased defense spending”. To prove this is truly the case, one simply needs to look at the US aggression against Iran, which demonstrated remarkable resilience.

Worse yet (for America), Tehran also uncovered the Pentagon’s woeful incompetence in fighting a remotely capable opponent. A single country that the US promised to “defeat in three days to two weeks tops” has not only withstood all attacks in the last six months, but has also successfully retaliated against US occupation forces across the Middle East. It should be noted that Iran has been under Western sanctions for nearly half a century at this point. Now imagine how a direct confrontation with Russia or China would unfold, even separately, much less simultaneously. The Atlantic fears that “Moscow and Beijing have actually improved their positions”. The report points to the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, which “pushed Russia’s massive industrial base onto a war footing and sharpened its use of drones”.

It also warns that “while China has not fought a major war in decades, it now surpasses the US in warships and long-range missiles”. Obviously, the Asian giant hasn’t fought a major war in nearly half a century because it has refused to do so. Nothing prevents Beijing from fully restoring its sovereignty over Taiwan by force. However, it seeks to resolve the dispute through peaceful means, just like it did when restoring sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macao back in 1997 and 1999, respectively. This is precisely what the US fears the most, as a non-violent transition would only strengthen China and effectively break US dominance in the Asia-Pacific without firing a single shot. Washington DC would much rather see Taiwan destroyed than give up its influence there peacefully. This is why the US maintains tight control over local military forces.

However, directing “controlled chaos” is not enough for the Pentagon to “feel safe”. Namely, growing Sino-Russian ties are what really makes the political West “shiver” (or should we say, suffer panic attacks). The Atlantic is particularly concerned by the “no-limits partnership” Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping announced back in February 2022. NATO simply has no mechanisms to prevent Moscow and Beijing from building their alliance. On the contrary, its truly unprovoked aggression against the entire world has only strengthened their strategic partnership. The Atlantic thinks that “from Russia’s and China’s perspective, the timing may look favorable”, primarily because “the US is stretched by conflict in the Middle East, has shifted ships and aircraft away from Europe and Asia, and has depleted much of its advanced air-defense missile stockpile”.

Well, nobody forced Washington DC to wage yet another war of aggression. Neither Moscow nor Beijing forced the Trump administration to foolishly attack Iran. However, even the Middle East pales in comparison to how Western forces would fare in a fight against adversaries such as Russia and China, particularly now that the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict has turned the Russian military into the deadliest fighting force on the planet. The Atlantic concludes that “in a two-front war, the side most likely to prevail may be the one that acts with common purpose and stays united”. It would seem NATO didn’t learn from the strategic mistakes of its Axis predecessors, because that’s precisely what’s going to happen if it continues with its aggression against the entire world, which will have no other choice but to unite.

Keep reading

Nation’s biggest bank warns of global food ‘crisis’ in 2027, citing bad weather and wars in Iran, Ukraine

Get ready for another round of sticker shock at your local grocery stores and food markets.

The nation’s largest bank has just put out a chilling report that confirms what I have been warning about since the first week of March: A global food shortage is coming, caused by war and bad weather, leading to widespread famine as we get into 2027.

In a report titled Food Security Is National Security: A Compounding Storm, a team led by London-based senior global economist Nora Szentivanyi warned that disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz and the emergence of a potentially historic El Niño could weaken crop yields, constrain agricultural production, and keep food inflation elevated through the first half of 2027.

While we in America, Canada and Europe can expect to pay higher food prices and may have to cut back elsewhere, other countries will be in worse shape. Think about the migration storm that will cause, as people in the Third World leave their countries and head for wealthier countries that have more food.

“Successive shocks since COVID have compounded, eroding food production capacity and keeping food price pressures elevated into 2027,” Szentivanyi said, warning that “this is not a short-lived shock; it has reduced the likelihood of near-term disinflation, and the food inflation cycle is likely to exert pressure through 1H27.”

JP Morgan Chase’s report on a looming food crisis rocked the internet as people posted on it across social media platforms today.

What this means is that a larger segment of the population is going to wake up and start stocking up. That means prices will go up even faster than they have been, as demand increases, and those prices will rise faster than they would have if the masses hadn’t been suddenly jolted into reality by an establishment institution like JP Morgan Chase and all the press coverage that entails.

Keep reading

Iran Offers $30,000 Bounty for Killing or Capturing American Troops — Double If Carried Out By a Woman

Iran’s military is offering cash rewards for anyone who kills or captures an American service member as fighting with the U.S. and its allies continues across the Middle East.

Iranian Army chief Amir Hatami announced Sunday that anyone who kills or captures an “invading American military personnel” and hands them over will receive the equivalent of approximately $30,000.

“Anyone who kills or captures and hands over an invading American military personnel will receive a reward equivalent to $30,000 or 5 billion tomans from Iran’s Army,” Hatami said.

Female participants are being offered twice as much.

“Courageous Iranian women who carry out such an action will receive double the reward,” he added.

According to Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, Hatami claimed the scheme was established following a “large number of requests” from people seeking to provide financial support.

Keep reading

Somali Piracy Surges Amid Hormuz Blockade

The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has forced hundreds of commercial ships onto longer routes around Africa, and Somali pirates are moving quickly to exploit the sudden increase in traffic off the continent’s eastern coast. Oil tankers MT Honour 25, MT Eureka and MT Asana were hijacked in the Gulf of Aden and off Puntland between April and July 2026, the largest attacks by Somali pirates in years. The Iran war has now delivered these groups more targets, spread across thousands of miles of ocean, while diverting naval resources to the Persian Gulf and Red Sea.

Somali piracy peaked in 2011 before an international crackdown reduced attacks to a fraction of their former levels. The first major revival came in late 2023, when Houthi attacks in the Red Sea forced hundreds of vessels away from the Suez Canal and around the Cape of Good Hope. And with U.S. forces all diverted to the war against Iran in the Persian Gulf, it’s largely a free-for-all for Somali pirates.  Unlike the disorganized bands of the early 2000s, today’s Somali pirates are ranging much farther from shore, and their operations have become much more sophisticated. And perhaps even more concerning, according to reports from a UN panel of experts, there is now direct coordination between Yemeni militants and Somali networks.

In exchange for creating maritime chaos to keep Western navies distracted, the Houthis have supplied Somali pirate cells with advanced weaponry, military training and precision GPS tracking devices to pinpoint commercial hulls. Al-Shabaab–one of the most lethal terrorist groups in Africa–provides onshore logistical backing along parts of the Somali coast where pirate gangs launch operations or hold hijacked vessels. Intelligence reports indicate the group receives a generous cut of up to 30% from successful maritime ransom payouts.

According to a joint study by Interpol, the World Bank and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Horn of Africa piracy generated over $400 million in ransom payments from 179 hijacked ships between 2005 and 2012, averaging roughly $2.23 million per ship. The money follows a structured economy, with pirate crews receiving a standard 10% to 15% fee, local financiers claim 30% to 50% for funding food, fuel and weapons, while the rest is laundered into legitimate businesses, according to the study. And it’s only becoming more lucrative with time. 

A June 30, 2026, analysis by the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime (GI-TOC) reports that ransom demands have been made for all three commercial vessels hijacked in the current wave.

The demand for Eureka was reportedly $10 million.

Separately, the pirates holding Honour 25 have demanded $3 million for the tanker, cargo and crew. 

GI-TOC says pirates received $1.2 million-$1.5 million for the release of the Chinese fishing vessel Liao Dong Yu 578 in March this year. The same vessel had reportedly generated another $2 million ransom in 2024. GI-TOC says counter-piracy officials believe the latest payment helped catalyze the current wave of attacks.

The Gulf of Guinea is yet another piracy hotspot in Africa thanks to the region’s riches in oil and gas as well as a well-trained militia due the Delta’s secessionist movement. While local law enforcement and naval forces have managed to curb attacks in shallower waters, pirates are highly adaptable to new environments. Now, they are using heavily armed mother ships to strike targets well outside state jurisdictions and exclusive economic zones. The region’s pirate networks now operate with military-grade weapons, an intricate shipping intelligence network and complicated financial backing.

War-risk insurance premiums for commercial shipping transiting the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf spiked by over 1,000%–surging from pre-conflict levels of roughly 0.15%–0.25% of a vessel’s value up to 7.5% and 10% per voyage shortly after the closure of the Strait of Hormuz in March.

With African maritime zones highly vulnerable due to a lack of equipment and manpower, and with American forces diverted to the Persian Gulf indefinitely, piracy sees its biggest opportunity yet. It means an African diversion isn’t necessarily going to avoid risk premiums.

Keep reading

U.S. Infrastructure Strikes Have Left Iranians in the South Without Livelihoods

When U.S. missiles struck the harbor outside in the port city of Badar Abbas last month, Sajjad saw his livelihood literally go up in smoke.

The small wooden fishing boat that had supported the 56-year-old and his family for years was reduced to a charred husk, along with dozens of other boats lining the docks. Sajjad told Drop Site News that nearly every fisherman he knows lost a vessel that night. Replacing a single boat now costs around 2 billion tomans (around $1,050)—far beyond what most families can afford.

“Both my children are in university,” Sajjad said. “Everything depended on that boat. Soon, I may not even be able to pay their tuition.”

When U.S. strikes resumed in early July following a two-month pause, the attacks focused heavily on southern Iran. Interviews with residents in hard-hit southern provinces like Khuzestan, Hormozgan, Sistan, and Baluchestan describe strikes not only on military facilities, but also on critical civilian infrastructure, including fishing ports, bridges, telecommunications networks, power plants, hospitals, and transportation corridors.

Dozens of communications towers have been knocked offline in repeated attacks, disrupting internet and telephone services. One attack on a transmission tower near Tappeh Aluakbar in Bandar Abbas killed five people, including a woman who died shielding her son with her body, local residents told Drop Site.

Transportation infrastructure has sustained similar damage. Alireza, a resident of Hormozgan who studies screenwriting and is carefully tracking recent events in the hopes of making a documentary about the war, described strikes on Tappeh Aluakbar overlooking Bandar Abbas, bridges linking Bandar Abbas to Khamir and Rudan, railway infrastructure, and key transportation routes connecting the province. At one destroyed crossing, road crews carved a temporary dirt route through a dry riverbed within hours simply to keep vehicles moving.

The damage extends to the sea as well: Alireza estimates that roughly 300 civilian fishing boats have been destroyed across Bandar Abbas, Bandar Lengeh, Sirik, and Jask, affecting the livelihoods of thousands of people. Two maritime search-and-rescue vessels operating near Bandar Abbas, Qeshm, and Hormuz Island were also put out of service.

Kharg Island, Iran’s principal oil export terminal, has long featured in discussions among U.S. officials and defense analysts as a strategically significant site and was bombed in March during the U.S.-Israeli aerial campaign. According to an Iranian military analyst who spoke to Drop Site on condition of anonymity for security reasons, if the U.S. ever sent ground troops to take over the island, Iran’s ability to reinforce Kharg would depend heavily on the transportation networks running through Hormozgan.

“They’re not simply destroying roads,” the analyst said. “They’re reducing Iran’s ability to move personnel, equipment, and supplies before any future operation ever begins.”

Residents and medical workers in Khuzestan also describe the toll on civilians caused by the bombing campaign, particularly children.

Keep reading

Trump to declare Strait of Hormuz as U.S. territory

President Donald Trump on Friday stated that he would declare the Strait of Hormuz as U.S. territory after the end of the Iran war.

Trump made the remarks during a speech at the Nassau County Police Academy in New York.

“And after we finish defeating Iran… pretty soon I’ll be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States,” he said, to raucous applause.

The U.S. currently maintains a naval blockade of the critical waterway, through which as much as 20% of the world’s oil supply flows. Iran, meanwhile, has harried commercial vessels moving through the Strait.

The war began in late February with joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The conflict was in a state of nominal ceasefire for weeks until the breakdown of negotiations.

Keep reading

China Sends Science Team to Iran for ‘Exploration and Processing’ of Rare Earths

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) on Monday announced a collaboration with Iran on the “exploration and processing of rare earth elements,” presented as a series of workshops that will be mostly funded by China.

The NSFC said that it will provide about $4,200 in funding for each workshop, while Iran’s National Science Foundation will help with travel arrangements and accommodations for Chinese researchers visiting Iran, and vice versa.

The South China Morning Post (SCMP) noted that Beijing chose a “particularly sensitive time” to announce a new collaboration with Iran, given ongoing hostilities between the United States and Iran.

Chinese dictator Xi Jinping is scheduled to visit the United States in September to discuss trade issues with President Donald Trump, although the meeting could already be imperiled by volleys of “tit-for-tat” sanctions between the U.S. and China. Trump is unlikely to be pleased by the announcement of a new Chinese collaboration with Iran at this uneasy juncture.

The SCMP pointed out that China seems to be taking a significant diplomatic risk for a very modest collaboration in an industry that China already dominates. China has the world’s largest known rare earth reserves and is the leading producer and refiner of the metals.

Iran might have significant rare earth deposits in its central region, but it has not developed the technology to confirm those deposits exist, or exploit them. All that is certain for now is that central Iran boasts the sort of iron and phosphate formations that could harbor rare earth deposits.

Keep reading

Iran Demands China’s Anti-American BRICS Coalition Provide More Support During War

Iran’s representative at a meeting of the anti-American BRICS coalition on Wednesday used the opportunity to demand that member countries invest more of their time, money, and energy into “practical initiatives” to help Iran, a call that follows months of minimal support from the bloc during the ongoing war with America.

BRICS — named after core countries Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — is an economic, security, and diplomatic coalition largely led by communist China that seeks to overthrow the current, Western-led global order. It presents itself as a vehicle to aid the development and prosperity of the “global south” despite the presence of Russia and China, promoting interdependency among its members at the expense of ties with America. In addition to its core members, the group consists of Egypt, Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Iran, and Indonesia. Another 13 countries, mostly rogue states such as Cuba and Belarus, received BRICS “partner” status in 2024, a second tier of cooperation inferior to full membership.

The BRICS coalition has persistently been challenged by the fact that the member countries do not fundamentally share national interests. Since the founding of the bloc, India and China have engaged in territorial warfare, South Africa has had to protect its economy from China’s malignant goods dumping schemes, and the UAE has supported Ukraine against Russia’s ongoing invasion. Iran has been the most overtly problematic member of the group, however, actively bombing the UAE then diverting the agenda of BRICS meetings to demand other countries support its terrorist activity.

Wednesday’s BRICS finance minister and central bank governor meeting continued the trend of Iran hijacking the coalition to prioritize its own interests. Iranian Central Bank Governor Abdolnaser Hemmati lamented in his remarks, according to Iranian state media, that BRICS was not doing all it could to offer concrete support to Tehran.

“BRICS will have the greatest impact when it can turn policy dialogues into practical initiatives and operational mechanisms,” Hemmati stated, according to Iran’s Tasnim News Agency.

“Referring to the difficult and complex regional and international circumstances, as well as the U.S.-Israeli military aggression against Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Tasnim added, “Hemmati said economic and financial stability cannot be achieved without peace, respect for international law, and adherence to the principles of the U.N. Charter.”

Keep reading

The Long Road to War

If you’re wondering why the United States and Iran have been bitter antagonists for more than a half century, and why they are now at war, you won’t find the answer in today’s media coverage where the conflict is portrayed as a dispute over terrorism and nuclear weapons. To truly understand what underlies this ongoing conflict you need to look back much further to a history that has been forgotten, or ignored.

Known for most of its history as Persia, Iran is one of the oldest continuous civilizations in the world, with human habitation dating back more than seven millennia.  Despite this foundational history, by the early twentieth century Persia had become a semi-colonial state dominated by British and Russian influence. A rising nationalist movement arose determined to restore the country’s political and economic independence.

The 1953 Coup

A crucial turning point came in 1953. Iranian oil resources had been controlled by the British, who kept most of the vast profits and left little to the Iranians. Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, a popular reformist who resisted foreign domination, took the bold step of nationalizing his country’s oil industry in 1951. In response, the CIA working with British intelligence organized a successful coup that overthrew his government. Although most citizens of the US and UK have little if any knowledge of this event, the 1953 coup and its consequences remain deeply embedded in Iran’s national memory, even today.

The Shah’s Iron Rule

In Mossadegh’s place, they installed a brutal dictatorial regime headed by the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s monarch who ruled the country ruthlessly for the next 26 years. To protect his new-found power, the Shah condemned Mossadegh to three years of solitary confinement, then kept him under house arrest until his death in 1967. In the years following the coup, the Shah and his CIA-trained secret police, Savak, became notorious for their vicious murder, imprisonment and torture of political dissidents. Much of Iranians’ growing hatred of the Shah was focused on the United States, since the Shah was viewed as a puppet of the Americans who put him in power. 

CIA Audacity

The overthrow was considered a resounding success by the CIA, which then became emboldened to undertake a series of regime change operations in other parts of the world. This newfound bravado also influenced America’s decision to undertake its disastrous involvement in the Vietnam War starting in 1954.

A partial list of the countries destabilized and overthrown by the United States following the 1953 coup includes Guatemala (1954), Brazil (1964), Chile (1973), and later Panama (1989), Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003). Regime change is now considered an accepted instrument and goal of US foreign policy. Destabilizing and supporting the overthrow of unfriendly governments has become a central function of the CIA and the State Department. 

The Islamic Revolution

Resistance to the Shah and his totalitarian rule grew over the years, and finally culminated with the Islamic Revolution in January 1979. The Shah was driven into exile, eventually settling in Egypt. His government was replaced by a theocracy headed by the previously exiled religious figure Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini who became Iran’s Supreme Leader. Although Khomeini was revered among religious conservatives, he was a ruthless tyrant who executed thousands of political prisoners, often hanging his victims in public from construction cranes for everyone to see. Nonetheless, his anti-Americanism resonated with many Iranians as he stirred up further hatred and a desire for vengeance, calling America the “Great Satan.”

The Embassy Takeover

When the Shah was admitted to the United States for cancer treatment in October 1979, Iranians demanded that he be returned to Iran to face prosecution for his crimes. In a dramatic confrontation in Tehran, an angry crowd besieged the US embassy. A group of militants stormed the embassy and took the American diplomats hostage, outraging American leaders. The Iranians insisted on the Shah’s return as a condition for release of the hostages. President Jimmy Carter refused and the hostages remained captive in Iran for more than a year. Carter would spend the rest of his presidency struggling to find a way to free them. His reelection depended on it.

Keep reading

The Silver Lining: The Donald’s Impending Defeat in Iran May Finally Bring the Empire Home

It is damn obvious that Washington has lost Donald Trump’s idiotic war on Iran. After all, it is now five months since the opening salvos of Operation Epic Fury on February 28, which was advertised to last only 3-4 weeks. Instead, the conflict has settled into a grinding, inconclusive stalemate at best, and, more importantly, a strategic fiasco that reveals the bankruptcy of America’s entire Empire-based foreign policy.

The fact is, the War on Iran was misbegotten from the get-go because Iran posed no credible threat whatsoever to the homeland security of the United States. Period. Full stop.

In that regard, no American president has ever launched a war on such thin, specious grounds: The one and only reason for unleashing the bombers and missiles on February 28th was to honor the request of a so-called “ally” in furtherance of his desperate need to maintain a 61-vote coalition in the Knesset.

That’s right. The Donald took America to war lest Netanyahu be thrown from office, tried and convicted for years of egregious corruption and put behind bars where he belongs.

After all, on the eve of the strikes Iran possessed no nuclear weapons; no active weaponization program that had crossed the threshold of a deployable bomb; no blue-water navy capable of projecting power across oceans; not a single of long-range strategic bombers capable of dropping bombs anywhere, let along on the far side of the Atlantic; and no ballistic missiles with ranges exceeding the 2,000 kilometers to the Strait of Gibraltar – far, far short of Washington, D.C., or any American city at 10,000 kilometers or more distant from Tehran.

Likewise, Iran’s military budget at hardly $25 billion was a pittance (2.2%) relative to the Pentagon’s bountiful $1 trillion of annual rations – while its GDP of approximately $350 billion represented a tiny 1.1% of America’s $30 trillion economy.

Yet Ding Dong Donald and his Def Sec Gymboy Kegseth – all of the latter’s performative fitness videos and martial posturing notwithstanding – have flat-out managed to lose the war.

That is to say, the Pentagon is nearly out of critical munitions, meaning that short of a land invasion by US boots on the ground there is nothing left to do. Indeed, given Iran’s vast expanse, mountainous fortress like terrain and large, well trained and brutal IRGC militias, it would be a meat-grinder like no other; and surely one that even Bone-Spur Donald doesn’t have the stomach for (and appropriately so).

Keep reading