Tag: middle east

Pentagon Weighing Permanent Smaller US Presence In Gulf (Just Don’t Call It Retreat)

Already US officials have signaled they may just abandon hard-hit bases in the Middle East altogether, in the wake of Iran’s retaliation as a result of Operation Epic Fury, and a conflict that’s dragged on for nearly six months.

On Tuesday The Washington Post reviews the damage control underway, as the Pentagon ‘evaluates’ its future military footprint. All of this is framed as if Washington has a choice and full control over the matter, when it seems that all along the Trump administration was woefully underestimating what an Iranian response would look like.

“The Pentagon is evaluating its military footprint in the Middle East in an early sign of the Iran war’s potential to transform the U.S. presence in the region, according to eight people, including officials and others familiar with the matter,” Washington Post writes.

“One of the key areas the Defense Department is assessing is whether to pull back troops from the Persian Gulf, where America’s large overseas military bases have been battered by months of Iranian strikes, two people familiar with the ongoing analysis said,” it adds, further calling this a “once-in-a-generation” chance for the Pentagon to alter its presence in the region.

The whole thing is being reported as if the ‘smart people’ are in the room and in control, and also as if the US hegemon in the region didn’t already take a massive reputational hit following ‘forever wars’ and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Over 20 years after the initial invasions, the Taliban remains in firm control of Kabul and Afghanistan, and Shiite pro-Iranian politicians run Baghdad.

And now a half-year into a war where the response should have been entirely anticipated (having been predicted by years and decades of Persian Gulf war-gaming and intelligence papers), this is where things stand:

“The war really did highlight the vulnerability … of U.S. forces in the region,” said Michael Ratney, a former diplomat who served as the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia and the deputy chief of mission in Qatar.

Moving troops and equipment further west to Jordan, Israel or the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia could help alleviate some of the pressure, he argued, while noting the added distance wasn’t a “perfect solution to this problem.”

Iran has already demonstrated it can strike faraway targets in Jordan and Israel. Last month an Iranian attack on Jordan killed four U.S. service members.

Anyone with eyes to see knows that this is already happening. For months at this point, dozens of US refueling aircraft have clogged up Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport, for just one example.

Keep reading

Mysterious Orb Revealed in New Pentagon Release

A newly released U.S. government video (pictured above) is drawing attention after appearing to show a mysterious spherical object racing across the sky above a populated area in the Middle East in 2025.

The footage is part of a new batch of declassified records concerning unidentified anomalous phenomena, or UAP, released by the Pentagon. The short clip, said to be derived from an electro-optical and infrared sensor aboard a U.S. military platform, shows what appears to be an orb moving rapidly across the scene, but the available footage provides few clues about its size, distance, or method of propulsion.

According to the accompanying case summary, analysts were unable to determine whether the object was a drone, balloon, conventional aircraft or another known type of aerial vehicle. The case has therefore been designated “unresolved.” 

Keep reading

Pentagon Releases Declassified Footage of US Military Tracking UFO Over Middle East 

The White House on Friday released footage of an unidentified flying object flying over the Middle East.

The footage is from 2025.

The US government released the video as part of its declassification of UFO files.

US Central Command said the UAP remains unresolved.

In May, the Department of War released a video of a fighter jet shooting down a UFO.

The Pentagon earlier this year began releasing files related to UFOs after President Trump ordered them to be made public.

In the second batch, a video was released of an F-16 fighter jet shooting down the unidentified object over Lake Huron in Michigan in February 2023.

The object was shot down during the Chinese spy balloon incident. Biden allowed a Chinese spy balloon to traverse over the continental US in early 2023.

Last month, the Pentagon released a fourth batch of files on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP), with 40 new declassified files.

The fourth batch of files details the bizarre sightings, with unclassified reports from the military and various agencies, including one where a US military aviator describes seeing an object “unlike anything I had seen” in 28 years of Air Force and Navy service. The sighting was reported flying over the Eastern United States in a 2019 Range Fouler Debrief, which the Pentagon says is “a standardized reporting from the U.S. Navy uses to record the circumstances surrounding an unauthorized intrusion into controlled airspace during active military operations or training.”

Keep reading

America’s Middle East Bases: An Imperial Burden

By all conventional measures, America is losing the war with Iran. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has survived the U.S.-Israeli regime change effort, and it seems as though the hardline factions in Iran have been empowered. They also maintain their stockpiles of drones and missiles, while the U.S. is running dangerously low on crucial munitions.

Perhaps the most tangible sign of strategic defeat for the U.S. comes in the form of destroyed bases. Throughout the conflict, Iran has dealt severe blows to U.S. bases across the region, resulting in 18 troops having been killed and over 600 sustaining injuries.

A predictable outcome

Iran’s ability to touch American bases across the Middle East was not surprising to many of those advocating against this war. In fact, it was one of the foremost reasons to show restraint. In August 2025, Dr. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, warned that in the case of a renewed conflict, Iran would likely act with much less restraint than they did during the 12-day War.

“It’s not going to be like last time,” Dr. Parsi explained, “the Iranians may this time around strike at U.S. bases in a manner that they didn’t last time. Last time, as one Pentagon official said, it was a polite response because it was all about ending the war. This time around, it’s likely going to be much worse.”

Dr. Parsi also expressed concern about American defensive systems, saying “we know now that the Iranians have missile capabilities that can penetrate all layers of Israeli and American air defense systems and can lead to a large number of American deaths. So we will once again have Americans coming home from the Middle East in coffins.”

Tragically, these predictions have proven entirely correct.

From the early days of this war, the damage became apparent. The New York Times reported in late March that many American bases in the region had been rendered “all but uninhabitable.” The Iranians attacks have been effective at knocking out key defensive and communications infrastructure as well. All of this information has been intentionally underdiscussed by the Trump administration, in the hopes that Americans will buy their narrative that an easy U.S. victory has occurred.

Despite their decision to not inform the public of this troubling data, the risks are very real for troops still positioned in the region. Since the collapse of the Memorandum of Understanding, four U.S. soldiers have been killed, and roughly 100 have been injured by Iranian attacks.

Many of America’s bases in the Middle East simply weren’t prepared to face Iranian retaliation at the scale we’ve witnessed. During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fighting occurred predominantly within the borders of the respective countries, so many U.S. military facilities weren’t designed to withstand extensive enemy fire.

Iran, however, is a much different story.

Keep reading

“A Bridge Too Far”: Middle East Set For A Massive Escalation

Unless things change dramatically, the Middle East seems set for massive escalation.

President Trump yesterday warned every missile, rocket, or drone Iran fires at ships in Hormuz will be met with the destruction of an Iranian bridge or power plant.

This morning, the IRGC says a tanker is on fire after an explosion in the strait and Kuwait is under drone attack. Moreover, the Houthis claimed attacks on two Saudi tankers in the Red Sea, raising the risks of a new global energy chokepoint besides Hormuz.

Reports say the US is surging military forces to the region, heavy bombers are being prepared, and Mossad is coordinating with the CIA. Equally, Iran’s Ghalibaf has stated there will be no safety if Iran’s security is not guaranteed, read as more or less a declaration of war against the entire region’s infrastructure and energy should its own be hit.

Worse, Iranian strikes on CIA Middle-East facilities are prompting US questions about Russian involvement, which would conflate the war more deeply with Russia-Ukraine, where epic damage to Russian energy, shipping, and logistics infrastructure continues to mount. On that note, after Kazakhstan was forced to stop piping oil via the Black Sea due Ukraine’s drone attacks, the EU is launching a mission to board Russian shadow fleet ships in the Indian Ocean; however, Russian LNG is to remain exempt from EU sanctions – realpolitik or real weakness?

In the Middle East, the UK is evacuating its remaining diplomatic personnel from Iran, just as it did the day before the Iran war started in February, but Bulgaria is aiding US military operations from its territory. That could potentially make it a target for Iranian reprisals – and it’s a NATO and EU member, each with collective defense clauses.

If we see military escalation, it’s likely to drive energy prices even higher than the $95.5 level Brent was at this morning with benchmark crack spreads at $68. However, it’s unlikely to last long. Neither the US nor Israel, nor Iran, nor the GCC can sustain a no-holds-barred war for long – and the world economy obviously can’t either. As such, we may be close to the beginning of the end of this crisis – it’s just unclear if it will prove a bridge too far for the US or Iran.

Keep reading

The United States at 250: An Ode or Goad?

The 250th anniversary of American independence is fundamentally incompatible with a foreign policy defined by overwhelming civilian casualties and global devastation.  As the United States commemorates its semiquincentennial with celebratory pageantry, this milestone forces a reckoning.  How can a nation built on the promise of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” justify its role in upending and extinguishing millions of lives across the Middle East?

The Cost of War Project conducted by Brown University Watson Institute, documents that post-9-11 military interventions – ranging from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to Syria, Yemen and Iran (Palestine not included) have killed millions and displaced at least 38 million more.  Beyond these figures are fragmented lives and demolished communities.

Every day the human toll compounds. Behind every geopolitical maneuver and barbaric U.S.-Israeli bombing campaigns are shattered childhoods, obliterated infrastructure, and ancient Gaza reduced to endless piles of concrete ruins.

Families have been torn apart.  Incomprehensible numbers of orphans and homeless refugees are left to survive in unlivable conditions.  The fundamental pillars of existence – homes, hospitals, grocery stores, schools, libraries, banks, parks, playgrounds – have been pulverized.

The U.S and Israeli military machines do not operate in a vacuum.  American taxpayers have funded their weapons of mass destruction for decades. This reality makes celebrating American independence feel hollow and deeply hypocritical.  How can a nation observe a quarter millennium of its own sovereignty while arming and systematically depriving sovereignty and human rights to people across the Middle East?

Since its founding, the United States has fought 36 major wars and conducted 469 military interventions; only five were formally declared by Congress as the Constitution requires.  The country has been at war for 229 of its 250 years, at a cost of $11.7 trillion.

True patriotism requires moral accountability.  Solemnizing America’s 250th birthday while turning a blind eye to genocide and daily massacres in Gaza and the occupied West Bank creates a contradiction that history will never forget.

To honor the highest ideals of a republic – freedom, self-determination and fundamental human rights – the United States must finally confront the legacy of its destructive foreign policy.  And until the United States places human dignity above perpetual militarism and alliances with rapacious regimes, the semiquicentennial will remain a testament to abandoned principles and ideals rather than an observance of realized liberty.

Keep reading

The Security State’s Middle East: Why Washington Keeps Choosing Pressure Over Diplomacy

For more than twenty years now, American leaders from both parties have talked about turning over a new leaf in the Middle East. One president pushed hard for democracy promotion, another tried diplomatic outreach, and someone else swore we’d finally end the “forever wars.” Yet every time a crisis hits, Washington’s first move is rarely sitting down to hammer out a political deal. Instead, it reaches for sanctions, sends in more troops, ramps up deterrence, and leans on the threat – or actual use – of force.

This pattern raises a tough question. If the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq didn’t create stable governments, if years of pressure haven’t really changed Iran’s behavior, and if coercion keeps delivering only mixed results, why does the U.S. keep relying on the same old toolbox?

It’s not just about individual presidents or partisan fights. Republicans and Democrats argue over tactics, sure, but they all work inside a national security system that has slowly pushed military and coercive tools to the top while sidelining diplomacy and messy political solutions. The foreign policy crowd increasingly views the Middle East first through the lens of security competition and only second through its complicated politics.

More than sixty years ago, President Dwight Eisenhower warned about this in his farewell address. He talked about the “military-industrial complex” – the tight web of defense officials, contractors, and politicians that could end up warping America’s priorities. He wasn’t saying military power is useless. He worried it might become so dominant that other options would lose out. You can still read the speech on the Eisenhower Presidential Library archives. At the time it felt like a distant concern. Today it looks spot on.

The 9/11 attacks supercharged this shift. The Global War on Terror didn’t just launch invasions – it changed how Washington saw the world. Instability anywhere became a direct security threat. Local disputes turned into big strategic battles. Grievances rooted in history and society got reframed as problems that needed sanctions, surveillance, or military action. Diplomacy didn’t vanish, but it became secondary, always operating inside a security-first framework.

The Middle East shows this dynamic better than anywhere else. Take Afghanistan. At first, the invasion looked like a clear success. The Taliban fell fast, and officials in Washington talked confidently about building democracy and long-term stability. But turning military victory into a legitimate government proved far harder. We had the guns and the money, but we underestimated tribal loyalties, history, and what local people would actually accept. After twenty years, the U.S. left and the Taliban came right back. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) reports laid it out plainly: unrealistic goals set in Washington, poor understanding of local realities, and timelines that ignored conditions on the ground.

Keep reading

Israel not Iran is major nuclear threat in Middle East – professor

The major nuclear danger facing the Middle East originates not from Iran but from Israel, Professor Theodore Postol, a former Science and Policy Adviser on Strategic Nuclear Issues to the Chief of Naval Operations, has told RT. The expert warned that the leadership in West Jerusalem had placed the Jewish state on an increasingly perilous course.

Israel is widely believed to possess an undeclared nuclear arsenal, although authorities in West Jerusalem have consistently refused to either confirm or deny the allegations. The issue of Iran’s nuclear program has served as the justification for launching strikes against Iran earlier this year.

“Do not think Iran is the big nuclear threat, is the big nuclear instability in the Middle East, Israel is,” the prominent MIT physicist said during an interview with Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi, which aired on Friday.

Postol noted that Israel’s leadership pushed the country into a situation where even its own military commanders are warning that their forces are “on the ropes” and have reached the limits of what they can do.

Citing reports, the former strategic adviser to Pentagon said that Israeli military leaders have told PM Benjamin Netanyahu that they “cannot do any more,” adding that the country is suffering heavy troop losses.

Postol said he found Trump’s apparent fear of nuclear weapons somewhat reassuring, describing it as a positive trait. The expert said that Trump is “extremely horrified and afraid of nuclear weapons, which is good,” adding that he believes the head of state would be warned that any decision to use such capabilities would “open a box that none of us want to see opened.”

Keep reading

Did Iran Establish a New Equation in the Middle East Through Its Attacks on Israel?

It remains unclear whether Iran’s effort to establish a new equation in the region has truly succeeded — an equation in which, for the first time, Iran would directly strike Israel if Israel attacks Lebanon.

What is clear is that recent events suggest the strategic landscape may be shifting. Israel chose to defy President Trump and carry out strikes against Iran. Yet according to both Iranian and American sources, those Israeli attacks appear to have been deliberately calibrated to inflict limited damage, perhaps reflecting U.S. pressure to avoid a broader escalation.

Iran, for its part, responded by striking Israel once more after the Israeli attacks. The full extent of the damage caused by Iran’s two rounds of attacks remains unknown, however, due to extensive Israeli military censorship. As a result, outside observers still lack a complete picture of the military and strategic consequences of these exchanges.

The real test of whether a new regional equation has emerged may not lie in what has already happened, but in what comes next. Specifically: Will Israel strike Beirut again?

Even if it does, Israeli decision-makers will now have to factor in a cost that did not previously exis t— the likelihood of a direct Iranian response against Israel. For decades, Israel enjoyed near-complete freedom of maneuver in much of the region. It could bomb targets in Lebanon at will without facing meaningful costs imposed by third parties. That assumption may no longer hold.

At the same time, the United States has signaled clearly that it no longer intends to be an active participant in Israel’s confrontation with Iran. The White House has, for instance, stated that it did not partake in Israel’s defense this time around. This would be a first and a very alarming development for Israel, if true. Washington’s desire to avoid direct involvement has become increasingly evident, even as it continues to support Israel in other ways.

Taken together, these developments suggest that a new strategic reality may be in the making. The picture remains murky, and it is far too early to declare that a durable deterrence framework has been established. Much will depend on future Israeli actions, Iranian responses, and the degree to which both sides internalize the risks of escalation.

But if Israel now has to weigh the prospect of direct Iranian retaliation before striking Lebanon, then something important has changed. Whether that change proves temporary or enduring remains to be seen.

The next question is whether this emerging equation can be translated into renewed momentum for U.S.-Iran diplomacy.

The Iranians believe that their action demonstrated to the US that the value of the Memorandum is so low that Iran is willing to risk a complete collapse of diplomacy. The hope is that Trump yields on what appears to be the last sticking point in the talks, which is the release of $12 billion of Iranian frozen assets.

Trump, on the other hand, may calculate that the exchange of fire demonstrated both the cost to Iran if full-scale war were to break out again, as well as Trump’s ability to impose certain restraints on the Israelis. As a result, the Iranians should feel confident in Trump’s ability to deliver on his end of the bargain and not insist on the release of the assets at the outset of the MOU.

Keep reading

US Service Members Targeted Via Commercial Location Data, Pentagon Tells Senators

Adversaries have used commercially-available location data to attack individual US service members in war zones, according to a report furnished by the Department of Defense to Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, and first reported by Reuters. Wyden is a Democratic member of the Senate intelligence committee. 

Responding to four questions Wyden had posed about this potential avenue of vulnerability for service members deployed to the Middle East, the Pentagon said that US Central Command “has received multiple threat reports concerning adversary exploitation of commercial location data to target or surveil US personnel in theater. The Threat Fusion Cell identified, tracked, and disseminated these threats through the USCENTCOM Threat Working Group and to component force protection personnel.” 

Elaborating on the nature of the threat, the Pentagon noted that: 

“Commercial location data can be used to identify where U.S. troops congregate and their pattern of life, which can be exploited by adversaries ​to target attacks such as missiles, drones, and roadside bombs, as well as for counterintelligence purposes.” 

The Pentagon’s brief set of responses did not provide details on any specific incidents. Early in the US-Israeli war on Iran, two DOD officials were wounded in an Iranian drone strike on a Crowne Plaza hotel in Bahrain. After the strike, a senior Iranian official told Drop Site that Iran had built a “target bank” of both American and Israeli personnel.  “The fact that they’ve now pinpointed the residences/locations of some of these forces has really caught the Americans and Israelis off guard,” the official said, without detailing Iran’s methodology. He did say the building of the target bank began after the 2025 12-Day War.   

Keep reading