Hormuz Strait shut down again over US ‘piracy’, says Tehran

  • Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp says control of the Strait of Hormuz has now “returned to its previous state” because of the US’s continuing blockade of Iranian ports.
  • US President Donald Trump says the naval blockade will “remain in full force” until “our transaction with Iran is 100% complete”.
  • Earlier Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the strait is “completely open” to all commercial vessels, “in line with the ceasefire in Lebanon” and “on the coordinated route as already announced”.
  • Trump said Israel is “prohibited” from bombing Lebanon as the first day of a 10-day ceasefire in the country saw tens of thousands of people return to homes they were forced to flee during weeks of Israeli attacks.

‘Iran believes it has the upper hand’

Iranian professor Mostafa Khoshcheshm says President Trump’s contradictory statements last night convinced Tehran it would not find “a trustworthy partner for any kind of deal”, and as long as the US acts this way, “Iran will continue the war”.

On the broader mood in Tehran, Khoshcheshm said the Iranian armed forces are “completely ready”, and millions of people taking to the streets every night are demanding continuation of “resistance”.

“Iran believes it has the upper hand and that this must be established in any future confrontation,” he told Al Jazeera.

Keep reading

This Isn’t Just Trump’s War on Iran. Both Parties Paved the Way for Disaster.

nlike the invasion of Iraq, which received the support of a sizable minority of congressional Democrats, Donald Trump’s war on Iran has received near-universal criticism. Still, the party has focused primarily on process-style critiques — such as the legality of declaring the war under the Constitution and the war’s economic impact — rather than the humanitarian consequences and flagrant violations of international law.

That should not come as a surprise to anyone familiar with the U.S. bipartisan consensus on Iran: For over 20 years, a number of prominent Democratic leaders — and in some cases, large majorities of congressional Democrats overall — have helped paved the groundwork for Trump’s war by issuing exaggerated and alarmist statements about Iran’s supposed danger to the region, threatening the use of military force, and undermining diplomatic initiatives, sometimes even criticizing Republicans from the right.

In 2024, the Democratic Party platform criticized “Trump’s fecklessness and weakness in the face of Iranian aggression during his presidency” by not responding militarily to attacks by Iran and groups in Iraq and elsewhere that share Iran’s strategic objectives. The platform cited four separate incidents that took place under his first administration, failing to acknowledge that each was a direct result of Trump’s aggressive policies against Iran, including the assassination of Qassim Suleimani, a top Iranian general.

By contrast, the party’s platform praised President Joe Biden for having “authorized precision airstrikes on key Iranian-linked targets,” which it claimed would “deter further aggression by Iran.” It praised “America’s ironclad commitment to the security of Israel and our unrivaled ability to leverage growing regional integration among U.S. partners to counter Iranian aggression.” Though eager to stress military means to counter Iran, the platform failed to directly call for a return to the Iran nuclear deal under the Obama administration, which considerably reduced regional tensions — a deal that Biden campaigned on reinstating but failed to do.

The month after the release of the party platform, Democratic nominee Kamala Harris attacked Trump in a presidential debate, declaring that her administration “will always give Israel the ability to defend itself, in particular as it relates to Iran and any threat that Iran and its proxies pose to Israel.”

Keep reading

Belgium seizes arms shipment sent from Britain to Israel

Two shipments from Britain of military components bound for Israel have been seized in Belgium, which has banned aircaft carrying military equipment for Israel from stopping in the country or using its airspace. 

Last month, the British news website Declassified, Belgian NGO Vredesactie, Irish news website The Ditch, and the Palestinian Youth Movement alerted authorities in Brussells of a shipment travelling from Britain to Israel through Liege airport. 

The consignments left Britain on 23 March and were siezed at Liege airport in Belgium on 24 March.

They were searched by a specialised engineer who found “fire control systems and spare parts for military aircraft”, which had not been properly declared.

Belgian authorities reportedly opened a criminal investigation into the affair but have declined to name the firms involved in the complaint.

Keep reading

The Winner at the DNC’s Latest Meeting? Israel, Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide

In the aftermath of last week’s big meeting of the Democratic National Committee in New Orleans, supporters of the U.S.-Israel alliance have been quite content. “We’re pleased that the DNC Resolutions Committee rejected a set of divisive, anti-Israel resolutions,” the president of Democratic Majority for Israel said. The CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, a former national security advisor to Kamala Harris, expressed gratitude to the DNC’s leadership.

Why did pro-Israel groups voice so much pleasure and praise – not only for the sidelining of pro-human-rights resolutions but also for the process that sidelined them? The answer has to do with the DNC’s mechanism that thwarted changes in positions on Israel. A panel named the Middle East Working Group gummed up all efforts to align the DNC with the views of most Democratic voters, even while supposedly hard at work.

Last Friday, the transparent thinness of the pretense caused Politico to headline an article this way: “Inside the DNC’s Middle East (Not) Working Group.” But the not-working group had been functioning quite well – as a charade for delay and obfuscation.

The day before the derisive headline appeared, the DNC Resolutions Committee dispensed with a resolution about events in Gaza and the West Bank. Its provisions included a declaration that the DNC “supports pausing or conditioning U.S. weapons transfers to any military units credibly implicated in violations of international humanitarian law or obstruction of humanitarian assistance.”

That resolution critical of Israel went nowhere, which is to say it went to the so-called working group, also known as a “task force.”

Assisting the diversion as chair of the Resolutions Committee was political strategist Ron Harris, described in his home state of Minnesota as a “longtime Democratic Party insider.” He made false claims during the meeting: “I know that the task force has met once a month since it was created…. I have the confidence that work is happening…. These are people working really really hard over a very thorny issue…. They are doing their work…. They’re hearing from experts and all sorts of things.”

The falsehood that the task force had met “once a month,” when actually it had scarcely met, was enough reason for me to contact Harris and ask where he’d gotten that (mis)information. He replied that it was “according to the DNC staffer coordinating the process.”

The basic problem with the working group is not only that it hasn’t done much of anything in the nearly eight months since DNC Chair Ken Martin announced it with great fanfare. The underlying hoax is that it was set up not to reflect the views of registered Democrats nationwide.

Polling is clear. Three-quarters of Democrats agree that “Israel is committing genocide,” and a large majority are more sympathetic to Palestinians than to Israelis by a 4-to-1 margin. But only a minority of the Middle East Working Group’s eight members has a record of supporting Palestinian rights, while several are firm supporters of Israel. The oil-and-water mix seems destined for stalemate or mere platitudes. But stalemate and platitudes appear to be just fine from here to the horizon for DNC leadership.

Such stalling mechanisms and scant real representation are as old as the political hills. In this case, an unfortunate boost has come from James Zogby, who for decades bravely worked inside the Democratic Party and elsewhere to advocate for the human rights of Palestinians, in sharp contrast to U.S. foreign policy.

Keep reading

The Collapse is Real – Lebanon Ceasefire Marks a Historic Strategic Defeat

A ceasefire in Lebanon was announced on Thursday by US President Donald Trump, but its reality tells a very different story. The ceasefire was not the product of American diplomacy, nor Israeli strategic calculation. It was imposed – largely as a result of sustained Iranian pressure.

Washington, Tel Aviv, and their allies – including some within Lebanon itself – will continue to deny this reality. Acknowledging Iran’s role would mean admitting that a historic precedent has been set: for the first time, forces opposing the United States and Israel have succeeded in imposing conditions on both.

This is not a minor development. It is a strategic rupture. But it is not the only fundamental shift now underway: Israel’s very approach to war and diplomacy is itself changing.

After failing to secure victory through overwhelming violence, Israel is increasingly relying on coercive diplomacy to impose political outcomes.

Over the past two to three decades, this Israeli strategy has become unmistakably clear: achieving through diplomacy what it has failed to impose on the battlefield.

‘Diplomacy’ as War

Israeli ‘diplomacy’ does not conform to the conventional meaning of the term. It is not negotiation between equals, nor a genuine pursuit of peace. Rather, it is diplomacy fused with violence: assassinations, sieges, blockades, political coercion, and the systematic manipulation of internal divisions within opposing societies. It is diplomacy as an extension of war by other means.

Likewise, Israel’s conception of the ‘battlefield’ is fundamentally different. The deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure is not incidental, nor merely ‘collateral damage’; it is central to the strategy itself.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Gaza. Following the ongoing genocide, vast swathes of Gaza have been reduced to rubble, with estimates indicating that around 90 percent of the whole of Gaza has been destroyed. According to the Gaza Ministry of Health, women and children consistently account for roughly 70 percent of all of Gaza’s casualties.

This is not collateral damage. It is the deliberate destruction of a civilian population, an act of genocide that is designed to force mass displacement and remake the political and demographic reality in Israel’s favor.

The same logic extends beyond Gaza. It shapes Israel’s wars in Lebanon against Hezbollah and its broader confrontation with Iran.

The United States, Israel’s principal ally, has historically operated within a similar paradigm. From Vietnam to Iraq, civilian populations, infrastructure, and even the environment itself have borne the brunt of American warfare.

Keep reading

Last US Convoy Exits Syria After Brutal 14-Year Regime Change Proxy War

Widespread reports on Thursday say the very last US military convoy has finally departed Syrian territory, with the years-long occupation of the primarily northeast oil and gas rich sector over in a ‘mission accomplished’ fashion.

It brings to a final close the 14-year long bloody proxy war which overthrew the Assad government and ultimately installed a pro-US/Saudi axis puppet, in the person of founding Syrian Al Qaeda Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, now known as President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Hundreds of thousand of people lost their lives in the regime change war, with the country and its economy left in a sanction-starved and conflict-demolished state of ruins.

The US-backed Syrian Foreign Ministry declared Washington had decided to “complete its military mission” in the country. “The Syrian state is today fully capable of leading counter-terrorism efforts from within, in co-operation with the international community,” it said, happy to now be back in control of the domestic oil and gas supply.

The ministry “welcomes the completed handover of military sites where United States forces were previously present in Syria to the Syrian government,” adding that “the handover of these sites was carried out … in full coordination between the Syrian and American governments.”

While Pentagon propaganda had for years touted an ‘anti-ISIS’ mission, the real purpose of the troop presence was to cut off Damascus under Assad of its sovereign natural resources, and to arm and prop up a Kurdish-Arab coalition called the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). 

All the while, the CIA supported Sunni hardline jihadists who were indistinguishable from ISIS in their ideology in the fight against the Syrian Army, and the civilian population which often largely supported the secular Ba’ath government. The broader strategy has long been to destroy the Tehran-Baghdad-Hezbollah ‘Shia axis’ – even if that meant using ISIS as a tool of regime change.

Ironically, in the process of this US handover of oil and gas facilities back to post-Assad Damascus, the Kurds were thrown under the bus. Their dream for an autonomous enclave (Rojava) once again proved illusory, and in the long term the Kurds will find themselves at the mercy of Sunni fanatics on the one hand, and Turkish state under Erdogan on the other.

Keep reading

NATO Allies Adopt Evasive Policies on US War in Iran

Trump administration officials are discovering that a daunting number of longstanding U.S. allies and security clients are adopting hedging policies or even openly opposing Washington’s decision to wage war against Iran.  That sobering reality has become even clearer over the past week than it was during the earlier stages of the armed conflict.  On April 12, the president called upon NATO members to join U.S. naval forces in blockading Iranian ports. The proposed move was in response to Tehran’s continuing efforts to selectively close the vital Strait of Hormuz to foreign shipping.

However, most of Washington’s alliance partners refused to join the retaliatory blockade. British prime minister Keir Starmer was especially blunt and negative. The U.K. is “not supporting” the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports, Starmer stated, insisting that the country would not get “dragged in” to the Iran war.  Starmer, along with French President Emmanuel Macron, instead proposed intensified international efforts, including a conference, to secure an effective agreement to reopen the strait.

The extensive allied refusal regarding Washington’s blockade plans reflects growing European dissatisfaction with overall U.S. policy toward Iran and, indeed, with Trump’s entire approach to world affairs. Concerned longtime proponents of close transatlantic security cooperation are expressing mounting worries that disagreements between the United States and its principal European allies about Iran policy could lead to a fatal breach in NATO.

European leaders and their publics clearly are getting restless. Serge Schmemann, the Moscow bureau chief for the New York Timesemphasizes the extent of the change.  “Mr. Trump’s war on Iran, about which NATO allies were not consulted and in which they subsequently declined to participate, has made clear that Europeans no longer defer to Mr. Trump as the de facto “‘leader of the free world.’”

At the same time, European leaders have tried to avoid directly antagonizing President Trump.  Achieving such a balance is not easy.  Trump expressed fury at NATO allies who have failed to support Washington’s intervention against Iran. Even before the latest intra-alliance spat over establishing a blockade, the president denounced such allies as “cowards.” Administration officials also are examining ways to punish uncooperative Alliance partners.  Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed and amplified Trump’s earlier doubts about the continuing value of NATO to America’s security. “Why are we in NATO? You have to ask that question. Why do we send trillions of dollars and have all of these American forces stationed in the region, if in our time of need, we won’t be allowed to use those bases?” Rubio said during an interview with Fox News in early April.  The refusal of most NATO members to authorize U.S. airstrikes and other offensive operations against targets in Iran has especially irritated administration officials.

However, as Wall Street Journal columnists Linas Kojalaand and Vytautas Leškevičius point out, with the notable and ostentatious exception of Spain, the most significant and influential Alliance members, including Britain, France, and Italy, have all quietly assisted the U.S. war effort in other ways.  The outcome has been a bit of a muddle. “Politically, the war with Iran has widened the gap between Washington and many European governments. Operationally, it has underscored how heavily the U.S. still relies on Europe – and how cooperative most European governments are.”

Keep reading

Israeli army says soldiers accused of abusing Palestinian to return to duty

Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir has authorised five soldiers accused of sexually assaulting a Palestinian inmate in the notorious Sde Teiman detention camp to return to reserve service after charges against them were dropped, according to Israeli media reports.

The soldiers, all from the Force 100 unit assigned to guard military prisons, are being reinstated despite an ongoing, internal military inquiry into their conduct.

Israeli Army Radio reported that some of the reservists have already returned to active duty, including deployment to combat roles.

An Israeli army statement, cited by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, said: “The investigation does not prevent them from continuing to serve … the command-level investigation will be completed as soon as possible.”

The reinstatement comes after Israel’s top military lawyer dropped all charges against the soldiers last month, closing a case that had been among the most divisive in Israel’s recent history.

The soldiers had been charged with aggravated assault and causing severe injury, after footage broadcast by Israeli television showed them abusing a Palestinian man in Sde Teiman. The military’s own indictment described soldiers stabbing the detainee with a sharp object near his rectum, causing cracked ribs, a punctured lung and an internal tear.

A doctor at the facility, Yoel Donchin, told Haaretz he was so shocked by the Palestinian inmate’s condition that he initially assumed it was the work of a rival armed group.

Keep reading

Pentagon Turns to World War II-Era Tactic in Bid to Ramp Up Weapons Production: Report

The Trump administration wants automakers to put the pedal to the metal to help rebuild America’s weapons stockpiles, according to a new report.

As wars in the Middle East and Ukraine have consumed missiles and other weapons, the Trump administration is turning to a tactic from World War II in order to resupply as fast as possible, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Top executives at General Motors and Ford have been approached, the outlet reported, citing sources it did not name. GE Aerospace and machinery producer Oshkosh have also been approached.

The War Department “is committed to rapidly expanding the defense industrial base by leveraging all available commercial solutions and technologies to ensure our warfighters maintain a decisive advantage,” a Pentagon official said.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has called for American manufacturing to be on a “wartime footing.”

Talks with manufacturers began before the war against Iran, with the goal of strengthening national security by increasing the military’s ability to quickly increase production of weapons and technology to meet emerging needs.

Defense officials sought input from companies that do not perform extensive defense work about barriers that need to be addressed by the government, such as the process for bidding and contracting.

Keep reading

Hegseth Says US ‘Locked and Loaded’ to Strike Iran’s Power Plants If No Deal Reached

U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on April 16 urged Iran’s leadership to reach a deal with the United States, warning that a military operation against the country could be restarted quickly and that Iran’s power plants would be struck.

He said the U.S. government will ensure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon, which Trump administration officials say was a primary reason for launching strikes against the country in late February. Iran has long denied that it wants to obtain a nuclear weapon and insists that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes.

“We’d prefer to do it the nice way through a deal led by our great vice president and negotiating team. Or we can do it the hard way,” Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon alongside the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine.

Hegseth called on Tehran to “choose wisely” in dealings with the United States.

“I pray you choose a deal, which is within your grasp for the betterment of your people and for the betterment of the world,” Hegseth added.

The U.S. military has kept up a naval blockade on Iran’s ports since April 13 in a bid to place economic pressure on the country’s leadership.

Keep reading