Latest news with #IsraelSecurity
Russia Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
From bunker bombs to Nobel dreams: Trump's war for peace
The US seems to have learned no lessons from the post-Cold War phase of its unilateralism and regime-change policies in the Middle East. Instead of a new peaceful and stable order being established under Washington's tutelage, it ended in the collapse of countries – not merely regimes – chaos, civil war, and the rise of Islamic extremism and terrorism. It is not clear what legitimate US core interests were served by its military interventions to re-order the political forces in the region. If the objective was also to remove regimes that were a threat to Israel's security and erode Russian influence in the region, some success may have been achieved in Iraq and Syria, though in a divided Libya Moscow seems to have gained ground. Giving Israel a freer hand in Lebanon and Syria, and a virtual carte blanche in Gaza and in the West Bank too, may have in the short term given it an upper hand in security terms but longer term the answer to Israel's security dilemmas may not lie in asserting its regional hegemony with the backing of the US. Israel has long viewed its core security challenge as emanating from a nuclear-armed Iran. It has worked hard over the years to mobilize US and European opinion against Iran's nuclear program. That this program has been subject to stringent International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards has not reduced the virulence of Israel's campaign against it. Israel has for years raised the specter of Iran becoming nuclear within months or even weeks even though no proof is produced to support this belief. The IAEA has not backed Israel's allegations. These Israeli claims have resonated in the pro-Israel lobbies in the US to the point that President Donald Trump in his first term repudiated the nuclear agreement signed between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (China, France, Russia, the UK and US) plus Germany. Under this agreement, Iran had accepted severe and even humiliating curbs on its nuclear program as a sovereign country, which included highly intrusive monitoring by the IAEA. In his second term, Trump sought to negotiate a new, much tougher, nuclear agreement with Iran that would deny it even some rights it had under the first one. A couple of rounds of talks took place, and the date for another round had been slated. These talks were being held under the shadow of timelines and intimidating ultimatums by Trump. It is not improbable that the US was engaged in a show of negotiations while actually preparing for an aerial strike against Iran. With Hamas and Hezbollah decimated and regime change having been carried out in Syria, Iran's hand was greatly weakened vis-à-vis Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu evidently calculated that this was the most opportune moment to do the unthinkable – attack Iran militarily and open the door to US military intervention in support of Israel. In other words, for Israel the objective would be to prevent any possible negotiated agreement between the US and Iran, and for Trump to seize the opportunity to eliminate Iran's nuclear capability by force, in particular its underground facilities with the use of B2s armed with bunker-busting bombs. That Trump has chosen a military solution over a negotiated one is a throwback to US unilateralism and regime-change policies. The US attack on Iran is a gross violation of international law. It infringes the UN Charter. The US had no mandate from the UN Security Council to act against Iran. There is no provision in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that would allow the recognized nuclear powers to eliminate a suspected nuclear program of a non-nuclear state in violation of the Treaty. The US attack also cannot be justified as a pre-emptive one as Iran was not threatening to attack the US. The rhetoric of a rules-based international order has been exposed for what it is. The irony is that Trump's election rhetoric was against the US getting involved in wars abroad, which he believed had drained America's resources. His MAGA base wanted the US to focus on domestic priorities. Trump projected himself as against wars as such, as someone who would work to end conflicts. His position on the Ukraine conflict reflected this. His unfounded claim that he brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, as well as his offer to mediate between the two countries on Kashmir, is part of how he projects himself as a peacemaker. He now claims to have brokered an agreement between Rwanda and Congo and between Egypt and Ethiopia, among others. His efforts should, as he says, entitle him to four or five Nobel Peace Prizes. Pakistan tried to capitalize on Trump's obsession with a Nobel Prize by officially nominating him for one after his unprecedented invitation to a foreign military chief (the Pakistani field marshal) to lunch with him at the White House. This sycophantic ploy recoiled on Pakistan when virtually the next day Trump attacked Iran militarily. Trump believes that now summoning Israel and Iran to a ceasefire shows his commitment to peace. Unsurprisingly, his supporters in the US Congress have nominated him for the Nobel Prize. While Netanyahu publicly speaking of killing Ali Khamenei, Iran's spiritual leader, is one thing, Trump visualizing the possibility of assassinating him at an opportune moment on his social media account is egregious. Such talk of political assassination are being normalized in diplomatic discourse. Trump has also not ruled out regime change in Iran, potentially causing chaos in a country of over 90 million. A ceasefire between Israel and Iran, even if it holds, is simply a pause. The underlying issues remain unresolved. Iran needs to give up its rhetoric that Israel has no right to exist. It is most unlikely that Iran will give up its nuclear program and its rights under the NPT. Iran has decided to end the monitoring of its program by the IAEA. Iran has accused the agency head of leaking information about its nuclear scientists to the US and Israelis and facilitating their assassination. Meanwhile, the whereabouts of Iran's highly enriched uranium are not known. There are also some doubts about the extent of damage caused to Iranian nuclear sites by the US bombers, and therefore the assessment is that Iran's program could be revived quickly enough. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has questioned the integrity of IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi for pressuring Iran to allow renewed access to its nuclear facilities. Meanwhile, the US attack has exposed the inability of Moscow and Beijing to give protection to Iran during the conflict. Russia signed a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement with Iran in January 2025. Iran is a member of BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), two organizations in which both Russia and China play dominant roles. Putin has explained that Russia had offered to help build up Iran's air defenses but Tehran declined as it wanted to rely on its own capacities. The Iranian foreign minister went to Moscow and met Russian President Vladimir Putin, but whatever help is now given to Iran will be diplomatic – as well as potential assistance in building up its air defenses if Iran has learned the right lessons about its vulnerabilities. China, which signed a 25-year strategic accord with Iran and is the biggest buyer of Iranian oil, has stood aloof from the conflict in practical terms although, unlike in the case of Russia, its rhetoric against Israel is harsh. Russia itself is involved in a major conflict and would want to avoid alienating Trump. China too has major stakes in managing its tense ties with the US. Iran has suffered and so has Israel. The story is not yet over.
National Post
7 days ago
- Politics
- National Post
'A wonderful morning for the world' — Israelis celebrate U.S. strikes on Iran
JERUSALEM — 'Hallelujah. We've been waiting for this moment. I knew it would come. A lot of people doubted that it would come,' said Fleur Hassan-Nahoum, an Israeli politician and media commentator, as we waited in a public bomb shelter in Jerusalem early Sunday morning. Article content Hours earlier, the United States struck several of Iran's key nuclear facilities, in some cases using bunker-buster bombs to destroy deeply buried infrastructure that had been beyond the reach of Israeli weapons. While the exact extent of the inflicted damage was (and remains) unknown, it was already evident, even in those first hours, that much had been destroyed. Article content Article content Article content Despite the sleep deprivation of an early-morning alarm, the mood in the shelter was celebratory. Article content Article content 'Israelis have been waiting patiently for American involvement, and Israelis don't know how to wait patiently for anything,' continued Hassan-Nahoum, who said that she did not fear retaliation from the Iranian leadership because Israel had spent the previous week 'cutting off their legs.' Article content She said that, 'Being in a shelter at 7:30 in the morning, losing people, having buildings destroyed, running to shelters, having our children traumatized. Everybody's willing to do that for the sake of destroying the existential threat against our country.' Raphael, a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, was similarly elated. 'I think it's a wonderful morning for the world. We've woken up to a new reality where we've seen one potential nuclear menace taken off of the map,' he told me amid the dim light. Article content Having just returned from the United States, he understood that Americans are 'reticent' about getting entangled in another Middle Eastern 'forever war.' However, he feels that this situation is different from Iraq or Afghanistan, because, this time, the goal is not to reconstruct a foreign nation, but only to de-fang an emerging nuclear state that could pose a 'very credible threat to the West.' Article content Article content He said that regime change is needed, characterizing the Islamic Republic as an 'evil state that's trapped the (Iranian) people in tyranny.' Like others in the shelter, he was unconcerned about Iranian retribution, because Jews have 'survived many tougher ordeals over thousands of years' and 'whatever they throw our way, we've seen worse before.' Article content Article content The alarm ended soon after and life resumed. The day was hot and sunny. Iran had launched around 35 missiles that morning — far fewer than the hundreds that had been sent in the initial days of the war — but only three managed to land. At a nearby cafe, locals drank coffee and discussed the American strikes over pastries. Article content But the city was relatively quiet. Most businesses were closed by emergency mandate, and only food stores operated. One Australian tourist, Zevi Gestetner, explained how the attacks caused his government to cancel its evacuation plans for the day, leaving his family stranded. They sat on a patio together, mulling their options, as buskers performed music down the street.
Washington Post
7 days ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
As it attacks Iran's nuclear program, Israel maintains ambiguity about its own
TEL AVIV, Israel — Israel says it is determined to destroy Iran's nuclear program because its archenemy's furtive efforts to build an atomic weapon are a threat to its existence. What's not-so-secret is that for decades Israel has been believed to be the Middle East's only nation with nuclear weapons , even though its leaders have refused to confirm or deny their existence.
South China Morning Post
22-06-2025
- Politics
- South China Morning Post
Israel faces new reality after US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites
Israelis woke up to a new reality on Sunday after President Donald Trump confirmed that the US bombed Iran's three main nuclear sites , diminishing a threat they have considered existential for decades. The US attack was embraced across the Israeli political spectrum, lauded on hastily assembled TV panels as a historic symbol of unprecedented US-Israeli cooperation at a time when the mainly Jewish state has been shunned by others for its war in Gaza. But commentators and officials were quick to acknowledge that what comes next is far from clear, including Iran's potential responses. They expressed concern that Iran might attack US bases in the region or Israel's own nuclear research centre near the desert town of Dimona, or escalate its own nuclear programme. Iran's atomic energy agency described the US strikes as a 'savage assault' but pledged not to abandon its nuclear industry. The agency did not confirm whether the sites of Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan had been 'completely and totally obliterated', as Trump said they were in a speech. Iranian lawmaker Mannan Raisi was cited by the semi-official Tasnim News Agency as saying that any material at Fordow that could pose a potential risk to the public 'had already been removed'. The Israeli home command returned the country to a state of emergency, telling citizens to stay close to bomb shelters and safe rooms; banning gatherings; and keeping schools, workplaces and the airport shut. It had eased some of those restrictions in recent days. Still, a sense of victory was palpable. The US strike is something Israelis have been seeking for years and it grants them the sense of being under US protection. It is also a personal victory for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose political fortunes have fallen since the October 2023 assault on Israel by Hamas that triggered the Gaza war.
CNN
20-06-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Trump's two-week delay on Iran strike decision leaves Israel in limbo
US President Donald Trump's self-imposed two-week delay to decide whether to strike Iran has sparked confusion and conjecture in Israel. Some of Israel's most senior officials had openly pushed for US involvement, arguing that American military involvement can shorten the conflict and allow Israel to achieve its goal of removing what is has long perceived as an existential threat of a nuclear Iran armed with ballistic missiles. 'We believe that the United States of America and the president of the United States have an obligation to make sure that the region is going to a positive way and that the world is free from Iran that possesses (a) nuclear weapon,' former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant told CNN earlier this week. Gallant was involved in planning the Iran operation before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired him in November. But after Trump's new timeline, Israel's political leaders are being careful in their statements, not wanting to be seen as pushing the president into the exact type of Middle East conflict he has long sought to avoid. Netanyahu and others are more cautious now in their public messaging, extolling the potential benefits of US involvement without calling for it. CNN spoke to half a dozen Israeli officials to better understand how the country's leadership sees this critical moment in the conflict, as Trump weighs whether to join the Israel's ongoing military campaign. Most spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the relations between the US and Israel. US involvement would dramatically change the nature of the conflict, Israel has argued, including a far greater chance of successfully striking Iran's Fordow nuclear facility, which is hidden deep in a mountain south of Tehran. Such a decisive strike would likely require 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs carried only by American bombers. 'There is an understanding that the Israelis will go for Fordow anyway, but it can be much nastier and less decisive without the Americans,' said Yaki Dayan, the former Israeli consul general in Los Angeles. After the first week of Israel's strikes in Iran, the Israeli military no longer has the element of surprise, and the country's political leadership must decide how far to go with the campaign, a decision that relies heavily on what Trump decides to do. Israel has followed closely the debate within Trump's MAGA base between the more isolationist wing that opposes US involvement in a new Middle East war and the camp that sees this as the best opportunity for decisive military action against Iran. The political echelon has been careful in its public statements because of the isolationist wing, Dayan told CNN, but Israel's perspective is getting across, with Netanyahu confidant Ron Dermer and others giving interviews to right-wing media outlets in the US. Publicly, Netanyahu has effusively praised Trump. On Wednesday, the Israeli leader said the two speak 'frequently.' In a pre-recorded video statement, Netanyahu said, 'I think President Trump for his backing.' But Trump has deviated from the US' traditional pro-Israel footing in the Middle East, including on negotiations with Iran, a ceasefire deal with the Houthis, and a trip to the region that skipped Israel. The White House decisions have exposed sharp divides between the two leaders. Even so, the two governments have maintained an ongoing dialogue since Israel began attacking Iran. Dayan said that coordination between Netanyahu and Trump is 'much better than people think,' but acknowledged that Trump makes decisions unilaterally, after consulting only a small circle of advisers. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was meeting his counterparts from the UK, Germany and France on Friday in Switzerland, which will allow the US to gauge the viability of a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear program. On Thursday, the White House said the contact between the US and Iran 'has continued' without offering any details of the communications, even as Trump weighs military strikes. But the government has not signaled any sense of hysteria about Trump's decision to hold off on a strike on Iran for two weeks. Several Israeli officials who spoke with CNN see the president's statement as 'smoke and mirrors,' as one put it – part of a deception act to keep Tehran guessing when Trump has already decided to get the US involved. 'He wouldn't give himself a deadline that he would have to keep to if he hadn't already made the decision,' the official said, while acknowledging this interpretation is the most favorable to Israel. But others who spoke with CNN were more concerned. 'If you follow the statements for the last two or three weeks, it's been a lot of zigzagging,' said another Israeli official. What seemed like a certainty to Israeli officials just 48 hours ago – that Trump would order US military involvement – now appears far less assured. Trump went from saying 'we now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran' – taking credit for Israel's military successes – to giving himself two more weeks to make what could be one the most fateful foreign policy decisions of his presidency. Israel launched the operation against Iran without a commitment from the US that it would take part in the campaign, officials have said, but the belief was that the headlines of Israel's military accomplishments could entice Trump to authorize US military involvement. But as the campaign enters its second week, Israel's 'pace of success is slowing down,' the official said. And as Israel continues its operations over Iran – roughly a thousand miles away – the likelihood of error is increasing, which could affect not only Israel's actions, but also reduce the chance of US involvement. 'Every day that this goes on, there's a greater chance that something goes wrong,' the official said, without elaborating. 'They don't know what this means,' Alon Pinkas, the former Israeli consul general in New York City, told CNN. 'Israel will get more worried with each day that passes.' Pinkas said Trump's deadline to make a decision underscores that the American leader 'cannot be deciphered.' It also raises the possibility that 'maybe Netanyahu overplayed his cards here,' he added.
