Israelis are being recruited as spies for Iran in what security experts call an espionage 'epidemic'

Abdal Jawad Omar | Mondoweiss

Israel has long used the same playbook to recruit informants from enemy societies. Iran is now using it to recruit spies in Israel by exploiting new cracks in Israeli society.

On Sunday, Israeli prosecutors charged two Israeli citizens with espionage for Iran — 19-year-old Sagi Haik, who had been in contact with an Iranian handler for months through Telegram, and 21-year-old Asaf Shitrit, who was allegedly recruited by Haik to carry out tasks under Iranian direction. The months-long contact included plans for the two men to travel to an Arab country for "training," while the younger suspect allegedly told Israeli authorities that he had given "fake intelligence" to his Iranian handler in the form of a forged document detailing plans for a U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran. Prosecutors warned that if the allegedly fake document had reached Tehran, it could have triggered a preemptive Iranian attack.

It was the latest entry in what Israeli security commentators now describe as a "magefa" — an epidemic. Since October 2023, over 50 indictments have been filed against Israeli citizens for spying on behalf of Iran. In 2025, Israel's internal security agency, the Shin Bet, reported a 400% increase in Iranian recruitment attempts compared to the previous year, which itself had seen an unprecedented surge.

In 2026, several prominent cases dominated the headlines. In March, an Iron Dome reservist was arrested on suspicion of passing along details on how the missile interceptor system worked in exchange for $1000. During the past month alone, a rash of spy rings was uncovered: two suspected moles in the Israeli Air Force, a thwarted plot to assassinate former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennet, four active-duty soldiers accused of spying for Iran, and now, the two citizens with the forged documents.

The suspects have ranged in age from 13 to 73. They include ultra-Orthodox yeshiva students, Azerbaijani immigrants, a Bnei Brak resident who stalked a nuclear scientist, reservists who filmed Iron Dome batteries, and soldiers arrested during an ongoing "existential" war with Iran.

What is notable about this development isn't the intelligence failure, or even the relative success in uncovering the espionage operations. The more interesting part is the underlying sociological realities that made it possible. Emblematic of this reality is the emergence of a new figure in Israeli political life: the ordinary citizen-traitor who sells out his country not for ideology, but for a Telegram payment made in cryptocurrency.

The fact that such attempts were made isn't necessarily due to Iranian cunning — though that, too, deserves attention — but to internal conditions within Israeli society that created an opening for such infiltrations.

The Iranian method is strikingly simple. Intelligence experts describe it as a "spray-and-pray" operation: thousands of messages sent via Telegram and social media offer payment for "easy tasks" — no careful vetting, no assets cultivated over years, no dead drops, no safe houses. Just a message: interested in making money?

The first task might be spraying graffiti. The second is photographing a street. By the fifth or sixth mission, the recruit is filming the entrance to an air defense base. By the tenth, he is being asked to assassinate his reserve commander for NIS 100,000 (about $33,000).

What makes this method work is not its sophistication but its environment: Iran is planting in soil that has already been made fertile. The Hebrew-language commentary keeps coming back to a single phrase, again and again: "ha-kesef menatze'akh." Money wins.

But the thing is, money wins when nothing else does. And this is where the analysis must turn inward, toward the conditions that made the Israeli social contract so brittle that a few thousand dollars could fracture it.

Read more

Iran's Shahab-3 Just Obliterated Dimona — The World Will Never Be The Same

Scott Ritter Updates

BREAKING: Iran's Shahab-3 ballistic missile has struck the Dimona nuclear facility — and the world as we know it has changed FOREVER. Scott Ritter, former UN weapons inspector, breaks down what this strike REALLY means for the Middle East, Israel, and global nuclear security.

💥 What happens when a nuclear site gets hit?

💥 Why is the mainstream media SILENT on this?

💥 Is this the beginning of World War 3?

💥 What does Scott Ritter say the West is hiding?

The Dimona nuclear reactor has been Israel's most guarded secret for decades. Now, Iran's most powerful ballistic missile — the Shahab-3 — has allegedly reached its target. The geopolitical shockwaves are being felt from Washington to Moscow.

Scott Ritter — the man who PREDICTED this escalation — gives his unfiltered, expert analysis that you will NOT hear on CNN, Fox News, or BBC.

Who's behind the mysterious 'Iran-backed terror cell' haunting Europe?

Wyatt Reed | The Gray zone

Claims that an Iran-backed group is carrying out attacks in European cities raise questions about why they're not targeting countries directly involved in the US-Israeli war, and why they appear to communicate like Israelis. Strangely, suspects arrested in the attacks have been released on bail.

A specter is haunting Europe - the specter of Ashab al-Yamin. Officially known as "Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia (HAYI)," or the "Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right," the group mysteriously appeared in early March, and, according to mainstream media, it's taking the continent by storm.

But a closer look at the supposedly Iran-backed terror organization suggests that it does not exist in any concrete form, and may be a confection of Israeli intelligence.

Though the nebulous HAYI claimed credit for torching ambulances belonging to a Jewish community organization in London on March 23, two suspects in the attack have been released on bail, and are not charged with any terror-related crimes. What's more, London Metropolitan Police have so far refused to release the men's names, raising questions about their identities. Were they even Muslim?

HAYI's first public mention in the West came on March 9, when the previously non-existent organization released a video showing an explosive device detonating outside a synagogue in Liege, Belgium, alongside a statement taking credit for the attack. Within hours, the group had somehow been identified by the "SITE Intelligence Group," an Israeli-led private intelligence firm founded in the aftermath of Sept. 11 to cash in on the newly-minted Global War on Terror.

The materials HAYI published were promptly circulated on social media by Joe Truzman, a self-described "Senior Research analyst examining Palestinian armed groups and Iranian proxy organizations" at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a neoconservative DC-based think tank founded in 2001 with the stated goal of working to "enhance Israel's image." As The Grayzone reported, the Trump White House plagiarized its public justification for attacking Iran word-for-word from an FDD paper.

Though Truzman declined to state where he'd found the materials, he wrote that "Telegram channels linked to the Axis of Resistance... widely disseminated the publications," using a reference to a variety of resistance factions sympathetic to Iran and Palestine throughout the greater Middle East. The group he linked to, a popular Telegram channel called Sabereen News, made it clear they were reposting the video, which they said was the work of a group calling themselves "the companions."

Almost immediately, Truzman began asserting that these "companions" were all but guaranteed to be a Tehran-linked cutout. For starters, he told British media, "their logo with the wording is a sign of a classic Iranian front organization." And Iran had already threatened to carry out just such a wave of attacks, Truzman claimed. After all, he wrote, "On March 8, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran's deputy-foreign minister, warned that if a European country joined the US and Israel in the current war against the Islamic Republic, it would be a 'legitimate' target 'for Iranian retaliation.'"

Read more

Barbaria strategically surrenders. Civilization wins. For now

Pepe Escobar | Strategic Culture Foundation

This was always about Civilization.

"A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again." History will register it with a gaze as pitiless as the Sun. An astonishing barbarian imprimatur, courtesy of the President of the United States, via a social media post.

In a nutshell, this was a trashy "civilization" that gave the world the Big Mac threatening to wipe out an ancient civilization that gave the world algebra; influenced art, science, governance in unparalleled ways; produced stars from Cyrus the Great to Avicenna, from Omar Khayyam to poet supreme Jalaladdin Rumi; developed serial, sublime gardens, carpets, architectural wonders and philosophical and ethical frameworks.

Crucially, there was not a single peep about this Barbaria outburst from the political leadership of the entire "civilized" collective West, not even feigning outrage, once again proving their absolute, irreversible moral and political bankruptcy.

Iranians answered Barbaria in kind. Over 14 million people registered to form human walls around their power stations all across the nation, simultaneously protecting their livelihood and confronting head on the firepower of the Epstein Syndicate.

As a hair-raising cliffhanger approached, the Baboon of Barbaria pivoted into - what else - TACO: the LEGO guys immortalized it.

There's absolutely no way that Pakistan could have offered "guarantees" to Iran that a ceasefire was the way for the war to eventually end. As confirmed by diplomatic sources, what really happened is that Beijing, at the 11th moment, placed itself as the guarantor, assuring Tehran that the US would accept at least some of Iran's demands included in its 10-point plan.

That was further confirmed by Iranian ambassador to China, Abdolreza Rhamani Fazili. The negotiations start this Friday in Islamabad.

POTUS, the Drooling Baboon of Barbaria, confronted with the inevitable, dire consequences of his own strategic blunder, used Pakistan for his off-ramp. That was confirmed by another epic blunder by the Pakistani Prime Minister himself: he forgot to remove the header of the tweet/X post drafted by the White House for him to publish.

Read more

"Agents of Influence": How Netanyahu, through Trump's family circle, dragged America into war to save his own skin

Viktor Mikhin | New Eastern Outlook

The Resignation That Exposed the Mechanism of Betrayal of U.S. National Interests.

On March 19, 2026, an event occurred that, in a normal political system, should have caused an earthquake. Joe Kent, Director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center, resigned. But not for family reasons or due to "differences over strategic issues" — the euphemisms Washington typically uses to cover up the departure of those who have fallen out of favor. Kent stepped down with a public statement that reads like an indictment: "I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran."

This is not just a resignation. It's the removal of a seal behind which lay the ugly truth about how foreign policy decisions are actually made in the United States. Kent, a veteran of special forces and the CIA, a man whose wife died in Syria while on duty, stated what Washington usually prefers to keep quiet: the Trump administration launched a war with Iran under pressure from Israel and its powerful lobby.

Iran did not pose an "imminent threat" to the United States. This was acknowledged by a man who, by virtue of his position, had access to the most classified information on terrorist threats. Yet America found itself drawn into a full-scale military conflict that has already cost the lives of American service members — at least 13 killed and about 200 wounded (at the time of this writing).

How did this become possible? The answer to this question leads straight to Jerusalem, to the office of Benjamin Netanyahu, who found a way to use the U.S. president as a tool to achieve his own political and personal goals.

The Puppeteers from the Family Circle: Trump's Sons-in-Law and "Mossad Agents"

For those still doubting how deeply Israeli influence has penetrated the highest offices of the White House, one need only look at Donald Trump's inner circle. At the center of decision-making are two of the president's sons-in-law — Jared Kushner and, according to some reports, his other son-in-law as well — who hold Israeli passports and, according to informed sources, maintain direct contact with Israeli intelligence agencies.

It was Kushner who, according to reports, played a key role in orchestrating deals and military decisions in Israel's interest. And this is not speculation: Netanyahu himself, in his memoir "Bibi: My Story," described how his close adviser Ron Dermer used "golf terminology" to communicate with Trump, finding common ground with him that was beyond the reach of professional diplomats. Trump, as experts note, is "hungry for flattery," and this weakness was masterfully exploited.

Read more

Made in Israel: Trump White House plagiarized Iran war manifesto from Israel-aligned think tank

Wyatt Reed and Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone

The Trump White House plagiarized its justification for attacking Iran from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, the main DC outfit promoting war with Tehran. The think tank was originally founded to "enhance Israel's image," and partners closely with the Israeli government.

The Trump Administration appeared to plagiarize its official justification for its war on Iran, copying almost word-for-word a document originally produced by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a pro-war think tank with close ties to Israeli intelligence which was originally founded to "enhance Israel's image."

The FDD document was authored by Tzvi Kahn, the former assistant director for policy and government affairs at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

A March 2, 2026 statement issued by the White House accusing Tehran of 44 instances of terrorism against American citizens is "virtually identical" to the list published by FDD in June 2025, analyst Stephen McIntyre noted Thursday.

While the White House did make superficial alterations to the text, they largely consisted of appending the label "Iran-backed" to every mention of groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. In the few instances where Trump administration officials bothered to make significant changes to the original FDD list, the edits were almost always made in service of "ratcheting up the underlying allegation," McIntyre concluded.

Among the most egregious examples was a 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, which FDD originally said merely that Hezbollah al-Hejaz was "deemed responsible" for. In the White House version, however, the group's responsibility was "asserted as factual," explained McIntyre, noting that serious questions about the incident remain unanswered to this day. "Clinton's Defense Secretary William Perry subsequently wondered (along with many others) whether Khobar Towers should have been attributed to Al Qaeda," he wrote.

A 2009 investigation by journalist Gareth Porter based on interviews with over a dozen former CIA, FBI and Clinton administration officials demonstrated that the FBI's inquiry into the Khobar Towers attack was precooked to blame Iran, when Al Qaeda was mostly like the culprit. Porter found that Shia citizens of Saudi Arabia had been tortured into confessing to the crime by Saudi secret police.

Read more

Join The US Military - Kill And Die For Israel

Brian McGlinchey | Stark Realities

President Trump's decision to join Israel in launching a regime-change war on Iran has so far cost the lives of at least 13 American service members. More than 200 have been wounded, dozens seriously enough to require evacuations to military hospitals in Europe and the United States. Among them are individuals who've suffered traumatic brain injuries, burns and shrapnel wounds. One was facing potential amputation of an arm or leg.

As much as these service members and their families are victims of Iran's justified retaliation for a surprise attack perpetrated amid ongoing negotiations, they're victims of a betrayal perpetrated by their president and the joint chiefs of staff, who cast them into an unconstitutional war of aggression, packaged in lies and initiated to advance the agenda of a foreign government, while undermining the security of their own country.

Of course, US casualties comprise a small subset of the total bloodshed. In executing this unjust war, Americans have collectively inflicted far more death and dismemberment than they've endured, teaming up with their Israeli counterparts to kill more than 3,000 Iranians, including some 150 schoolgirls — mostly between age 7 and 12 — whose school was destroyed by Tomahawk cruise missiles at the war's very start.

Though it should have already been apparent, Operation Epic Fury should make clear that — service members' good intentions aside — combat waged under the US flag rarely has anything to do with American security. Moreover — and I say this as former Army Reserve enlistee and Regular Army officer — anyone thinking of starting or extending a military career should understand that their government may send them to be killed, maimed or psychologically damaged, and to slaughter foreign innocents, so long as it helps those in power remain in the good graces of the extremists who rule Israel, and their powerful collaborators inside the United States.

A New Regime-Change War Built On False Premises

Under international law, a war of aggression is considered a supreme war crime unto itself, and Operation Epic Fury is precisely that. Like so many of America's wars before it, this one was launched on false premises. Contrary to the US-Israeli narrative...

Iran was not developing a nuclear weapon. In 2007, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran halted any effort to develop a nuclear weapon in 2003. Since then, the intelligence community has periodically re-validated that conclusion, most recently in March 2025. Belying Trump's claim that the United States had only two weeks in which to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard this week testified that Iran had made "no efforts" to rebuild its enrichment capacity after it was devastated by last summer's US bombing.

Read more

Screw the Pooch, Betray the Base

Comment: Excellent article and well worth reading in full.

--------------------

Harrison Koehli | Political Ponerology

According to Gallup polling from last year, up to 45% of adult Americans identify as political independents. That's a plurality, as the remainder is evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, with 27% each. Forty-five percent is around 120 million adults, and that number has been growing for the past 20 years, driven largely by the younger generations. It's easy to see why. Neither party represents them.

Every four years, independents are put in the position of either throwing their vote away for a third-party candidate who will get at most 3% of the popular vote, or choosing what they see as the lesser of two evils. (In the last 50 years, only Ross Perot came close, winning 19% in 1992.)

That's not to say independents are a homogeneous group. Slightly more independents lean Democrat than Republican (20% vs. 15%), with a core 10% who explicitly reject both parties. Given the choice (and an electoral system that would support it), their votes might be split among a handful of parties, as is the case in most democracies. The end result is that the largest segment of the American voting population does not have consistent political representation, at least on the federal level.

That's not always the case, however. Independents may genuinely favor a particular candidate, despite his alignment with one of the parties. This was arguably the case with Donald Trump. As Bret Weinstein — a liberal Democrat who voted for him — described it recently on Tucker, Trump did the impossible: "he beat the duopoly, both sides of it, took over the Republican party, defeated the Democratic party soundly." He did that by dipping into the pool of independents and disaffected liberals like Weinstein. And he did that by presenting a platform that voters largely agreed with, e.g., no new wars, MAHA, unrigging elections, mass deportations, DOGE.

In the first year of his second term, he seems to have at least tried to follow through on many of these promises, despite obstruction from judges and the immobility of Congress. And even when his decisions were controversial among some of his base, such as last year's Iran strikes and January's kidnapping of an El Presidente, those operations were successful one-and-dones, over as soon as the news reached the homeland, with any ex-post-facto criticism just coming across as lame.

All of that seems to have changed with Operation Epic Fury. (And the only reason I say "seems" is because of the meme.) Regime-change war is back on the menu (but it's not a regime change war, in fact, it's not a war, it's an excursion to prevent a war, which might still turn into one, but it's war for peace) and the price of gas is no longer important. Within days, the White House was already caving on another central policy, mass deportations: "Don't mention them anymore." Along with the handling of the Epstein files, voters who aren't Catturd are notably pissed. For many, not going to war with Iran was the main reason they voted for Trump. Here's how Weinstein put it:

Now, I will say I'm very upset with President Trump at the moment. I feel personally burned as somebody who worked to get him elected. I did it for a reason and frankly if given the same choice today I would have to make the same vote, because I think what the Democratic party offered was anti-constitutional. We had a demented president who they pretended wasn't, and then we had somebody who hadn't won a primary installed by the party. This is not the consent of the governed. So I would have to vote for Trump again just because he's at least a qualified person who was the nominee of his party through a lawful process. But I'm angry at him because I voted for no new wars. And when I voted for no new wars, Iran was top of mind for me because I knew that it was on the agenda of the neocons. So I expected somebody to try to force this to happen.

This was Vance in 2024: "America doesn't have to constantly police every region of the world. Our interest, I think very much, is in not going to war with Iran. It would be a huge distraction of resources. It would be massively expensive to our country."

When Trump said "no new wars" on the campaign trail, and when voters gave their support to that policy with their votes, they had precisely Iran in mind. The neocons have been blue-balled for decades over Iran. They have gotten practically every other country on their list: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. Iran was the last one, probably because it was the biggest challenge. (Unless they really want to try Turkey after this.) Now the Lindsay Grahams and Mark Levins have their war — a war that never would have happened if Trump were president, I'm sure.

Read more

The Strait of Hormuz crisis: Why the US may be heading toward a strategic disaster

RT

US forces could capture a key Iranian island, but this would lead to a whole host of new problems.

When the US and Israel choose the logic of coercive pressure on Iran, they inevitably step into more than just another Middle Eastern crisis. They enter one of the most dangerous knots in world politics.

Here, military geography is directly bound up with global energy flows, the internal resilience of states, and the limits of American power projection. The war that began in late February 2026 has already crossed the line beyond which it can no longer be described as a localized air campaign and has started to affect global markets, US alliances, and the very architecture of security in the Persian Gulf.

Under normal conditions, around a fifth of global liquid hydrocarbon consumption passes through the Strait of Hormuz, along with a fifth of global LNG trade. At the same time, Iran's island-based oil export infrastructure remains one of the key arteries of the country's economy. Judging by media reporting and official US notices, the dynamics of the first weeks of the conflict already show that actual developments have diverged significantly from what the initiators of the escalation likely expected. If the plan had been working in full, the US would not have had to scramble to assemble an international coalition to restore shipping, admit that military escorts remain too risky for now, or face refusals from allies to join an operation in the Strait of Hormuz. The mere fact that even after large-scale strikes, the question of safe passage for commercial vessels remains unresolved, and that allies are in no hurry to share the military burden, points to a fairly well-grounded conclusion: The situation has clearly not unfolded according to the desired script.

Read more

In 2002, the U.S. Military Conducted an Iran War Simulation. Iran Won

David Axe | The National Interest 

As tensions escalate in the Persian Gulf region, it’s worth recalling a 2002 Pentagon war game in which a U.S. Marine Corps played the part of an enemy commander waging a bloody defensive campaign against a much more powerful U.S. force.

Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper’s own hodgepodge of troops, ships and planes was similar in organization and capability to Iran’s actual forces. Van Riper’s success in blunting a simulated American assault could reveal how Tehran might fight in the real world.

“The exercise was called Millennium Challenge 2002,” Blake Stilwell wrote for We Are the Mighty.

Read more

Tucker Carlson Responds to Israel’s War on Iran

Tucker Carlson

The Tucker Carlson Show 

Israel Officials Get Blunt On Iran Aims: 'If We Can Have A Civil War, Great'

Zero Hedge

US mainstream media is issuing one headline after another that read like they are ripped straight off the plot of Homeland or some other subpar CIA counter-terrorism series. For example, Wednesday: Israel Is Blowing Up Iran’s Police State to Clear the Way for a Revolt.

In a bit of incredibly naive and wishful thinking and fantasy, WSJ writes: "Israel’s military is targeting the Iranian police state that brutally suppressed protests and killed thousands of people, with the hope of clearing the way for a popular revolt to overthrow the Islamic government."

Sure thing... it all sounds so nice and easy, and even 'good' on paper.

In this rosy US media narrative, Israeli and US forces are cast as the noble good guy warriors riding in to valiantly to crush the 'baddies' of the IRGC and Basij forces.

"Israeli officials have made it clear they are looking to do enough damage to Iran’s police state from the air that the people can take over on the ground. While Israel has long been content to weaken Tehran with military action or covert operations, Israeli officials have concluded they now must push for regime change," the same report continues.

The Israelis, however, are busy presenting their war in aims with much less romanticism, idealism, and dressed-up propaganda. 

Read more

Iran confirms Supreme Leader Khamenei killed in US-Israeli strike

RT

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has been "martyred," state news agencies have announced.

Iranian state media have confirmed the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the ongoing joint US-Israeli strikes on the Islamic Republic.

Multiple news agencies, including the Tasnim, Mehr and Press TV simultaneously announced early Sunday that the 85-year-old leader had been "martyred" in the attack.

"The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in a joint attack by the criminal America and the Zionist regime," the official statement said.

"At the moment of the martyrdom, he was carrying out his assigned duties and was present at his workplace, when this cowardly attack occurred," it added, refuting the "Zionist regime's psychological warfare" claiming that the Supreme Leader was hiding in a secure and hidden location.

"This great crime will never go unanswered and will mark a new chapter in the history of the Islamic and Shiite world," President Masoud Pezeshkian's office said in a statement, announcing 40 days of public mourning. "With full force and strength... we will make the perpetrators and commanders of this great crime regret their actions."

The confirmation came hours after conflicting reports about Khamenei's fate. Earlier on Saturday, US President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that "Khamenei, one of the most evil people in History, is dead," following a statement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that "there are many signs" the supreme leader "is no more."

Netanyahu claimed that Khamenei's compound was struck in a "powerful surprise attack," vowing that "thousands of targets" in the Iranian leadership would be killed in the coming days and calling on Iranians to take to the streets and overthrow the government.

The strikes, which Washington and West Jerusalem described as a "preemptive" operation, targeted the Iranian leadership, as well as military and nuclear-related facilities. Trump said the attack was aimed at destroying Iran's missile industry and navy, as well as forcing regime change in Tehran. Iran has since retaliated with missile and drone strikes against Israeli territory and US military bases across the Middle East.

Moscow condemned the operation, with the Russian Foreign Ministry describing it as a "premeditated and unprovoked act of aggression" aimed at toppling a government "they deem undesirable because it has refused to yield to the dictates of force and hegemonic pressure."

Zero Hour approaching

Pepe Escobar | Strategic Culture Foundation

The hour is getting late. Virtually all pieces of the puzzle are falling into place.

Even as his "massive armada" is being deployed, neo-Caligula social posts/vociferates to Iran: "MAKE A DEAL" (originally in caps). That's maximum pressure in effect. Not even the possibility of negotiation. It's Capitulation or War.

Neo-Caligula's Top Three demands:

Iran should ditch its - civilian - nuclear program, as in total cessation of uranium enrichment.

Iran must reduce its missile program to a minimum.

Iran must stop supporting "proxy forces" - as in Hezbollah, Yemen's Ansarallah and Iraqi militias.

There's absolutely no way that Ayatollah Khamenei, the IRGC and the Majlis - the Iranian Parliament - will agree to any item on this ultimatum, dictated, of course, by the Zionist axis. Hence no capitulation.

Cue to Tehran dramatically raising the stakes.

The Majlis has already approved the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The final decision is in the hands of the Iranian government/security apparatus. This is in fact binding for the government and the military, de facto authorizing the IRGC, under full constitutional cover, to seal the Strait of Hormuz.

I've extensively written about that on Asia Times during the past decade. At the time, Goldman Sachs derivative experts were adamant: if Hormuz is blocked, before or during a full-scale naval war in the Gulf, oil may reach $700.00 a barrel.

And this will only be temporary - because the entire global economy will collapse.

Most of all, the blocking of Hormuz would trigger the detonation of the TWO QUADRILLION (caps mine) dollars derivative market - updating the initial, misleading calculation by the BIS (Bank for International Settlements), placed at $700 trillion. Over the years, several Gulf traders, off the record, have agreed with the "quadrillion" numbers.

Read more

Marco Rubio: An Abhorrent Choice for Secretary of State

Comment: A reminder of who Trump's Marc Rubio is...Unfortunately, despite the scope of this article (from November 2024) it does not focus on where the real danger lies with this man: his rampant loyalty to Israel and his worship of the very worst elements of Zio-conservatism.

----------------------------

Jeremey Kumarov | Covert Action Magazine

He is part of a group of extreme right-wing hawks devoid of ethics set to run Trump’s foreign policy team

President-elect Donald Trump named Florida Senator Marco Rubio as his nominee for Secretary of State, an abhorrent choice that shows Trump’s claim to be a peace candidate to be a complete illusion.

The New York Times reported that, since he was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010, Rubio has “staked out a position as a foreign policy hawk, taking hard lines on China, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba in particular.”

Supportive of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, 2011 U.S. bombing of Libya and genocidal U.S.-Saudi war on Yemen, Rubio has further expressed unalloyed support for Israel’s war in Gaza, claiming that Hamas was to blame for Palestinian civilian deaths.

The New York Times emphasized that Rubio has been among the most outspoken senators on the need for the U.S. to be more aggressive on China.

While sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee, he demanded that the Biden administration block sales to Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, after it released an artificial intelligence processor chip-powered laptop.

Sanctioned by the Chinese government for supporting an anti-Chinese uprising in Hong Kong, Rubio introduced the “Taiwan Peace Through Strength Act” that would fast-track U.S.-Taiwan military coordination, and has called for Taiwan to increase its defense spending, which is not a majority view in Taiwan.

Zhu Junwei, a former researcher in the People’s Liberation Army and director of American research at Beijing’s Grandview Institution think tank, told the Australian Financial Review that Rubio’s appointment would “be a nightmare coming true.”

Rubio’s selection is also a nightmare for Cubans, given his stature as a leader of Miami’s anti-Castro Cuban expat community.

Falsely claiming that the Castro/Díaz-Canel regime has served as a puppet for Communist China, Iran, and most recently Russia, Rubio’s overriding priority as Secretary of State will be to achieve Washington’s long-standing goal of overthrowing Cuba’s socialist government by expanding on an already crushing embargo, and by supporting dissident movements through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and other State Department-linked agencies.

The son of Cuban immigrants, Rubio asserted on the campaign trail that his family came to the U.S. to escape persecution by Fidel Castro’s government. However, a review of government immigration records revealed that Rubio’s parents actually came to Miami in 1956 in order to escape persecution by U.S.-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista whom Castro overthrew.

Rubio’s grandfather Pedro Victor Garcia went back to Cuba after the Cuban Revolution to take a job in the Cuban Treasury Ministry, though later had a falling out with the Castro regime.

During Rubio’s 2016 presidential run, The New York Times quoted from a Havana resident living on the street where Rubio’s father grew up who gave Rubio a vigorous thumbs down when asked about him. Héctor Montiel, 66, said that, “if Marco Rubio becomes president, we’re done for. He’s against Cuba in every possible way….Rubio and these Republicans, they are still stuck in 1959.” Echoing similar sentiments, Alain Marcelo, 46, told The New York Times: “He [Rubio] wants to kill us!…Viva Fidel. Rubio’s our enemy!”

Born in 1971, Rubio was an indifferent student who played football at Tarkio College in Missouri before earning degrees from the University of Florida and the University of Miami School of Law.

Rubio’s dishonesty was evident when he claimed to be unaware of his brother-in-law Orlando Cicilia’s direction of a $75 million cocaine smuggling ring from his home in West Kendall, Florida, in the 1980s where Rubio lived as a teenager.

Read more

Iran in ‘full-scale war’ with US and Europe, says president

The Independent

Iran’s president has claimed that his country is in an all-out war with the West, days before Donald Trump meets with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Masoud Pezeshkian said that the “full-scale war with the US, Israel and Europe” was worse than Iran’s war with Iraq in the 1980s, in which hundreds of thousands of people died.

“We are in a full-scale war with the US, Israel and Europe; they do not want our country to stand on its feet,” he said in the interview published on the website of the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Saturday.

Mr Pezeshkian said the West’s war against Iran is “more complicated and more difficult” compared to the 1980-88 war with Iraq that left more than 1 million casualties on both sides.

“In the war with Iraq, the situation was clear: they fired missiles, and I also knew where to hit,” he explained. “Here, they are besieging us from every aspect, they are putting us in difficulty and constraint, creating problems – in terms of livelihood, culturally, politically, and security-wise – while raising society’s expectations. 

Read more

How many countries has Israel attacked in 2025?

Hanna Duggal | Al-Jazeera

Israel has attacked more countries than any other country this year.

In 2025, Israel attacked at least six countries, including Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, Qatar, Syria, and Yemen.

It also carried out strikes in Tunisian, Maltese and Greek territorial waters on aid flotillas heading for Gaza.

According to Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED), an independent conflict monitor, from January 1 to December 5, Israel carried out at least 10,631 attacks, marking one of the broadest geographic military offensives in a single year. [...]

According to ACLED, in 2025, up to December 5, 2025, Israel attacked:

• Gaza and the occupied West Bank 8,332 times
• Lebanon 1,653 times
• Iran 379 times
• Syria 207 times
• Yemen 48 times
• Qatar once
• Tunisian waters twice, Maltese and Greek waters once each

Read more

The real story behind the Russia-Ukraine war — and what happens next

David Stockman | International Man

Notwithstanding the historic fluidity of borders, there is no case whatsoever that Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was "unprovoked" and unrelated to NATO's own transparent provocations in the region.

The details are arrayed below, but the larger issue needs be addressed first.

Namely, is there any reason to believe that Russia is an expansionist power looking to gobble up neighbors which were not integral parts of its own historic evolution, as is the case with Ukraine?

After all, if despite Rubio's treachery President Trump does manage to strike a Ukraine peace and partition deal with Putin you can be sure that the neocons will come charging in with a false Munich appeasement analogy.

The answer, however, is a resounding no!

Our firm rebuke of the hoary Munich analogy as it has been falsely applied to Putin is based on what might be called the double-digit rule. To wit, the true expansionary hegemons of modern history have spent huge parts of their GDP on defense because that's what it takes to support the military infrastructure and logistics required for invasion and occupation of foreign lands.

For instance, here are the figures for military spending by Nazi Germany from 1935-1944 expressed as a percent of GDP. This is what an aggressive hegemon looks like in the ramp-up to war: German military spending had already reach 23% of GDP, even before its invasion of Poland in September 1939 and its subsequent commencement of actual military campaigns of invasion and occupation.

Read more

The Deep Roots of Today’s Geopolitics

Peter Turchin | Cliodynamica

China, Russia, and Iran—what is the common denominator? Most obviously, they are the main geopolitical rivals of the United States today. As Ross Douthat recently wrote in an NYT opinion, Who Is Winning the World War?, “it’s useful for Americans to think about our situation in global terms, with Russia and Iran and China as a revisionist alliance putting our imperial power to the test.”

Today’s post is about a much less appreciated similarity, having to do with deep history of these Eurasian empires.

As I have argued in a series of publications over the past 20 years, and most comprehensively in the forthcoming book, the main driver of “imperiogenesis” (processes underlying the rise of empires) is interstate competition. The intensity of this competition, in turn, is dialed up by advances in military technologies. Each military revolution, thus, generates a set of mega-empires. Today we live in the historical shadow of two most consequential military revolutions.

The iron-cavalry revolution dates to about 1000 BCE. Although horse riding and iron smelting were invented independently (and in different regions, see the infographic below), by 500 BCE they were spreading together (for the spread maps, see Figures 2 and 3 in our article, Rise of the War Machines). And the detailed story of this military revolution and its profound effects on world history are in my book Ultrasociety.

Read more