Blackmail? Certainly a threat. “Exclusive: Gulf states must not allow use of airspace against Iran, Iranian official says,” Reuters, 10-9-24.
“Iran warns of potential change in nuclear doctrine if Israel targets facilities,” Financial Times, 10-9-24. Keep in mind that Israel’s actions do not force Iran to pursue nuclear weapons. No country threatens Iran to need them. Iran has all the oil and gas they need to be a modern and strong country.
“A Weakened Iran Still Has a Major Deterrent: the Nuclear Option,” WSJ, 10-8-24. “In late September, a former head of Iran’s atomic agency, Fereydoun Abbasi, suggested that Tehran could start producing 90% enriched, weapons-grade uranium. U.S. officials have said it would take Iran less than two weeks to convert its current 60% nuclear-fuel stockpile into weapons-grade material. … While it claims its nuclear program is for purely peaceful purposes, Iran is the only nonnuclear weapons power that produces highly enriched uranium. It currently has enough near-weapons-grade fuel for almost four nuclear weapons, according to the most recent data from the International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran also has been conducting experiments with uranium metal, a key component of a nuclear weapon, and has cut back much of the international oversight granted by the nuclear deal.”
Again the NYT gets the story wrong. Trump was right to back out of such a bad deal, an agreement that would actually lead to Iran having a nuclear program that produced a nuclear weapon. Think of it this way—just because the U.S. backed out doesn’t mean that Iran had to decide to move toward weapons. That is the definition of blackmail. Or think of it this way—the Obama Administration believed in paying ransoms. That the Trump Administration said no more ransoms was not a bad thing. Or think of it like this—Obama’s JCPOA didn’t restrict Iran’s missiles, the same missiles it has used against the Middle East countries, against U.S. troops, and now against Israel. And hey NYT, anytime you rely on Ben Rhodes for foreign policy advice, you’ve got a problem. See “Iran Crisis Ignites New Debate About Trump’s Nuclear Deal Exit,” NYT, 10-8-24.
“Ex-soldier on trial accused of spying for Iran,” BBC, 10-8-24.
Notice the lack of evidence. Only the word of a person who has probably been commanded what to say. I wonder what this person, Quds Force deputy commander Iraj Masjedi, is thinking. First, the U.S. eliminate his powerful predecessor Qassem Soleimani, then Israel eliminated the partner of the Quds Force, head of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah. Is Masjedi next? Don’t take that promotion. And stay out of Lebanon. I suppose the ultimate evidence of Esmail Qaani’s life will be a public appearance. In the meantime, “The Iranian Students’ News Agency reported that a message from Qaani was conveyed to a conference in solidarity with Palestinian children held on Monday in Tehran, adding that the commander could not attend “due to his being in another important meeting.”” I wonder where that important meeting was? If underground, is it now on one of Dante’s levels? “Commander of Iran’s Quds Force is ‘in good health’, force’s deputy commander says,” Reuters, 10-7-24.
“Iran president set to meet Putin for first time as clash with Israel escalates,” Times of Israel, 10-7-24.
“Iran is increasingly desperate, retired US general says,” Politico, 10-6-24. And the former CENTCOM commander Frank McKenzie “said he found it entirely believable that Iran’s leaders, driven by “desperation” as they seek to stay in power, could be targeting former President Donald Trump as he seeks to regain the presidency. “They view the election of President Trump as a direct threat to that regime preservation,” he said.”
“Iran’s Quds Force leader missing after Israeli strike in Beirut: Reports,” India Today, 10-6-24. “According to reports, the Israeli airstrikes in Beirut’s southern suburb Dahiyeh were targeted at Hashem Safieddine, the successor to slain Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah. Esmail Qaani was also reportedly present in Dahiyeh at the time.” This begs the question—Why in the world would the Leader allow Quds Force leader Qaani to be in a place where Israel would attack? That is very poor military judgment. See also “Iran’s Quds Force chief out of contact since Beirut strikes, Iranian officials say,” Reuters, 10-6-24.
“Iran’s Khamenei decorates commander for Israel attack,” AFP, VOA, 10-6-24.
“Murder for hire: Inside Iran’s proxy war with Israel in the West,” USA Today, 10-6-24. “Since 2020, there have been at least 33 assassination or abduction attempts in the West in which local or Israeli authorities allege an Iran link, Reuters found in an examination of court documents and public statements by government officials.”
Almost makes your head spin—then you realize this is Iran, tying two (it has many) of its important proxies together, in a confused but real effort to release Sinwar and figure out how to replace Nasrallah. “Iran open to cease-fire efforts in Lebanon — if Israel stops bombing Gaza,” Politico, 10-5-24. BTW, this story carries the rare example of an exception within an exception to the international law humanitarian standard for not attacking non-military targets—the IDF struck Hezbollah operatives at a command center inside a mosque in southern Lebanon’s Bint Jbeil, within the Martyr Salah Ghandour Hospital compound. What’s next for Hamas or Hezbollah to violate under the laws of war? Maybe a Red Crescent office within a school within a mosque within a hospital?
“Benny Gantz: What the World Needs to Understand About Iran,” NYT, 10-5-24. “Iran’s religious leadership is devoted to exporting its fundamentalist ideology, driven by the pursuit of hegemony and captivated by the thought of its opponents’ violent subjugation. I ask that other nations not make the same mistake we made and underestimate this component of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s calculus.”
He really is fortunate that Israel didn’t time his appearance while he was outside. The Supreme Leader also said nothing about most of his ballistic missiles being shot down, nor that they were destroyed by Israel, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, United States, United Kingdom, and France. “In Rare Appearance, Khamenei Says Iran ‘Won’t Back Down’ As Israel Strikes In Beirut,” Iran International, 10-4-24.
But give the Leader some credit for his approx. 300 missile attacks on civilians and military sites, about 30 missiles got through. “Iranian missiles hit Israeli military sites, visuals show,” WPost, 10-4-24.
What about China, and its cover for Iran? This slows Iran from changing its behavior. “China Buys Nearly All of Iran’s Oil Exports, but Has Options if Israel Attacks,” NYT, 10-4-24.
This would be a great move, and to pressure Iran to change its actions long-term—stop supporting proxies! Real governments don’t use proxies! Normal countries have allies, which means the other country is a sovereign state and not under the control of another. “Scoop: U.S. wants to use Hezbollah’s weakness to elect new Lebanese president,” Axios, 10-4-24.
This limited success (no serious damage at the base nor planes lost, but over 30 missiles landed) will embolden Iran. And BTW, the anniversary of Oct. 7 is coming. “Iranian Missiles Overwhelmed Israeli Defenses at Some Sites, Analysts Say,” WSJ, 10-4-24. “Unlike April 13, when Iran fired a large number of slower cruise missiles and drones, Tuesday’s barrage was made up exclusively of some 180 much faster ballistic missiles, one of the largest such strikes in the history of warfare. Analysts say that most of these projectiles were Iran’s most modern ballistic missiles, the Fattah-1 and Kheibar Shekan. “The faster the missile, the harder it is to intercept it, that’s simple physics,” said Ulrich Kühn, head of research for arms control at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy in Hamburg, Germany. “It’s certainly much harder to defend against ballistic missiles, and even more so if there is a bulk of them coming in on a certain target, because then you have the ability to overwhelm the antimissile defenses—which is exactly what happened in Israel.” Satellite images of a target on Tuesday—the Nevatim air base in southern Israel, home to its F-35 jet fighters—show that as many as 32 Iranian missiles managed to land within the base’s perimeter, according to analysis by professor Jeffrey Lewis, at the Middlebury Institute for International Studies in Monterey, Calif.”
Will this change Iran’s behavior? In other words, if SA and Israel normalize, will Iran deradicalize? No. Iran’s creation in 1979 and its constitution and laws and then military set-up and bureaucracy, etc., etc. resulting in a governmental political culture is to spread the Shia revolution, and spread it in a violent, intimidating way. Although the masses disagree, they don’t hold the bicycle chains and the guns. The Supreme Leader has no reason to change even if the Crown Prince of SArabia sees what is the better path forward for his (Sunni Muslim) country and the region. See “Kushner has held talks with MBS on US-Saudi diplomacy, Israel normalization,” Times of Israel, 10-4-24. The other big news in this story is, implicitly, that NSA Jake Sullivan has okayed these talks between Jared Kushner and MBS.
“Iran’s supreme leader warns it ‘won’t back down’ in Israel fight,” USA Today, 10-4-24.
“Iranian supreme leader praises missile attack on Israel, saying Iran will do it again if necessary,” AP, 10-4-24.
Iran has blocked a Lebanese president (and some semblance of democracy) for too long. “Scoop: U.S. wants to use Hezbollah’s weakness to elect new Lebanese president,” Axios, 10-4-24.
“Clutching a rifle, Khamenei delivers rare public sermon in Arabic,” I24, 10-4-24.
“Missile attack on Israel lays bare deep divisions among Iranians,” BBC, 10-3-24.
“Iran warns of ‘unconventional response’ in case of new Israeli attack,” Al Jazeera, 10-3-24.
“Map shows possible Israeli targets in Iran,” CNN, 10-3-24.
“Why Israel Is Worried About Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions,” WSJ, 10-3-24.
“Biden says he opposes potential Israeli strike against Iran nuclear program,” Axios, 10-2-24. Notice that “Iran said its retaliation is now complete, unless Israel attacks.” But wait, Iran attacked with the 200 ballistics first. Israel had warned them, but Iran still attacked. Why can’t Israel retaliate for an unprovoked attack? Notice also that the U.S. has been lagging—Wouldn’t it be a good idea to extricate Iran’s nuclear program?
“How Israel’s air defenses knocked down Iran’s missiles,” Axios, 10-2-24.
“IRGC commander who died with Nasrallah carried warning message from Khamenei to Hezbollah chief,” I-24, 10-2-24.
Almost 200 ballistics. No other country in the world would do what Iran has done. “Iran launches ballistic missile attack against Israel,” Politico, 10-1-24.
“Iran carries out a massive missile attack on Israel, expanding the Middle East conflict,” NPR, 10-1-24.
Bret Stephens is exactly right—go after the nuclear program. “We Absolutely Need to Escalate in Iran,” NYT, 10-1-24.
