I’m going to start today by reflecting on the changing Middle East, and using a story I posted yesterday and a second one today to make a point. So, where is the Middle East going? Toward modernity and trade and law, and agreements like the Abraham Accords, or will it stay in a place where countries’ status is equal just because they are countries, regardless of how they act? The NYT and those that prefer its take on the world are going to have to decide if they prefer the Israel model or the Iran model of governance. Yesterday and today there are articles about what the Arabs are saying about this. As of this morning, the NYT and the Democratic Party broadly are still stuck in a place where Israel and Iran are equated, like having equal seats at the UN General Assembly. Well, I’d rather live in Israel, and I think most persons would if they have to chose between the two countries. The Iranian people certainly prefer the Israel model over the ayatollah-led radical Islam revolution, and the Arab states do also. See “Arabic source to i24NEWS: “Israel’s actions in Iran promote relations with Saudi Arabia,” i24, 6-17-25. See “In Attacking Iran, Israel Further Alienates Would-Be Arab Allies,” NYT, 6-18-25.
I’m not looking to fight NYT, I have other duties. And this is a blog about Iran. But the NYT worldview is distorting the news. Today’s statement by the NYT, speaking of Ayatollah Khamenei, is too much: “He has played a key role in positioning Iran as a counterweight to American, Israeli and Saudi influence across the Middle East.” What?! That completely ignores history since 1979, and completely presents this as some sort of balancing affair of regional politics. The U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Israel are not some kind of 900 pound gorillas. Several U.S. presidents even want to draw down U.S. activities in the Middle East, and pivot toward the Far East. The problem is Iran, and has been. NYT, do you remember the Hostage Crisis? And Beirut? And Hezbollah? All the way up to the Hamas attack Oct. 7, 2023. See “In a defiant address, Iran’s supreme leader rejects Trump’s call to surrender,” NYT, 6-18-25. BTW, the Supreme Leader is unwilling to give up his nuclear enrichment and accept sanctions relief. This is absolutely in line with his life decisions, and how this blog has reflected the stories of his policies. He will not surrender. That seals his fate. I don’t think Russia will take him in like they did Assad.
The result of Iran’s decision. Iran doesn’t want international news reaching its people, so it cut the lines. This is an indication that Iran really feels threatened. “Iran enters near-total internet blackout, NetBlocks says,” Iran International, 6-18-25.
“Khamenei rejects Trump’s call for surrender, warns against US intervention,” Iran International, 6-18-25. It must be galling for him that he has fewer and fewer missiles (only 5-7 ballistics fired against Israel tonight) and drones to use each day, and that his army and navy are almost toothless. And that the Jewish state’s air force has control of his skies. And that Fordo’s days are numbered. It is all coming crashing down.
Many of us are thinking about post-war Iran, with or without the Supreme Leader. But let’s get it right what is happening, Israel is knocking out/back the nuclear program. So when we read Foreign Affairs today, released yesterday, and see Robert Pape claiming “Israel has engaged in a protracted air campaign in Iran to achieve something no other country has ever done before: topple a government and eliminate its major military capability using airpower alone. … Israel appears to be falling into the “smart-bomb trap,” in which overconfidence in precision weapons and intelligence not only allows the country’s leaders to believe that they can stop an Iranian nuclear breakout and even topple the regime of the Islamic Republic but also leaves Israel less secure than before. Airpower, no matter how targeted and intense, is not certain to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program in its entirety, nor will it clear a path for regime change in Tehran. In fact, if the historical record is any indication, Israel’s overconfidence in what its technologically advanced weapons can do is likely to harden Iran’s resolve and produce the opposite of its intended results: a more dangerous Iran, now armed with nuclear weapons. Without a ground invasion (highly improbable) or direct U.S. support (which the Trump administration may be wary to provide), Israel’s military successes in Iran and beyond could very well be short-lived.” Sure, Israel may want Iran to have a change in management. But this article is proposing a motive that is not exhibited. See “Israel’s Futile Air War: Precision Strikes Will Not Destroy Iran’s Nuclear Program—or Its Government,” Foreign Affairs, 6-17-25. Pape must certainly know that it is the Iranian people who have to make the decision about how they are governed. Look what just happened in Lebanon, where the traditional army and citizens were empowered (but there is still work there to do to disarm Iran’s Hezbollah).
Brilliant move by Israel, sending Pres. Herzog out to ask all countries for assistance. Is this the first time in world history that the interest of all persons have been called on to eliminate a bad actor from developing nuclear weapons? Will the UN (and because of the recent announcement by the IAEA) take a position? And think about the antithesis to Israel’s position—Will Iran call on all countries to protect its nuclear weapons program? “Israeli president calls on the world to help destroy Iran nuclear sites,” NPR, 6-18-25.
“Israeli Air Dominance Means It Is Taking Out Iranian Missiles Before They Launch,” WSJ, 6-18-25. Israel has now taken out about 2/3 of Iran’s missile launchers. This leaves about 100 launchers. BTW, there is such a difference between NYT and WSJ coverage.
They know they will be attacked, that’s why. “Why Iran’s ‘Axis of Resistance’ Is Missing in Action,” WSJ, 6-18-25.
“Trump Privately Approved of Attack Plans for Iran but Has Withheld Final Order,” WSJ, 6-18-25.
Good article. “Options for Targeting Iran’s Fordow Nuclear Facility,” CSIS, 6-18-25.