Archives: Articles

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark

De-escalation has become one of those coarse words in severe need of banishment, best kept in an index used by unredeemable hypocrites.  It is used by the living dead in human resources, management worthies and war criminals.  It’s almost always used to target the person or entity that exerts retribution or seeks to avenge (dramatic) or merely overcome (mildly) a state of affairs imposed upon them. 

You might be bullied in the workplace for being fastidious and conscientious, showing up your daft colleagues, or reputationally attacked by a member of the establishment keen to conceal his corrupt practices.  When contemplating retaliation, the self-appointed middle ground types will call upon you to “de-escalate” the situation, insisting that you appeal to the better side of your bruised nature.  After all, you know it was your fault.

The joining of the United States in the war against Iran made Washington a co-conspirator to soiling international law and profaning its salient provisions.  The US was in no immediate danger, nor was there any imminent threat, existential or otherwise, to its interests vis-à-vis Tehran.  Yet President Donald Trump, having had the poison of persuasion poured into his ear by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had succumbed.  His will annexed to that of the Israeli premier, Trump ordered the US Air Force on June 22 to conduct bombing raids on three Iranian nuclear facilities: Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow.  They were recipients of that hefty example of phallocratic lethality known as the bunker buster, the GBU-57A Massive Ordnance Penetrator.  With his usual unwavering confidence, Trump declared in an address to the nation that all the country’s “nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”

In violating international law and desecrating that important canon injuncting states from committing crimes against peace, Israel and the United States are not the ones being told to restrain their violence and acknowledge breaching the United Nations Charter, risking yet another conflagration in the Middle East.  It is their targeted state, the Republic of Iran, whose officials must “de-escalate” and play nice before the diplomatic table, abandoning a nuclear program, civil or military.  “Iran, the bully of the Middle East,” Trump directs, “must now make peace.”

With suddenness, the advocates and publicists for international law vanished across the broadly described West.  In Europe, Canada, the US and Australia, the mores and customs observed by states could be conveniently forgotten and retired.  In its place reigned the logic of brute force and unquestioned violence.  Provided such violence is exercised by that rogue combine of Amerisrael, deference and dispensation will be afforded.  The same could never be said for such countries as China and Russia, abominated for not accepting the “rules-based order” imposed by Western weaponry and force.   

The lamentable, plaintiff responses from Brussels to Canberra tell a sorry tale: pre-emptive war waged against a country’s nuclear and oil facilities is just the sort of thing that one is allowed to do, since the rotter in question is a theocratic state of haughty disposition and regional ambition.  You can get away with murdering scientists in their sleep, along with their families, liquidating the upper echelons of their military leadership and killing journalists along the way.

The approved formula behind these responses is as follows.  From the outset, mention that Iran must never acquire a nuclear weapon.  If possible, underline any relevant qualities that render it ineligible to any other state that has nuclear weapons.  Instruct Tehran that diplomacy is imperative, and retaliation terrible.  Behave and exercise restraint. 

Here is Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of the UK, speaking from his Chequers country retreat: it was “clear Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon”, which was “why our focus has been on de-escalating, getting people back around to negotiate what is a very real threat in relation to the nuclear program.”  If one was left in any doubt who the guilty party was, UK Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds helped dispel it, calling Iran “a threat to this country, not in an abstract way, not in a speculative way”.

The German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, after convening his security cabinet on the morning of June 22, conveyed his views through German government spokesperson Stefan Kornelius: “Friedrich Merz reiterated his call for Iran to immediately begin negotiations with the US and Israel and to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict.”

French President Emmanuel Macron similarly got on the de-escalation bandwagon with gusto, giving a teacherly warning to Iran to “exercise the greatest restraint” and dedicate itself to renouncing nuclear weapons.  It was the only credible path to peace and security for all.  The president conveniently skipped past the huge elephant in the room: Israel’s illicit possession of nuclear weapons, undeclared, unmonitored and extra-legal, as a factor that severely compromises the issue of stability in the Middle East.

From the European Union, the attackers and the attacked were given equal billing.  “I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation,” urged Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the European Commission.  The obligatory “Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, as it would be a threat to international security” followed.  European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also thought it perfectly sensible to matronly instruct the Iranians on the next step: “Now is the moment for Iran to engage in a credible diplomatic solution.  The negotiating table is the only way to end this crisis.” 

All these comments are deliciously rich given that Israel has never entertained negotiations on any level with Iran, dismissive of its nuclear energy needs, while the first Trump administration sabotaged the diplomatically brokered Joint Plan of Comprehensive Action that successfully diverted Tehran away from a military nuclear program in favour of a lifting of sanctions.  Talk from Amerisrael and their allies would seem to be heavily discounted, if not counterfeit.  The glaring, coruscating message to Iran: retaliation bad; de-escalation good.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Tom Engelhardt

How strange. I’ve been going to demonstrations for a long, long while now. I began once upon a distant time in opposition to the nightmarish all-American war in Vietnam. And almost 60 years later, that war, in some sense, has come home. Hence, the other day, I found myself at the “No Kings” demonstration in New York City, one of more than 2,000 (yes, 2,000!) across this country of ours at which millions — yes, again, literally millions! — of Americans reportedly turned out. These days, in New York where I live, such demonstrations are often launched from Bryant Park, right behind the classic 42nd Street library on Fifth Avenue, and the marchers normally walk down Fifth for perhaps 20 blocks. The last time I went to a demonstration there, I didn’t walk myself but stood and watched all the marchers with their signs go past me, and it took perhaps 35 minutes or so for them to slowly, slowly do so. That time, which was then typical of such demonstrations, most of the protesters were, like me, also old and White.

No more. The other day at that No Kings march in New York, I wove my way ever so slowly through the crowd to Fifth Avenue and 40th Street just after the march had begun and started watching the demonstrators, packed into literally every square inch of that wide avenue, ever so slowly crawl by me. That crowd ranged from babies in strollers to old people like me, and looked like it represented a distinct cross-section of everybody in America, whether by race or age. How many of us were there? Who knows? CBS News simply and vaguely said “tens of thousands,” while the local Fox News station, which obviously had no interest in playing up such demonstrations, still claimed that “tens of thousands of people marched in New York City and the Tri-State area.” If I had to guess, I would say that at least a couple of hundred thousand people crept down Fifth Avenue that day (and on that figure the British Guardian agrees, suggesting “over 200,000” in New York and “millions” nationally).

After all, when I finally left, almost two hours later, exhausted from just standing there taking notes in an ongoing drizzle, the last of the crowd hadn’t even made it from 40th Street onto a still utterly packed Fifth Avenue (as it had been from the moment I arrived), with that parade of anti-Trump protestors still just creeping along. To depart, in fact, I had to literally weave my way through a still-impressive crowd of No Kings demonstrators with a typical array of signs still waiting to join the march. In short, that demonstration, just one of thousands across the country, was beyond huge! And signs? I watched what must all too literally have been thousands of homemade signs go by me, while listening to endless periodic chants from the crowd.

It was, I have to say, quite something, even for someone like me who has seen so many protests in my lifetime and, in its size, it seemed to offer a genuine sense of how deeply disturbed so many Americans are by a president, or do I indeed mean a “king,” who wants to be able to do anything he madly desires without opposition from anyone. And that included having his own military parade in Washington on that very day, his birthday (though it evidently turned out to be a distinctly underwhelming affair that many spectators evidently left early).

“No Kings, No Tyrants, No Fascists, No Dictators, Dump Trump”

Let me just start — even days after the event occurred — by saying how striking I think it is that increasingly significant numbers of Americans are visibly ever more deeply disturbed by the man who did indeed get only 49.7% of the popular vote in 2024 and, according to CBS News, won the presidency thanks to a “mere 0.15% of voters nationwide” who proved the difference between victory and defeat. Not that you would know it from his ever more disturbing excesses, including that mega-military birthday parade (for both the 250-year-old U.S. Army and the now-79-year-old Donald Trump) with tanks, artillery vehicles, and paratroopers at the cost of at least $25-$45 million taxpayer dollars (at a time when he’s slashing benefits for military veterans) slated to begin in Washington not long after the “No Kings” demonstration I attended ended.

I must admit I found it moving that so many of us wanted to express ourselves in person and through signs and chants. And New York wasn’t faintly alone in responding, among other things, to the criminal way Donald Trump dealt with the first of the recent demonstrations against his rule in Los Angeles. There were, after all, an estimated 2,100 or more No Kings protests across this country that day, in red states and blue ones, red cities and blue ones.

Let me, in that context, give you a little sense of what I saw in an up-close-and-personal fashion. And remember this took place on the street in my hometown, about which, in 2016, Donald Trump, while campaigning for president in Sioux Center, Iowa, had indeed said: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, OK? It’s, like, incredible.” Well, fortunately, no shots were fired that afternoon in New York, though, of course, they were indeed fired that very day in truly shocking targeted political assassinations in Minnesota, killing Melissa Hortman, a state legislator, and her husband, and wounding state Senator John A. Hoffman and his wife.

Oh, and as is a typical New York thing to do, I took the subway from my neighborhood to the stop nearest the protest site. And the subway car I entered turned out to be full of other protestors heading for 42nd street as well, including a woman giving out little American flags, and a couple of people with homemade signs, one of which said: “Stop bullying and lying to & stealing from the American people”; a second said, “impeach Humpty Trumpty”; and a third, “No kings, no tyrants, no fascists, no dictators, dump Trump.” And mind you, that was just a single subway car.

And simply walking the few blocks from the subway stop to the area where the demonstration was to take place, I found myself almost instantly on ever more crowded streets surrounded by people carrying homemade signs and already starting to scribble them down in the little notebook I was carrying with me (along with an umbrella on that distinctly drizzly day). As I was heading there, I even passed a woman who had decorated her umbrella with the words “No Dick… Tator, No Fascists,” and a man with a sign that had an image of George Washington and the words “Democracy, yes, Kleptocracy, no.”

“Elect a Clown, Expect a Circus”

Now, consider what follows my portrait of the mood of that moment. There were literally thousands of signs I watched go past me that day — and mind you, we’re talking about an afternoon when it was lightly raining and not a faintly comfortable moment to demonstrate. So, here’s just a little potpourri of some of the ones I scribbled down. Probably the single most prominent word on so many of them on that No Kings day was indeed “king” and it gave you a sense of the greatest fear of all too many Americans that Donald Trump is turning what was once our democracy into his — yes! — perverse kingdom.

Most of the signs I saw had clearly been written or drawn by hand, sometimes with images added. Here are just a few of the ones that caught my eye (or were short enough that I could scribble them down before they passed me by): “King Trump, you’re fired!”; “Immigrants belong, Kings be gone!”; “ICE is the new SS” (a reference, of course, to Adolf Hitler’s Nazi paramilitary outfit); “Deportation without due process is tyranny”; “King Tut, King Coal, Carole King, Not a king” (with an image of Trump, of course); “No kings since 1776”; “Yes, masks, no kings” (a sign held by a man wearing an N-95 Covid-era mask of the sort that I still often wear myself); “When cruelty becomes normal, compassion looks radical”; “The real criminal is in the White House”; “Elect a clown, expect a circus”; “Not my dictator”; “This American girl says no to kings”; “No kings for these old queens” (signs held by two men); “ICE burn in hell”; “Where is Melania from?”; one with no words, just Trump holding a bloody knife in one hand and the cut off, bleeding head of the Statue of Liberty in the other; “Your only throne is a golden toilet”; “Don’t be a chicken in a coup!” (with a yellow chicken doll hanging on the sign); “If she was president, we’d all be at brunch right now” (with a photo of Kamala Harris); “Trump lies while America dies”; “It’s really bad, even I’m out here”; “Two paths and America chooses the psychopath”; “Rebelling against tyrants since 1776”; “Without immigrants, Trump would have no wives”; “The cruelty is the point”; “Elect an ass, expect shit”; “Deport Trump!”; “ICE belongs in Margueritas, not schools”; “Preserve PBS”; “Impeach diaper Don”; “Not a king, just a taco” (a reference to the phrase “Trump Always Chickens Out”); “America wasn’t great in 1768” (with an image of British King George III); “The Mayflower was full of immigrants”; “Trump cut my social security and went golfing”; “Heil, no!”; “Immigrants make America great!”; “Faux-King joke” (with a ludicrous crowned Trump image); “The greatest threat we face is not simply their actions. But our silence — Cory Booker”; “Trump lies while America dies”; and, of course, tons of “No Kings!”

And here were some of the things that parts of the crowd began chanting in unison as they walked by me: “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Donald Trump has got to go!”; “Money for education, not deportation!”; “No KKK, No fascist USA, No ICE!”; “Say it loud, say it clear, ICE is not welcome here!”; “Our streets! Our streets!”; “No hate, no fear, immigrants are welcome here!”; “This is not what democracy looks like!”; “No ICE, no ICE, no KKK, no Fascist USA!”; “Tell me what democracy looks like! This is what democracy looks like!”; “Whose street? Our street!”

Yes, in the city that Donald Trump once considered his own, it couldn’t have been clearer that it truly wasn’t faintly his anymore.

And despite what had happened in Los Angeles, though the police were there in significant numbers (as they always are at such demonstrations), they in no way took center stage. Yes, Mayor Eric Adams claimed that more than 34,000 police had been mobilized for the demonstrations in New York. Still, I saw just a couple of police cars with their red lights flashing as I first approached Fifth Avenue and 40th Street and then a group of perhaps 20 policemen (and at least one policewoman) as I was heading back down that street on my way home. Otherwise, at least as far as I could see, they weren’t overly evident. And, again, it was New York City, so no local official had just been assassinated (as in Minnesota that day) and, unlike in San Francisco or Culpeper, Virginia, no car tried to hit any protestors in that march; nor, as in Austin, Texas, had the police told local officials not to attend such a protest because of a threat to them related to the Minnesota assassinations.

So, at least for me, and possibly millions of other Americans, No Kings Day proved an event to remember. Yes, in truth, I still find it hard to believe that we have three and a half more years of King Donald to go (and when, like me, you’re 80 years old, it becomes ever harder to imagine living through those years to another, possibly better future). Still, being at that demonstration was a good reminder that those of us who see in Donald Trump’s version of America an increasingly menacing threat to freedom are anything but alone.

Tom Engelhardt created and runs the website TomDispatch.com.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network)

Gaza (Quds News Network)- At least 13 Palestinians were killed earlier on Monday by Israeli forces while waiting for food near aid distribution sites operated by the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) in central and southern Gaza. Israeli attacks on starving aid seekers have become a grim daily reality.

In central Gaza, local sources confirmed that at least three aid seekers were killed by an Israeli tank shell near the GHF aid distribution site close to the Netzarim Corridor.

In southern Gaza, reports say that 10 people were killed by Israeli gunfire northwest of Rafah city, near the GHF aid site while waiting for food.

Israel has regularly attacked starving aid seekers, particularly those waiting for food near aid distribution sites operated by the GHF, killing over 450 and injuring more than 3,466 since GHF launched its operations on May 27, the Palestinian Health Ministry reported.

On March 2, Israel announced the closure of Gaza’s main crossings, cutting off food, medical and humanitarian supplies, worsening a humanitarian crisis for 2.3 million Palestinians, according to reports by human rights organisations who have accused it of using starvation as a weapon of war against Palestinains.

An Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) report last month warned that almost a quarter of the civilian population would face catastrophic levels of food insecurity (IPC Phase Five) in the coming months.

After more than 80 days of total blockade, starvation, and growing international outrage, limited aid has allegedly been distributed by the GHF, a scandal-plagued organization backed by the US and Israel, created to bypass the UN’s established aid delivery infrastructure in the Gaza Strip.

Most humanitarian organisations, including the UN, have distanced themselves from GHF, arguing that the group violates humanitarian principles by restricting aid to south and central Gaza, requiring Palestinians to walk long distances to collect aid, and only providing limited aid, among other critiques.

The UN confirmed that Israel is still blocking food from reaching starving Palestinians with only a few trucks of aid having reached Gaza.

Doctors Without Borders (MSF) warned that “weaponizing aid in this manner may constitute crimes against humanity.”

“Every day Palestinians are met with carnage in their attempts to receive supplies from the insufficient amount of aid trickling into Gaza,” MSF said on Tuesday in a statement.

“I saw people torn to pieces; it’s a disaster. Seeking food should not be a death sentence.” Dr. Wafaa Abu Nemer, MSF paediatrician.

Israeli mass killings of aid seekers have become a grim daily reality amid chaotic scenes, as desperate Palestinians are given only a narrow window to rush for food and are later targeted by Israeli forces.

On Tuesday, Israeli forces killed at least 70 Palestinians and wounded hundreds as they sought aid on Gaza’s deadliest day at aid sites so far.

The commissioner-general of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), Philippe Lazzarini, condemned the “lethal” US-Israel aid distribution mechanism in Gaza. In a post on X, Lazzarini indicated that Palestinian lives “have been so devalued”.

“It is now the routine to shoot & kill desperate & starving people while they try to collect little food from a company made of mercenaries,” he said.

“Inviting starving people to their death is a war crime. Those responsible of this system must be held accountable. This is a disgrace & a stain on our collective consciousness.”

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Ashish Singh

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, filmmakers around the world turned their gaze not only toward New York, but also inward — toward their own histories of fear, violence, and grief. Among the most poignant responses came from two acclaimed directors: Israeli filmmaker Amos Gitai and Palestinian filmmaker Elia Suleiman. While Gitai contributed a segment to the 2002 international anthology 11’09″01 September 11, Suleiman created a separate, meditative response to the global moment of reckoning. These two films, emerging from different political realities and cinematic vocabularies, feel like echoes across a wall — distinct yet uncannily aligned.

Gitai’s short begins amid the chaos of a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv. Sirens wail, smoke rises, and a news team rushes to the scene, eager to broadcast the horror live. As reports begin to emerge about the attacks in New York, the Israeli anchor shrugs them off: “Why should we talk about that? We have our own terror here.” This blunt dismissal is not callousness, but a critique. Gitai holds up a mirror to national media narratives, asking whose suffering gets attention — and whose is always local, always somehow less urgent in the global conversation. His film is fast, chaotic, and relentless — a storm of sound and movement that forces us to confront how we weigh tragedy.

In contrast, Elia Suleiman’s response to 9/11 is wordless and slow, unfolding like a poem written in silences. Though not part of the 11’09″01 project, his 2002 film Divine Intervention was shaped in the shadows of the Twin Towers. Set in Ramallah and Jerusalem, it captures the surreal normalcy of occupation. Israeli tanks roll past houses. Soldiers stop cars and search passengers. A man peels an apple slowly. On a TV in the background, the world watches 9/11. But Suleiman — who appears in his own films as a silent observer — offers no commentary, only stillness. The violence is ever-present but quiet, embedded in the landscape. His cinema doesn’t shout; it watches.

These films never try to compete with the tragedy of 9/11. Neither Gitai nor Suleiman claims that their people’s suffering is greater, or more deserving of global grief. Instead, they offer something harder to process: the simultaneity of pain. They ask us to hold two truths in our minds — that while the world mourned New York, others lived in cities where explosions were routine, where the air always tasted faintly of smoke, and where grief did not begin on September 11.

Gitai’s urgency collides with Suleiman’s restraint. One film is built on speed, the other on stillness. But both arrive at the same insight — that violence is never localized. Its impact echoes across borders, across screens, across lives. When one city falls, others remember how often they have already been on fire.

Even decades later, these films remain painfully relevant. They ask what it means to be seen, and what it means to be forgotten. They challenge us not just to remember the towers that fell in New York, but to ask ourselves whose stories we never noticed collapsing in silence.

This is not just about history — it’s about empathy. Gitai and Suleiman, in radically different ways, show that true understanding begins when we stop ranking sorrow. When we look at each other’s tragedies not as interruptions to our own, but as part of a shared human condition. In a world where walls still rise and smoke still blurs our vision, these films offer one clear truth: every grief deserves to be seen.   

Ashish Singh has finished his Ph.D. coursework in political science from the NRU-HSE, Moscow, Russia.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Ramzy Baroud

The profound and unrelenting struggles endured by Palestinians should, by any rational expectation, have irrevocably concluded the Palestinian cause. Yet, the struggle for freedom in Palestine is at its zenith. How is one to explain this? 

Attempts aimed at the erasure of Palestine, the Palestinian people, and their cause go back well over a century.  This encompasses the historical and ongoing impacts of the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent Mandate period, which ushered in an era of extreme violence, systemic suppression, and the imposition of harsh emergency regulations. 

The devastating  Nakba – the catastrophic destruction of the Palestinian homeland – was followed by the enactment of new emergency laws and the widespread dispersal of several Palestinian generations into the Shattat (diaspora). 

A relentless cycle of constant war, new occupations, and persistent ethnic cleansing has been further compounded by a pervasive lack of international action and sustained Arab solidarity, exacerbated by the presence of corrupt Palestinian elites. 

This litany of suffering extends to countless Israeli massacres, escalating violence, the relentless expansion of settlements, widespread destruction, and the recurring demolition of homes. 

The protracted Gaza siege, marked by war after war, has now culminated in the ongoing genocide.

Yet, despite this comprehensive and overwhelming accumulation of adversities, the Palestinian cause not only endures but persists with an unwavering spirit. This remarkable and enduring resilience is most profoundly understood through the concept of sumud.

The Indomitable Spirit of Sumud

Sumud transcends mere steadfastness; it represents a profound and deeply ingrained cultural phenomenon rooted in defiance, historical consciousness, unwavering faith, spirituality, the strength of family bonds, and the cohesion of community. 

The language of sumud is remarkably pervasive and rich, manifesting eloquently in poetry, intricate storytelling, Quranic verses, and the compelling terminology of revolution. Words such as sumud itself, Muqawama (resistance), Hurriyya (freedom), Thawra (revolution), Hatta Akher Nuqtat Dum (to the last drop of blood), and even the very word Falasteen (Palestine) are imbued with profound and multifaceted significance. 

For countless children growing up in Gaza, like myself, the simple, yet powerful, act of writing the word Falasteen on sand, in every text book, or on one’s own hand serves as a foundational and deeply personal experience.

Therefore, any truly genuine comprehension of Palestine must be meticulously shaped by the authentic language and the lived experiences of Palestinians themselves, with particular emphasis on those residing in Gaza. 

This imperative necessitates a deliberate shift in focus, moving away from historical documents like the Balfour Declaration or the Nation-State Law. Instead, understanding must authentically emerge from the narratives of pivotal figures such as Izz al-Din al-Qassam, Abdul Qader al-Husseini, Akram Zeiter, and Ghassan Kanafani, extending all the way to the fighting Palestinians in Gaza, their innocent children, their courageous journalists, their dedicated doctors, and their ordinary people.

Gaza: The Unyielding Heart of the Palestinian Story

One might be inclined to perceive this perspective as sentimental. However, it stands as a clear articulation of a long-held conviction that Gaza occupies the indisputable core of the Palestinian story, its historical trajectory, and its future destiny. 

This is not an emotional plea but a profound recognition of a harsh and unyielding living reality: Gaza has borne the brunt of the most severe manifestations of Israeli occupation, apartheid, siege, war, violence, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. 

Crucially, it is also the place where resistance has never ceased, not for a single moment. This fact alone is sufficient to establish Gaza as the most critical and undeniable component in the entire intricate history of the so-called conflict.

The Israeli genocide unfolding in Gaza is not merely an act of collective punishment. Rather, it originates from a deeply distorted and chilling Israeli perception of reality: that the Palestinian people themselves, and not a specific ideology, a particular group of individuals, or a defined organization, constitute the very heart and soul of the Palestinian cause. 

Consequently, the perceived sole method for thoroughly decimating the resistance is through the mass killing of the people and the subsequent ethnic cleansing of the survivors. If Israel, in its twisted and profoundly criminal way, has managed to grasp this horrifying understanding, then it becomes equally imperative that we, too, fully comprehend this fundamental concept.

Forging a New Understanding of Palestine

Therefore, a new and transformative understanding of Palestine is not just desirable but absolutely imperative. This understanding must unequivocally center Palestinian voices that genuinely reflect the sentiments, wishes, feelings, aspirations, and the authentic popular politics of ordinary people. 

It is crucial that not just any Palestinian voice will suffice, nor will any narrative do. This deliberate and focused approach will also help to liberate the word sumud, and all adjacent terminology, from being dismissed as merely fleeting sentimental language, thereby elevating it to the very heart of our collective discourse.

Palestinians, like all native populations engaged in a just struggle for freedom, should be unequivocally entrusted with the custodianship of their own discourse. They are not a liability to that discourse; they are not marginal actors within it; they are, in fact, the undeniable main characters.

Within an astonishing 600 days, Palestinians in Gaza, largely cut off, isolated, and targeted for extermination, have managed to expose Zionism more comprehensively and effectively than all the cumulative work undertaken over the course of an entire century. 

This monumental achievement, too, is a direct byproduct of their profound sumud. 

It is now time to critically revisit our language of solidarity with Palestine, consciously liberating it from our own ideological, political, and often personal priorities, and decisively reshaping it based solely on the authentic priorities of the Palestinians themselves.

Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. 

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Sally Dugman

We people who care about integrity, truth, honesty, decency, fairness and justice get satisfaction from our like-minded whistle blowers who lay their lives on the line and sometimes endure incredible hardships on account of sharing secretive, shameful truths like this: here: 

Wikileaks: Document dumps that shook the world, and here:

Wikileaks reveals video showing US air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians

in addition to here:

July 12, 2007, Baghdad airstrike

Excerpted from the latter link: 

On July 12, 2007, a series of air-to-ground attacks were conducted by a team of two U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopters in Al-Amin al-Thaniyah, New Baghdad, during the Iraqi insurgency which followed the invasion of Iraq. On April 5, 2010, the attacks received worldwide coverage and controversy following the release of 39 minutes of classified gunsight footage by WikiLeaks. The video, which WikiLeaks titled Collateral Murder, showed the crew firing on a group of people and killing several of them, including two Reuters journalists, and then laughing at some of the casualties, all of whom were civilians. An anonymous U.S. military official confirmed the authenticity of the footage, which provoked global discussion on the legality and morality of the attacks.

I personally happen to know that this sort of travesty happened quite frequently in that war such as Marines being shot at from their rooftop location from a single apartment in a tall apartment building across the street and their being told to indiscriminately fire into all of the apartments since it wasn’t a situation in which it could be determined as to which apartment held the shooter. Thus, elderly grandmothers fixing meals for their baby grandchildren, the children and other noncombatant civilians were immediately gunned down by U.S. Marines located across the street as a, I suppose, form of collective punishment for the one daring shooter.

At the same time, I do have my favorite whistle blowers with whom I identify and one of my best ones happens to be Mordechai Vanunu, an openly proactive peace activist and a nuclear technician who took it upon himself to publicly inform the world that Israel had nuclear bomb capabilities. So what did he get in return?

Here’s his punishment: Excerpted from 

Mordechai Vanunu

He was subsequently lured to Italy by the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, where he was drugged and abducted. He was secretly transported to Israel and ultimately convicted in a trial that was held behind closed doors.

Vanunu spent 18 years in prison, including more than 11 in solitary confinement, though no such restriction is mentioned in Israel’s penal code, nor imposed by his verdict. Released from prison in 2004, he was further subjected to a broad array of restrictions on his speech and his movement and arrested several times for violations of his parole terms, giving interviews to foreign journalists and attempting to leave Israel. He claims to have suffered from “cruel and barbaric treatment” at the hands of prison authorities and suggests that things would have been different if he had not converted to Christianity.^[6]

His own Israeli parents disowned him and he was adopted by an elderly U.S. Quaker couple who, although physically far away from him, ideologically chose to be close to and emotionally support him as well as they could on behalf of both him AND his stance.

He got solace from that occurrence and from other parts of his life such as his writing poetry like this one, my favorite poem of his, which reminds of how easy it is to become part of a murderous war machine when simply obeying orders from higher up authority figures.I’M YOUR SPY
Mordechai Vanunu

I am the clerk, the technician, the mechanic,
the driver.

They said, Do this, do that, don’t look left
or right,
don’t read the text. Don’t look at the whole
machine. You
are only responsible for this one bolt. For this
one rubber-stamp.
This is your only concern. Don’t bother
with what is above you.
Don’t try to think for us. Go on, drive. Keep
going. On, on.
So they thought, the big ones, the smart ones,
the futurologists.
There is nothing to fear. Not to worry.
Everything is ticking just fine.

Our little clerk is a diligent worker. He’s a
simple mechanic.
He’s a little man.
Little men’s ears don’t hear, their eyes
don’t see.
We have heads, they don’t
Answer them, said he to himself, said the
little man,
the man with a head of his own. Who is in
charge? Who knows
where this train is going?
Where is their head? I too have a head.
Why do I see the whole engine.
Why do I see the precipice —
is there a driver on this train?
The clerk driver technician mechanic
looked up.
He stepped back and saw — what a monster.
Can’t believe it. Rubbed his eyes and — yes,
it’s there all right. I’m all right. I do see
the monster. I’m part of the system.
I signed this form. Only now I am reading the
rest of it.
This bolt is part of a bomb. This bolt is me.
How
did I fail to see, and how do the others go on
fitting bolts. Who else knows?
Who has seen? Who has heard — The
emperor really is naked.
I see him. Why me? It’s not for me. It’s too big.
Rise and cry out. Rise and tell the people.
You can.
I, the bolt, the technician, mechanic —
Yes, you.
You are the secret agent of the people. You are
the eyes of the nation.
Agent-spy, tell us what you’ve seen. Tell us
what the insiders, the clever ones, have
hidden from us.
Without you, there is only the precipice.
Only catastrophe.
I have no choice. I’m a little man, a citizen,
one of the people,
but I’ll do what I have to. I’ve heard the voice
of my conscience
and there is nowhere to hide.
The world is small, small for Big Brother.
I’m your mission. I’m doing my duty. Take
it from me.
Come and see for yourselves. Lighten my
burden. Stop the train.
Get off the train. The next stop — nuclear
disaster. The next book,
the next machine. No. There is no such thing.

——————-
In addition, I want to know about how is it my U.S. President’s business that Iran has nuclear medicine making capabilities such as my friend received to drink, a radioactive substance, to study his digestive tract last year.
So, too, the best way to prevent nuclear war might just well be opposed countries like India and Pakistan, Israel and Iran, USA and Russia, etc., having roughly equal war capacity and caution about starting a nuclear war that would likely kill the majority of all life on our planet. 
So, yes, I’m thankful to know from Mordechai Vanunu that Israel has nuclear bomb capacity. Likewise, I’m glad to learn from the nuclear overseeing agency and Tulsi Gabbard’s assessment of Iran’s nuclear capacity that Iran’s leadership had no intention to develop a nuclear bomb, although that choice might have changed now that Israel has directly and overtly attacked that country. So, we’ll have to wait and see about outcomes now that Trump joined in on the assault against Iran, which upsets the ante, of course, for other lands like Turkey, Egypt, Russia, China and so on to join in the start of a third world war.

Sally Dugman writes from and lives in MA, USA.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network

Tehran (Quds News Network)- The US joined Israel in its attack against Iran, with President Donald Trump announcing that US forces had struck three Iranian nuclear sites. In response, Iran accused Washington of violating international law.

Trump claimed the heavily fortified Fordow nuclear facility is “gone”.

“We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan,” Trump posted on Truth Social.

“NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!” he added.

Later, in a televised Oval Office address, Trump said, “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”

[https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1936646971210760513]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump’s decision to attack Iran.

“Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran’s nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu added his promise to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities had been “fulfilled”.

“From the beginning of the operation, I promised you that Iran’s nuclear facilities would be destroyed, one way or another. This promise has been fulfilled,” he said.

In response, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accused the US of breaching international law.

“The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran’s peaceful nuclear installations,” Araghchi said.

“The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior.”

He added that Iran “reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people”.

The raid on the Iran nuclear sites was reportedly carried out by B-2 stealth bombers that dropped so-called “bunker buster bombs,” along with submarine-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Israel launched an aggressive attack on Iran on June 13, claiming that it wanted to remove any chance of Tehran developing nuclear weapons despite Israel itself widely assuming to have nuclear weapons.

At least 430 people have been killed and 3,500 injured in Iran since Israel began its attacks, Iranian state-run Nour News said, citing the Ministry of Health.

Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only. Iranian officials have repeatedly said they do not plan to develop nuclear weapons but will pursue its right to nuclear energy and research.

Iran’s nuclear agency on Sunday confirmed radiation system data and field surveys do not show signs of contamination or danger to residents near the sites.

“Following the illegal US attack on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites, field surveys and radiation systems data showed: No contamination recorded,” the organisation said in a social media post, adding that there was no danger to residents around.

Later on Sunday, the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency said it had not detected any increase in radiation levels at key nuclear sites in Iran following US air strikes.

“Following attacks on three nuclear sites in Iran… the IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,” the nuclear watchdog posted on X.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “gravely alarmed” by the “dangerous escalation” of the US strikes.

“There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,” he said in a statement.

The US attacks mark a major turning point for Trump, who campaigned for his second term on a pledge to end “forever wars”.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr Binoy Kampmark

Farce is a regular feature of international relations.  It can be gaudy and lurid, dressed up in all manner of outfits.  It can adopt an absurd visage that renders the subject comical and lacking in credibility.  That subject is the European Union, that curious collective of cobbled, sometimes erratic nation states that has pretensions of having a foreign policy, hints at having a security policy and yearns for a cohering enemy.

With its pre-emptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities and much civilian infrastructure besides, Israel is being treated as a delicate matter.  Condemnation of its attacks as a violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the threat or use of force against independent, sovereign states, should have been a formality.  Likewise, the violation of the various protocols dealing with the protection of civilian infrastructure and nuclear facilities. 

Rather than chastise Israel for committing a crime against peace, Iran was chided for exercising a retaliatory right that arose the moment Israeli weaponry started striking targets across the country on June 12.  A villain had been identified, but it was not Israel.

With this skewed and absurd assessment of self-defence, notably by the Europeans and the US, French President Emmanuel Macron could only weakly declare that it was “essential to urgently bring these military operations to an end, as they pose serious threats to regional security.”  On June 18, he gave his foreign minister Jean-Nöel Barrott the task of launching an “initiative, with close European partners, to propose a […] negotiated settlement, designed to end the conflict.”  The initiative, to commence as talks on June 20 in Geneva, would involve the foreign ministers of France and Germany, along with Iran’s own Abbas Araghchi and relevant officials from the European Union.

Not much in terms of detail has emerged from that gathering, though Macron was confident, after holding phone talks with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, of a “path” that would “end war and avoid even greater dangers”.  To attain that goal, “we will accelerate the negotiations led by France and its European partners with Iran.” 

It has been reported that the E3 countries (France, Germany and the UK) felt that Israel would refuse to accept a ceasefire as things stood, while the resumption of negotiations between Tehran and Washington seemed unlikely.  With these factors in mind, the proposal entailed conducting a parallel process of negotiations  that would – again, a force of parochial habit – focus on Iranian conduct rather than Israeli aggression.  Iran would have to submit to more intrusive inspections, not merely regarding its nuclear program but its ballistic missile arsenal, albeit permitting Tehran a certain uranium enrichment capacity. 

It was clear, in short, who was to wear the dunce’s hat.  As Macron reiterated, Tehran could never acquire nuclear weapons.  “It is up to Iran to provide full guarantees that its intentions are peaceful.”

A senior Iranian official, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, saw little to impress him.  “The discussions and proposals made by the Europeans in Geneva were unrealistic.  Insisting on these positions will not bring Iran and Europe closer to an agreement.”  Having given the proposals a cold shower, the official nonetheless conceded that “Iran will review the European proposals in Tehran and present its responses in the next meeting.”

The European proposals were more than unrealistic.  They did nothing to compel Israel to stop its campaign, effectively making the Iranians concede surrender and return to negotiations even as their state is being destabilised.  While their command structure and nuclear scientific establishment face liquidation, their civilian infrastructure malicious destruction, they are to be the stoic ones of the show, turning the other cheek.  With this, Israel can operate outside the regulatory frameworks of nuclear non-proliferation, being an undeclared nuclear weapons state that also refuses to submit to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The European proposition would also do nothing to stop what are effectively war crimes happening, and being planned, in real time.  The EU states have made little of the dangers associated with Israel’s striking of nuclear facilities, something they were most willing to do when Russia seized the Zaporizhzhia plant from Ukraine in March 2022.  During capture, the plant was shelled, while the ongoing conflict continues to risk the safety of the facility.

The International Committee for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) has also drawn attention to the critical risks associated with attacking nuclear facilities.  “The use of force against nuclear facilities,” it stated in a media release, “violates international law and risks radioactive contamination with long-term consequences for human health and environment.”  That same point has been made by the director general of the IAEA, Rafael Marino Grossi.  “Military escalation,” stated Grossi on June 16, “threatens lives, increases the chance of radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment and delays indispensable work towards a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon.” 

US President Donald Trump’s own assessment of the EU’s feeble intervention was self-serving but apposite.  “Nah, they didn’t help.”  The Iranians did not care much for the Europeans.  “They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help on this one.”  In fact, the European effort, led unconvincingly by Macron, is looking most unhelpful.

Dr Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Francisco Dominguez

On the eve of Venezuela’s presidential election on 29^th July 2024, Guardian correspondents, Tiago Rogero (based in Rio de Janeiro) and Sam Jones (based in Madrid) predicted the vote “could end 25 years of socialist rule.” It did not. The following, 30 July, another group of Guardian correspondents gave prominent coverage to far-right wing Venezuelan politician Maria Corina Machado, quoting her claim that “Maduro’s exit was inevitable.” Yet, Nicolas Maduro was inaugurated as the re-elected president for the 2025-2031 term on 10 January 2025.

The July 2024 presidential election was followed by the election for National Assembly deputies and all 24 governorships of Venezuela’s federal structure on 25 May 2025. Venezuela’s US-funded far-right opposition, led by Machado boycotted the vote. Corporate media outlets –including the New York Times, The Washington Post, Le Monde, El País, the BBC, and others – framed their coverage by labelling the election “divisive” and extensively quoting Machado’s claim that “85% of the electorate did not obey the regime and said no.” In reality, she falsely portrayed the opposition’s boycott as a political victory, implying widespread voter rejection.

Unlike the July 2024 presidential election –when the far-right factions instigated street violence resulting in 27 deaths at the hands of armed thugs, including two armed attacks on the presidential palace –, the 25 May 2025 legislative and gubernatorial elections (Venezuela’s 32^nd electoral process), proceeded calmly and peacefully. However, the far-right’s boycott was never merely a peaceful protest against an election organized by a government they refuse to recognise. Their actions went far beyond that.

On 28 May, Venezuela’s Interior Minister, Diosdado Cabello, reported the arrest of over 70 individuals of various nationalities (Venezuelan, Colombian, American, Argentine, Spanish, Ecuadorian, Serbian, Albanian and others). Several foreign-funded ‘NGOs’ appeared implicated in the plot. Authorities seized explosives, assault rifles, and other military equipment intended for attacks on foreign embassies, hospitals, emergency services, electricity substations, police stations, and high-profile political figures – particularly those from the opposition who participated in the election. The suspects had entered Venezuela via Colombia. Cabello also revealed that Venezuela’s armed forces had thwarted nearly 60 attacks on oil installations in the preceding ten days. Evidence indicated the terrorist group was led by Venezuela’s far-right leaders.

 This was not their first attempt. The government has also reported the arrest of mercenaries coming from Trinidad and Tobago with ties to a broader network trained in Ecuador – a country now reportedly a hub of cocaine exports. A glance at a map reveals Venezuela’s encirclement by US-aligned hostile forces: Guyana, Ecuador, Colombian narcotraffickers, and SOUTHCOM to its north and beyond.

Machado’s boycott strategy backfired, fracturing her already divided coalition further when several former boycotters decided to stand as candidates and urged their supporters to vote. The result? Chavismo secured 253 of 285 for the National Assembly and 23 of 24 governorships, including the election of a governor for Guayana Esequiba –a territory Venezuela claims. The sole governorship not won by Chavismo, Cojedes, went to Alberto Galíndez, an opposition politician who recognises Maduro’s legitimacy and accepted the overall results. Moreover, Chavismo gained 1.3 million more votes than in the 2021 elections, demonstrating growing support. With this victory, President Maduro and the Bolivarian Revolution now hold not only the presidency until 2031, but also commanding majorities in the National Assembly and among governorships.

The May 2025 election results marked a resounding triumph for the Bolivarian government and a stinging defeat for the Trump administration –particularly with the election of Chavista, Admiral Neil Villamizar as governor for Guayana Esequiba. On 23 May, The Guardian quoted Guyana’s president Irfaan Ali,  who denounced the election in this state as an “assault on Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” Yet, the report conveniently omitted any mention of the 1966 Geneva Agreement, which underpins Venezuela’s claim.[2]

In collusion with Guyana, the US has transformed Guyana into a military enclave, using it as a base for regular military provocations against Venezuela since 2021. Strangely, just one day after the election, on 26 May 2025, The Guardian wrote an exhaustively researched feature with stunning photographs –not on Venezuela’s election, but on…the Orinoco crocodile.

Beyond their self-defeating abstentionism, Machado and the far-right further eroded their credibility by enthusiastically endorsing U.S. sanctions –effectively advocating for Venezuela’s economic strangulation – and cheering Trump’s brutal deportation policies targeting Latin Americans, especially Venezuelans whom he falsely labels as “government-controlled criminals.

When asked whether she supported Trump’s deeply unpopular policy of deporting Latino and Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s CECOT prison –a facility notorious for torture– Machado replied “Absolutely!” –uncritically parroting Trump’s baseless claims.

The record of Venezuela’s far-right opposition is simply appalling. Not only have they been heavily involved with Colombian narco-traffickers to carry out terrorist acts against their own country, but their leader, Juan Guaidó, even proclaimed himself “interim president” on a Caracas street in 2019. Worse still, this claim was recognized by the U.S.-led Collective West. They colluded with Western powers to facilitate the confiscation of Venezuelan assets—including gold, bank accounts, and property—in actions that amount to nothing less than high treason.

With the backing of the Collective West, they prolonged the farce of the 2015 National Assembly’s legitimacy—where they once held a majority—long after its mandate expired in 2020. In fact, they still falsely claim legitimacy in 2025, five years after the end of their constitutional term, while continuing to pay monthly U.S. dollar “emoluments” to their obsolete lawmakers.

Under the guise of a humanitarian effort to bring food by force across the Colombian border, they even attempted a military incursion with Colombian paramilitaries, aiming to seize control of a Venezuelan city and install a “provisional government” to be recognized by the U.S. and the Collective West.

The Venezuelan opposition’s actions are indefensible. They have been linked to multiple assassination attempts against President Maduro, including plots to decapitate Venezuela’s political and military leadership using explosives. They organized a mercenary incursion aimed at violently overthrowing the Bolivarian government, with the explicit goal of assassinating Maduro and as many Bolivarian leaders as possible. They have enthusiastically supported the U.S. blockade’s economic asphyxiation—which remains in place—while sabotaging every election since 2013 through violent disruptions.

Repeatedly, they have called on the military to revolt, urging the overthrow of Venezuela’s democratically elected governments (under both Chávez and Maduro). Their tactics include systematic infrastructure sabotage, consistently timed to coincide with elections. They have exacerbated U.S. sanctions by promoting hoarding, artificially inflating prices, and engineering shortages of basic goods—deliberately inflicting severe hardship on the population. Even worse, they manipulated Venezuela’s currency crisis through DolarToday, a platform that daily published inflated exchange rates to fuel hyperinflation.

The opposition’s transgressions go even further. On multiple occasions they have enlisted the services of mercenary Erik Prince, even launching a crowdfunding campaign (Ya Casi Venezuela) to finance his proposed violent overthrow of President Maduro’s government. They are currently under FBI investigation for large-scale corruption, accused of embezzling nearly US$1 billion in humanitarian aid meant for Venezuelans abroad – of which mere 2% as properly allocated). Worse still, they have fraudulently managed over US$40 billion in Venezuelan assets through shady contracts with Miami-based firms, exchanging national resources for personal bribes. Their attempt to replicate the DolarToday scheme was swiftly  crushed by the government, which acted decisively to shut it down.

This brazen subversion aligns with broader U.S. imperial ambitions. In a blatant reaffirmation of the Monroe Doctrine, SOUTHCOM commander Admiral Alvin Holsey declared before the Senate Armed Services Committee (13 February 2025) that the U.S. must prevail in the “strategic competition with China in the Western Hemisphere” and counter “Russia’s malign agenda” – naming Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua as their conduits. Thus Washington now openly frames its assault on Bolivarian Revolution as part of its geopolitical competition with China and Russia. US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth underscored this stance on 6 June 2025, bluntly stating “We are preparing for war with China.”

Yet, despite 12 years of relentless aggression since Comandante Chávez’s passing, the Venezuelan people have shown extraordinary resilience, defying predictions of inevitable collapse. The government’s response? Deepening democracy. Ahead of upcoming municipal and mayoral elections (27 July 2025), Venezuela is intensifying its participatory democracy model, empowering the comunas –grassroots, self-managed councils where communities directly decide and implement projects to improve their living standards: direct democracy.

President Maduro has announced the “creation of the Communal Portfolio Fund of the national budget” that will directly allocate resources to projects developed by local communities. These funds will be managed through communal circuits, with spending priorities democratically decided by commune inhabitants themselves.

In revealing interview (7 June 2025), Jesús Faría, PSUV Vice Minister of Productive Economy of the PSUV, emphasized the urgent need to accelerate the expansion of Communal direct democracy and consolidate people’s power. Faría made a critical observation: the PSUV must take the lead in advancing the commune system. With tens of thousands of grassroots organizations across Venezuela, the PSUV maintains a Gramscian hegemony –not by imposition but by organically articulating this vibrant social ecosystem into a cohesive for socialism. Its structural bonds with them enable it to harmonize and mobilize this rich social universe towards socialist construction.

Thus, even as U.S. imperialism doubles down on its fanatical crusade to destroy the Bolivarian Revolution, Venezuela is fortifying its socialist foundations. By empowering communes, deepening participatory democracy, and strengthening the PSUV’s vanguard role, the revolution is building unshakable resilience—proving that people’s power, not imperial aggression, will shape Venezuela’s future.

Francisco Dominguez is the national secretary of the UK-based Venezuela Solidarity.

23 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Ali Abutalebi

19 June marked the seventh day of Israeli strikes against Iran, with developments appearing to diverge from White House expectations.

Following targeted attacks on senior military commanders and nuclear scientists, along with strikes on nuclear and military facilities, Iran has regained operational control. The country launched its ‘True Promise 3’ operation without delay.

After initial disruption in the opening hours, Iran appointed replacement commanders and enhanced the effectiveness of its air defence systems. Iranian authorities also implemented security measures to identify suspected infiltrators who had allegedly used drones and other small aircraft to conduct covert operations within the country.

US and Israeli authorities likely did not anticipate an immediate collapse of the Iranian government through airstrikes alone. While both governments have made strategic miscalculations, it would be surprising if they genuinely believed a state could be toppled solely through aerial bombardment.

The apparent strategy seemed to rely on triggering civil unrest among opposition groups following the initial government disruption. This would have potentially created openings for trained mercenaries to initiate a secondary phase of operations. However, this scenario failed to materialise.

Instead, the majority of Iranians, particularly after reports emerged of civilian casualties from the attacks, responded with anger and solidarity. The civilian losses appear to have awakened a sense of national unity and patriotism among the population.

Trump’s contradictory statements can be understood within this context of strategic miscalculation, alongside pressure from the Zionist authorities, as evidenced in social media posts and public commentary.

Trump’s messaging has been inconsistent: one day stating he has no plans for US involvement in the conflict, the next threatening to consider declaring war against Iran unless it accepts ‘unconditional surrender’.

On the other side, the televised message from Iran’s Supreme Leader was clear and definitive: ‘We do not accept imposed “peace”, just as we did not accept imposed war, as we demonstrated during the Iraqi Ba’ath regime’s invasion of Iran’.

This stance is reflected in the Iranian armed forces’ retaliation and the positions taken by senior political officials.

Perhaps this explains why International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi acknowledged that they have ‘no proof of Iran’s active plan to build nuclear weapons’.

Notably, Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, had previously made similar statements, though Trump recently indicated he dismisses them, saying he doesn’t care about ‘what she said’. This echoes the pretext used to invade Iraq: claims of ‘weapons of mass destruction’ that proved to be unfounded, similar to the discredited Nayirah testimony that became a scandal for the George W. Bush administration.

We could debate for hours about the reasons behind the current situation and the timing of direct attacks on Iran: external factors, internal catalysts, international dynamics, and more.

However, three points are clear:

First, Israel is not operating independently. The Israeli state functions as a settler colonial entity representing Western imperial interests in West Asia.

Second, the United States disregards international law, evidence, and public opinion when it calculates that the benefits of military action outweigh the costs.

Third, and most importantly in my view, this is not a religious or regional conflict between two competing powers. This represents a new phase of the ‘New Middle East’ plan, as reflected in the cover of a recent Time magazine issue. And the fragmentation of Iran is a main part of this plan. It builds upon earlier strategic frameworks, including the Yinon Plan (1980s) and ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm’ (1990s), with backing from the Western bloc.

From this perspective, this constitutes a full-scale confrontation between the Global North and Global South, with Iran positioned on the front lines of Western imperialist aggression against national liberation movements throughout the Global South.

Based on this analysis, all revolutionary forces must unite behind this slogan: ‘Hands Off Iran!’

And a message to our friends around the world: Iran resists, to the last person, the last bullet, the last breath.

Ali Abutalebi has been the executive director of Mazmoon Books since 2005. 

21 June 2025

Source: countercurrents.org