Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

This is part 2 of a two-part analysis. Please read part 1 here.

President Putin sent a gracious message to Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, personally congratulating him on his election as Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Words do (italics mine) matter:

“At a time when Iran is confronting armed aggression, your efforts in this high position will undoubtedly require great courage and dedication. I am confident that you will honourably continue your father’s work and unite the Iranian people in the face of an immense ordeal.”

After stressing foreign “aggression” and continuity of government, Putin reiterated the strategic partnership in no uncertain terms:

“For my part, I would like to reaffirm our unwavering support for Tehran and solidarity with our Iranian friends. Russia has been and will remain a reliable partner for the Islamic Republic.”

Cue to a desperate President Trump, or neo-Caligula, placing a call to Putin, essentialy to ask him to intervene as a mediator to convince Iran into accepting a ceasefire. What he heard instead was a polite enumeration of unpleasant facts regarding the war of choice launched by the Epstein Syndicate on Iran.

Trump is throwing his favorite envoy Steve Witkoff under the bus, alongside puny Jared Kushner and the push up clown posing as Secretary of Forever Wars, as the ones who forced him to bomb Iran. It’s Witkoff who claimed after the phone call that Russia stated it’s not transfering intel data to Iran, as confirmed, he said, by presidential assistant for international affairs Yuri Ushakov.

Nonsense. Ushakov never said such a thing. Russians at the highest political level do not comment on military matters linked to their strategic partnerships with both Iran and China.

Now for the facts.

Russian intel, Iranian execution, and no military treaty

It’s no secret that Moscow has shared what can be defined as industrial amounts of intel – and combat data – gathered in Ukraine with Tehran. A great deal of the advanced jamming tech and satellite intel leading to the serial destruction of THAAD radars, Patriot radars, and every other ultra-heavy fixed radar installations comes from both Russia and China.

Even if footage of Russian S-400 and Krasukha systems successfully intercepting American missiles has not been released, and probably it won’t be, the fact is Russian technicians are helping Iranian crews fine-tune the trajectories of missiles and drones during flight.

So there is a sophisticated, practical interplay in effect between Chinese and Russian high-resolution orbital imagery and targeting assistance, and swarms of cheap, $20,000 drones.

Russia provided Iran with the super-charged, upgraded and battle-tested Geran-3 and Geran-5 drones. These are the facto Russian Shaheds: lethal, inexpensive cruise missiles, equipped with anti-jamming via their Komet antenna, and able to reach 600 km/h. They are now all over the battlefield.

Now for the extremely savoury part.

Slightly over a week before the Epstein Syndicate decapitation strike on Tehran on February 28, Russian intel sent to the IRGC the fully developed US strike plan – complete with target matrices, launch platforms, timing sequences.

So the IRGC knew exactly what to expect.

Six weeks before that, in December last year, Moscow signed a 500 million euros weapons deal with Iran, including the delivery of 500 Verba MANPADS launchers and 2,500 advanced 9M336 missiles.

Essentially, Russia is providing Iran with intel and air defense. And China provides anti-ship missiles and real-time satellite surveillance.

The beauty of it all is there’s no formal trilateral alliance in play. And no military treaty. It’s all embedded in their interlocking strategic partnerships.

Considering all of the above, it’s no wonder the puzzled Epstein Syndicate is blaming Russia and China intel for certified hits such as the satellite communications station part of the communications and cyber defense unit of the Israeli military near Beer Sheeba.

And we’re not even talking about the next, inevitable Russian move: installing the extremely powerful S-500 Prometheus air defense system in Iran.

How to capture market share without breaking a sweat

The Russia-Iran strategic partnership – even if does not include a military treaty – works in several interlocked levels.

On the energy front. Moscow, under Putin’s orders, is now evaluating what may eventually become a definitive pre-emptive halt of remaining exports to the EU, so they may be redirected to Asia at ever-climbing prices.

The EU after all is phasing Russian gas out: short-term contracts will be banned starting late April; full LNG ban by the end of the year; and ban on pipeline gas by 2027.

So a lot of LNG is already being directed to China, India, Thailand and Philippines. As in Follow The Money: LNG tankers diverted mid-voyage from European ports to Asia, offering higher spot prices.

Every day that the Strait of Hormuz remains closed – and it will remain closed – Russia captures extra market share, anywhere, at a premium, without breaking a sweat.

Secretary of Iranian Security Council Ali Larijani made it crystal clear in several languages, including Russian: when it comes to Hormuz, there are “open opportunities for everyone”, as in partnership with allies Russia and China; and it’s “a dead-end for warmongers”, as in the Epstein Syndicate and other hostile entities.

Russia certainly does not need the Strait of Hormuz open. Still, it received a nod and a wink from Larijani acknowledging their partnership.

The Epstein Syndicate war on Iran is becoming immensely profitable for the Russian state budget – something not seen since early 2022 price hikes. With the Strait of Hormuz closed and Qatar LNG completely out of the picture, Russian energy is the only game in town: no more a sanctioned commodity. Talk about the war on Iran weaponizing Russian oil and gas.

What will India learn from its double betrayal

India, by contrast, is a case that could break any psychoanalytic cabinet. New Delhi is chairing BRICS in 2026. It’s one of BRICS founders, and Iran is a full BRICS member. Every BRICS original member condemned the Epstein Syndicate war on Iran: Brazil, Russia, China, South Africa. India waited three days to basically say that Iran and the US should talk, “nicely”.

While Prime Minister Modi was signing defense deals with that death cult in West Asia – 40% of its weapons exports go to India – a fellow BRICS member was being bombed with some of these very same weapons.

Modi in effect was in Israel gushing about “motherland” (India) and “fatherland” (Israel) only 48 hours before the death cult in West Asia and the wider Epstein Syndicate launched their decapitation strike on Tehran.

For all practical purposes, the Modi gang privileged weapons deals – and Trump’s tariff relief – over international law.

And it gets even filthier.

India could not even issue a pro-forma statement condemning the American torpedo attack on Iranian warship Iris Dena on international waters – after the Indian Navy hosted Iris Dena in a military exercise. All BRICS founding members condemned it. Not India.

The controversy is still rolling: India may have even given the coordinates of the – unarmed and invited – Iris Dena to the Americans. And now Sri Lanka, under American pressure, refuses to hand over the dead bodies to Iran.

It will take time to evaluate how deep India’s betrayal blew BRICS apart. As it stands, BRICS are in a coma.

Perhaps there may be something auspicious coming out of it. And that’s thanks to unbounded Iranian finesse.

Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, had a phone call with Abbas Araghchi, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran.

Aragchi played it like a consumate gentleman. He did not lecture India, or exploded in rage – American-style. He was restrained, as in letting India know that Iran is fully aware New Delhi is in a very tight spot, and that Tehran interprets this strategic ambiguity as relatively useful, and not hostile.

In practical terms, Iran is virtually India’s neighbor: Iran’s southern Makran coast is right across the Arabian Sea from India’s western shore. Kandla Port in Gujarat to Chabahar in Sistan-Balochistan is just 550 nautical miles. Talk about a maritime corridor, which for centuries was a Maritime Silk Road between two civilizational states.

And now it’s all back, as part of the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), which links 3 BRICS: Russia, Iran and India, the theme of my ‘Golden Corridor’ documentary shot last year in Iran.

Moreover, Iran is the nearest major source of oil and LNG for India.

Russia is teaching India its own lesson. New Delhi will have to pay dearly for it – as in no more energy discounts, even if Moscow is ready to potentially raise India’s share of Russian crude imports to up to 40%, as confirmed by Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak.

New Delhi may be out of the picture in terms of understanding the enormous stakes of the Epstein Syndicate war on Iran.

Moscow-Beijing though, are on a whole new level. They are investing on the optimal outcome: a war that the Empire of Chaos cannot win, and at a price it cannot afford to pay.

The stage is set. Russia briefed Iran on what was coming; Russia-China provide crucial intel and 24/7 satellite surveillance; and Decentralized Mosaic does the heavy lifting. The Exceptionalist strike “plan” was deeply compromised from the start.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The recent statement by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian asserting that Iran does not intend to attack neighboring countries generated widespread misinterpretations in several analytical circles. Many observers assumed the message was directed at the Gulf monarchies. However, such an interpretation makes little sense considering that American attacks against Iran are being launched from Sunni countries in the region. Moreover, Iran continues to frequently strike targets in those states.

A closer reading of the statement indicates that the message had a specific recipient: Azerbaijan. Pezeshkian’s remarks appear to have been primarily an attempt at de-escalation amid the possibility of a new front opening in the current war.

The tension began after the crash of a supposed Iranian drone at an airport in Azerbaijan. Authorities in Baku classified the episode as a possible hostile attack and responded with harsh rhetoric, including promises of the use of force. Military movements along the border were reported, suggesting that the incident could escalate into a direct confrontation.

Tehran immediately denied any involvement in the episode. Such a denial alone would not necessarily be enough to dispel suspicion. Nevertheless, several factors make the hypothesis of a deliberate Iranian attack unlikely. First, if the objective had been to strike Israeli or American strategic assets located on Azerbaijani territory, Iran would hardly have chosen such a limited and ineffective action as a simple drone incident that caused no significant damage.

Furthermore, Baku’s own reaction raises questions. Interstate conflicts are rarely triggered by isolated drone incidents, especially when there are no casualties or meaningful destruction. The speed and intensity of the response suggest that the episode may have been interpreted within an already tense political context, in which some actors might have been seeking a pretext for escalation.

Another relevant element concerns Iran’s demographic composition. A significant portion of the country’s population consists of ethnic Azeris, which creates an additional layer of sensitivity in bilateral relations. An open conflict with Azerbaijan could generate internal tensions and undesirable identity-based mobilizations within Iran itself. Historically, for this reason, Tehran has adopted a cautious posture toward Baku, avoiding direct confrontations whenever possible.

Given this context, alternative hypotheses have emerged to explain the incident. One possibility is a false-flag operation conducted by actors interested in dragging Azerbaijan into the current conflict between Iran, the United States, and Israel. Another possibility involves the use of electronic warfare capabilities to divert Iranian drones launched toward other directions and cause them to fall on Azerbaijani territory, thereby creating an artificially politicized incident.

Regardless of the origin of the episode, the decisive factor for understanding the crisis lies in Azerbaijan’s geopolitical alliances. In recent years, Baku has developed significant strategic cooperation with Israel, particularly in the fields of energy, defense and intelligence. However, this rapprochement creates tensions with another key Azerbaijani partner: Turkey. Ankara has traditionally regarded Baku as a natural ally based on ethnic, linguistic, and historical affinities between Turks and Azeris. The slogan “one nation, two states” symbolized this partnership for many years.

However, the regional scenario changed significantly after the fall of the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, an event that altered the strategic balance in the Middle East. With the weakening of the former geopolitical buffer zone represented by the Syrian state, competing expansionist projects began interacting more directly. On one side stands Turkey’s regional strategy, often described as neo-Ottomanism; on the other, the expansion of Zionist influence under the project commonly referred to as “Greater Israel.”

In this context, Turkey increasingly perceives Israel as a potential existential rival. The emergence of possible anti-Turkish military alignments in the Eastern Mediterranean – such as cooperation between Greece, Israel, and Cyprus – as well as Israeli involvement in the Horn of Africa, including the recognition of Somaliland, are clear signs of growing hostility between Tel Aviv and Ankara. For this reason, despite its many disagreements with Iran, Turkey currently sees Tehran’s role in the conflict as indirectly beneficial, since it contributes to weakening Israel and improving Turkish strategic security.

Within this framework, Turkey does not want its “brother nation” in the South Caucasus to attack Iran, as such a move would undermine Ankara’s broader strategic posture toward Israel. By threatening Iran, Baku risks ignoring its closest ethnic ally in favor of its partnership with Israel – something many Turkish observers view as unacceptable. Among Turkish nationalist circles – including Turkists, Turanists, neo-Ottomanists, and even Islamist circles – the possibility of Azerbaijan acting militarily against Iran under Israeli influence is widely interpreted as a move contrary to the interests of the broader Turkic world.

Thus, the current crisis reveals a complex web of rivalries and alliances. A direct confrontation between Iran and Azerbaijan would have profound consequences not only for the South Caucasus but also for the strategic balance involving Turkey, Israel, and other regional powers. It would also carry serious risks of internal instability within Iran due to its large ethnic Azeri population.

In this sense, Pezeshkian’s statement can be understood as an attempt to prevent a limited incident from evolving into a broader conflict. Whether this effort at de-escalation will be sufficient remains uncertain. What seems clear, however, is that a war between Iran and Azerbaijan would hardly benefit any regional actor other than those interested in deepening divisions and rivalries across the Eurasian space – namely Israel and the United States.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

“Our success will continue to hinge on America’s military power and the credibility of our assurances to our allies and partners in the Middle East.”

These were the words spoken in December 2013 by the Secretary of Defense of the Obama administration, Chuck Hagel, to the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council. That reinforced the historical guarantees given by Washington to its puppets, reaffirming the deceptive propaganda that the United States is the guardian of global security.

Promises like that are made by every administration, whether Democrat or Republican. Twelve years later, Donald Trump would reinforce that mantra again, addressing Qatar specifically: “The United States shall regard any armed attack on the territory (…) of Qatar as a threat to the peace and security of the United States.” According to Trump, the United States would respond to attacks against Qatar with “all lawful and appropriate measures,” “including militarily.”

Israel had just bombed Doha, targeting Hamas leaders. The entire speech by the president of the United States was completely hollow: the Patriot systems acquired for 10 billion dollars in the 2012 agreement, together with a new acquisition of Patriot and NASAMS systems for more than 2 billion dollars in 2019, did not intercept the Israeli bombardment. And the United States did not consider that attack a “threat to the peace and security of the United States” — on the contrary, they turned a blind eye to it.

Qatar hosts the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. Air Force and the British Royal Air Force at Al-Udeid Air Base, built with more than 8 billion dollars invested by the Qatari government. None of this has protected the Qatari people. Iran’s retaliation for the U.S.–Israel aggression revealed that the base itself (the largest U.S. military installation in the Middle East) is a fragile target: it was struck by a missile on the 3rd, which likely damaged or destroyed the AN/FPS-132 early-warning radar, one of the most important sensors in the U.S. missile defense system, valued at about $1.1 billion. Satellite images suggest significant damage to the equipment, which could compromise the ability to detect ballistic missiles at long distances.

In 2017, Saudi Arabia spent $110 billion on U.S. military equipment in an agreement that foresees spending more than $350 billion by next year — including Patriot and THAAD systems. Apparently, this enormous expenditure is not guaranteeing fully secure protection. Despite important interceptions in the current war, the U.S. government instructed part of its personnel to flee Saudi Arabia to protect themselves — which reveals that even the United States does not trust the defensive capability it sells to others. In fact, in the early hours of the 3rd, two drones struck the U.S. embassy in Riyadh and, two days earlier, U.S. soldiers were also targeted.

Since 1990, Gulf countries have spent nearly $500 billion purchasing weapons and protection systems from the United States, according to data from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) database and reports from the Congressional Research Service (CRS). The construction and maintenance of defense infrastructure by the United States is almost entirely financed by the host countries. All of this is being blown apart by the legitimate Iranian retaliation.

The ineffectiveness of the protection provided by the United States had already been demonstrated in last year’s war, but also by the launches from Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis toward Israel, which shattered the myth surrounding the Iron Dome. In a certain sense, the success of many of those attacks represented a humiliation for the all-powerful American arms industry. The several MQ-9 Reaper drones shot down by the Yemenis represented losses amounting to $200 million — the drones used by the Houthis to shoot down the American aircraft cost an insignificant fraction to produce.

The ineffectiveness of American protection also reveals the extremely low quality of the products of its military complex. This complex is dominated by a small handful of monopolies such as Lockheed Martin and Raytheon which, without competitors and with clients subservient to the American government, see no need to make the maximum effort to produce weapons and systems of unsurpassable quality. Finally, corruption runs rampant in this field, and inferior peoples such as those of the Gulf do not deserve to consume products of the same quality as those destined for America — apparently their regimes are willing to pay dearly for anything.

Iran, with all its experience of more than four decades dealing with aggression, has known how to use these vulnerabilities very well. Leaders at the highest levels of the Iranian state publicly insist that peace in the Middle East is impossible while U.S. bases remain operational in the region. Saeed Khatibzadeh, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister, stated, “We have no option but to put an end to the existence of American presence in the Persian Gulf area.” These appeals are certainly circulating in neighboring countries — both among the general population and within the armed and political forces.

The Persian nation is not only attacking military installations but also strategic targets that affect the nerve center of the Gulf countries’ economies: the energy industry — in retaliation for the bombings of its own oil infrastructure by the United States and Israel. These Iranian attacks place even greater pressure on the puppet regimes of imperialism to do something to stop their masters. The obvious solution would be to prevent the use of their territory for aggression against Iran, which would necessarily imply closing the military bases.

Although all these countries are dictatorships that repress any dissent, as the suffering of the civilian population increases, popular discontent may become uncontrollable. Their rulers know this and are already racking their brains to find a safe way out of this potentially explosive situation.

Will the peoples of these countries swallow all the lying propaganda that their regimes — fed by the lie industry of the United States and Israel — try to tell them, that Iran is the aggressor and responsible for the attacks? But why do the United States build missile launch bases so close to residential neighborhoods? Clearly, just like the Israelis, this is not a “moral” and “ethical” army: those people exist to serve as human shields for American soldiers. The logic of protection is inverted: it is not U.S. anti-aircraft systems that serve to protect the Saudi, Emirati or Qatari people — it is these second-class citizens who must die to protect the occupying forces.

Moreover, U.S. military bases frequently house soldiers responsible for crimes against local populations. This became explicit during the Iraq War. For example, the rape of a 14-year-old girl named Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, followed by her murder and the killing of her family after soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division invaded her house in Mahmudiya in 2004. Or the rapes documented over years during the invasion of Iraq, together with the practice of sexual exploitation and prostitution carried out in areas near American military installations such as Balad Air Base, used by the 4th Infantry Division.

On the 1st, U.S. Marines killed at least nine protesters who attempted to storm the American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, in protest against the criminal aggression against Iran that had already massacred about 150 girls in an Iranian school the previous day. This is what imperialist presence in the countries of the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa and Latin America serves for: to rape, murder and use the natives themselves as human shields, not to protect them.

How long will it take before they rise up against this true military occupation? Probably not long.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Join up the dots and you come to the same conclusion. America and Israel are the biggest losers in the Iran war. But not Trump.

A recent poll in the U.S. concluded that Donald Trump tells the truth only about 3 percent of the time during his public announcements at press conferences. Perhaps it was his stint at being a celebrity on TV that taught him how gullible people in America are when fed the most fanciful, moronic lies a leading figure can tell, through the American media. Of course, it’s also about the journalists as well, and if there’s one thing that the Trump administrations have taught us, it is how poor the general level of journalism is in America these days. American journalists are not afraid to ask difficult questions or disbelieve what they are told. They simply don’t know how to do this in the first place.

Covering the Iran war, it is breathtaking, some of the brazen lies he tells while being questioned by journalists who are complicit in his dirty work. The mere idea that Iran, for example, acquired a Tomahawk missile and used it to kill its own schoolgirls is beyond absurd. How could journalists not question such a reply when it is so clear that Trump is lying through his teeth?

Because of this lying, we can see how Trump works, though. Unlike other U.S. presidents who have some shame and discomfort in lying to the press, Trump suffers no such handicap and so can take on bolder, more daring ventures on the global stage. In this environment, there is no respect for international law or even due process within the political framework of how Congress works. Trump hasn’t worked out how to defeat Iran, but he has all the contingent narratives to lay out afterwards to explain why everything that goes wrong is not his fault. We see that he is already preparing himself for the day of judgement by the press pack in the coming days and weeks by telling them that it was Jared Kushner, Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff who told him to hit Iran.

The direction towards these three is revealing. Of course, we have learned the simple rule of Trump when it comes to decisions. When things go well, everything was his decision; when things go badly, blame others.

And so, the blaming of these three is a clear example and acknowledgement by Trump that the Iran war was a failure. The U.S. didn’t bring about regime change nor seek any military concessions from its government. In fact, it’s really hard to establish one minor point where you could say that the Americans chalked up any kind of victory, given the high energy prices around the world and the Straits of Hormuz still closed to oil tankers. Despite the U.S. being a net exporter of oil, the crisis is raising pump prices back home, and so it is Trump’s support base of blue-collar workers who are, once again, paying the price for his failed policies.

This last point about the Straits of Hormuz is worth taking stock of when we examine Trump’s lies, which just get increasingly fatuous by the day. It’s like we’re dealing with a child in power who has lost sense of any of the realities around him. One of Trump’s claims which he repeats over and over again is that the U.S. navy has completely destroyed its Iranian counterpart, and that all ships have been sunk. And yet there is no video evidence at all to support this, official or even just phone footage from even one U.S. sailor’s phone. Could this be another massive Trump lie, given that he is struggling to prove to the American people or the press that the operation has been a success? Very convenient that all Iranian vessels happen to have been sunk. Perhaps the truth sunk and the Iranian vessels are still operational. The saddest thing is that not one American “journalist” is even able at a press conference, or even in their copy, to ask the most obvious question about this claim, which is: “If there is no Iranian navy, then why are the Straits of Hormuz still closed to ships passing through?”

Or is it that the Iranian navy has been destroyed, but Iran’s control of the shipping and its threat against America’s aircraft carriers is so strong and prevalent that the U.S. navy doesn’t have the capability to break the siege?

Trump is busy building up a case to make him look less culpable in the whole war, which in itself is a massive admission that it has all gone horribly wrong. These indicators are subtle and sometimes are not easy to spot, like his recent comment that GCC countries helped the U.S. bomb Iran. So the mighty U.S. navy, air force and army did not come up to scratch and had to rely on regional partners? The president needs some help here with his messaging, as he is clearly trying to spread the blame and reduce his own importance, perhaps as a ploy to not only protect himself from impeachment but from facing international criminal courts.

The lie that GCC countries bombed Iran is even more laughable than the one about Iran bombing its own schoolgirls, but with no real journalists around who are even able to ask the most obvious questions, he’ll be able to get away with it, despite the odd dichotomy of logic shooting himself in the foot. The truth about the so-called Iran War is that almost nothing we see on our TV screens is anywhere near the truth. Sometimes it is simply omission, as in the case of the real level of destruction in Israel, which is not being reported due to a shameful agreement struck between U.S. networks and Israel to block the truth and only show bombs which have hit civilian targets rather than military ones. The biggest lie possibly concerns the reasons behind it, although blithering buffoons like Lindsey Graham can hardly keep the lid on it. Money. Do even Trump’s more vociferous supporters doubt for one moment that he hasn’t made billions out of it by manipulating markets?

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

When you dance with the devil, the dance isn’t done until you are done. U.S. President Trump may have believed he could manage Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s maniacal ambitions and succeed in a contest for power; sometimes hidden, other times open. Until February 27^th, considering the ending of the 12 Day War last summer, and also UNSC 2803 on Gaza, Trump appeared to have the upper hand. But on February 28th, the script would be flipped, resulting in an honorless war on Iran; not only on the Iranian government, military, and state institutions, but on the Iranian people themselves.

The victims in this are chiefly the people of Iran, starting with some 165 Iranian school girls at the Minab school in southern Iran, killed by Israeli strikes, though Iran will not remain victims as they push to become victors. Yet this conflict has other casualties too. Trump, MAGA, and whatever efforts at rebuilding American credibility appear to be among the ruins of the US-Israeli attack on the sovereign nation of Iran, and the despicable assassination of its leader Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei. It appears that the U.S. has passed the point of no return.

The solemn burial of the 165 school girls wantonly slaughtered by U.S.-Israeli attacks

Some time ago the U.S. pushed the world into mayhem in the domain of international law. The Western powers had, since the end of the 20^th century Cold War, begun to shift away from a formal acknowledgement of international law, and pursued the rhetoric and practice of a so-called “rules based order”; one where the rules were unilaterally created by the Washington consensus, and were fluid, constantly shifting, conveniently and hypocritically to meet the needs of the American imperial machine. Trump’s mandate, from the American people, was to restore international law and credibility. But in the 47^th administration, there were some disconcerting signs early on that this would not be the case, even if somewhat hilarious. Threats made against Greenland and Canada were more comical than worrisome at the time. The strange (if mutually agreeable) outcomes with Venezuela seemed to have been a win-win for both countries. Nationalists laughed, globalists cried; but it’s all fun and games until it’s not.

So today to describe the U.S.-Israel attack on Iran as “violations of international law”, or “war crimes”, while no doubt true, feel very much like meaningless technical phrases from a bygone era. And in this new day and age, it is therefore clearer and more germane to simply describe these viscerally as murderous and valourless. It is mass murder, for at the time of writing, more than a thousand Iranian people have been killed in these wanton attacks, and this is simply ignominious, for Iran posed no imminent threat and the U.S. was engaged with Iran in negotiations towards a peaceable resolution of their differences.  It was right when the U.S. and Iran had all but tentatively agreed that Israel notified the U.S. that it was about to strike, and it is important to meditate on the profoundly dishonorable and discrediting nature of the U.S. going in on the attack instead of pushing to halt it.

Trump apparently made the grievous error, one of potentially world-changing proportions, to join in with these attacks, unlike the way his administration handled Israel’s attacks last summer. We have arrived at a catastrophic inflection point for the MAGA project and American credibility. It is impossible to underscore enough the extraordinary damage done to the U.S.’s efforts to improve its reputation under Trump, after decades of neoconservative and neoliberal imperialist adventurism in the post-Cold War period which ostensibly the Trump project was aimed at reversing.

Nuclear Blackmail?

Former CIA officer John Kiriakou claimed back in November of 2025 that Netanyahu threatened Trump with Israeli nuclear strikes on Iran, if Trump did not go along with a conventional strike at the time. Kiriakou says this information comes to him from a trusted source, and Kiriakou’s own credentials, history, and credibility as a whistle-blower who served time in U.S. prison as a result of his commitment to truth, combined with his unique access to insider information, leads us to give high credence to his testimony.

Former CIA Counter-terrorism office John Kiriakou in the November 2025 interview

According to Kiriakou:

“The reason though, I’m told that Donald Trump decided to bomb Iran, was that the Israelis said for the first time, ‘If you don’t bomb Iran to take out these deep bunkers, we are going to use nuclear weapons.’ And they have never threatened that before. And so Trump said, bombing Iran might actually save us from the start of World War III, if it keeps the Israelis from using nuclear weapons.”

In addition, we are forced to account for the conclusions of ex Saudi intel chief Prince Turki al-Faisal, who explains that Netanyahu “convinced” Trump to support him on February 28th, concluding that “This is Netanyahu’s war”.

Al Faisal’s interview with Amanpour on CNN, March 4, 2026

Trump has apparently been outmaneuvered by the Zionist establishment, even if this was the result of nuclear blackmail, and has driven MAGA smack into a Zionist brick wall, while we should caution that these are unfolding events and this is but the read of things as of today.

Trump has been trapped, compromised, and outplayed by Netanyahu and the Israeli establishment, resulting in U.S. participation in a horrifically discrediting and strategically counterproductive war on Iran. While Trump might attempt to salvage the situation, more will rely on the diplomatic and strategic intervention of BRICS leaders like Russia, China, and even India, to de-escalate this crisis.

Eliminating Khamenei was strategically self-defeating even in the narrowest and immediate sense, as the Ayatollah was arguably a moderating force on the nuclear question, and Iran’s technocratic system ensures institutional continuity regardless of leadership decapitation. It would be understandable, even expected, now if Iran were indeed to pursue nuclear weapons, assessing what has happened in some part no doubt because they do not apparently have one now. Which is not to say they ought to, but who could readily blame them today if they did?

The Kiriakou claim about Israeli nuclear blackmail, if true, represents nuclear terrorism by definition, but there is a fundamental flaw in the logic of compliance: if Trump bombed Iran to prevent an Israeli nuclear strike last summer, nothing prevents Israel from issuing the same threat again with escalating demands. The leverage problem is not resolved by submission to it, which is perhaps then what we have seen again on February 28th.

Rubio’s disavowal of the Khamenei assassination is another strange factor in this. Is it plausible deniability, or a reflection of team Trump having lost control of the situation?  Kiriakou’s claim of Israeli nuclear threats against Trump, Saudi complaints about the lack of defense for US regional bases, Prince Turki al-Faisal’s conclusion that Netanyahu pushed Trump into the war, and reports of Iranian retaliatory strikes on U.S. bases for which the Americans were underprepared, all lend towards the conclusion that the U.S. lost control of the situation and did not seek a confrontation where increasingly successful negotiations were merely a ruse.

Khamenei’s Assassination: Strategic Futility

The assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei was counterproductive on its own terms. The Ayatollah was elderly, physically declining, and had perhaps a few years remaining. If the objective was to prevent Iranian nuclearization, Khamenei’s continued leadership served that purpose better than his removal.

Iran operates as a “meritocratic technocracy” organized around organizations of experts, where individuals are promoted to below their level of competence: the next tier of leadership is perpetually prepared. This is a system governed by institutions, not men, with the sole exception of the Supreme Ayatollah’s interpretive authority. Decapitation strikes against such a system are structurally futile, and in terms of morale within Iran, these do not serve to reduce it but to strengthen their resolve and unity.

Trump’s previous behavior is inconsistent with the interpretation that he simply wanted war with Iran. Historical friction with Pompeo and Bolton, friction with Netanyahu, the fact that military conditions favored an attack far more in 2017-2018, and the events of the 12-Day War in which Trump forced Israeli jets to turn around, as they were trying to break the ceasefire just agreed to, in such a way that would pull the U.S. in the way we see now. These all point in the direction of Trump’s preference for non-military solutions at times when military conditions and a more coherent casus belli were more favorable than now. We may recall Trump being quite irate at Israel for trying to break the ceasefire:

“Uh they violated, but Israel violated it, too. Israel, as soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs the likes of which I’ve never seen before. The biggest load that we’ve seen. I’m not happy with Israel. You know, when when I say, “Okay, now you have 12 hours.” You don’t go out in the first hour and just drop everything you have on them. So, I’m not happy with them. I’m not happy with Iran either. But I’m really unhappy if Israel is going out this morning because of one rocket that didn’t land that was shot perhaps by mistake that didn’t land. I’m not happy about that. You know what we have? We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f*ck they’re doing. Do you understand that?”

Trump’s irate comments to the Guardian about Israel’s bellicosity at the end of the 12 Day War

Conclusively, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s statements to press more or less confirm that Israel initiated the conflict, and the U.S. went ahead and joined it, on the rationale that Iran would retaliate against both parties even if Israel was the chief provocateur. While from the perspective of international law, the U.S. had no business threatening Iran in the first place, within that microcosm of reality, there is a certain logic to it. Iran, after all, is not in the business of being fooled by any sort of ‘good cop/bad cop’ antics, nor would they let the U.S. off the hook by buying into some sort of plausible deniability. Moreover, Iran had already warned the U.S. that any strike from either party would result in a firm military response aimed at numerous U.S. military bases and installations in the region. Rubio accounts that the Pentagon’s assessment was that because Iran would strike the U.S. anyhow, even though Israel was the aggressor, then the U.S. had better join in on the initial attack in order to mitigate their own losses.

But Rubio’s response points to a broader reality. Rubio, on behalf of the administration, had effectively shifted blame onto Israel and the Pentagon, and in so doing attempted to deflect responsibility and tell a story that “our hands were tied” by the logic of the conflict. It’s a fair point, within the problematic setup that the U.S. had created for itself in the first place, we should note.

At the end of the day, it is most probable that Israel will begin soon to pressure the U.S. to engage in ceasefire talks with the Iranians. According to Israel’s Ynet, the Americans themselves apparently tried to immediately end the conflict right as it started, but because the Israelis (if we are to believe Rubio) had assassinated Khamenei, the Iranians weren’t having it. After all, the U.S. or Israel has now attacked Iran three times already, entirely unprovoked. Iran has planned for a multi-year war, and Khamenei’s strategic legacy was one of preparing Iran for such a conflict, with a victory strategy contingent upon decentralizing their forces within Iran, withstanding ongoing and major strikes on buildings associated with traditional command and control in Tehran, the ensuing havoc upon the global economy that such a war would create including the Strait of Hormuz, combined with Israel’s relative inability to take punches for too long – the same metric that forced Israel to push the U.S. for a ceasefire at the end of the 12 Day War last summer.

The attacks on U.S. bases in the region are meant to disrupt the ability for the aggressors to resupply and support Israel, paving the way for increasingly effective attacks on Israeli military targets like we have seen before.

Trump is no doubt in store for a very painful lesson due to his honorless bellicosity in service of Netanyahu’s unhinged war-mongering. Does he have a trick up his sleeve? Will he once again pull a rabbit out of the hat? He has surprised the world numerous times, so time will tell. But as things look, his project appears burnt and there is little sympathy for his own political survival among large swathes of his former supporters. Can he get them back? Can dead school children be brought back to life? There’s no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. At the same time, if Iran succeeds at hitting the U.S. and Israel hard, and Trump is able to end this conflict sooner than later, the world will be better off for it. As for Israel’s alleged nuclear blackmail, that’s a gift that keeps on giving, and one that needs to be confronted.

Follow Joaquin on Telegram @NewResistance or on X/Twitter @XoaquinFlores

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

A little clarity for everyone

Pakistan has attacked Afghanistan. American aircraft carriers have broken toilets. The embassies of twelve states are calling on their citizens and diplomatic staff to leave Iran. How are all these events connected? Let’s take a strategic and geopolitical look.

The situation after January’s “Operation 13 Days,” in which Western intelligence services plotted and attempted yet another regime change in the Islamic Republic of Iran through the old method of organized protests, was one of encirclement of Iran by U.S. armed forces, concurrent with negotiations between the American and Iranian governments. The whole world cried out against the U.S., which, with its usual gangster-like arrogance, put Iran under pressure, creating no small number of problems.

But what if the perspective were broader than that?

From a strategic point of view, both military and diplomatic, what we have seen is this: the U.S. and Iran open diplomatic talks; the U.S. surrounds them with its military force. If we stick to a technical analysis, this gesture has meant putting up a wall of military defense between Iran and… Israel.

That’s right: Israel is the country that is trying to provoke an escalation in the Middle East, pressuring the U.S. for authorization and military support to attack Iran. Without the U.S., Israel would risk ending up like a squashed fly, making a lot of noise and disturbing everyone, but it wouldn’t take much to wipe it out. This link is essential. If we admit this possibility, which, I repeat, makes strategic sense, we realize that there is an attempt at collaboration between the U.S. and Iran to redraw the maps of the Middle East. And this makes sense and is indispensable for reducing the power of the Zionist entity, reshaping Arab influences, and agreeing on zones of influence. An absurd idea? We will see in six or seven months.

If we look more closely, we realize that it is Israel itself that has tried to detonate the conflict, creating various enmities and breaking points. A method already known on the international scene. And this is where the Pakistan issue comes in.

When plumbers are lacking

If we broaden our view, we see that Israel has meanwhile tried to run for cover and has rushed to find some new allies. The first was India. The country led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi is thirsty for military technology, particularly nuclear technology, and with the agreement signed with Netanyahu, it will have access to Israeli and American technology. This choice is consistent with both the political stance of the current Indian leadership and the concrete needs of the world’s most populous country.

In order to be a power, it must have access to a range of technologies that will allow it to remain at the top of the competition, technologies that it cannot obtain from China, its long-standing rival. Israel is well aware of this, which is why it has stepped in and tried to fragment the rapprochement that had been achieved thanks to Vladimir Putin’s Russia, which had managed to bring the RIC (Russia-India-China), the three great superpowers, to the table, reaching a historic agreement on cooperation and healing the animosities of the past.

And how does Israel go against China as well, trying to create a zone of negotiation with the U.S., which cannot stand China? It inserts itself into Pakistan, which has excellent relations with China and is also a rival of India. Two possible victories in one fell swoop. But perhaps even more than that.

The detonation of a conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, in fact, does what the U.S. did not want to do: set the region on fire, but in the East, not in the West. In this way, Iran finds itself indirectly involved, since the well-known tensions with the Balochistan region, between Pakistan and Iran, and also the political relations that have stabilized positively with the new Afghan leadership, are now being called into question and become the subject of a series of problems to be resolved.

This choice is still a Plan B, but it makes sense. By setting the region ablaze, Israel is aiming for a change in the balance of power in the medium term, not immediately. The only way to escalate the situation is to involve the U.S. in the Pakistan-Afghanistan affair, perhaps by offering the Washington government the opportunity to return to Kabul. What is certain is that the USS Ford, with 35 hydraulic engineers on board, did not suffer a ‘random’ failure of its toilets: the tampering with one of the largest warships in the world (and other ships as well) is a simple but effective way of telling Israel that no, they have no intention of engaging in a war in the Middle East right now to satisfy the follies of the genocidal Netanyahu.

Then there is the other player that is being called into the field, Russia, which has kept its distance for the moment, leaving the U.S. to deal with Iran. Russia has already made a significant retreat from the region with the loss of exclusive access to the Caucasus, due to the century-old agreement between the U.S., Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Russia, which mediated the transition in Afghanistan with incredible foresight, could now be called upon, precisely by Israel, to have its say. In this way, Israel also aims to disrupt the hard work of rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia, which objectively constitutes a major barrier to Zionist ambitions, but this could also become an opportunity for Russia and the U.S. to disqualify Israel from the game. How? By allowing at least part of this escalation to come to light, revealing the Israeli mind behind it all, in order to completely delegitimize Israeli authority and its influence in the world.

It is not yet entirely clear who is pushing whom in this strange conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, nor how things will end between Iran and the U.S… what is certain is that the situation is heating up and could become very, very dangerous if Israel is not stopped in time.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Let’s cut to the chase: BRICS is in deep coma. Blown up, at least temporarily, by India – which happens to host the BRICS summit later this year. Talk about horrendous timing.

India has betrayed, sequentially, both full BRICS members Russia and Iran. By sealing its alignment with the Epstein Syndicate, New Delhi has proved, without the shadow of a doubt, not only that it’s untrustworthy: more than that, its whole lofty rhetoric of “leading the Global South” has collapsed – for good.

BRICS will have to be completely revamped: even Grandmaster Sergey Lavrov will have to reach this inescapable conclusion. The original Primakov triangle, “RIC”, once again dies another day. Even if India is not expelled from BRICS – it could be suspended – “RIC” will necessarily have to be translated as Russia-Iran-China, or even “RIIC” (Russia-Iran-Indonesia-China).

When it comes to where we stand on the Grand Chessboard, Prof. Michael Hudson synthesizes it: “The great enabling fiction is gone. America is not protecting the world from attack by Russia, China and Iran. Its long-term aim of controlling the world oil trade requires ongoing terrorism and permanent war in the Middle East.”

Whatever happens next, ongoing terrorism across West Asia will remain – as in the Epstein Syndicate, out of pervert impotence and sheer rage, unleashing a Black Rain over the civilian (italics mine) population of Tehran because Iranians refused to go for regime change.

Moreover, the heart of the matter until at least the mid-century is more crystal clear than ever. Either the Exceptionalist system of international chaos prevails. Or it will be replaced by Global South-driven equality, with China leading from behind. 

This is a two-part analysis on key BRICS interplay related to the war on Iran. Here we focus on China. Next we will focus on Russia and India.

Don’t shoot! I’m Chinese owned!

Clueless MICIMATT (military-industrial-congressional-intelligence-media-academia-think tank complex) speculation about US intel “suggesting” China is preparing to help Iran is, once again, evidence of how Chinese sophistication total evades the puny “analyses” emanating from Barbaria.

First of all: energy. China and Iran follow a $400 billion, mutually beneficial 25-year agreement that essentially interlocks energy and infrastructure investment.

For all practical purposes, the Strait of Hormuz is blocked because of panicky Western insurance withdrawal. Not because Tehran blocked it.

China receives 90% of total Iran crude oil exports; that represents 12% of total Chinese imports. The key point is that China still has access to Iranian exports as well as Saudi, Emirati, Kuwaiti, Qatari and Iraqi exports: that’s because the strategic partnership Tehran-Beijing is iron-clad, meaning that Chinese-bound tankers can cross the Strait of Hormuz back and forth.

Beijing-Tehran negotiated a bilateral safe passage, operational since last Friday, in what for all practical purposes is a multilaterally-closed crucial maritime corridor. It’s no wonder that more and more tankers are now texting on their transponders the magic words Chinese Owned (italics mine). That’s their naval diplomatic passport.

Translation – and that’s a mega-game-changer: the end of the thalassocratic hegemony of the Empire of Chaos.

“Freedom of navigation” in selected maritime connectivity corridors now means “a deal with China”. Chinese owned, OK; but not European, Japanese or even South Korean.

What Tehran gets, in spades,is high-tech Chinese help for the war with the Epstein Syndicate. And that started even before the war.

The Chinese intel gathering Liaowang-1, a next generation SIGINT (signals intelligence) and space tracking vessel, for weeks has been navigating near the coast of Oman, providing Iran with real-time electromagnetic intel on the Epstein Syndicate’s naval and aerial movements.

That accounts to an enormous degree for the pinpoint accuracy of most Iranian strikes.

The Liaowang-1, escorted by Type 055 and Type 052D destroyers, carries at least five radar domes and high-gain antennas, accurately tracking at least 1,200 air and missile targets simultaneously using deep neural network algorithms. The range of its sensors is roughly 6,000 kilometers.

The beauty is that those sensors can equally track a Chinese satellite or an American carrier.

Translation: China is helping its strategic partner without firing a single shot, just by sailing a neural network processing surveillance platform in international waters.

So yes: China is recording the war, live, 24/7.

Complementing the Liaowang-1, over 300 Jilin-1 satellites record literally everything, constituting a massive ISR database of the Empire of Chaos in action.

There won’t be any official confirmation either from Tehran or Beijing. But Chinese real-life intel, relayed on Beidou, was certainly crucial for Tehran to totally destroy the US 5^th Fleet infrastructure in Bahrain – a comprehensive radar, intel and database center and the backbone of US hegemony in West Asia.

This chapter of the war, tackled right at the beginning, reveals how Tehran went to the jugular when it comes to smashing the imperially designed power play of controlling strategic chokepoints and energy transit, thus denying Chinese access to them.

As stunning as it sounds, what we are watching, in real time, is Iran denying key maritime chokepoints, ports and naval connectivity corridors to the Empire of Chaos. For the moment, that’s Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Soon it may be, with the help of the Yemeni Houthis, also the Bab-al-Mandeb.

Now that’s a max game-changer profiting not only China but also Russia – which needs to keep its maritime export routes open.

Got money, go East

Now let’s follow the money. China holds $760 billion in US Treasury bonds. Beijing has ordered its whole banking system to sell their Treasures like there’s no tomorrow, and simultaneously hoard gold.

China and Iran already trade in yuan. From now on, the BRICS lab experimenting with alternative payment systems must reach escape velocity. That involves all mechanisms being tested – from BRICS Pay to The Unit.

Then there’s the incoming money exodus. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Kuwait are already “reviewing” every deal – dodgy or otherwise – they have struck with Washington. Collectively, they control no less than $2 trillion in US investments: Treasury bonds, Silicon Valley tech stakes, real estate, the works.

A tsunami of cash is beginning to invade East Asia. The favorite destination, as it stands, is Thailand – not Hong Kong. That will come – and once again, it will immensely profit China as Hong Kong is one of the key nodes of the Greater Bay Area, alongside Shenzhen and Guangzhou.

China’s strategic and commercial crude reserves  are enough for up to 4 months. Apart from that, imports of crude and natural gas can be increased, by sea and by pipelines, from Russia, Kazakhstan and Myanmar.

So a mix of enough strategic reserves; several supply sources; and “demand-side shift from oil to electricity” qualify once again as Chinese resilience. The blockade of Hormuz may break the West. But it won’t break China.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The oppression of women has been at the core of the CIA’s propaganda attacks against Iran since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. All the media outlets, think tanks, NGOs, parties, and personalities that make up the CIA’s extensive payroll accuse Iran of oppressing women. This campaign of demagoguery reached alarming levels when the U.S. government decided to attempt a coup through a failed color revolution and now bombards the Persian nation incessantly.

Daily events, however, invariably demolish this demagoguery and cruelly expose its hypocrisy.

This artificial feminist movement is even authorized by its sponsors to denounce Trump’s sexism or Netanyahu’s violence when such denunciations have no power to affect the general policy of imperialism and represent no serious confrontation with those governments. Or when Democrats and liberals want to undermine the power of the far right solely to reap electoral benefits. In any case, this phenomenon amounts to nothing more than an imperialist pawn.

The dominant slogans about the oppression of women follow to the letter the script of the great bankers and capitalists, especially the European and American ones. The same applies to the demagoguery surrounding the oppression of Black people, homosexuals, Indigenous peoples, immigrants, and the various “minorities.”

It is enough to see that this monstrous propaganda apparatus, which made such a spectacle against Trump’s sexism, fully supports the imperialist aggressions led by the president of the United States. Or did anyone see CNN, BBC, DW, and Rede Globo denouncing the kidnapping of the Venezuelan first lady and deputy Cilia Flores along with Nicolás Maduro? Is it possible to find a greater oppression against women than the massacre of at least 150 girls at the school in Minab, in southern Iran, carried out by a U.S. bombing launched from a base in the United Arab Emirates? And among the more than 1,300 people killed in U.S. and Israeli attacks against Iran, how many hundreds were women?

The imperialist aggression against Iran is being fully supported by the feminist demagoguery industry made in the USA. Part of it even criticized Israel’s genocide in Gaza, but only so as not to lose the little credibility it still manages to maintain, thanks to the blindness of the majority of the petty bourgeoisie. Yet from the moment the regime responsible for the extermination of around 15,000 Palestinian women—the terrorist regime of Israel—launched aggression together with the United States against Iran, Jeffrey Epstein’s colleagues suddenly turned into liberators of Iranian women.

Of course, all these immaculate fighters against fake news will not say that Iran is one of the most progressive countries in the Middle East, where women have achieved rights that they do not have in most neighboring countries, where they enjoy broad access to higher education, the labor market, leisure, and freedom to dress in ways found in no other country of the Gulf. Rights won by the Revolution of 1979.

What the imperialists have never accepted is precisely the fact that Iran carried out a revolution that freed it from the slavery imposed on the overwhelming majority of the world’s peoples by the very same forces that present themselves as liberators of women. And in the face of the constant aggressions of those slave masters, that revolution has only grown stronger—to the point that, at this moment, it is paying back with interest all the provocations, threats, and attacks it has suffered over decades.

The actions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have no precedent in modern history. By destroying or severely damaging U.S. and NATO military bases, embassies, and other facilities—and by bombing the largest of them (the land stolen from Palestine called “Israel”)—Iran is striking a monumental blow against the imperialist presence in the Middle East.

“We have no choice but to put an end to the American presence in the Gulf,” said the Persian deputy foreign minister, Sayed Khatibzadeh. These words express Iran’s conviction that its war is not merely a war of definitive independence against aggressive powers—though that alone would already justify fighting it. It is an even more sacred war: a war to free the entire region from the colonial domination of the United States and other imperialist powers, which are there only to plunder its oil and natural wealth and to control one of the arteries of the global capitalist system.

Since the late nineteenth century, in order to guarantee the plunder of those peoples, the imperialist powers imposed puppet dictatorships that would control the populations with weapons, training, technology, and full political, diplomatic, and economic support from the United States and European imperialist nations. They even artificially created many of those countries.

The regimes of the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian Authority, and of course Israel remain in power only because of the strong military presence of the United States and NATO. Without it, they would never exist. The governments of most of these countries are monarchies or military dictatorships where political rights and democratic freedoms do not exist and where, obviously, women live in the deepest darkness. At this stage, of course, “progressive” demagoguery will not utter a word, but it is difficult to believe that Iranian women are more oppressed than Saudi women.

By attacking imperialist installations in those countries, Iran is undermining the foundations of colonial domination over their peoples. It not only weakens the U.S. military presence but also, consequently, the very puppet regimes created to more conveniently exploit their wealth. These artificial and oppressive regimes become increasingly fragile as Iran expels imperialism. The weakening of these regimes means the weakening of exploitation over their peoples. Iran’s expulsion of imperialism opens the path for the fall of this entire system of oppression, especially the regimes themselves.

It will not be long before the peoples of the entire Middle East hail the Islamic Republic of Iran. And women will be freer than ever, following the example of Iranian women.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

After just a week into Donald Trump’s war, there is very little to report which should or could please the U.S. president. Much of America’s infrastructure in the Middle East has been destroyed with U.S. soldiers now housed by hotels in GCC countries as there is nothing left of their bases. The stocks that these countries have as part of their air defence systems is almost depleted as military chiefs argue about how quickly they can be replaced (some THAAD and Patriot systems are being shipped from Japan and South Korea) and Iran is hitting Israel harder and harder each day.

Of course, due to the new draconian rules which Israel has imposed — that no military strikes that Iran succeeds in carrying out can be ‘reported’ on by journalists or even citizens who wish to post it on social media — as well as the comically corrupt, partisan way U.S. news outlets are covering the war, very little bad news gets seen by the public, if any.

Under this set up, it is hardly surprising that Trump went to war, given that he must have factored in a great deal of support from U.S. media, whom he claims to despise. In this regard, we can conclude that media itself is complicit in war crimes, given that it has played a huge role in the decision to go to war and also the day to day reporting of events on the ground.

A good example of the few points of the war which are reported, but done in such a distorted way, is the news that Iran has stopped its bombing of GCC Gulf states. This has been presented as a victory by the U.S. and a climb down by Iran. The truth though is that it is a considerable victory for Tehran as what is not being reported or even examined is the deal that Iran has struck with those countries. None of those countries will allow any kind of military activity now by U.S. forces there, which means the thousands of U.S. soldiers in hotels in these GCC countries might as well head back home as their role there is redundant. Of course it’s unlikely that Trump will move them out as such an event will be captured by many on social media and will look like a great defeat. But some analysts are going further and speculating that there is more bad news for Israel and the U.S. with this latest move. Not only has Iran insisted on no activity at all in these countries by U.S. forces but they have also said that when the war is over, all the bases must be completely shut down.

Sadly, the gesture didn’t hold for long as it is rumoured that Iran’s elite guard was angered by Trump’s response and so the missile attack on the GCC countries continued.

Against a backdrop of rumours spreading throughout the middle east that Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar were considering jointly to completely pull out their investment in the U.S., this move, even as a gesture, couldn’t have come at a worse time for Trump.

His media machine is working over time in spewing out so many fake news reports, like the recent one that the U.S. has total air superiority over Iran, that it will be interesting to see how this is spun in the coming days. But there is nothing but lies from the Trump camp and as a complicit western media scrum is happy to pump out these lies, people are obviously turning to social media or international news channels in the global south, like CGTN and Russia Today. For many Americans, they are simply too dumb to know how to even question the narrative. Where is the video footage to support these preposterous claims that American has air superiority over Iran? Within 24 hours of Trumps B2 bombers hitting nuclear sites in Iran last year in June, media were given video clips of the satellite imagery. So far, the claims by Trump’s people about air superiority, have not been matched with any evidence. None the less U.S. media reports it more or less like it is fact.

It’s a similar story with the claims about the U.S. navy sinking 20 Iranian vessels. Where’s the evidence? If we are to take into account completely defenceless ships like the unarmed frigate that was sunk in international waters after it returned from a joint exercise with India, it would seem that America is on the losing side. Not even Japanese naval strikes in the WWII would blow up enemies’ ships and not then pick up survivors. The Americans left 80 sailors to drown, the same seaman who posed with photos days earlier with Prime Minister Modi, who, it should be pointed out often claims that India is the “guardian of the Indian ocean”, a patently absurd claim. Many believe Modi sold the Iranians out and disclosed its position to the Americans, leaving many to question just how much he can be trusted with his present allies. Will Russia still sell its oil to India after such a betrayal?

It’s clear that the Iran war is already WWIII in many respects. Certainly each side has its partners and media have made much of Russia’s intelligence support to Iran pointing out American positions, while China has given Iran considerable military support both in state of the art radar systems and ground to air missile systems. The sinking of the Iranian ship shows us all though the depth of the desperation of America, that it needs to go as far as hunting for Iranian ships thousands of miles away and sinking them, even if they are unarmed as this ship was. Does that look like the act of a confident aggressor on a victory role? Hardly.

It isn’t just that America can barely hold the high moral ground for even a brief, ephemeral media moment, but more that the number of shocking tactical errors by Trump are piling up and having an impact. The failure to see that killing the supreme leader, who has been replaced by his son, a hard liner who has always wanted Iran to have a nuclear deterrent, was a major act of stupidity. Nearly all U.S. wars follow the same pattern of America under estimating its enemy and over estimating its own capabilities and this one is no exception. The move to bring GCC states closer to Iran and turn them against the U.S. is smart and what we could expect from Iran who has had years to prepare for this attack and has been given so many free lessons by America’s blunders — the best one being the June attack which resulted in Iran upping its game and identifying all the weak spots which needed work. The biggest miscalculation probably of all is going to war in the first place believing that regime change would be inevitable in days and therefore no longer term plans, in terms of military stocks, need to be addressed. American is about to run out of ammo. For the GCC countries, it’s quite possible that the deal might be reinstated in the coming days as a new truth emerges from the war, to date laden with the most absurd lies ever pumped out to media. While Donald Trump tells reporters on Air Force one that Iran was responsible for bombing its own school, GCC leaders will have to wake up to a new reality which is summed up by Henry Kissinger. “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The money-laundering Kiev regime has gone from cutting off oil supply for EU member states to now issuing death threats to heads of state – and all that the regime’s patrons in Brussels can do is squirm with embarrassment.

The latest twist in the corrupt regime of Vladimir Zelensky is his death threat to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

That was then followed by the Hungarian authorities impounding an armed convoy transporting $100 million in cash and gold bullion from Austria over Hungary’s borders to Kiev – no doubt as part of the war mafia operating under Zelensky.

You couldn’t make this up. A comedian actor who used to dress up in high heels and played a soap-opera hero president is now ruling by decree as a dictator propped up by EU taxpayers, and only because of Brussels indulging in the largesse of their Russophobic obsessions. And now this fictive creation is threatening the assassination of elected leaders.

Zelensky didn’t mention Orbán by name, but in a press briefing last Thursday, he said that “the address of the person” (Orbán) who has blocked a proposed €90 billion loan from the EU to Ukraine was being given to “our military guys” who would “speak in their own language.”

The Hungarian prime minister denounced Zelensky’s words as a “threat to my life”. The country’s foreign ministry condemned the Ukrainian leader for “crossing all limits.”

Yet the European Union has not condemned Zelensky. A junior spokesman for the European Commission merely released a perfunctory statement, saying “that type of language is not acceptable… There must be no threats against EU member states.”

Where is a full-throated denunciation from European leaders like Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, or Kaja Kallas, the Commissioner for Foreign Affairs?

Let’s get this straight. Ukraine’s nominal president tells a head of an EU state that his name is on a hit list, and the bloc’s highest officials say nothing about that. They leave it to some low-level press officer to make a bland statement about it “not being acceptable.”

This shows how deeply corrupted the EU leadership has become in the proxy war racket in Ukraine against Russia. Threats of assassination are being made and played down out of embarrassment, not because such threats are a grave violation of international law.

The background is even more damning. Hungary and Slovakia are being subjected to energy blackmail by the Ukrainian regime because the countries have refused to terminate buying their oil supplies from Russia, as demanded by Brussels and Zelensky.

On January 27, the oil supply to Hungary and Slovakia was cut off after the Kiev regime claimed that a Russian drone strike damaged the Drushba pipeline carrying the oil over Ukrainian territory from Russia. Budapest and Bratislava have accused the Kiev regime of “energy blackmail.”

A Russian air strike did not hit the pipeline. Why would Russia deprive its customers? It doesn’t make sense, and Moscow rejected the claim.

As always, the question is: Who gains?

The Kiev regime has unilaterally cut the supply as a way to pressure Hungary and Slovakia into lifting their opposition to the EU donating more loans and military aid to Ukraine.

Tellingly, Ukraine has delayed supposed “repairs” to the Drushba pipeline. Hungary and Slovakia are facing a critical shortage of oil supply, which is destabilizing their economies. Kiev is even refusing to allow independent inspectors to assess the alleged damage. It’s obvious this is a set-up. There’s probably not even any physical damage other than turning off the pumps.

Last month, Orbán’s government caused a major upset in the European Union when it vetoed a proposed €90 billion loan from Brussels to Ukraine. The loan is seen as a vital lifeline to prop up the Kiev regime and extend the war. Budapest’s refusal was partly in response to the “energy blackmail.”

The block on the money supply has put Kiev and its EU sponsors in a quandary. The regime will not be able to keep fighting the war against Russia without more purchases of military equipment from NATO. Just as important, the block on the loan by Hungary means an obstacle to the money racket that the West has been running under the Zelensky regime, whereby billions of taxpayer funds get laundered into profits for corporations with a hefty cut for the Kiev mafia.

This would explain the bizarre convoy of cash and gold bullion that Hungarian authorities busted and impounded last Thursday. Two armoured vehicles were apprehended carrying $80 million in cash and $20 million in gold bars on their way to Ukraine from Austria. Among those detained were former Ukrainian intelligence officials.

The physical transport of such large amounts of funds, rather than by electronic bank transfer, indicates that the funds were meant not to be traced. The finding exposes once again the illicit money laundering by Zelensky’s regime. This is not in the least bit surprising, given the repeated scandals of corruption and embezzlement in Kiev under Zelensky and his circle, who have acquired luxury portfolios of overseas properties over the last four years.

Hungary and Slovakia are the only EU members out of 27 nations that have shown any principles about stopping the proxy war in Ukraine and ending the racket of robbing European citizens and saddling future generations with astronomical debts.

For taking that stand, the Brussels leadership has turned a blind eye to the Kiev regime’s cutting off oil supplies and using energy blackmail. Now the regime has gone even further to issue death threats to a European head of state, and the Brussels elite has effectively said nothing.

What the EU’s proxy war sponsors seem more concerned about is that their overindulged, corrupt puppet in Kiev is a public relations embarrassment. The blatant criminality of terroristic blackmail and death threats betrays the complicity of the EU’s leadership.

Von der Leyen, Kajas and the Brussels elites are more worried that Zelensky’s mafia threats might rebound by galvanizing Hungarians to vote for Orbán’s party in parliamentary elections next month.

Their message is: you can launder millions, use blackmail and issue death threats. Just don’t make it obvious.