logo
‘If Iran falls, we all lose': Why Tehran's allies see this war as civilizational

‘If Iran falls, we all lose': Why Tehran's allies see this war as civilizational

Russia Today4 hours ago

In his first public address since the beginning of Operation Rising Lion, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to strip Iran of the ability to develop nuclear weapons, eliminate its ballistic missile capabilities, and remove what he called an existential threat to the State of Israel.
'This is a battle for survival,' Netanyahu told reporters in a Zoom press conference on Monday. 'We will continue this operation until the Islamic Republic of Iran is no longer a nuclear threat – not to Israel, not to the region, not to the world.'
Netanyahu's bold declaration came as Israeli jets continued a fourth day of coordinated strikes deep into Iranian territory. According to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), over 370 missiles and hundreds of UAVs have been launched from Iran since Friday, prompting swift Israeli retaliation. The IDF claims to have struck more than 90 strategic targets across Iran, including suspected missile depots, radar installations, and command centers near Tehran, Esfahan, and along the Persian Gulf coast.
The operation has already resulted in more than 200 casualties in Iran, though precise numbers remain unverified due to restricted access for international media. Satellite imagery reviewed by analysts at the Institute for Science and International Security showed significant damage to facilities near Natanz and Parchin, long suspected of being part of Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
But critics of the Israeli campaign – and its justification – are raising serious concerns about the underlying motives of Netanyahu and his allies.
Mohammad Marandi, a prominent Iranian academic, political analyst, and adviser to Iran's nuclear negotiating team, rejects Netanyahu's claims outright.
'The regime is lying about nuclear programs just to justify aggression and murder,' Marandi told RT. 'Tulsi Gabbard, who is the Director of US National Intelligence, just recently said Iran is not developing nuclear weapons. So it's clear that the issue is Netanyahu, neat escalation, and the Zionist lobby in the United States is behind him.'
Iran's nuclear program has long been a subject of contention. While Tehran has enriched uranium and developed advanced centrifuge technology, it has consistently denied seeking nuclear weapons. Iranian officials argue that their nuclear program is designed solely for peaceful energy production and medical research – a position grounded, they say, in religious doctrine that prohibits weapons of mass destruction.
To prove its intentions, Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, an international accord with the US and European powers that limited uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. However, in 2018, then-President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the deal, reigniting tensions. Since then, Tehran has allowed international inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) limited access to its facilities, but Israel remains unconvinced.
According to Marandi, Israel's true objective lies far beyond neutralizing a nuclear threat.
'It's always been so-called regime change,' he said. 'Whether it's the Israeli regime or the Americans or the Europeans. That's how they are. They don't want independent countries, and especially countries like Iran, which support the Palestinian cause.'
Marandi is not alone in his assessment. Syrian analyst Taleb Ibrahim, a longtime commentator on Iranian affairs and an author of several books on the Islamic Republic, agrees that Western powers – particularly the United States – are pursuing a broader geopolitical agenda.
'If the United States will put its hands on Iran again [like it was before 1979],' Ibrahim told RT, 'they will block the Russian southern wall. This means that Russia will not be able to expand its influence beyond the Caspian Sea. And it will be restricted to a very narrow place between Central Asia and the Arctic.'
Ibrahim warns that China, too, would suffer consequences from a weakened Iran. 'China will not be able to reach the Middle East. Because if Iran becomes part of the Western bloc, it will sever China's access. And the most important thing of all – a new world order will emerge. It will be a new American world order.'
Ibrahim believes this is not a regional conflict, but part of a sweeping strategy to restore American hegemony.
'To make America great again is to regain American control across the globe. The war in Iran is just a chapter in that plan.'
President Donald Trump has thus far distanced himself from the Israeli operation, saying America's goals are purely defensive and promising that he will not be starting any wars.
But Ibrahim is unconvinced.
'In strategy, if you want to make war, talk about peace,' he said. 'The United States is preparing for a very big war – first against China, then Russia. After this, they will try to build an American century. One government for the world, headquartered in the White House. That's the final goal.'
Both Marandi and Ibrahim agree that forced regime change in Iran would unleash chaos across the region.
The fall of Tehran's current government could lead to the fragmentation of Iran – a multi-ethnic nation with Kurds, Azeris, Arabs, and Baloch who may pursue autonomy or independence in the power vacuum. It could ignite sectarian warfare akin to what unfolded in Iraq after the 2003 US invasion, and destabilize fragile neighbors like Iraq, Afghanistan, and even Turkey.
Moreover, Iran's alliances with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Shia militias across Iraq and Syria mean that a collapse in Tehran could trigger cascading violence across the Middle East. Global oil markets, already rattled, could see disruptions on a historic scale.
Yet, both experts maintain that such an outcome is unlikely.
'Regime change is more likely in Israel and across Europe than anywhere near Iran,' Marandi said. 'These Western governments failed with Russia, failed with China, and they'll fail with Iran too.'
Ibrahim agrees: 'It is impossible to make regime change in Iran by force. The Iran-Iraq war was designed to do exactly that – to overthrow the Islamic Republic established by Ayatollah Khomeini. But after eight years of war, billions of dollars, and support from the US, France, and Gulf states, Iran survived – and emerged stronger. The only way to change the regime is through the Iranian people. And right now, the Iranian people are standing with their leaders. They believe they are fighting the Satan – the US, the bigger Satan, and Israel, the smaller one. And that gives them unity and strength.'
As Israel continues its campaign and the international community watches nervously, the implications of the current conflict are far from limited to the Middle East.
'This war,' Ibrahim concluded, 'will be the starting point of reshaping the world. If Iran wins – and I believe it will, eventually – the world will shift to a multipolar order. That is the shared vision of Iran, Russia, and China. But if Iran loses, we will all live under an American empire. The White House will rule from Washington to Beijing. This is a decisive battle – not just for Iran, but for the destiny of the world.'
As missiles fly and rhetoric intensifies, what began as a regional standoff may ultimately determine the balance of power in the 21st century.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Art of the bluff: Israel's moves against Iran lays post-US Middle East bare
Art of the bluff: Israel's moves against Iran lays post-US Middle East bare

Russia Today

time2 hours ago

  • Russia Today

Art of the bluff: Israel's moves against Iran lays post-US Middle East bare

If the Academy handed out Oscars for political theater, Donald Trump would be a shoo-in for the 2025 award for Worst Performance in a Leading Role. His latest remarks are less about statesmanship and more about saving face as global events spin far beyond the grasp of American diplomacy. And the harder he tries to project himself as a dealmaker pulling strings behind the scenes, the clearer it becomes: Western dominance is cracking, and Washington is reacting more on impulse than strategy. The latest flashpoint – the 2025 escalation between Israel and Iran – has exposed the crumbling illusion of American leadership. Despite Trump's claim that he 'convinced' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to strike Iran, the facts tell a different story. Netanyahu brushed off the advice and launched a sweeping assault on Iranian targets – not just military, but symbolic. In one bold move, he derailed already fragile nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran, revealing exactly who sets the agenda in the region now. Faced with this reality, US leaders had two choices: admit their influence over Israel had faded, or publicly support the strikes and cling to the image of leadership – even if it meant further undermining their credibility as a neutral arbiter. Unsurprisingly, they chose the latter. Backing Israel at the expense of diplomacy with Iran has become business as usual. Washington isn't conducting the symphony anymore; it's trying to stay in rhythm while the conductor's baton is in someone else's hand. So when Trump talks about having 'leverage' over Israel, it sounds more like community theater than statesmanship. Even he doesn't seem to believe the part he's playing. In 2025, once again, the United States isn't leading the charge – it's being dragged along. And the more American leaders insist everything's fine, the more obvious it becomes: the age of Western supremacy is fading out, in a blaze of theatrical flair that rivals Trump's own off-script improvisations. A close look at Trump's statements – and those from his administration – in the wake of Israel's strike on Iran reveals a political paradox: while the US officially opposed escalation, it did nothing to stop it. Why? Because the political cost at home was too high. In an election year, Trump couldn't risk a fight with one of the GOP's most reliable bases: pro-Israel voters and the powerful lobbying machine behind them. Trump tried to play it both ways. On one hand, he said, 'It wasn't a surprise to me,' and claimed he neither endorsed nor blocked the strike. But just days earlier, he boasted: 'I talked to Bibi. He promised not to do anything drastic. We held him back.' That's a crucial detail. At least on the surface, the Trump White House wanted to avoid escalation. But once the missiles flew, Trump pivoted hard: 'Israel has the right to defend itself.' 'The US wasn't involved in the operation.' 'But if Iran hits us, we'll hit back harder than ever.' This about-face reveals just how little influence Washington had. Netanyahu played the hand he wanted – defying US interests, derailing diplomacy, and still compelling American support. Warnings from Washington didn't even register. Caught flat-footed, Trump scrambled to regain control with vague reassurances: 'Iran might still get a second chance.' 'We're open to talks.' 'Iranian officials are calling me. They want to talk.' These weren't policy statements. They were PR – a bid to dodge blame for a failed containment strategy. His line that 'I gave Iran a chance, but they didn't take it' is less a fact and more a way to recast himself as the peacemaker – the guy who ended tensions between India and Pakistan and now promises to 'make the Middle East great again.' Is this genuine diplomacy? Or a carefully crafted performance aimed at domestic audiences – and international ones, too? Trump even welcomed Vladimir Putin as a potential mediator: 'He's ready. He called me. We had a long talk.' By doing so, he tried to recast the situation from an American failure to a global problem that needs collective resolution – conveniently shifting the spotlight away from US accountability. And while Trump played diplomat, Axios reported that Israel had actively lobbied for US participation in the strikes, and the Wall Street Journal revealed that Trump had promised Netanyahu he wouldn't stand in the way. All signs point to this: any restraint Washington projected was a smokescreen for its inability – or unwillingness – to rein in its closest Middle Eastern ally. In the end, Israel got what it wanted. The US got sidelined. And Iran got a loud-and-clear message: America isn't calling the shots. Netanyahu exploited the weaknesses baked into the US political system – proving once again that alliances don't equal parity. And while Trump talks of giving Iran another chance, the truth is this: Washington is now playing by rules written in Jerusalem. The current Israel-Iran confrontation has sparked alarm worldwide. But while tensions are high and missiles have flown, the chances of full-scale war still appear slim. Tehran, despite its fiery rhetoric, has shown restraint. It seems to be holding out for a return to diplomacy – and possibly a new round of talks with Washington. The US, too, is in no mood for another drawn-out Middle East war. With its strategic focus shifting elsewhere and voters tired of endless foreign entanglements, Washington is eager to avoid getting pulled into something deeper. A slow, uneasy de-escalation looks like the most plausible outcome – the only question is how long that will take. Make no mistake: Israel's strikes inflicted heavy damage – particularly on the IRGC's infrastructure and the supply networks for Iran-backed forces in Syria and Lebanon. But Iran's retaliation – a massive drone and missile barrage on Israeli territory – was a shock to the Israeli public. It caused serious destruction and considerable casualties, raising questions about Netanyahu's gamble. Inside Iran, the regime faces mounting economic pressure and growing public frustration. Yet there are no signs of collapse. The leadership remains intact, held together by tight control and elite loyalty. A new deal with the US could offer much-needed economic relief, giving leverage to more pragmatic voices in Tehran that favor engagement over confrontation. As for Israel, the longer-term political fallout is still unclear. Netanyahu may have boosted his image as a tough, decisive leader – but if talks between Washington and Tehran resume and produce even a temporary agreement, Israel could find itself isolated. Netanyahu's open friction with the Biden administration over Gaza and Iran may come back to haunt him. If diplomacy moves forward without Israel, it could leave him out in the cold – and facing heat from both domestic critics and international partners. Meanwhile, regional powers like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar are stepping up. They've launched a flurry of diplomatic efforts – including quiet lobbying in Washington – to further rein in Israeli escalation. These countries have no interest in another war. They're worried that if things spiral, US bases and assets across the region – from Iraq to the Gulf – could become targets. That would bring serious security risks and economic disruption, just as these nations are trying to push forward with growth and reform. Their message is clear: further chaos in the Middle East is not an option. These states are now emerging as key voices for de-escalation – working to steer the crisis back to the negotiating table. Despite the intensity of the current standoff, the likeliest path forward remains a tense but managed de-escalation. Neither Iran nor the US wants a war. Israel, meanwhile, is walking a tightrope – trying to look strong while navigating a shrinking space for unilateral action. That leaves a narrow window for diplomacy. The real question is: when will the politics – in all three capitals – catch up with the need for a deal?

EU could cancel visa-free travel for Israelis
EU could cancel visa-free travel for Israelis

Russia Today

time2 hours ago

  • Russia Today

EU could cancel visa-free travel for Israelis

Israel could face a suspension of its visa-free access to the EU's Schengen area under new rules approved by European lawmakers, Euronews reported on Wednesday. This comes shortly after the Jewish state launched a bombing campaign against Iran, prompting retaliatory attacks. The new rules amend the visa suspension mechanisms to include violations of the UN Charter, human rights, breaches of international humanitarian law, and defiance of international court rulings. Israel is among the countries most at risk following allegations of war crimes in Gaza raised by the UN, Euronews wrote, citing sources in the European Parliament. 'This tool helps us deliver the values that have built our community,' Slovenian MEP Matjaz Nemec, the bill's rapporteur, told the news outlet. He insisted that 'no specific country is being targeted,' although European Parliament sources said Israel was a focus for several political groups pushing for the reform. Currently, citizens from 61 countries – including Israel, the UK, Japan, and Australia – may enter the Schengen area for up to 90 days without a visa. So far, the EU has suspended visa-free access only once, in the case of the Republic of Vanuatu for its alleged citizenship-by-investment scheme. Under the new rules, the European Commission can impose a one-year suspension through an implementing act, which only needs the approval of member states and can be blocked by a qualified majority. Extensions require a delegated act, which can be blocked by either the European Council or Parliament. The process can be initiated by the Commission or prompted by an EU member state. The deal still awaits formal approval by the full European Parliament and Council before becoming EU law. The reform follows widespread international condemnation of Israel's conduct in Gaza and its recent military operation against Iran. Russia has denounced Israel's actions against Iran as 'illegal' and warned they could trigger a 'nuclear catastrophe.' Israel began bombing Iran on Friday, claiming Tehran was close to building a nuclear weapon. Iran denied the accusations and responded with drone and missile strikes.

No evidence of nuclear threat from Iran – ex-UK ambassador
No evidence of nuclear threat from Iran – ex-UK ambassador

Russia Today

time2 hours ago

  • Russia Today

No evidence of nuclear threat from Iran – ex-UK ambassador

There's no evidence that Iran poses a nuclear threat to Israel, former UK Ambassador to Iran Richard Dalton has said. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed that Iran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons shortly after Israel launched air strikes on Iranian territory last week. Speaking to Sky News last week, Dalton said, 'There is no evidence in the public domain' that Iran was on the brink of nuclear weaponization. He noted that US intelligence shows 'no change in the basic assessment' that Tehran has decided 'to develop nuclear weapons in accordance with their own defense doctrine, which is to eschew weapons of mass destruction.' 'So, we are entitled to disbelieve Netanyahu's claims that there was some recent change in Iranian policy and behavior until evidence is put in the public domain,' Dalton said. Israel began bombing Iran last Friday, claiming that the country was nearing the completion of a nuclear bomb. Iran denied the accusations and responded to the Israeli military operation with waves of drone and missile strikes on the Jewish state. According to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group, the Israeli assault has so far killed 585 people, including 239 civilians, and wounded more than 1,300. Israel's Government Press Office reported on Wednesday that Iran's retaliatory missile attacks claimed the lives of 24 people, with 804 injured. It added that around 3,800 people have been evacuated from various areas due to ongoing tensions. In 2015, Tehran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, an international accord with the US and European powers that limited uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. In 2018, then-US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal, reimposing all sanctions and prompting Iran to gradually move away from its own commitments. Since then, the Iranian authorities have granted foreign inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency only limited access to its nuclear facilities. The Islamic Republic currently enriches uranium to 60% purity, far above the 3.67% cap set under the now-defunct agreement. Russia has condemned Israel's airstrikes and called for deescalation, warning that strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure could trigger a 'nuclear catastrophe.' In a statement on Tuesday, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Israel's attacks on peaceful atomic sites violate international law and threaten global stability.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store