Israel has no right to force ‘regime change' in Iran
Israel has no justification for trying to bring about 'regime change' in Iran through its bombing campaign, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told RT's Rick Sanchez on Wednesday. West Jerusalem's backers conveniently forget about all the legal and moral principles they claim to defend the moment they're called upon to support the Jewish State, she stated.
Israel launched a series of missile attacks against Iran on Friday, claiming that Tehran was on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons – a goal Tehran has repeatedly denied pursuing. The Islamic Republic responded with a missile barrage of its own, and the two nations have been exchanging strikes ever since.
'What has Iran done wrong? What is it being bombed for?' Zakharova asked Sanchez in response to a question about the ongoing hostilities.
'Israel says they don't like the regime in Iran, the political regime,' Zakharova said, stressing that this doesn't gives West Jerusalem the right to attack another nation. 'Whether you like a regime or you don't, if it doesn't attack you… you have no right to change that regime,' she argued.
Iran's nuclear program, which Israel portrays as a source of major concern, is a matter for international law and diplomacy to deal with, the spokeswoman pointed out, adding that any issues linked to it should be resolved by the international community. 'It's not a matter of somebody trying to solve this issue on their own,' she added.
West Jerusalem has also failed to prove that there was any immediate threat coming from Tehran, Zakharova maintained. 'We've heard multiple statements from Israel that they have proof that Iran is one step away from creating weapons of mass destruction. Why can't they just show the documents?' she said, expressing doubts about whether any such evidence exists.
Yet, the lack of justification for Israel's actions apparently does not concern Western nations, the spokeswoman said.
Israel is bombing Iran, and the Western world keeps saying that Israel has the right to do so. The West seems to have forgotten in an instant about human rights, about children… in the midst of hell.
On Monday, Iran's authorities said that, since the start of hostilities, Israeli attacks have killed at least 224 people, including 74 women and children, while injuring 1,800. Meanwhile, Israel claims that Iranian strikes have killed at least 24 people, all civilians, while injuring nearly 600.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
Trump says ‘chill,' Bibi goes full thrill. So, who's in charge of the Middle East?
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?
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
Israel to run out of air defense missiles soon
Israel's air defenses can intercept Iranian ballistic missiles at its current pace for less than two more weeks without significant additional supplies from the US or its direct involvement, the Washington Post reports. Tehran has launched multiple waves of drones and missiles at Israel since the Jewish state struck Iran last Friday, framing the attack as a preemptive move to stop the Islamic Republic from developing a nuclear bomb. US forces are reportedly assisting Israel in intercepting incoming projectiles. President Donald Trump has said that the US may join Israel's bombing campaign but hasn't made a final decision. Iran has warned the US that any involvement would result in 'irreparable' damage. Intercepting Iranian missiles and drones has been costly for West Jerusalem, WaPo wrote on Tuesday. The cost of missile defense could be running as high as $285 million per night, according to Israeli media. Given the current pace of Iranian attacks, Israel can only maintain its current level of air defense for 10 to 12 more days without resupplies from the US, or even deeper involvement by American forces, WaPo wrote, citing an anonymous source. West Jerusalem may need to begin rationing its air defense missiles as early as the latter part of this week, it added. 'They will need to select what they want to intercept,' the newspaper cited the anonymous source as saying. 'The system is already overwhelmed.' Israel has a layered air defense shield with multiple systems but relies on the Arrow system to shoot down heavy Iranian ballistic missiles. While efficient against rockets fired by Hamas, Israel's famed 'Iron Dome' is ineffective against Iran's heavier ballistic missiles, WaPo wrote, citing Israeli missile expert Tal Inbar. According to former senior Pentagon adviser Dan Caldwell, West Jerusalem's Arrow and David's Sling units likely used up many of its interceptors to counter attacks from the Houthis and Iran earlier this year, while noting that these missiles are expensive and take a long time to produce. 'It is therefore likely that Israel and the US are going to have to start rationing their interceptors soon (if they haven't already),' the former defense official wrote on X on Monday. Since Tuesday, Trump has repeatedly demanded Tehran's 'unconditional surrender,' boasting that the US has uncontested control of Iranian airspace, while suggesting that killing Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei would be 'easy.' Multiple media outlets have suggested that the US president may join the Israeli campaign against Iran at any moment. Tehran has declared that it will 'not capitulate to anyone in the face of coercion' and threatened to retaliate against any attack.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Iranian centrifuge and missile sites hit in airstrikes
Israel struck several military targets in Iran, including a centrifuge production facility and several weapons manufacturing sites in Tehran, on Tuesday, according to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The operation, which involved more than 50 fighter jets, targeted Iran's nuclear weapons and missile programs, the IDF said in a statement. The Israeli air force struck a centrifuge production site near Tehran that the IDF claimed was designed to 'enable the Iranian regime to expand the scale and speed of its uranium enrichment to develop nuclear weapons.' The IDF described it as 'a key facility for centrifuge production.' In addition to the centrifuge facility, the IDF said its jets hit factories that make missile components. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has confirmed that Israeli airstrikes targeted two centrifuge production facilities linked to Iran's nuclear program. In a statement posted on X, the agency named the sites as the Tehran Research Center and the TESA workshop in Karaj, a city west of the capital. The IDF claimed Iran is enriching uranium at levels 'not required for civilian use,' and said the strike was 'part of the broad effort to operate against Iran's nuclear weapons development project.' Iran currently enriches uranium to 60% purity, far above the 3.67% cap set under the now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal, which was rendered null and void after President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from it during his first term. Despite Israel's claims, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said the agency does 'not have any proof of a systematic effort' by Iran to move closer to producing a nuclear weapon, in an interview with CNN. Despite the ongoing talks between the US and Iran, late last week Israel launched strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites, killing a number of senior commanders and scientists. Iran responded with missile strikes on Israel. Moscow, which had earlier offered to mediate between the two sides, condemned Israel's strike and warned that further escalation could destabilize the entire region. The Russian Foreign Ministry also called on Israel to 'come to its senses and immediately stop raids on nuclear installations.'
