Iran's Army Repairs Air Defenses for New War
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Iran has replaced air defence systems damaged during last month's clash with Israel, a senior military official said, as Tehran prepares for potential further military action with nuclear talks in the balance.
With both Iran and Israel rearming and accusations flying, the threat of a renewed war continues to loom over the Middle East.
Newsweek has reached out to the State Department as well as the foreign ministries of Iran and Israel.
Why It Matters
The restoration of Iran's air defenses highlights the growing risk of renewed conflict. Following coordinated Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iranian targets last month, Tehran accused Israel of acting with U.S. and NATO backing, framing the confrontation as part of a broader Western campaign. This escalation moves beyond a bilateral dispute, raising the possibility of a larger regional war involving multiple powers and proxy groups.
This photo provided Sunday, Jan. 12, 2025, by the Iranian Army, shows a missile system during a military drill, Iran.
This photo provided Sunday, Jan. 12, 2025, by the Iranian Army, shows a missile system during a military drill, Iran.
Mahdi Vaziri/AP Photo
What to Know
According to Iran's Defah Press news agency, Iranian air defence systems sustained significant damage during June's conflict when Israel took control of the skies over Iran for a short time, allowing them to carry out attacks with less resistance. Rear Admiral Mahmoud Mousavi, acknowledged the losses but stressed a swift recovery. "Some of our defense systems were damaged in this war; but with the efforts of my comrades the damaged systems were replaced and deployed in predetermined locations." he said.
Iran's military says it restored its air defenses using domestically developed systems. Its current arsenal includes the long-range Bavar-373 and Russian-supplied S-300 platforms. Defah Press did not report any recent imports of foreign-made equipment.
Status of Nuclear Talks
Meanwhile, Iran, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom are set to hold nuclear talks in Istanbul on Friday following warnings that the failure to resume negotiations could lead to international sanctions being reimposed on Tehran. The scheduled talks come after the foreign ministers of these E3 nations, along with the European Union's foreign policy chief, held their first call with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi late last week.
The E3, China, and Russia remain parties to the 2015 nuclear deal, which the Trump administration exited in 2018. Tehran says its nuclear programme is solely meant for civilian purposes.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, European Union High Representative Federica Mogherini, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond and U.S. Secretary...
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, European Union High Representative Federica Mogherini, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, from left, pose for a group photo following talks with Iran on their nuclear program in Vienna, Austria, Tuesday, July 14, 2015. World powers and Iran announce a long-term, comprehensive nuclear agreement. More
Ronald Zak/AP Photo
What People Are Saying
Iran's Rear Admiral Mahmoud Mousavi: "The Zionist enemy sought to destroy Iran's defence capabilities, and some of our defence systems were damaged in this war; But with the efforts of my comrades, the damaged systems were replaced and deployed in predetermined locations."
Israel's Military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir: "The campaign against Iran is not over. We are entering a new phase."
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: "If EU/E3 want to have a role, they should act responsibly, and put aside the worn-out policies of threat and pressure, including the 'snapback' for which they lack absolutely [any] moral and legal ground."
What Happens Next
With its air defenses restored and nuclear diplomacy back on the table, Iran is positioning itself for parallel military and political engagement as Western powers weigh whether to reimpose UN sanctions before an October 18 deadline.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
26 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The for-profit companies behind Israeli-U.S. nonprofit Gaza aid plan
Inside the four hastily constructed warehouses in southern Gaza where food is handed out to desperate and starving Palestinians, it is relatively calm. Ration boxes stamped with the name and logo of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation are distributed by local volunteers in red vests, under the watchful gaze of beefy, armed American security contractors. It is just outside the warehouses where most of the trouble happens. Outside is where hundreds of civilians desperately crowding toward the distribution sites have been shot and killed — many of them allegedly by Israeli soldiers positioned nearby — and where at least 20 Palestinians died Wednesday in a stampede that the GHF says was initiated by gun-toting Hamas militants. Humanitarian aid has been one of the most controversial aspects of the war between Israel and Hamas, which is now approaching its second anniversary. In recent weeks, it has emerged as a final sticking point in negotiations over a ceasefire, placing the Israeli- and U.S.-backed GHF squarely in the crosshairs of the latest talks. Hamas is demanding a return to the U.N.-coordinated system of aid delivery that operated in Gaza for decades. Israel charges that Hamas has corrupted that system. It wants to maintain strict controls on assistance to Gazans, using the newly created GHF as the primary mechanism for food distribution. Critics, including the United Nations and most of the international humanitarian aid community, say the GHF is designed to further Israeli war aims by selectively and inadequately providing assistance, and by forcing Gazans to put their lives in danger for a box of provisions. In a statement released Monday, 21 European countries and others including Canada and Australia issued a joint statement saying that 'the suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths' and condemning 'the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of water and food.' 'The Israeli government's aid delivery model,' it said, 'is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity.' Like much of what happens inside Gaza, where Israel has banned international reporters except on brief tours led by the Israel Defense Forces, the origins and operations of the GHF remain obscure. Even more opaque is its funding. The foundation says it received about $100 million in start-up money from a government it has declined to identify. In late June, the Trump administration said it would supply $30 million to GHF operations. A major donation initially expected from the United Arab Emirates, according to internal planning documents seen by The Washington Post, has not materialized. The government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which has been deeply involved in the aid program, has publicly denied paying for it. But behind the foundation, which is a registered nonprofit, is a web of interconnected U.S. and Israeli individuals, and private U.S. companies — including some that hope to eventually make money on the relief effort, according to public and private documents reviewed by The Post and interviews with more than a dozen U.S. and Israeli government officials, business representatives and others involved, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the controversial initiative. Among those positioned to profit from GHF-linked contracts are a Chicago-based private equity firm, McNally Capital, whose subsidiary Orbis Operations helped set up the foundation; and Safe Reach Solutions, the primary contractor overseeing GHF operations inside Gaza, which was created late last year for that purpose. SRS is owned by a Wyoming-based trust whose beneficiary is McNally Capital. Boston Consulting Group was also engaged in the effort to stand up the GHF, on what it has said was a pro bono basis. In March, it signed a two-month contract for more than $1 million with McNally to continue assisting SRS, with later extensions in May, an arrangement first reported by the Financial Times. BCG later withdrew from the project amid controversy, and a BCG spokeswoman, Nidhi Sinha, said no payment was accepted. The GHF has continued to deliver food to hungry Gazans: since late May, according to the foundation's count, more than 80 million meals in boxes that are calibrated to feed 5.5 people for 3.5 days. But dwindling resources have limited the number of trucks available to bring food into the enclave to about 70 to 80 per day, compared with early plans for more than 300, according to people familiar with GHF operations. Construction of additional distribution sites has also been indefinitely put off because of a lack of financing, ongoing Israeli military operations and the need to remove unexploded ordnance throughout Gaza. Money problems, and the unknown outcome of ceasefire negotiations, have also put on hold GHF plans for a more holistic — and controversial — proposal to relocate Gazans, summarized in a 19-page slide deck distributed at the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv in January, several people said. In addition to the food distribution, the slides included plans for GHF construction of large-scale residential compounds inside and potentially outside Gaza where 'the population' could reside while the enclave was 'demilitarized and rebuilt.' The slide deck suggested that approach would allow the GHF to gain trust with Gazans — a currency that could be leveraged to 'facilitate President Trump's vision' for the battle-scarred enclave. The GHF concept was born as part of a larger effort by a group of Israeli military officials, Israeli businesspeople and foreign partners to support Israel's war effort and plan for Gaza's future. They began meeting shortly after the conflict began with Hamas's Oct. 7, 2023, surprise attack in southern Israel, which killed about 1,200 people and saw at least 250 hostages taken back to Gaza. As Israel responded to the attack, pounding Gaza with airstrikes and ground troops, it cut off the daily assistance that the 141-square-mile enclave had depended on for decades. Netanyahu's government — long distrustful of the U.N., which coordinated deliveries of food, fuel and medical supplies — justified the blockade by claiming that Hamas controlled and profited from the aid distribution. Under pressure from the Biden administration and humanitarian organizations that said depriving noncombatants of food was a potential war crime, Israel eventually allowed limited relief to resume. But the Israelis kept a tight hold on the spigot of assistance, generating friction between Netanyahu and the U.S. government, Israel's main source of weaponry and diplomatic backing. 'There was a need to get humanitarian aid into Gaza,' an Israeli familiar with the group's efforts said, but it needed to be done 'in a non-U.N. way.' In January 2024, the fledgling Gaza aid working group sought advice from Michael Vickers, a former Green Beret, CIA veteran and undersecretary of defense for intelligence during the Obama administration. Vickers was on the board of Orbis Operations, a consulting company based in McLean, Virginia, that was founded by former national security, military and intelligence specialists and which McNally purchased in 2021. Vickers told the planners, 'I'm not the guy, but I know the guy who can talk to you,' according to a person familiar with the approach. The man they wanted, Vickers said, was then-Orbis Vice President Philip Reilly, a former senior CIA operations officer with extensive experience in private security operations. Reilly quickly gained the trust of the IDF and the Gaza planning group, and spent much of 2024 immersing himself in the details of the Gaza conflict. Neither Vickers nor Reilly responded to queries about their involvement in the Gaza initiative. The Biden administration was well aware that the Israeli government and private-sector Israelis and Americans were working with the government on a plan to impose a new aid delivery system. While some in the administration were supportive, most were skeptical. But they did not directly interfere in the project. 'They were all talking — they being the Israeli government, the prime minister's office, the IDF — sort of throwing spaghetti against the wall to find some magic formula to take the responsibility off their shoulders' to care for Gaza's civilians, a former Biden official involved in Israel policy said. By the fall, the outline of a plan was laid out in a lengthy feasibility study compiled by Silat Technologies, an Orbis subsidiary, envisioning the creation of a nonprofit entity, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, 'to safely deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza.' Planning documents distributed over the next several months said that the foundation's leadership would include respected humanitarian figures such as David Beasley, former head of the World Food Program, and Tony Blair, the former British prime minister who now runs an institute to advise change-making political leaders. Although the U.N. and major nongovernmental aid organizations already operating in Gaza were described as an integral part, their proposed role was unclear. An elaborate social media presence and public relations program would include outreach to select journalists to promote a positive image of the GHF. The foundation would hire a 'prime' contractor to organize and supervise construction of the sites and the aid operation inside Gaza. That firm would then subcontract a private security company — ideally U.S.-based — to be the boots and guns on the ground, guarding the aid as it was transported to distribution sites and protecting the sites themselves. The private companies lined up to service the planned foundation also included BCG, where both Reilly and Vickers were senior advisers. BCG, which later said its initial services were offered pro bono, projected $2 billion in initial operating costs for the GHF. On Nov. 21, a new limited liability company, Safe Reach Solutions, was registered in Jackson, Wyoming, and placed in a trust administered by a local company, Two Ocean Trust. While no information in the registration documents indicated what the new company did, who ran it or whom it employed, the beneficiary of the trust and any money it made, according to three people familiar with the arrangement, was McNally Capital, the private equity firm that owns Orbis. SRS, with Reilly as its chief executive, would later become the primary GHF contractor. Spokespeople for Two Ocean Trust and SRS declined to comment. In a statement to The Post, McNally Capital said it 'did not invest in SRS or actively manage the company,' but said it has an 'economic interest' in the firm. 'Given our long-established relationship with Phil Reilly … our strong belief in the importance of humanitarian aid, and the U.S. government's appeal for innovative solutions,' the statement said, McNally was 'pleased to have supported the establishment of SRS as an important step toward meeting the full scope of humanitarian need in Gaza.' Founded in 2008 by Ward McNally, of the Rand McNally publishing family, the firm specializes in the acquisition of aerospace, defense and technology companies. 'Obviously, McNally is a business. They're in the business of making money,' a person familiar with the financial aspects of the project said. But 'I think it's very ambiguous whether this ends up being profitable.' As the new year approached, progress toward the food aid program planning was interrupted by the prospect of a Gaza ceasefire and partial hostage release. Israel had agreed to move its troops out of portions of Gaza at least temporarily — allowing citizens to return to what remained of their homes in the largely destroyed northern portion of the enclave. But Israeli officials insisted on a vehicle checkpoint — run by non-IDF security — on the Netzarim Corridor, a dividing line between northern and southern Gaza, to ensure weapons were not carried back to areas the IDF said it had earlier cleared of Hamas militants. With nine days' notice, U.S. and Arab mediators turned to the newly created SRS to organize the checkpoint. Reilly subcontracted UG Solutions, a small security firm based in North Carolina, to staff the ground operation. Headed by former Green Beret Jameson Govoni, UG had previously worked in Ukraine and Haiti, among other hot spots, and could move quickly because it had few of the classified contracts with the United States or other governments that proved to be complications for bigger security companies. The ceasefire mediators — the United States and Qatar — administered payments to SRS, the prime contractor, according to people familiar with the operation. The ceasefire began Jan. 19, the day before Donald Trump's second-term inauguration. Although the truce lasted only until mid-March, when Israel launched another ground invasion of northern Gaza, the checkpoint was deemed a success, with no major incidents reported. The Netzarim operation came to be considered a test run for the food distribution operation, and SRS and UG were well positioned to take it over for GHF. On Feb. 2, the foundation was registered as a humanitarian nonprofit in Switzerland and Delaware. The Netanyahu government had every reason to believe that Trump would support the initiative. He vowed to quickly end the war and proposed that the United States 'take over' and 'own' Gaza, developing it as a high-end Mediterranean resort. Food distribution by the GHF, planning documents indicated, was just the first step in a larger redevelopment plan. When the ceasefire collapsed on March 18 and the IDF resumed ground operations and airstrikes, Israel again stopped all humanitarian aid from entering Gaza. As the days and weeks ticked on, thousands of tons of food and goods piled up in warehouses outside its borders; WFP and other humanitarian actors began to tally reports of starvation inside. By early May, Israel was under mounting international pressure to end its aid blockade, and Trump was looking for progress on his promise to end the war as he prepared for a trip to the Persian Gulf. At a May 9 news conference in Tel Aviv, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee claimed the GHF as a Trump 'initiative.' U.S. representatives, including Aryeh Lightstone, an official who now works with Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and formerly served as an aide to David Friedman when he was U.S. ambassador to Israel, courted U.N. and humanitarian partners to sign on to the plan. But opposition to the plan had grown. The United Nations and most aid partners refused, publicly denouncing the proposal as immoral and designed to further Israel's war plans against Hamas by 'militarizing' assistance to more than a million civilians corralled into ever-shrinking 'safe zones' demarcated by the IDF in southern Gaza. Neither Beasley nor Blair agreed to sign on. On May 22, newly named GHF executive director Jake Wood, a U.S. Marine veteran and co-founding board chair of Team Rubicon, a humanitarian organization that operated in disaster zones, released a letter he had sent to COGAT, the Israeli government coordinator for Gaza and the occupied West Bank. Its purpose, he wrote, was to confirm 'our understandings of agreements' — including an understanding that aid agencies would also be permitted to distribute food and medical assistance under 'existing' humanitarian mechanisms, outside the GHF program. 'GHF acknowledges that we do not possess the technical capacity or field infrastructure to manage such distributions independently,' he wrote, suggesting that the new aid mechanism should complement, but not replace, Gaza's existing aid sector. The night before the scheduled May 26 launch, Wood unsuccessfully sought to persuade the IDF to delay the start date by at least a week amid unanswered questions about funding, the participation of other agencies and the nearby positioning of Israeli troops. Wood resigned, and the next day, UG contractors accompanied the first convoys of GHF food into Gaza. Some of the plans, he said in a statement, were not consistent with 'humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence.' David Burke, a fellow Marine veteran and former Team Rubicon colleague who had been named GHF chief operating officer, also resigned. Burke and Wood did not respond to inquiries from The Post. The GHF promoted John Acree, a former official with the U.S. Agency for International Development originally named head of the GHF operations inside Gaza, to interim executive director of the foundation. The opening of the sites brought new problems, with tens of thousands of despairing Gazans surging toward promised food. In the first week of GHF's operations, witnesses said that Israeli troops shot in the direction of Palestinians queuing outside the fenced distribution sites at least three times. UG contractors voiced concerns about the rules of engagement of nearby IDF troops and the safety of the Palestinians, according to several people familiar with the site operations. Meanwhile, paid Palestinian volunteers working at the GHF sites were receiving death threats from Hamas for participating in the Israeli-backed plan. Volunteers were afraid to travel back to their families at night, but the financial planners had not budgeted to provide them with housing, running water or other supplies to stay on-site, one person said. 'There were number crunchers at every stage, asking why do we have to do this stuff,' said another person familiar with the conversations between BCG financial consultants and SRS planners. Contractors purchased some provisions for the workers out of their own pockets, the person said. The limited number of trucks that passed through the Kerem Shalom crossing into Gaza each day to the sites after Israeli inspection meant that supplies ran out too early, leaving thousands empty-handed, angry and disbelieving there was no more food to be had. During the first week of June, BCG abruptly withdrew from the project. Amid what several people familiar with the situation said was internal criticism of perceived anti-Palestinian initiatives, the company said that members of its team had undertaken 'unauthorized' efforts on postwar planning. Two senior partners, it said in a statement, had been 'exited ... from the firm' and BCG 'has not and will not be paid for any of their work.' Despite ongoing problems and frequent reports of gunfire nearby, the GHF food program achieved a rhythm of sorts after a few weeks. News releases provided a daily accounting of tens of thousands of boxes of pasta, lentils, cooking oil and other commodities it distributed. But the killing of civilians in the vicinity of GHF sites has continued. Last month, eight Palestinian volunteers were shot and killed, allegedly by Hamas, aboard a bus returning them to GHF sites after visiting their families. Early this month, this IDF said 'terrorists' had tossed grenades into a distribution site, injuring two American contractors. Then came the deaths in Wednesday's stampede. 'We came to Gaza to help feed people, not to fight a narrative war,' GHF spokesman Chapin Fay told reporters hours after the stampede deaths, publicly accusing Hamas of causing the carnage by showing up at the site with guns. Aid organizations said it was the predicted result of Israeli militarization of what should be a neutral endeavor. On Sunday, at least 79 Palestinians were killed when food-seeking crowds mobbed a U.N. aid convoy in the northern part of the enclave and were fired on by Israeli troops, according to Gaza health authorities and witnesses. The IDF said it was 'aware of the claim' and that details of the event were 'being examined.' Acree, the GHF interim executive director, repeated appeals to the United Nations and other aid organizations to cooperate with the foundation. 'The demand for food is relentless, and so is our commitment,' he said in a statement. 'We're adjusting our operations in real time to keep people safe and informed, and we stand ready to partner with other organizations to scale up and deliver more meals to the people of Gaza.' GHF contracts expire at the end of August, unless a ceasefire comes first. If and when the fighting stops, it remains unclear how much aid will be allowed into Gaza and who will distribute it. Since late June, Trump has said repeatedly that negotiations were going well and that a truce was imminent.
an hour ago
Scores killed at aid site by Israeli gunfire, Gaza officials say
Nearly 100 Palestinians were killed by Israeli gunfire while seeking aid near the Israel-Gaza border, Gaza officials say.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Zohran Mamdani's disdain for the law is disqualifying — and dangerous
Zohran Mamdani's many antics — setting to music his love for those who provide material support to Hamas, shutting down major transportation hubs with rush-hour protests, refusing to condemn calls for a globalized intifada and flipping off Christopher Columbus, to name just a few — make it easy to lose sight of the fact that he is applying for a job. Indeed, Mamdani would prefer we fracture over what 'intifada' means than that we evaluate his qualifications to serve as New York City's mayor. But precisely because he does not want us to, we should. The mayor sits within a three-branch system: A legislative branch creates laws, an executive branch implements and enforces laws, and a judicial branch interprets laws. Note the common thread: laws. Laws provide the stability and safety necessary for New Yorkers to walk our dogs at 11 p.m., and for the private sector to invest billions in corporate headquarters. A Mayor Mamdani would lead the executive branch, with the primary responsibility of implementing and enforcing laws. His campaign is effectively a job interview, which allows us to assess his views on and understanding of the law. Helpfully, he has revealed a great deal about both. Take Mamdani's repeated threat to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, purportedly to enforce a warrant issued by the International Criminal Court. Yet the United States is not a member state of the ICC, as Mamdani should know — and if he nevertheless orders the NYPD to execute the warrant, he would violate the American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2001, which prohibits any 'local government' from cooperating with or providing support to the ICC. Without the ICC warrant, Mamdani has no legal means to arrest a sitting prime minister. Even a non-citizen like Netanyahu enjoys the Fourth Amendment's protection against arrests without warrants or probable cause — a point on which Mamdani is well-versed when it comes to his crusade against Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Then there's 'Stop the Squeeze on NYC Homeowners,' Mamdani's plan to 'shift the tax burden' away from 'outer boroughs' and onto 'whiter neighborhoods.' Apart from its manifest racism, the plan evinces an appalling ignorance of the Constitution and civil rights law — the 14th Amendment and Section 1981 of the Federal Civil Rights Act exist to prevent the kind of race-based tax system Mamdani envisions. In his 'Protecting New York's Tenants' plan, Mamdani vows to seize property from wayward landlords (vaguely, those who 'do not work with' his administration or are 'ripping off' tenants) 'through a public foreclosure process' after doubling and tripling fines for code violations. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters Mamdani's campaign website breezily compares this idea to the way the city's Department of Health shutters a dirty restaurant, without delving into how he might legally extend the concept to housing. That's a question we should ask. Theoretically, by increasing fines, the city could artificially place otherwise financially healthy properties in fiscal distress, and such distress could trigger a foreclosure proceeding. However, the city would be entitled only to the value of the outstanding fines, not the value of the building — a government cannot capitalize on the real property investment of a private citizen. Further, under Mamdani's plan, the city would not just recover the fines owed, but become the property's owner. In foreclosure, property is auctioned to the highest bidder — is Mamdani suggesting the city act as a fair-market participant, even though it is initiating the proceeding? And guarantee to outbid the field? Again, the Constitution answers with a resounding no: The Fifth Amendment's protection against unjust governmental takings and the 14th Amendment's protection against arbitrary enforcement of laws guard against seizures on the basis of such whims. It seems our Founders had a good idea of what might imperil our democracy. What's most revealing is not that Mamdani's plans are illegal, but that he appears never to have bothered considering whether they are. Indeed, whether he can legally implement his promises seems irrelevant to him. For those of us who are not avowed Marxists, it's hard to respect a campaign that hasn't done its homework. But it's not surprising: Mamdani is an ideologue who has never held a job that required him to exhibit the discipline to operate within the confines of what is practical or legal. This candidate may wish to imprison Netanyahu, tax white New Yorkers and seize property, but making his wishes reality requires a legal basis. If Mamdani is hell-bent on destroying the status quo, he would be well-advised to first understand it. Susan Greene is a partner at Holzman Vogel, where she specializes in commercial litigation and constitutional law.
