Trump threatens bombing Iran

According to Reuters, US President Donald Trump has threatened Iran on Sunday with bombing and secondary tariffs if Tehran did not come to an agreement with Washington over its nuclear program.

Western powers accuse Iran of having a clandestine agenda to develop nuclear weapons capability by enriching uranium to a high level of fissile purity, above what they say is justifiable for a civilian atomic energy program. However, Tehran insists its nuclear program is wholly for civilian energy purposes.

In Trump's first remarks since Iran rejected direct negotiations with Washington last week, he told NBC News that US and Iranian officials were talking, but did not elaborate.

"If they don't make a deal, there will be bombing," Trump said in a telephone interview. "It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before."

"There's a chance that if they don't make a deal, that I will do secondary tariffs on them like I did four years ago," he added.

Iran sent a response through Oman to a letter from Trump urging Tehran to reach a new nuclear deal, saying its policy was to not engage in direct negotiations with the United States while under its maximum pressure campaign and military threats, Tehran's foreign minister was quoted as saying on Thursday.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterated the policy on Sunday. "Direct negotiations with the US have been rejected, but Iran has always been involved in indirect negotiations, and now too, the Supreme Leader has emphasized that indirect negotiations can still continue," he said, referring to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

In the NBC interview, Trump also threatened so-called secondary tariffs, which affect buyers of a country's goods, on both Russia and Iran. He signed an executive order last week authorizing such tariffs on buyers of Venezuelan oil.

Trump did not elaborate on those potential tariffs.

In his first 2017-21 term, Trump withdrew the US from a 2015 deal between Iran and world powers that placed strict limits on Tehran's disputed nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.

Trump also reimposed sweeping US sanctions. It is alleged that since then, the Islamic Republic has far surpassed the agreed limits in its escalating program of uranium enrichment.

 

 

 

 

 

Political Swings in the Middle East in 2025

I am inclined to refer to an article by Robin Wright and Peyton Dashiel of Wilson Center. I consider it more like a US narrative. I suggest the readers to read the content dispassionately to understand how situation is likely to unfold in the near future.

In 2025, power dynamics in the Middle East shifted significantly. Sunni factions gained influence while Shiite groups tied to Iran weakened. Political turmoil, economic struggles, and escalating conflicts—especially between Israel and Iran—exacerbated regional instability, hampering diplomacy, development, and prospects for long-term peace.

Regional Shifts and Rising Conflicts

The region faced an unprecedented level of crises, with violence escalating in Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, and Yemen. The Sunni resurgence saw Islamist parties gaining political ground in Jordan and Syria, where a military coup toppled the Assad regime. Iran’s influence waned, with its proxy militias suffering major losses due to Israeli and US airstrikes. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia bolstered its regional dominance, hosting US-Russia talks on Ukraine and offering to mediate US-Iran negotiations.

Conflicts in Gaza and the Red Sea intensified. Israel’s war with Hamas continued, with peace efforts stalling. Hostilities between Israel and Iran escalated, with both nations engaging in direct attacks. Houthi rebels in Yemen disrupted international shipping in the Red Sea, causing a sharp decline in Suez Canal traffic.

Internal Political Shifts

In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) lost major local elections in 2024, signaling a shift in public sentiment. The government’s arrest of opposition figure Ekrem İmamoğlu in March 2025 further fueled tensions.

In Iran, reformist Masoud Pezeshkian won the presidency, reflecting growing dissatisfaction with theocratic rule.

Tunisian President Kais Saied intensified crackdowns on opposition, extending the prison sentence of Ennahdha leader Rachid Ghannouchi.

Syria’s Assad regime collapsed after more than 70 years in power. Sunni militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seized control, igniting sectarian clashes with Alawites. While Iran distanced itself from its traditional proxies, its Supreme Leader insisted Tehran did not rely on foreign militias.

Economic and Diplomatic Fallout

Economic crises deepened, with the World Bank warning of long-term stagnation. Diplomatic efforts faltered as regional rivalries intensified, particularly between Israel and Iran. With increasing violence and political upheaval, the path to stability in the Middle East remained highly uncertain.

Undeclared US-Iran war and role of Israel

The tension between the United States and Iranian clerics — especially the ruling ones — is rooted in a mix of historical events, ideological differences, and geopolitical conflicts. To understand the prevailing situation one has to peep into the history.

Iranian Revolution of 1979

Let us begin with the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The US had a strong alliance with Iran’s Shah (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi), who promoted Western-friendly policies. After Shah was overthrown, Ayatollah Khomeini established the Islamic Republic, rejecting Western influence and terming the US the "Great Satan." During the US embassy hostage crisis (1979-1981), 52 Americans were held captive for 444 days.

Ideological Clash

The Western media is never tired of claiming that Iran’s clerical leadership promotes anti-Western, anti-imperialist, and anti-Israel sentiments. This is termed directly challenging the US hegemony in the region.

The US supports secular governance and democracy, while Iran's leadership is based on Velayat-e Faqih (rule of the Islamic jurist), blending religion and politics in a way that challenges Western norms.

Regional Power Struggle

The United States considers Iran the biggest challenger of its hegemony in the MENA. The US classifies the axis of resistance as terrorist organizations and alleges that Iran supports militant groups like Hezbollah and Houthi rebels. Over the years the US has been playing the mantra, “Iran is a bigger threat for Saudi Arabia as compared to Iran” and promoting animosity among the two countries. This enabled the US to sell lethal weapons worth billions of dollars to Saudi Arabia.

Nuclear Tensions

Despite Iran’s repeated assurances that its nuclear program is peaceful, the US has been propagating that Iran is busy in developing nuclear weapons to destabilize the region. The 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) temporarily eased tensions, but Trump withdrew from it in 2018, leading to renewed sanctions and hostilities.

Human Rights and Freedom

The US has been persistently accusing Iran’s clerical leadership for suppressing protests, women’s rights violations, censorship, and political imprisonments — especially after events like the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests.

In short, the US sees Iranian clerics as anti-Western, oppressive, and destabilizing, while the clerics view the US as imperialist and morally corrupt. It is believed that after the US Embassy debacle, the world super power decided not enter into direct confrontation with Iran. The US, found a proxy, Israel.

Strategic Partnership with Israel

The US sees Israel as its closest ally in the Middle East — a stable, technologically advanced, and militarily strong partner in a region filled with rival powers. Israel shares the US goal of curbing Iranian influence, especially because Iran funds groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, which directly threaten Israel.

Iran as a Regional Threat

The US and Israel both view Iran’s leadership as destabilizing due to Iranian support for militant proxies (Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria). Anti-Israel rhetoric — Iran’s leaders have repeatedly called for Israel’s destruction. Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which both nations see as a potential existential threat to Israel and a power-shifting game changer in the region.

Covert Israeli Operations

Israel often conducts covert strikes on Iranian targets — like the assassination of nuclear scientists or cyberattacks. This allows the US to distance itself publicly while still supporting Israeli actions behind the scenes (financial aid, intelligence sharing, advanced weaponry).

 Funding and Military Aid

The US provides Israel with $3.8 billion annually in military aid, ensuring Israel maintains a "Qualitative Military Edge" over regional adversaries, particularly Iran. This enables Israel to act as a forward line of defense without direct US military involvement.

Avoiding a Full-Scale War

Direct US conflict with Iran could escalate into a massive regional war — something the US wants to avoid after the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. By using Israel and occasionally other regional allies to contain Iran, the US avoids deploying troops while still advancing its strategic goals.

Balancing Regional Power

Iran’s influence stretches from Tehran to Beirut (the so-called "Shia Crescent"). The US and Israel work to disrupt this expansion, particularly in Syria (where Iran supported Assad) and Lebanon (via Hezbollah). Recent airstrikes on Iranian arms shipments and proxy bases — often attributed to Israel — are part of this containment strategy.

The Conclusion

The US doesn’t officially call Israel a proxy, but the relationship functions that way in practice. Israel handles the dirty work, and the US provides diplomatic cover, weapons, and money. This setup gives the US strategic flexibility without the cost and backlash of another Middle Eastern war.

Drawing a parallel between US supplying arms to Israel and Iran supplying arms to Houthis

This morning I sat down to explore a parallel between US supplying arms to Israel and Iran supplying arms to Houthis. My gut feeling is, though the situations are complex and have key differences, the outcome depends on the analyst if he/ she is a friend of United States.

The Parallel:

Proxy Support:
The Western analysts, without any hesitation say both Iranian support for the Houthis and the US support for Israel involve supplying advanced weapons to allied groups or nations engaged in regional conflicts. Over the years Western analysis have been saying, Iran backs the Houthis to extend its influence against Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, while the US supports Israel as a key strategic ally in the Middle East.

Strategic Goals:
The mantra of Western analysts is, Iran aims to challenge Western-aligned powers (like Saudi Arabia and Israel), while the US supports Israel to maintain a balance of power favorable to its interests in the region.

Impact on Conflicts:
They also say, both arms supplies prolong conflicts. Iranian weapons bolster Houthi resilience in Yemen’s civil war, while US arms help Israel maintain its military edge in Gaza and against regional threats like Hezbollah.

Key Differences:

Legitimacy and International Recognition:
God Fathers of genocide in Gaza say, Israel is a recognized sovereign state, whereas the Houthis are a rebel group (though they control significant territory in Yemen). This affects how international law and diplomacy perceive the arms transfers.

Military Capabilities:
The reality is, the US arms to Israel include advanced fighter jets, missile defense systems, and intelligence support — a level of military aid far beyond the drones, missiles, and small arms Iran provides to the Houthis.

Transparency and Alliances:
The funniest argument is, the US military aid to Israel is largely public, subject to congressional oversight, and part of formal agreements. Iran’s support for the Houthis is clandestine, violating UN arms embargoes.

Global Perception:
The dishonest Western media go to the extent of saying, the US positions its support as aiding a democracy for self-defense, while Iran’s aid to the Houthis is widely seen as destabilizing and fueling a humanitarian crisis.

 

Iran Nuclear Program: West’s Double Standards

The ongoing debate over Iran’s nuclear program has resurfaced, with a Wall Street Journal piece urging Iran’s complete nuclear disarmament. It likens Iran to South Africa’s voluntary disarmament and Libya’s renouncement of nuclear ambitions, arguing that only pressure — sanctions, military threats, and economic isolation — can force compliance. However, this argument overlooks historical context, Western double standards, and the consequences of past interference in West Asia.

Hypocrisy in Disarmament Demands

Comparing Iran to South Africa and Libya is misleading. South Africa dismantled its program during a peaceful transition from apartheid, not under external pressure. Libya abandoned its efforts after the US invaded Iraq in 2003 — a move that didn’t prevent Libya’s eventual collapse under Western intervention. Iran, aware of this history, has little reason to believe unilateral disarmament would ensure its security.

Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), allows International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. In contrast, Israel, which possesses nuclear weapons, hasn’t signed the NPT or permitted inspections — yet faces no calls to disarm. If non-proliferation were truly the goal, the same standards would apply to all nations, not just US adversaries.

Broken Agreements and Misleading Narratives

Iran adhered to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), verified by the IAEA, until the United States unilaterally withdrew in 2018, reimposing sanctions. Iran continued compliance, hoping European nations would uphold the deal, reducing commitments only after it became clear sanctions would persist. The portrayal of Iran as the party breaking agreements is a distortion of events.

Sanctions: Economic Warfare, Not Diplomacy

Sanctions have hurt ordinary Iranians without forcing government collapse or nuclear abandonment. Iran’s economy, despite hardships, has adapted through domestic industries and alliances with China and Russia. Economic warfare often fuels national resilience, not surrender.

Real Source of Instability

The issue isn’t Iran’s nuclear program — it’s Western intervention and support for authoritarian regimes to maintain US-Israeli military dominance. Iran remains open to dialogue but not likely to accept one-sided deals demanding surrender. True diplomacy requires mutual respect, not coercion — the only path to a fair, lasting peace.

Trump gives Iran deadline to reach new nuclear deal

US President Donald Trump, in a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proposing negotiations on a new nuclear deal, made clear that Iran has a two-month deadline to reach an agreement, a source familiar with the letter’s contents told CNN.

The directive comes as Trump has said he would like to reach a deal with Iran to gain more control over their nuclear capabilities.

Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff delivered the letter to the president of the United Arab Emirates Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan while he was in Abu Dhabi last week, the source said. The UAE later gave the letter to the Iranians.

“President Trump made it clear to Ayatollah Khamenei that he wanted to resolve the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program diplomatically – and very soon – and if this was not possible, there would be other ways to resolve the dispute,” a spokesman for the National Security Council Brian Hughes said in a statement to CNN.

Axios was the first to report on the contents of the letter.

Trump also discussed a potential nuclear deal with Iran during his phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday, according to a White House readout of the call.

The readout stated that Trump and Putin “spoke broadly about the Middle East as a region of potential cooperation to prevent future conflicts. They further discussed the need to stop proliferation of strategic weapons and will engage with others to ensure the broadest possible application.”

“The two leaders shared the view that Iran should never be in a position to destroy Israel,” the readout continued.

Earlier this month, Trump told Fox News that there “are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal. I would prefer to make a deal, because I’m not looking to hurt Iran.”

“I said, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate, because it’s going to be a lot better for Iran,’ and I think they want to get that letter – the alternative is we have to do something, because you can’t let them have a nuclear weapon,” Trump added.

It is unclear how the US would respond if Iran fails to enter direct talks regarding its nuclear program. However, senior US officials have not ruled out potential military action, whether through the US or Israel, on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the future.

During his first term in office, Trump withdrew from the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran and ordered a US-led strike on Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, leading to further backlash from Tehran.

Trump, in his second term, has returned to his “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran, in an effort to isolate the country economically and diplomatically.

Khamenei recently said calls for negotiations by “bully states” are aimed at dominating others, not resolving issues.

“The insistence on the part of some bully states on negotiations is not to resolve issues, but to dominate and impose their own expectations,” Khamenei said this month, as cited by Iranian state media outlets.

Iran to be held responsible for attacks by Houthis

US President Donald Trump said on Monday he would hold Iran responsible for any attacks carried out by the Houthi group that it backs in Yemen, as his administration expanded the biggest US military operation in the Middle East since Trump returned to the White House, reports Reuters.

Responding to the Houthi movement's threats to international shipping, the US launched a new wave of airstrikes on Saturday. On Monday, the Red Sea port city of Hodeidah and Al Jawf governorate north of the capital Sanaa were targeted, Houthi-run Al Masirah TV said.

"Every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon, from this point forward, as being a shot fired from the weapons and leadership of IRAN, and IRAN will be held responsible, and suffer the consequences, and those consequences will be dire!" Trump said on his Truth Social platform.

The White House said that Trump's message to Iran was to take the United States seriously.

The Pentagon said it had struck over 30 sites so far and would use overwhelming lethal force against the Houthis until the group stopped attacks. The Pentagon's chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell, said the goal was not regime change.

Lieutenant General Alex Grynkewich, director of operations at the Joint Staff, said the latest campaign against the Houthis was different to the one under former President Joe Biden because the range of targets was broader and included senior Houthi drone experts.

Grynkewich said dozens of Houthi members were killed in the strike. The Biden administration is not believed to have targeted senior Houthi leaders.

The Houthi-run health ministry said on Sunday that at least 53 people have been killed in the attacks. Five children and two women were among the victims and 98 have been hurt, it said. Reuters could not independently verify those casualty numbers.

One US official told Reuters the strikes might continue for weeks. Washington has also ramped up sanctions pressure on Iran while trying to bring it to the negotiating table over its nuclear program.

The Houthis say their attacks, which have forced companies to re-route ships to longer and more expensive journeys around southern Africa, are in solidarity with Palestinians as Israel strikes Gaza.

Houthi leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi said on Sunday the militants would target US ships in the Red Sea as long as the US continues attacks on Yemen.

Under the direction of al-Houthi, who is in his 40s, the ragtag group has become an army of tens of thousands of fighters and acquired an arsenal of armed drones and ballistic missiles.

While Iran champions the Houthis, the Houthis deny being puppets of Tehran, and experts on Yemen say they are motivated primarily by a domestic agenda.

The Houthis' military spokesman, without providing evidence, said in a televised statement early on Monday that the group had launched a second attack against the US aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman in the Red Sea.

 

China and Russia reject US maximum pressure

Lately, China, Iran, and Russia held talks in Beijing, urging diplomacy over “pressure and threats” and calling for an end to “illegal unilateral sanctions” on Iran.

The meeting, led by deputy foreign ministers from the three nations, comes as China positions itself as a key player in resolving Iran’s nuclear issue.

This follows US President Donald Trump’s statement that Iran faces two options: a deal or military action.

China’s Executive Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu emphasized eliminating the root causes of the crisis, rejecting sanctions and force.

The joint statement called for avoiding escalation and fostering a diplomatic resolution. The urgency grows as the UN nuclear watchdog warns of Iran’s expanding uranium stockpile, though Iran maintains its program is peaceful.

Beijing opposes US sanctions and the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign, which began after the US withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal — the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The deal’s looming October deadline could trigger a “snapback” of UN sanctions unless a new agreement is reached.

China, alongside European powers, hopes to salvage the JCPOA or craft a new deal. Trump remains open to negotiation but maintains pressure through sanctions, while Iran’s leadership rejects talks under US duress.

China’s diplomatic push aligns with its goal of emerging as a global leader, especially as Trump’s "America First" policy shifts US foreign strategies. The Beijing meeting also showcased non-Western approaches to global issues.

For Iran, the talks offered a chance to reinforce ties with China and Russia — key allies amid Western sanctions. Tehran and Moscow have deepened cooperation, particularly through military support in Ukraine, while China remains a vital economic and diplomatic partner.

China seeks to balance its relationships across the Middle East, including ties with Saudi Arabia, and mitigate potential risks to its businesses from US pressure on Iran.

Analysts note that China’s limited experience in Middle Eastern diplomacy and Iran’s independent stance could restrict its role as a deal broker. Despite this, China’s efforts signal growing influence and alignment with Russia and Iran against Western pressure.

Iranian crude oil meets global standards

National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) has dismissed claims in some media outlets about the production of low-quality crude, stating that Iran's oil exports meet global standards and urging biased media to prioritize national interests.

According to a report by the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), NIOC emphasized that it consistently prioritizes crude oil quality to maintain its brand and meet the expectations of its customers.

The company stated that refineries—both domestic and international—are the primary consumers of Iranian crude, and maintaining quality is essential, as any decline would disrupt export and transportation operations.

NIOC further noted that during periods of peak production or when output expansion is a policy focus, fluctuations in crude oil’s water and salt content may occur. However, the company stressed that such variations are not a cause for concern and do not impact the global price of Iranian crude.

Iran’s oil exports have risen significantly in recent months, driven by increased shipments to China and other Asian buyers.

According to OPEC’s latest monthly report, the Islamic Republic’s crude oil production increased by 37,000 barrels per day (bpd) in February.

China remains the top destination for Iranian crude, with independent refiners in Shandong province being key buyers.

Iran has also strengthened its energy ties with Russia and Venezuela, engaging in barter trade and joint refining projects to expand its market reach.

Tehran has ramped up oil production while navigating sanctions through intermediaries and alternative payment mechanisms.

The increased output has positioned Iran as a more prominent supplier in global energy markets, with analysts noting that its crude remains competitively priced compared to other West Asian producers.

 

West Asia can ensure its security, claims Iranian commander

Iran's Navy Commander, Rear Admiral Shahram Irani, stated that countries in West Asia are capable of handling their own security and urged external actors to rethink their involvement in the region. 

Speaking to Al Jazeera, he emphasized that regional nations are no longer as vulnerable as they once were and possess the means to protect themselves.

“The region is no longer what it used to be, and its countries are equipped to ensure their safety; therefore, foes must change their policies and respect regional nations,” The commander stressed.

Admiral Irani also asserted that Iran rejects isolation and will operate within international legal frameworks.

“The behavior of Iranians, particularly in the current regional context, aligns with international laws,” he noted. 

“Regional instability will harm the global economy,” Admiral Iravani said, adding that Iran is offering expertise to West Asian regional countries. 

The statement came as Iran, Russia, and China wrapped up a joint maritime exercise dubbed “Maritime Security Belt 2025” in the Indian Ocean on Wednesday, alongside observers from several other nations.

In related remarks on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi congratulated Admiral Irani on the successful execution of the exercises, emphasizing the Navy's strength and international dominance.

The top diplomat said the drills, beginning on March 10, demonstrated the Navy's decisive attitude and global operational capabilities.

He also stressed the importance of an assertive presence in expansive oceanic areas for maritime security and development.

“Iran has an unwavering determination to maintain and enhance the security of the strategic and sensitive Persian Gulf region, the strategically crucial Strait of Hormuz within it, the Sea of Oman, and beyond. These exercises were a reflection of that resolve.” Araghchi noted. 

 

US imposes sanctions on Iranian oil minister

According to Reuters, the United States imposed sanctions on Thursday on Iran's Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad and some Hong Kong-flagged vessels that are part of a shadow fleet that helps disguise Iranian oil shipments.

President Donald Trump re-imposed a maximum pressure policy on Iran in February that includes efforts to drive its oil exports to zero in order to stop Tehran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and funding militant groups.

It was alleged that Paknejad oversees the export of tens of billions of dollars’ worth of Iranian oil and has allocated billions of dollars’ worth of oil to Iran’s armed forces for export.

“The Iranian regime continues to use the proceeds from the nation’s vast oil resources to advance its narrow, alarming self-interests at the expense of the Iranian people,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

“Treasury will fight and disrupt any attempts by the regime to fund its destabilizing activities and further its dangerous agenda.”

Treasury also designated owners or operators of vessels that have delivered Iranian oil to China or lifted it from storage there, it said. Those were in multiple jurisdictions, including India and China, it said.

Iran's military relies on a vast shadow fleet of ships to disguise shipments of oil worth billions of dollars to China.

Thursday's designated vessels include the Hong Kong-flagged Peace Hill and its owner Hong Kong Heshun Transportation Trading Limited, the Iran-flagged Polaris 1, the Seychelles-registered Fallon Shipping Company Ltd, and the Liberia-registered Itaugua Services Inc.

It also designated the Panama-flagged Corona Fun, which it said has manipulated automatic identification systems to disguise efforts to ship Iranian oil, and the San Marino-flagged Seasky, for transporting fuel oil on behalf of Iran's national oil company to China.

The sanctions block US assets of the designated entities and prohibit Americans from engaging in any transactions with them.

The US Department of State is designating three entities and three vessels as blocked property, it said.

 

Iran, Russia and China to participate in naval drill in Indian Ocean

Iran, Russia, and China are set to conduct a large-scale joint naval exercise in the northern Indian Ocean, focusing on maritime security operations and strategic military coordination.

The drill, named Security Belt-2025, will take place in early and mid-March near Iran’s southeastern Chabahar Port, involving various branches of the three nations' naval forces.  

The Chinese Defense Ministry announced the exercise on Sunday via its official Weibo account, detailing that the drill will include multiple training operations such as maritime target strikes, VBSS (visit, board, search, and seizure), damage control, and joint search and rescue missions.  

According to the ministry, the primary goal of Security Belt-2025 is to enhance military trust and strengthen practical cooperation between the participating forces. China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy is set to deploy a destroyer and a replenishment ship for the exercise.  

A Chinese military analyst emphasized that the drill will contribute to safeguarding security in a strategically critical region, particularly one that serves as a key transit route for global energy shipments.  

Security Belt-2025 marks the fifth joint naval exercise between Iran, China, and Russia since 2019.

Over the past few years, the three nations have conducted multiple military drills to reinforce regional maritime stability and safeguard international trade routes.  

In addition to countering piracy and maritime terrorism, these exercises have facilitated intelligence sharing on naval rescue operations and the exchange of tactical and operational expertise.  

In March 2024, the Iranian Navy, along with Chinese and Russian naval and airborne units, participated in the Maritime Security Belt-2024 drills.

Observers from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Oman, Pakistan, and South Africa attended the exercises, reflecting the growing interest in multilateral maritime cooperation.  

The joint maneuvers were designed to strengthen maritime security, bolster international trade protection, combat piracy, and enhance operational coordination among naval forces.

The drills also served as a demonstration of the participants' collective commitment to global peace and stability at sea.  

As part of the upcoming exercises, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) will deploy two advanced vessels: the Shahid Nazeri and the Shahid Sayyad Shirazi.  

Commissioned into the IRGC Navy in September 2016, the Shahid Nazeri is a high-speed patrol and reconnaissance vessel designed for extended operational reach. With a length of 55 meters, a width of 14 meters, and a height of 13 meters, the vessel significantly enhances the IRGCN’s maritime capabilities, extending its operational range up to 10,000 kilometers.  

The Shahid Nazeri features a specialized twin-hull (SWATH – Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull) design, providing enhanced stability in high-speed operations and rough seas. Its design ensures that it remains steady even at high speeds, reducing the risk of capsizing.  

Equipped with a helicopter landing pad, the vessel can conduct surveillance and reconnaissance missions across various maritime zones, making it a valuable asset for intelligence gathering and patrol operations.  

The Shahid Sayyad Shirazi is a newly commissioned stealth warship from the Shahid Soleimani class, officially joining the IRGC Navy in February 2024. This catamaran-style ocean-going vessel is designed for high-speed operations, with a maximum speed of 45 knots.  

Armed with a wide array of offensive and defensive missile systems, the Shahid Sayyad Shirazi is equipped with vertical-launch Nawab air defense missiles and Sayyad cruise missiles with a strike range of 700 kilometers.  

With a length of 67 meters, a width of 20 meters, and a displacement of 600 tons, the vessel is powered by four engines, enabling long-distance operations. It has an operational range of 5,500 nautical miles and is capable of carrying three missile-launching fast attack boats along with an armed combat helicopter.  

 

Qatar calls for US-Iran agreement

According to media reports, Qatar's Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani has emphasized the urgent need for a diplomatic agreement between the United States and Iran, reaffirming that Qatar would not support any military escalation in the region.

“There is no way that Qatar would support any kind of military step in that region. We will not give up until we see a diplomatic solution between the United States and Iran. This needs to reach an agreement,” Al-Thani said, as quoted by Al Jazeera.

His remarks came shortly after US President Donald Trump hinted on Friday at the possibility of a "peace agreement" with Iran.

In a televised interview with journalist Tucker Carlson, Al-Thani underscored regional concerns over potential military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, stressing that Iran is “our next-door neighbor, and we have to maintain good relations with all our neighbors... It is in the interest of the region to have a better relationship with Iran.”

He also highlighted "huge progress" in relations between the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and Iran in recent years. While acknowledging policy differences with Tehran, he asserted that these had not negatively impacted diplomatic ties with Gulf states.

Trump, speaking on Friday, stated that interesting days lay ahead in US-Iran relations as he sought either to negotiate a new nuclear deal with Tehran or consider "the other option," an apparent reference to military action.

In response, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi dismissed direct negotiations with Washington, stating that as long as the US policy of maximum pressure and threats continues, we will not enter into direct negotiations with the US.

Discussing Qatar's involvement in mediating the Gaza ceasefire, Al-Thani noted that Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani had consistently prioritized humanitarian efforts, stating, “If we are able to save a single life, it is worth everything.”

He acknowledged that Qatar had faced significant criticism throughout the 15-month conflict in Gaza.

“We’ve been under significant attacks for 15 months during this war on Gaza, something unbelievable, no one would handle such an attack,” he said.

Despite the challenges, he emphasized Qatar’s tireless efforts in brokering a ceasefire, stating that seeing celebrations in both Gaza and Israel upon announcing the deal had made the hardships worthwhile.

Al-Thani credited the successful agreement to joint efforts by Qatar, the US, and other partners, singling out US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff for playing a key role in pushing negotiations forward.

 

What gives the US authority to impose sanctions on other countries?

It is believed that the United States has the legal authority to impose sanctions based on a combination of constitutional powers, legislative acts, executive orders, and national security considerations. Sanctions can be imposed for a range of reasons, from counterterrorism efforts to enforcing international law or responding to violations of human rights or international norms. However, the time has come to reject these power, which cause difficulties for the nations the US does not like.

Sanctions are often imposed for reasons related to US national security. This could include targeting foreign governments or groups that support terrorism, are involved in weapons proliferation, or engage in activities that harm US foreign policy objectives.

While US sanctions are often unilateral, they can also be part of multilateral efforts. The US may align its sanctions with those of international organizations, such as the United Nations or the European Union, especially when it comes to issues like nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and human rights violations. In this context, sanctions are seen as part of broader international diplomatic efforts.

The President has the authority to issue executive orders to implement sanctions without needing Congressional approval. These orders often cite national security concerns, international obligations, or the need to enforce specific laws (like the IEEPA) to restrict economic relations with certain countries or individuals.

 

Here's a breakdown of the key legal and institutional bases for US sanctions:

1. US Constitution

• Executive Powers (Article II): The President of the United States, as the head of the executive branch, has the authority to conduct foreign policy and engage in international relations. This includes the power to implement sanctions as a tool of diplomacy and national security.
• Congressional Powers (Article I): Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and declare war. This allows it to pass laws that authorize sanctions, and the executive branch often implements those laws.

2. Specific Legislation

Several US laws grant the authority to impose sanctions, including:

• International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (1977): This law grants the President broad powers to regulate international trade and economic transactions in response to national emergencies. Under this act, the President can block financial transactions, freeze assets, and prohibit trade with foreign governments or entities that pose a threat to U.S. interests.
• Trading with the Enemy Act (1917): Initially passed during World War I, this law allows the President to regulate or prohibit trade with foreign nations deemed enemies during wartime or national emergencies.
• The USA PATRIOT Act (2001): This law expanded the President's powers to combat terrorism and the financing of terrorist activities, enabling sanctions targeting individuals and entities linked to terrorism.
• Magnitsky Act (2012): This law allows the U.S. government to impose sanctions on individuals involved in human rights violations and corruption, even if they are not from countries officially designated as threats to U.S. security.
• Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) (2017): This law specifically targets countries like Russia, Iran, and North Korea, providing a legal framework for imposing sanctions against foreign governments and individuals involved in activities that threaten U.S. security or foreign policy.

 

 

Muslim unity necessary to counter forced displacement of Palestinians

The foreign ministers of Iran and Saudi Arabia have emphasized the urgent need for unity within the Muslim world to counter Israel’s efforts to forcibly displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, reports Tehran Times.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with his Saudi counterpart, Prince Faisal bin Farhan, on the sidelines of an extraordinary session of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Jeddah on Friday. 

The two top diplomats reaffirmed the necessity for the Islamic world to remain focused on the Palestinian cause and resist attempts to erase Palestine through mass displacement.  

During their talks, Araghchi and Faisal bin Farhan also assessed the progress of Iran-Saudi relations and expressed their nations' commitment to strengthening diplomatic, economic, and strategic ties in accordance with the vision of their respective leaders.  

Araghchi had arrived in Jeddah a day earlier to participate in the high-stakes OIC meeting, which was convened to address Israel’s military actions in Gaza and its broader campaign against Palestinians.  

A key topic of discussion was a recent proposal by US President Donald Trump, suggesting that Washington, could take control of Gaza and transform it into "Riviera of West Asia." The proposal was widely condemned by Arab and Islamic nations.  

On the sidelines of the OIC meeting, Araghchi also met with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. The two officials addressed the broader challenges facing the Muslim world, particularly Israel’s ongoing aggression in Gaza and the occupation of the West Bank.

Araghchi expressed deep concern over the deteriorating security situation in Syria, where militant groups such as Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) have gained control. He warned that instability in Syria would only serve Israeli interests and provide a breeding ground for terrorist organizations.

Fidan echoed these concerns and reaffirmed Turkey’s commitment to supporting Palestinian rights, emphasizing the collective responsibility of Islamic nations to resist Israeli expansionism.  

In addition to Saudi and Turkish officials, Araghchi held separate meetings with foreign ministers from Tunisia, Egypt, and Oman, discussing regional developments and the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza.  

During his meeting with Tunisian Foreign Minister Mohamed Ali Nafti, both sides underscored their shared stance in advocating for Palestinian self-determination and denouncing Israel’s apartheid policies. They called for collective action among Islamic nations to prevent further displacement of Palestinians and to hold Israel accountable for its war crimes.  

Similarly, in discussions with Oman’s Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Al Busaidi, both diplomats highlighted the strong ties between Tehran and Muscat. Busaidi reiterated Oman’s commitment to the Palestinian cause and emphasized the need for regional cooperation to support Palestinian sovereignty. Araghchi affirmed Iran’s willingness to expand its partnership with Oman across various sectors.  

In his talks with Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty, the Iranian diplomat rejected any initiative that involves the forced removal of Palestinians from Gaza, denouncing it as an act of ethnic cleansing. Both ministers stressed the need for continued solidarity within the Muslim world and the broader international community to support the Palestinian people and aid in Gaza’s reconstruction.  

 

Trump’s unsent letter to Iran

US President Donald Trump claimed to have sent a letter to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, expressing interest in striking a deal with Iran on its nuclear program – a move that represents neither a swerve in Iran-US relations nor holds much promise under the current US policies.

"I wrote them a letter saying I hope you are going to negotiate," Trump stated, coupling the plea with the familiar threat to either "handle" Iran militarily or "make a deal." In an eyebrow-raising moment, when asked when he'd sent the letter to [Imam] "Khomeini," the long-deceased founder of the Islamic Republic, Trump claimed it was "yesterday," meaning Wednesday.

An unnamed American official, later told Al Jazeera that the letter had been "written" but not yet sent. That came after Iran’s mission to the UN said the country had received no such letter.

This isn't the first instance of a US president writing – or, in this case, claiming to have written – to Iran's Leader. Former President Barack Obama penned two letters to Ayatollah Khamenei, and Trump himself entrusted former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe with a message for the Leader during Abe's 2019 visit to Tehran. Ayatollah Khamenei declined to receive the letter, telling Abe that he didn't consider Trump a “worthy” interlocutor.

This also isn’t the first instance of Trump saying he wants a deal with Iran. He's been making this statement since 2018, the year he withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

That 2015 agreement, negotiated over at least two years by Iran, the United States, Britain, Russia, China, and Germany, traded limits on Iran's nuclear program for sanctions relief.

Trump's abandonment of the JCPOA and reimposition of sanctions not only undermined the agreement but ultimately spurred European nations to enact their own embargoes later, despite remaining official signatories.

On the same Thursday that Trump told a Fox anchor he wanted to negotiate with Iran, his Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, addressed the Economic Club of New York.

There, Bessent vowed that the president’s anti-Iran sanctions during his second term would be even more severe.

“We are going to shut down Iran’s oil sector and drone manufacturing capabilities,” Bessent stated, adding that the administration also intends to cut off Tehran’s access to the international financial system.

Multiple Iranian officials have reiterated in recent weeks that Iran will not engage in talks under pressure, aligning with a directive from Ayatollah Khamenei, who in early February described negotiations with the US as "unwise, unintelligent, and dishonorable."

Iranians’ deep-seated distrust towards the US is rooted in decades of American meddling in Iran's affairs, especially during the Pahlavi era. But Ayatollah Khamenei’s stance has especially hardened since Trump withdrew Washington from the JCPOA.

The fact that the president continues to threaten Iran with sanctions or military action is not helping ease Tehran’s concerns either. 

During his Fox Business interview, Trump stated his primary concern was preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. However, his decision to withdraw from the JCPOA – a deal that subjected Iran's nuclear facilities to unprecedented international scrutiny and compelled the country to roll back some of its advancements – suggests other priorities are at play.

As a February directive revealed, Trump's real goals are to force Iran to curtail its missile programs and sever ties with regional Resistance forces.

Analysts argue that publicizing a letter before it reaches the intended recipient serves primarily to advance Trump's own interests, rather than reflecting a genuine desire for good faith diplomacy.

Given Iran's sustained resistance to years of sanctions, it's clear that propaganda and media maneuvers alone will not compel the country to negotiate.

Iran also remains firm on its refusal to negotiate its military capabilities, and persistent or intensified Western pressure may ultimately force it to reconsider its nuclear doctrine. 

There's no guarantee that Trump's potential military options against Iran would achieve the desired outcome. Washington likely lacks the capacity to destroy all of Iran's fortified and dispersed nuclear sites, while a devastating response from Tehran would be all but certain.

 

US mulls plan to disrupt Iranian oil movement

President Donald Trump's administration is considering a plan to stop and inspect Iranian oil tankers at sea under an international accord aimed at countering the spread of weapons of mass destruction, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

Trump has vowed to restore a "maximum pressure" campaign to isolate Iran from the global economy and drive its oil exports to zero, in order to stop the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Trump hit Iran with two waves of fresh sanctions in the first weeks of his second-term, targeting companies and the so-called shadow fleet of ageing oil tankers that sail without Western insurance and transport crude from sanctioned countries.

Those moves have largely been in line with the limited measures implemented during former President Joe Biden's administration, during which Iran succeeded in ramping up oil exports through complex smuggling networks.

Trump officials are now looking at ways for allied countries to stop and inspect ships sailing through critical chokepoints such as the Malacca Strait in Asia and other sea lanes.

Previous attempts to seize Iranian oil cargoes have triggered retaliation by Iran.

The US tried to interdict at least two cargoes of Iranian oil in 2023, under Biden. This prompted Iran to seize foreign ships - including one chartered by Chevron Corp, which sent crude prices higher.

The current low oil price environment gives Trump more options to block Iranian oil flows, from sanctions on tanker companies to seizing ships, according to Ben Cahill, an energy analyst at the Center for Energy and Environmental Systems at the University of Texas.

"I think if prices stay below US$75 a barrel, the White House has more latitude to look at sanctions that would affect, you know, supply from Iran and other countries. It would be much harder to do this in a US$92 per barrel environment," Cahill said.

Aggressive US action could cut Iran exports by some 750,000 barrels per day in the short term, he said, but the longer the sanctions are in place, the less effective they are as Iran and buyers figure out ways around them.

A speedy resumption of oil exports from Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdistan region would help offset any fall in Iranian exports.

Reuters previously reported that the White House is piling pressure on Iraq to allow Kurdish oil exports to restart or face sanctions alongside Iran.

Despite US sanctions in recent years, Tehran's oil exports brought in US$53 billion in 2023 and US$54 billion a year earlier, largely in trades with China, according to US Energy Information Administration estimates.

Iran relies on oil exports to China for vital revenue. Russia, which faces restrictions on oil exports and broader Western sanctions, is similarly focused on shipping oil to buyers in China and India.

Finland and other Nordic countries have warned in recent months of the dangers of ships sailing close to their shores and the environmental risks they pose to their shores in oil spills if there is an accident.

While European countries have spoken about inspections of ships transporting Russian oil suspected of not having valid insurance, little action has been taken and none mooted for vessels hauling Iranian oil.

 

Lebanon controlled by “Eisenhower Doctrine”

The pretexts that imperialist colonial powers follow to expand their influence vary. What is happening at Beirut airport in Lebanon is nothing new. It is obvious that the US is trying to ensure its control over Lebanon’s vital facilities and airports.

It is evident that the recent expansion work undertaken by the US in Lebanon is aimed at encircling the resistance, or at the very least, exerting pressure on the Lebanese authorities to incite them against the resistance under the pretext of avoiding severe brutal sanctions.

Preventing Iranian flights from landing at Beirut airport seems to be a part of US President Donald Trump’s plan to control the world, sometimes by proposing plans to displace Palestinians and other times by occupying countries.

Washington considers controlling the northern part of the West Asia region, in addition to the southern part, especially the Persian Gulf countries, a fundamental issue in light of the conflict with competing powers, as was the case decades ago when the Soviet Union existed.

The “Eisenhower Doctrine” was implemented in the 1950s, during the era of President Camille Chamoun, when the US naval forces landed on the shores of Beirut. Their interest was focused on Beirut airport because ensuring influence lies in tightening the noose around strategic outlets such as public facilities and airports.

This is exactly what is happening today, as the US embassy in Beirut is only functioning as a military base that insults the sovereignty and prestige of the Lebanese state whenever it wants.

Since Beirut air base is the only international airport in Lebanon, it has sought to reactivate some airports, such as Rayak air base, which currently witnesses a suspicious American and British military presence, given its strategic location in the heart of the Bekaa Valley near the Syrian border.

In 2011, Rayak air base was officially opened as a military air base for the Lebanese army. Before opening, the airport underwent expansion work funded and supervised directly by the US embassy.

Recently, it underwent additional expansion work as large capacity hangars were added to it. It was equipped with modern radars and surveillance devices.

It is worth noting that the Lebanese army used Rayak air base during its battles with Jolani’s terrorist groups during the Liberation of the Bekaa Outskirts Battle in 2015, which culminated in late August 2017 with the total elimination of all terrorists in the eastern chain of Lebanon and its liberation.

The US embassy also controls Qlayaat air base on the northern coast of Lebanon as a logistical base linking them to US bases in Cyprus, Greece, and the rest of West Asia. 

It is worth noting that Qlayaat air base is close to Syria and close to the Russian air and naval bases in Tartous and Latakia, which enhances its strategic importance for the Americans.

There is also effort to establish a facility at Qlayaat air base to facilitate the entry of weapons to support their anti-Hezbollah proxies in Lebanon. 

Lebanon’s airports are small in size but large in influence, just as Lebanon itself, which is small in size but great in influence.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

Iran: Zarif tenders resignation

Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s vice president for strategic affairs, has announced his resignation, stating that he was instructed to step down by a high-ranking official.

In a post on his social media X account, Zarif stated, “The head of the judiciary, considering the country’s current situation, advised me to return to academia in order to prevent further pressure on the government, and I immediately accepted.”  

He revealed that he met with Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, who suggested that stepping down would ease tensions on the government. Zarif added that he hoped his departure would remove obstacles facing the administration.  

Despite Zarif’s public announcement, government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani clarified that President Masoud Pezeshkian has not yet accepted the resignation. 

Speaking to IRNA on Monday, Mohajerani also addressed the possibility of additional changes within the government. She noted that the law governing appointments to sensitive positions is currently under review by the Social Committee of the Iranian Parliament, adding that officials hope for a swift resolution that will serve the national interest.

“We remain committed to the law, and its implementation is our duty,” Mohajerani said. “However, the reality is that Article 2 of this law could lead to the loss of a significant number of skilled professionals. We hope that a balanced approach will be taken to prevent unnecessary disruptions.”

The debate over Zarif’s position within the government stems from a legal provision that prohibits individuals from holding sensitive government positions if their immediate family members have foreign citizenship. Under Article 2 of the Law on the Appointment of Individuals to Sensitive Positions, Zarif’s appointment was considered illegal because two of his children hold dual US citizenship.

From the outset of the Pezeshkian administration, several members of Parliament have challenged Zarif’s appointment, arguing that it directly contradicts legal requirements. Lawmakers critical of his role have persistently called for his removal, viewing his appointment as a breach of national security policies designed to limit foreign influence within key government positions.

Zarif is a seasoned Iranian diplomat. He served as Iran’s foreign minister for 8 years during the 2010s and was a key figure in the inking of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. He has also been a professor at the prestigious University of Tehran for many years. 

 

Iran: Foreign outfits attempting to destabilize Sistan and Baluchistan province

Iranian Intelligence Minister Esmaeil Khatib said the foreign adversaries are attempting to destabilize the southeastern province of Sistan and Baluchistan by using external elements to fuel insecurity. His remarks came in the wake of a major counterterrorism operation that resulted in the dismantling of a Takfiri terrorist network and the seizure of a significant cache of weapons and explosives.  

Speaking during a visit to the province on Friday, Khatib stressed that Iran’s enemies have historically sought to create unrest within the country.

"From the very beginning of the Islamic Revolution, adversaries have continuously plotted against the Islamic Republic. Today, we see that efforts to incite insecurity are being carried out by foreign-backed agents who have no connection to the people of this region," he said.  

Khatib urged vigilance and national unity in the face of these threats, warning that hostile forces seek to exploit every opportunity to sow discord.

"The enemies will use any means at their disposal to create chaos, but the Iranian people have consistently resisted such conspiracies through awareness and solidarity. Now, more than ever, we must remain alert and prevent external actors from destabilizing our country," he emphasized.  

The intelligence minister reaffirmed the government's commitment to safeguarding security in the southeastern province, calling for enhanced cooperation between the public and local authorities. "Ensuring peace and stability in Sistan and Baluchistan is a top priority. We must not allow our enemies to use this region as a launching pad for their destructive agendas," he stated.  

Khatib reassured that Iran’s intelligence forces are closely monitoring and countering any threats to national security.

"The Ministry of Intelligence will not hesitate to take action against any attempts to undermine stability. We will continue to work relentlessly to protect the nation and uphold peace," he declared.

He also expressed gratitude to the people and officials of Sistan and Baluchistan for their crucial role in maintaining security.  

The counterterrorism operation, conducted on Wednesday, uncovered four warehouses filled with arms and explosives belonging to the terrorist group.

According to local media reports, security personnel confiscated 226 light and heavy weapons, including pistols, Kalashnikov rifles, and Goryunov machine guns.