China lauds progress in Iran-Saudi ties

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has expressed strong support for the constructive interactions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, emphasizing their role in fostering enduring good neighborly relations.

During a press briefing, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian noted that Saudi-Iran relations have been on a positive trajectory and China appreciates this progress. 

Lin Jian stated that Saudi Arabia and Iran have been engaging in positive interactions at various levels, further solidifying their reconciliation and playing a crucial role in fostering regional peace and stability. 

China remains committed to supporting both nations as they advance together, enhancing mutual trust, and achieving enduring good-neighborly relations and friendship, the spokesman said. 

The remarks come after several high-ranking visits between Iran and Saudi Arabia took place in the past month. 

Iran and Saudi Arabia restored diplomatic ties in March of 2023 under a China-brokered deal. The two West Asian countries have agreed to move towards establishing a security cooperation pact.

 

Trump Victory: Impact on Iran-Russia relations

Iranian political experts have quickly projected that a Trump victory in the presidential elections could lead to renewed US-Russia relations due to Trump and Putin's reportedly friendly ties. Some in Iran worry that this shift might undermine the strategic partnership between Iran and Russia, which has been strengthened over the past three years.

However, a closer look at Russian experts' views presents a more balanced and realistic perspective. These analysts believe that the US-Russia relationship is unlikely to return to pre-conflict levels, given the profound trust issues that have persisted since the Ukraine crisis.

Russian-Iranian partnership, which has gained unprecedented momentum, is unlikely to be sacrificed for potential rapprochement with the United States.

Examining the opinions of notable Russian experts can shed light on Moscow's likely short-term approach to US relations, especially regarding the Ukraine conflict.

In initial responses, some speculate that Trump's return might lead Russia to slightly slow its Eurasian integration efforts, potentially making space for renewed discussions with the US, especially on the Ukraine crisis.

Yet, Alexander Dugin, a prominent proponent of Eurasianism in Russia, expresses a different view. He argues that while Trump’s administration may deprioritize the Ukraine crisis, it will likely focus on domestic US issues and its trade war with China.

Dugin, who frames Russia's actions in Ukraine as part of a destiny-driven mission to “de-Nazify Kyiv,” is adamant that this campaign should continue westward in Ukraine. In his view, even if Trump were to ask Putin to halt military operations in Ukraine, such a request would be improbable to affect Russia's plans.

Similarly, Andrey Bezrukov, an international relations expert and professor at Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs University, believes that resolving the Ukraine issue depends more on Russia's military progress than the US elections.

He emphasizes Trump’s unpredictability, citing Iran's experience with US policy shifts, and warns of the risks if future Democratic administrations disregard any agreements.

Bezrukov adds that Trump's administration would likely focus primarily on countering China's global influence, rather than confronting Russia directly in Ukraine.

However, this does not necessarily mean the end of US support for Ukraine; the US might shift more of this responsibility to Europe, despite Trump's potential disagreements with European leaders.

Andrey Sushentsov, director of the Valdai Discussion Club’s programs and an expert on international relations, says US institutions constrained Trump’s policy intentions on Ukraine during his presidency from 2017-2021.

During his campaign, Trump asserted he could resolve the Ukraine crisis swiftly, but Sushentsov views such claims skeptically.

He argues that Ukraine is a tool for the US to manage Russia’s influence, rally European allies, and compel them to bear the economic and social costs of the crisis unless the US decides that Ukraine is no longer an effective lever.

In reviewing these insights from prominent Russian analysts and commentaries in Russian media, it is apparent that most Russian experts are skeptical about any rapid impact of a Trump-Putin rapport on resolving the Ukraine conflict.

Given the unprecedented level of Russian-Iranian relations over the past three years, it is unlikely that this alliance would be sacrificed for hypothetical negotiations between a Republican-led US and Russia.

 

No difference who wins election in the US

President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Thursday that it "does make a difference" for Iran who has won the presidential elections in the United States, noting Iran and its political system is reliant on its own power and its great and noble nation.   

It was the first reaction by the Iranian president since Donald Trump won the White House in the presidential elections on November 05.

Pezeshkian added, "In developing our relations with other countries we will never have a 'closed or limited' view."

The president said Iran prioritizes developing ties with Muslim and neighboring countries and deeply believes in fostering unity among Islamic nations.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeili Baghaei also said on Thursday that Iran will judge the new US government on the basis of its policies and approaches.

Baghaei said Trump's victory has provided an opportunity for the United States to reassess its "wrong policies".

 

Iran-Pakistan to finalize free trade agreement

Iranian Industry, Mining, and Trade Minister Mohammad Atabak said a free trade agreement with Pakistan has been finalized and the list of commodity items subject to the agreement will be prepared and released in two months.

In a meeting between the Head of the Iran Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines, and Agriculture (ICCIMA) Samad Hassanzadeh and Pakistani Ambassador to Iran Muhammad Mudassir Tipu in Tehran in late June, the officials stressed the need for Iran and Pakistan to exercise barter trade and free trade to materialize a US$10 billion trade target.

During a meeting between Atabak and Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Commerce Jam Kamal Khan in mid-October, the two sides discussed trade ties between the two countries, with both agreeing that economic exchanges should be promoted further.

The two ministers met in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad on the sidelines of the 23rd meeting of the Council of Heads of Government of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

Atabak told IRNA that he and the Pakistani minister discussed trade ties between the two countries and agreed to hold further talks in order to explore ways to remove obstacles to the promotion of bilateral trade.

“Considering the historical and cultural commonalities of the two countries, we should take advantage of the strong potentials to expand trade exchanges between Iran and Pakistan,” the minister stated.

He also said that he invited Kamal Khan to visit the Islamic Republic.

According to the official, the necessary measures will be taken to prepare an agreement to be signed between the two countries during the visit of the Pakistani minister to Iran.

He stated that the current amount of trade exchanges between the two countries is not acceptable from the point of view of both Iran and Pakistan, and considering the strong relations and common links of the two countries, the two sides are confident that they will be able to increase the volume of trade exchanges several times.

The Pakistani minister spoke with IRNA as well. He described his talks with the Iranian minister as constructive, and said that visiting Iran is on agenda of his plans.

“We had good talks with my Iranian counterpart and reached constructive agreements, and we believe that there are many remaining tasks that the two countries are determined to pursue,” he said.

In mid-July, the 11th meeting of the Joint Border Trade Committee of Iran and Pakistan opened in the southeastern Iranian city of Zahedan, where the two sides pursue the increase of bilateral trade to US$10 billion per annum.

Pakistan's Ambassador to Iran Muhammad Mudassir Tipu, who attended the meeting online, announced that Iranian and Pakistani delegations are scheduled to discuss the mechanism to increase mutual trade.

The Islamic Republic of Iran's consul general in Quetta, Pakistan's consul general in Zahedan, and other senior officials of Sistan-Baluchestan province took part in the meeting.

Such joint meetings are held to pave the way for reviewing obstacles, removing barriers, and developing trade and economic relations between the two friendly and neighboring countries.

The two sides make the necessary coordination to help improve trade and economic ties, exchange economic delegations, organize joint exhibitions, attract bilateral investment, and establish joint industrial centers and retail markets.

The head of the Pakistani delegation to the 11th meeting of the Joint Border Trade Committee said that Islamabad strongly supports the development of joint markets and investment, which can increase the level of trust between the two nations.

Irfan Javed added that Pakistan also calls for cooperation in the field of transportation because it can affect the livelihood of the people who are living in border regions.

The deputy coordinator of economic affairs of Sistan-Baluchestan governor’s office said that Iran is keen on expanding trade exchanges with Pakistan.

Israel strikes military targets in Iran

Israel has launched direct airstrikes against Iran in a high-stakes retaliatory attack that brings the Middle East closer to a regional war.

The Israeli military said it had completed its air attack on Saturday morning, hitting missile manufacturing sites and aerial defences in several areas inside Iran. Israel’s public broadcaster said three waves of strikes had been completed.

Iranian air defences said Israel attacked military targets in the provinces of Tehran, Khuzestan and Ilam and that “limited damage” was caused to some locations.

A senior US official described the strikes as “extensive”, “precise” and against military targets across Iran. The US did not participate in the strikes, the official said, but worked with the Israeli government to encourage a low-risk attack with no civilian harm.

“The effect was a proportionate self-defence response. The effect is to deter future attacks and to degrade Iran’s abilities to launch future attacks.”

The official stressed that the US considered the operation to be an “end to the exchange of fire between Israel and Iran”.

“This should be the end of the direct military exchange between Israel and Iran – we had a direct exchange in April and that was closed off and now we’ve had this direct exchange again.”

At least seven explosions were reported over the capital, Tehran, and nearby Karaj as well as the eastern city of Mashhad just after 2.30am local time on Saturday, as Israeli jets struck military targets in the country.

Iranian media initially appeared to downplay the airstrikes, noting that Tehran’s airport was operating normally. State TV reported several strong explosions heard around the capital, while the state news agency, IRNA, said there had been no casualties. There was no immediate official comment about the source of explosions, which Iranian news outlets reported were under investigation. Air defence systems were activated around the country.

In a statement, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) took the rare step of acknowledging the attack on Iran, in a confirmation that a decades-old shadow war between the enemy states has now firmly moved into the open.

Before Israel launched the airstrikes on Saturday, Iran had repeatedly warned there were “no red lines” for Iran on the issue of defending itself. Last week, the country’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, also indirectly threatened US forces against operating in Israel after Washington dispatched a Thaad advanced missile defence system battery and 100 troops to aid its ally amid the tensions.

The White House was notified shortly before Israel carried out airstrikes on Iran, a spokesperson said. The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, had said on Wednesday that Israel’s retaliation should not lead to greater escalation.

Russia-Iran use national currencies in trade

Iran and Russia have been using national currencies in more than 96% of their mutual payments, the Kremlin’s press service said on the verge of the meeting between presidents of the two countries to be held on the sidelines of the BRICS Summit in Kazan.

"The leadership of both countries pay priority attention to the development of trade and economic ties. Growth of mutual trade in 2023, despite a certain decline, totaled over US$4.0 billion.

We recorded growth of 12.4% as of the end of January - August. The share of national currencies in mutual payments ws over 96%," the press service informed.

Russia and Iran are implementing several large-scale mutual projects in the sphere of transport and energy, the Kremlin said. The North-South international transport corridor project is being developed. Russian-Iranian relations are on the rise, the press service noted.

According to the Islamic Republic of Iran Customs Administration (IRICA), the value of Iran’s non-oil exports to Russia rose 12% in the first six months of the current Iranian calendar year as compared to last year’s first half.

According to the IRICA data, Iran exported 1.3 million tons of commodities worth over US$494 million to Russia in the first half of the current Iranian year.

Non-oil exports to the Russian Federation also increased by 20% in terms of weight.

In the first half of the current Iranian year, foreign transit through Iran from Russia reached 526,000 tons with a growth of 17%, and foreign transit to Russia was 56,000 tons, which decreased by 18%.

The Islamic Republic had exported 2.2 million tons of commodities worth US$965 million to Russia in the previous Iranian calendar year, which also registered a 54% increase in weight and a 28% rise in value.

The main Iranian products exported to Russia in the previous year were fresh or dried pistachios, ordinary non-expandable polystyrene, fresh kiwi and synthetic fibers, and other types of polyester.

Iran and Russia have been taking serious steps to boost their mutual trade over the past few years.

In late January, Iran’s late President Ebrahim Raisi said that the Islamic Republic and Russia have reached an agreement to boost the trade between the two countries up to US$10 billion.

“We agreed to remove trade barriers and boost the economic exchanges between the two countries. Currently, the level of mutual trade is not acceptable, so the two countries agreed to increase trade to US$10 billion a year,” Raisi said on January 21, upon arrival to Tehran after a two-day visit to Moscow.

He also noted that the two sides also discussed monetary and banking issues during his talks with Russian officials.

The two countries also agreed to identify mutual agricultural capacities as well as suitable areas for the exchange of agricultural products in order to increase the level of trade in the agricultural sector, according to the official.

He went on to say that the Islamic Republic of Iran has very good capacities in the field of transit and transportation, saying: “During this visit, it was agreed to activate the north-south corridor. This transit route will make the time and distance of transiting goods from Russia and different northern countries to the southern regions much shorter.”

 

 

Saudi Arabia-Iran joint naval exercise

According to the Tehran Times, the head of the Iranian Army Navy has announced that Saudi Arabia has expressed interest in a joint naval exercise, a move aimed at strengthening regional cooperation.

Rear Admiral Shahram Irani highlighted the Iranian Navy's operations in the Red Sea, noting that Saudi Arabia has proposed a combined exercise in that region. Both nations have extended invitations to each other concerning their presence in the ports.

Irani added that both sides' initiatives include plans for a bilateral exercise and potential involvement from other nations. 

“Coordination efforts are currently in progress, and delegations from both countries will engage in necessary discussions regarding the execution of the exercise,” the commander emphasized.

This collaboration between Saudi Arabia and Iran could potentially pave the way for further dialogue and de-escalation of tensions in the region, benefiting both countries and the broader international community.

Military observers from both parties will be attentively assessing the results of this exercise and the possible effects it could have on the geopolitical dynamics of West Asia.

This proposed joint naval exercise in the Red Sea would mark the third instance of military cooperation between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the region.

In 2018, the two nations, alongside Oman and Pakistan, participated in a joint naval exercise in the Indian Ocean under the banner of the "Coalition of Friendship”.

This week, Iran concluded a joint naval drill in its southern waters, with Saudi Arabia among the participating nations.
 

 

US sending troops and munitions to Israel

The United States said on Sunday it will send US troops to Israel along with an advanced US anti-missile system, in a highly unusual deployment meant to bolster the country's air defenses following missile attacks by Iran.

US President Joe Biden said the move was meant "to defend Israel," which is weighing an expected retaliation against Iran after Tehran fired more than 180 missiles at Israel on October 01.

The United States has been privately urging Israel to calibrate its response to avoid triggering a broader war in the Middle East, officials say, with Biden publicly voicing his opposition to an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear sites and his concerns about a strike on Iran's energy infrastructure.

Pentagon spokesperson Major General Patrick Ryder described the deployment as part of "the broader adjustments the US military has made in recent months" to support Israel and defend US personnel from attacks by Iran and Iranian-backed groups.

But a US military deployment to Israel is rare outside of drills, given Israel's own military capabilities. US troops in recent months have aided Israel's defense from warships and fighter jets in the Middle East when it came under Iranian attack.

But they were based outside of Israel.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, is a critical part of the US military's layered air defense systems and add to Israel's already formidable anti-missile defenses.

A THAAD battery usually requires about 100 troops to operate. It counts six truck mounted launchers, with eight interceptors on each launcher, and a powerful radar.

Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi warned earlier on Sunday that the United States was putting the lives of its troops "at risk by deploying them to operate US missile systems in Israel."

"While we have made tremendous efforts in recent days to contain an all-out war in our region, I say it clearly that we have no red lines in defending our people and interests," Araqchi posted on X.

Still, experts say Iran has sought to avoid a direct war with the United States, making deployment of U.S. forces to Israel another factor in its calculus going forward.

Iran launched missiles and drones at Israel in April. Then on October 01, Iran fired more than 180 ballistic missiles at Israel amid another escalation in fighting between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. Many were intercepted in flight but some penetrated missile defenses.

US officials did not say how quickly the system would be deployed to Israel.

The Pentagon said a THAAD was deployed to southern Israel for drills in 2019, the last and only time it was known to be there.

Lockheed Martin, the biggest US arms maker, builds and integrates the THAAD system, which is designed to shoot down short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. Raytheon, under RTX, builds its advanced radar.

Israel, Iran, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, THAAD system,

US Enabled a Middle East Bully

According to Joe Macaron, one of the collateral damages of the Gaza conflict is the US global leadership. In the past year, the Biden administration was unable or unwilling to tame an out-of-control Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has gone beyond the retaliation to the October 07 attacks on the Gaza Envelope of southern Israel.

Netanyahu compared it to Pearl Harbor and 9/11, and the Biden administration has understandably embraced that,

However, this worn-out argument has unleashed a beast that is undermining US interests and failing to secure Israel in the long run.

Netanyahu is switching from one front to the other: Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Yemen with no internal or external constraint on his actions and the disproportional killing of civilians.

The Biden administration has initially advised Israel to agree on a ceasefire in Gaza and move to the second level of targeting Hamas commanders.

Netanyahu did neither; instead, he initiated another conflict in Lebanon with a death toll exceeding 1,000 since September 23, where not more than 3% of them were Hezbollah commanders.

Netanyahu’s discourse and policies are putting the Middle East in a perpetual security competition where Israel does whatever is necessary to ensure its self-defense while maximizing its force with an ambitious agenda to change “the balance of power in the region for years.”

It was enough to watch Netanyahu’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly to detect an egomaniacal discourse that is taking both Israel and the US on a dangerous path.

This overconfidence in Netanyahu’s discourse would not have existed without the air power dominance that the US provides, the Biden administration has yet to use this leverage of military aid to constrain Netanyahu. 

The US is now perceived as complicit with Netanyahu or unable to influence a key ally.

Beyond the immediate ecstasy of killing Hezbollah and Hamas leaders, Netanyahu has no clear plan or exit strategy, neither in Gaza nor Lebanon.

The Biden administration is enabling a bully by providing the tools and protection.

The excessive use of force will not secure the long-term stability of Israel nor sustain a moral and effective US global leadership.

Iran’s strategy for a year at least has been to intimidate the US military so Washington can exercise enough pressure on Netanyahu to agree on a ceasefire in Gaza, which was the safest path for the Iranian regime to avoid a direct confrontation with Israel.

The Biden administration has conveyed a clear message to Tehran not to attack American assets on the assumption that the US is committed to Israel’s security but is not directly involved in the conflict in Gaza and beyond.

It seems Netanyahu is pulling the US into a regional conflict rather than maintaining the stance from the first Iranian attack last April when Washington acted as a global leader managing the conflict between two regional powers. The US wants Iran to stay idle as Israel goes after its proxies one after the other.

Dealing with the threats of the Iranian regime and its proxies requires a long-term strategy because mass killing would only produce a radical generation in Gaza, Lebanon, and beyond.

Guaranteeing the silence of Arab autocrats is not enough to secure a long-term resolution of the Arab conflict with Israel.

In an insightful analysis in Foreign Affairs, Richard Haas argued, “America needs a playbook for difficult friends” and that Washington should have an independent policy when it disagrees with an ally as a subtle way to show objection without damaging the relationship.

The US should claim back its leadership role in the Middle East and send a clear signal that there is daylight between American and Israeli interests and that the US commitment to Israeli security is not a blank check.

The Biden administration’s blind support for Netanyahu is unprecedented and setting a dangerous precedence.

The damage to US image and interests in the Middle East should not be underestimated, and the long-term game is the most effective one; there are no quick fixes to the threats of the Iranian regime and its proxies.

No supporter of Palestinians except Iran

On Monday October 07, a year of Israeli genocide in Gaza will complete. A new front has been opened in Lebanon. Israel and Iran have attacked each other.

 Following are the takeaways from conflict: 1) Israel has emerged superior due to extensive support from the United States and European countries, 2) Iran has received many dents because of lack of support from other countries, 3) Iran is virtually alone, most of its missiles have been intercepted by Arab Muslim countries and 4) oil rich Arab countries are under the hegemony of United States and avoid even condemning Israel. 

Therefore, Iran has two option 1) accept Israel’s hegemony or 2) continue to support Palestinians and accept killing of its people.

The chances of getting any support from oil rich Arab countries are the least.

Iranian leader defends strikes on Israel

Iran's missile strikes on Israel were "correct, logical, and lawful", Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told a vast crowd that had gathered to hear him speak in Tehran on Friday.

The supreme leader described the attack as the "minimum punishment" for what he called Israel's "astonishing crimes" while leading Friday prayers in the capital, something he has not done since 2020.

Khamenei's speech came three days after Iran fired nearly 200 missiles at Israel, in what it said was retaliation for the assassination of Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah.

The Farsi-speaking supreme leader delivered part of his speech in Arabic.

During his sermon, Khamenei praised Nasrallah and voiced support for Hamas and Hezbollah, which he said provided "vital service to the entire region and the entire Islamic world".

He said Iran-aligned armed groups "will not back down" in their conflict with Israel, which entered a new phase after Hamas raided Israel almost one year ago.

Iran is the main supporter of Hezbollah and Hamas, as well as other armed groups around the Middle East which have attacked Israel. They often dub themselves the "Axis of Resistance".

In recent weeks, several senior leaders of Iran-backed groups and Iran's powerful military wing, the Revolutionary Guards, have been killed in Israeli strikes or presumed Israeli assassinations.

The supreme leader's appearance in front of a crowd of tens of thousands in Tehran is a sign of the gravity of the moment for the Iranian regime, which is facing widespread domestic discontent.

It could be read as an attempt to show strength and restore Iran’s credibility as leader of the “Axis of Resistance”.

The public appearance was also intended to show that Khamenei is not in hiding, after reports emerged that he had been taken to a secure location following Nasrallah's assassination.

The Grand Mosalla Mosque was flooded with people after Iranians were given free transport to attend the sermon. A large Palestinian flag was seen in the crowd. Khamenei holds ultimate power in Iran, but very rarely leads Friday prayers himself.

The last time he did was in 2020, after the US killed Iran's most senior military commander, Qassem Soleimani. The time before that was in 2012.

Iran is still reeling from the loss of its allies Nasrallah and Hamas's political leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was assassinated in Tehran in July.

Israel is widely considered to be behind Haniyeh's killing, though it has never commented on his death.

Khamenei also told the crowd that Iran would retaliate if, as expected, Israel launched a response to Tuesday's missile attack.

"If we needed to do that again, we would do it again in the future," Khamenei told supporters.

On Thursday, US President Joe Biden suggested a possible Israeli strike on Iran's oil infrastructure had been discussed, as Israel continued to weigh up how to strike back at Tehran.

Courtesy: Saudi Gazette

Message for Biden, No War with Iran

The day President Joe Biden said his administration and Israeli leaders were discussing an attack on Iranian oil infrastructure, a coalition of over 80 advocacy groups implored the US leader to halt Israel's march toward regional war.

The National Iranian-American Council (NIAC) led the groups in a letter to Biden asserted that it is not in the national interest for the US to be led into a war with Iran by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government.

The letter's signatories include Just Foreign Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation, IfNotNow, US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, CodePink, Peace Action, and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

"The primary ask behind this letter is that the Biden administration utilize the significant leverage it has to rein in Netanyahu as he continues to proceed with a consistently failed 'de-escalation through escalation' approach throughout the region that has cost countless civilian lives," NIAC explained.

As stated in the letter, "It is in the strong national interest to utilize diplomacy, backed by full American leverage—including withholding further offensive weapons transfers to Israel's military—to move all the parties back from the brink and toward a cease-fire that ends the devastation of Gaza and Lebanon and reverses the slide to regional war."

"Moreover, we urge you to recognize and respect that Congress has not authorized military force against Iran or militias backed by Iran, and that any potential military action against Iran could only proceed following a debate and passage of a war authorization before entering our troops into any imminent hostilities in the region," the groups continued.

"President Biden has recently spoken of steps he has taken to wind down America's military footprint abroad," the letter adds. "However, unless he acts quickly and decisively through diplomacy, it appears that a new endless war will be his legacy."

The US provides Israel with billions of dollars worth of armed aid and diplomatic cover for its yearlong war on Gaza, which has killed or wounded more than 148,000 Palestinians and is the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case.

Fears of a full-blown regional war have mounted recently as Israel escalates hostilities by assassinating Hamas and Hezbollah leaders in Tehran and Beirut and as Israeli forces invade southern Lebanon accompanied by a bombing campaign that has left thousands of Lebanese dead and wounded.

Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based political and paramilitary group, has been engaged in limited cross-border projectile attacks on Israel in solidarity with Gaza, resulting in scores of deaths and injuries.

"The wars in the Middle East are just getting more and more dangerous, not only with Lebanon, but now with Iran," CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin said Wednesday in a video urging Americans to call their members of Congress to demand peace. "Netanyahu has been trying to drag the US into a war with Iran for years, and unfortunately, there are many members in this Congress... who are all too eager to go along with him."

Benjamin highlighted remarks by US lawmakers including Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) who said Tuesday that attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities are "fair game."

"Let's remember it's Israel that has nuclear weapons, not Iran," said Benjamin, who added that attacking Iran would encourage Tehran's allies "to strike US soldiers in the region."

Benjamin also noted Sen. Robert Wicker's (R-Miss.) call for regime change in Tehran—one of the latest in a long line of such calls over the past 45 years—and admonished US officials for "forgetting the disastrous attempts of regime change that the US did recently in Iraq, in Libya, in Afghanistan," and that "the present government in Iran is there precisely because of the US overthrowing their democratically elected government in 1953."

"We want to live in peace," Benjamin added. "We want to stop supporting the genocide that Israel is carrying out... We don't want any more weapons sent to the region... We the American people don't want war with Iran. We want to live in peace."

 

Courtesy: Common Dreams

Israel with US fends off massive Iranian attack

Iran fired more than 180 missiles at Israel in retaliation for Israeli attacks that killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in July and Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah last week.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters on Tuesday that the attack "appears to have been defeated and ineffective." 

"We do not know of any deaths in Israel," he said. "We do not know of any damage to aircraft or strategic military assets in Israel."

Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said at a briefing after the attack that Israel was able to intercept the majority of the incoming missiles and that there was minimal damage on the ground.

Ryder added that two US Navy destroyers helped shoot down the missiles, and fired around a dozen interceptors. 

The attack marked a significant escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran, Ryder and Sullivan said.

Tehran previously attacked Israel in April in an attack defeated by the US and Israel, along with allied forces in the region.

Israeli military spokesperson Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said there were a "small number" of hits in central and southern Israel, but the "majority of the incoming missiles were intercepted."

"Iran's attack is a severe and dangerous escalation. There will be consequences," he said in a video address. "We will respond wherever, whenever, and however we choose."

Vice President Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, told reporters "I condemn this attack unequivocally."

"I'm clear eyed. Iran is a destabilizing, dangerous force in the Middle East, and today's attack on Israel only further demonstrates that fact," she said.

The Iranian attack comes after Israel began limited ground operations in Lebanon against the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militant group, which has been severely degraded by Israeli attacks in the past two months, including a strike last week that killed Nasrallah.

 

Israel has fought Hezbollah for nearly a year after the militant group began firing over the border following the October 07, 2023 attacks by Iranian-backed militant group Hamas, which sparked war in the Gaza Strip.

While the war in Gaza is still raging, Hamas's presence has been reduced over the past year, freeing up resources for Israel to move north and try to push Hezbollah back from the border to return some 60,000 residents displaced by the fighting there.

The US has pushed for a diplomatic agreement to resolve the Lebanon crisis, but Ryder indicated the Pentagon supported limited Israeli border attacks, saying the US "fully understands" the need to protect civilians, though Washington is asking questions about the operation.

Before the Tuesday attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday appealed directly to Iranians, saying in a video message he supported efforts for regime change in Iran.

After the attack, Netanyahu said at a Security Cabinet meeting that Israel has the momentum and the axis of evil is in retreat, referring to Iran.

"This evening, " he said, "Iran made a big mistake – and it will pay for it."

Israel brings the world to a ghastly war

The assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, alongside Iranian General Ali Nilforushan, has escalated tensions in the Middle East to dangerous levels, potentially triggering a regional conflict involving numerous proxies. Some analysts now even refer to the United States as an Israeli proxy.

On Friday, a large-scale Israeli strike in Beirut resulted in the death of Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah. Given Nasrallah’s pivotal role in Lebanese politics, regional geopolitics, and Hezbollah’s position as a central figure in the 'Axis of Resistance,' his assassination is poised to send shockwaves throughout the Middle East.

Since October 7, 2023, Hezbollah has been exchanging fire with Israel following Hamas’s armed incursion into Israeli territory. In the ensuing weeks, Israel has intensified its operations inside Lebanon, launching a brutal bombing campaign that, as of Monday, has claimed hundreds of lives and displaced tens of thousands of people. Israeli forces have been systematically targeting key Hezbollah commanders for months, with Nasrallah’s killing being the most significant blow to the movement.

While Israel may have secured a tactical victory with Nasrallah’s assassination, it risks unleashing a cycle of violence that could spiral out of control. This echoes the assassination of Abbas Musawi, Nasrallah’s predecessor, by Israel in 1992, which, despite Musawi’s death, only strengthened Hezbollah. Under Nasrallah’s leadership, the group became one of the most formidable armed non-state actors in the region, playing a key role in ending Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon in 2000.

Similarly, Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was assassinated by Israel in 2004, yet his organization remains a powerful political and military force within the Palestinian territories. Israel’s strategy of targeted killings has repeatedly backfired, as these movements often emerge more resilient, committed to retaliation.

While Hezbollah may be reeling from this latest loss, the group remains defiant. In a statement, they vowed to continue “confronting the enemy.” Iran’s Supreme Leader has also pledged continued support for Hezbollah and Lebanon, pushing the region into highly volatile territory.

Israel’s actions, including its unrelenting bombing campaign in Gaza and the targeted killings of Nasrallah and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, suggest it is seeking a broader confrontation with Iran and its allies. Moreover, some argue that Israel is attempting to drag the United States—its staunchest ally—into the conflict.

Israel’s aggressive posture has now brought the world to the edge of a major war.

Iranian General killed alongside Nasrallah

A prominent Iranian general in the Revolutionary Guard, Gen. Abbas Nilforushan, was killed in an Israeli airstrike that also claimed the life of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, according to Iranian media reports on Saturday.

The strike occurred in Beirut on Friday as part of the ongoing Israel-Hamas war, which has pushed the conflict closer to becoming a full-scale regional confrontation.

Nilforushan, 58, held a senior position as the deputy commander for operations in the Revolutionary Guard, overseeing ground forces. His presence in Lebanon during the strike has raised questions, although his role in the region highlights Iran’s long-standing support of Hezbollah.

The Tehran Times and other state-run media confirmed his death, with Iranian officials, including Ahmad Reza Pour Khaghan, deputy head of Iran’s judiciary, describing him as a "guest to the people of Lebanon." Khaghan stressed that Iran reserves the right to retaliate under international law.

Nilforushan’s death adds to the growing list of casualties within Iran's military leadership as Israel continues its operations against Hezbollah, which has been heavily involved in the conflict. Iranian support for Hezbollah has long been a source of tension, with the Guard’s Quds Force arming and training the militia in Lebanon.

The airstrike marks a significant blow to Iran’s military presence in the region, coming on the heels of the death of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was reportedly killed in Tehran earlier this year.

Both Hezbollah and Iran have vowed retaliation for these high-profile losses, intensifying concerns of a broader Middle Eastern war. 

Remembering the day Saddam invaded Iran

On September 22, 1980, months after the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the army of the Iraqi Ba’athist regime led by Saddam Hussein invaded the Iranian border towns in the southwestern province of Khuzestan and launched a massive aerial bombardment on Iran, igniting an eight-year conflict with Iran.

The Iranians fought back to expel the invaders from their occupied soil. The Saddam regime, which received all-out support from the big powers, imposed the war on Iran that lasted until the summer of 1988.

Since the beginning of the war, Iran demanded that Iraq be officially declared as the initiator of the war. However, neither the Iraqi Ba’athist regime nor any of the major powers were willing to officially declare that the Saddam regime initiated the war against Iran.

The UN Security Council which has the primary responsibility for international peace and security failed to take any action to declare the Saddam regime as the aggressor and initiator of the war.

The Ba’athist regime committed crimes against the Iranian nation, using chemical weapons, firing missiles at civilian targets, bombarding cities and villages during the war, and other vicious acts.

Influenced by big powers, who armed the Saddam regime to the teeth, the Security Council refused to adopt an impartial stance in that regard during the eight years of war.

When Saddam tore up the 1975 Algiers Agreement in front of cameras and then started the war, the Security Council refused to say who started the war and which side violated the principle of non-invasion.

The Iraqi Ba’athist regime used to refer to border skirmishes that preceded the invasion as its pretext for starting the war. The regime claimed that it took action after a long history of border disputes.

The reality was that Saddam couldn't wait to tear up the Algiers agreement amid political instability and fast pace of developments in the post-revolution Iran. He might also have been pushed by hostile Western states that were angered by the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

Instead of the UN Security Council, it was UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar who declared Iraq as the aggressor and the initiator of the war in his report to the UN body in December 1991.

This action of the UN Secretary General to officially declare Iraq the initiator of war endorsed Iran’s right to self-defense.

The UN report naturally required Iraq to pay compensation to Iran, which was estimated at about one trillion dollars.

This action of the United Nations took place after the continuous political efforts of the Iranian authorities. It is considered a great victory for Iran because it proved Iran's right to self-defense against the aggressor.

This action took place while the propaganda apparatus of the Saddam regime and its backers were trying to manipulate public opinion in the world that Iran was the initiator of the war.

At the start of the war, Saddam was Iraq's undisputed political and military ruler and Iraq's national interests were his personal interests.

There had been border disputes and skirmishes before the start of the invasion which Saddam's regime sought to present as a pretext for attacking Iran. Saddam must have thought that amid instability and nascent revolution, it was the right time to materialize his malicious goal of seizing part of the Iranian territory.

The Iraqi dictator’s likely goal was to annex some parts of the oil-rich Khuzestan, which has a sizeable ethnic Arab population.

Border skirmishes preceded the invasion. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein claimed that Iran's Islamic government was trying to destabilize his country and the whole Middle East. But the then UN chief rejected that argument.

In a letter to the UN Security Council, Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar in December 1991 Iran blamed Iraq for starting the war.

He rejected the Iraqi regime’s argument that border skirmishes pushed Iraq to invade Iran.

"Even if before the outbreak of the conflict there had been some encroachment by Iran on Iraqi territory, such encroachment did not justify Iraq's aggression against Iran -- which was followed by Iraq's continuous occupation of Iranian territory during the conflict," Javier Perez de Cuellar said.

Iran has always criticized the double standards of western states in dealing with the Iraqi war on Iran, especially the Security Council and Western powers were quick to take action against the regime after it invaded Kuwait on August 02, 1990.

Courtesy: Tehran Times

Israel getting desperate to attack Iran

Since October 07, 2023 Israeli citizens have been holding their collective breath, knowing that the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip and incessant fire exchanges on the northern border could escalate into a full-scale regional war at any moment.

The mysterious attack in Lebanon on Tuesday, in which thousands of pagers in the use of Hezbollah operatives exploded, apparently killing at least 11 and wounding thousands more, has made that possibility more likely than ever.

A war with the Iranian-backed militia to Israel’s north could quickly expand into war with Iran, which has yet to avenge the assassination of Hamas’s political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in late July, despite Islamic Republic leaders vowing a response.

Israel, in turn, stated it would exact a heavy price from the Iranian regime were it to carry out a significant attack against the Jewish state.

Maj-Gen. (res.) Itzhak Brik is adamant that war with Iran now would lead to Israel’s destruction.

Security expert Yair Ansbacher is convinced that war with Iran at this point is a must – to avoid Israel’s destruction.

This is the fork in the road that Israel faces today, 11 months after Hamas initiated the horrific October 07 attack, in which 1,200 Israelis and other nationals were murdered and 250 more were taken hostage.

Additional factors such as the apparent exhaustion of negotiations between Israel and Hamas for a ceasefire agreement, and the Israeli government’s decision earlier in the week to make the return of displaced northern residents an official war goal, have increased the likelihood of a regional war.

Speaking to The Jerusalem Post on the phone earlier in the week, Brik warned that Israel is not prepared for a multi-front war.

“Iran and its proxies have 250,000 missiles, rockets, and drones encircling Israel. Which means about 4,000 munitions hitting the Israeli home front on a daily basis, population centers, Haifa Bay, water and electricity facilities, gas fields [in the Mediterranean Sea], IDF bases, and strategic civilian infrastructure. A regional war can ruin the State of Israel,” he stressed.

Brik further warned that Israel would enter this all-out war alone, without the aid of the United States.

“Iran is backed by Russia, China, and North Korea, who don’t want to lose their [Iranian] asset,” he said, explaining that the US will avoid getting involved in a war that could develop into a world war.

What Israel should do, he advised, is build a strategic alliance with Western and moderate Arab nations that will form a “deterrence balance” against Iran and its partners. Trying to thwart the Islamic Republic’s nuclear capacity is futile, he added, which “is a development that can’t be stopped.”

Ansbacher views the situation differently. He is certain that now is the right time to strike Iran, before it makes its final nuclear breakthrough.

“If today the West has little success in taming the ayatollahs, it will have zero success when they obtain nuclear weapons,” he said via Zoom with the Post last week.

“Iran will provide a nuclear umbrella to terrorists across the globe. Imagine Hezbollah kidnaps [IDF] soldiers on [Israel’s] northern border, and before Israel launches a rescue operation, Hezbollah sends a message that this could result in a nonconventional missile attack. This is a scenario that we cannot accept,” Ansbacher stipulated.

In addition, the possibility of a hostile US administration come the November election, along with the inferior position Iran found itself in after the October 07 attack – exposing its plan to annihilate Israel – means that Jerusalem must now use this narrow opportunity to strike Iran, he noted.

“Tehran’s original plan was to attack Israel simultaneously [on all fronts], and that would have brought us to the brink of extinction. But their plan was disrupted when [Hamas head] Yahya Sinwar jumped the gun. This puts Iran in a weakened position. If the plan had fully worked, Israel would have been caught unawares, with all arms of the octopus around its neck. Then it’s checkmate. But the plan’s disadvantage was its extended period of implementation where many things could go wrong,” Ansbacher said.

Attacking Iran now is Israel’s last chance before it faces an existential threat of a nuclear Islamic Republic, he stressed. If Israel hits Iran in its two centers of power, Tehran and Qom, he added, the Iranian regime, largely unsupported by the nonreligious population, will very likely fall.

Iran wants US to abandon its hostility

Iran could hold direct talks with the United States if Washington demonstrates in practice that it is not hostile to the Islamic Republic, said President Masoud Pezeshkian on Monday.

Pezeshkian was responding to a question at a news conference in Tehran on whether Tehran would be open to direct talks with the US to revive a 2015 nuclear deal.

Former US president Donald Trump reneged on that deal in 2018, arguing it was too generous to Tehran, and restored harsh US sanctions on Iran, prompting Tehran to gradually violate the agreement's nuclear limits.

"We are not hostile towards the US, they should end their hostility towards us by showing their goodwill in practice," said Pezeshkian, adding, "We are brothers with the Americans as well."

After taking office in January 2021, US President Joe Biden tried to negotiate a revival of the nuclear pact under which Iran had restricted its nuclear program in return for relief from US, European Union and UN sanctions.

However, Tehran refused to directly negotiate with Washington and worked mainly through European or Arab intermediaries.

 

How far can crude oil prices plunge?

We are of the view that crude oil price may fall below US$60 per barrel, if production in countries like Libya, Iraq, Iran and Venezuela rise to normal. Sanctions on Russia and Iran are also there to avoid glut. We have the convictions that unrest in some of the African countries is there to avoid fall of crude oil price below US$50 per barrel  

Brent crude futures fell below US$70 a barrel on Tuesday for the first time since December 2021, after OPEC Plus revised down its demand forecast for this year and 2025.

Brent crude futures were traded at US$69.51 a barrel and US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude slipped to US$66.21. On Monday, both benchmarks had risen about 1%.

On Tuesday, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in a monthly report said world oil demand will rise by 2.03 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2024, down from last month's forecast for growth of 2.11 million bpd. Until last month, OPEC had kept the forecast unchanged since it was first made in July 2023.

OPEC also cut its 2025 global demand growth estimate to 1.74 million bpd from 1.78 million bpd. Prices slid on the weakening global demand prospects and expectations of oil oversupply.

On Monday, Chinese data showed consumer inflation accelerated in August to its fastest in half a year, though domestic demand remained fragile, and producer price deflation worsened.

Data released on Tuesday showed China's exports grew in August at their fastest in nearly 1-1/2 years, yet imports disappointed with domestic demand depressed.

“If we lose China this market is going to have a problem because OPEC just cannot cut enough to offset the US and Brazilian position, and some of the other reservoirs at work,” said John Kilduff, partner at Again Capital.

 

Iran trade with OIC members on the rise

The value of the trade between Iran and the other 56 members of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) reached US$26.7 billion in the first five months of the current Iranian calendar year, registering a 15 percent increase compared to the same period a year earlier.

According to the head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Customs Administration (IRICA), the volume of the trade between Iran and OIC member states in the mentioned five months reached 42.3 million tons, also 10 percent more compared to the previous year's same time span.

Iran exported 33.6 million tons of non-oil goods worth US$13.5 billion to OIC member countries and imported 8.7 million tons of commodities valued at US$13.2 billion from them in the first five months of the current Iranian year, Mohammad Rezvanifar said.

The deputy economy minister added that the country’s exports to OIC members registered 16% and 8.0% increase in value and weight respectively in the mentioned period, while the import of products from the mentioned countries also increased by 18% and 15% in terms of weight and value.

Among the OIC member states, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan, and Oman were Iran’s major trade partners, the IRICA head noted.

Back in May 2023, the former head of the Iran Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines, and Agriculture (ICCIMA) stressed the need for establishing a joint Islamic market among OIC members over the next 10 years.

Addressing a gathering of the heads of OIC member chambers of commerce on the sidelines of the "Russia - Islamic World: Kazan Forum 2023" in Russia, Gholam-Hossein Shafeie said, “An important issue that has been discussed a lot in the past and the organization should pay attention to it in the current situation is the creation of a common Islamic market in the next 10 years, which can be achieved by concluding a free trade agreement among Islamic countries and removing tariff and non-tariff barriers.”

“Experts have worked on the Islamic market plan, and using the experiences and studies of these experts can definitely be a way forward,” he added.

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which was formed in 1972, today has reached a position where, according to statistics, the future of the world's energy would be in the hands of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Shafeie said in his speech.