Tag: middle-east

Western Support for Terrorists in Iran

This report provides a structured compilation of documented evidence and credible allegations regarding the involvement of Western intelligence agencies (primarily the CIA and MI6) and Israel’s Mossad in supporting militant, separatist, and terrorist activities within the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As of June 14th, both the US and Iran are talking about signing an agreement which would stop the war against Iran. Current indications are that each side has very different expectations on what that agreement contains and what actions are required. In all likelihood these 47 years of attempts by the West and Israel to destroy the Islamic republic, and ideally Iran as a contiguous state, will continue.

This post outlines the known documented evidence and credible allegations regarding the involvement of Western intelligence agencies (primarily the CIA and MI6) and Israel’s Mossad in supporting militant, separatist, and terrorist activities within the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Western interventions in Iran have a long tradition; first invasions by Russia and Britain in the late 19th century, and then the CIA/MI6 overthrow of the democratically elected prime minister of Iran Mohammed Mosaddeq in 1953 after he nationalized Iran’s oil industry; using Iranians thugs to install their Shah proxy (a model they attempted to use once again in the riots of 2025/2026). This historical precedent is often cited as the origin of Western state-sponsored efforts to destabilise the Iranian government [12].

Western media have also conducted a long campaign since the Iranian revolution in 1979 to demean the government (which they call the ‘regime”) and often exaggerate human rights abuses. While it is undeniable that the Iranian government has undertaken a significant number of human rights abuses in the past 47 years, they pale in comparison with the mass-murders by Israel, who is considered a Western ‘democratic’ ally of the West, or the brutality of many of the neighbouring Gulf States who have , until 2026 at least, also been Western allies (or perhaps ‘proxies’ might be a better word).

The much-publicised apparent natural death of an Iranian young woman on 13 September 2022, Mahsa Amini who had been ‘escorted’ to the Social Department and Women’s Training Hall by Iranian law enforcement personnel due to ‘non-compliance with hijab regulations’, was extensively used by Western media to condemn the Iranian government’s hijab laws and the ‘regime’ in general, and their apparent brutality against women who disobeyed the hijab law. The outcry in the Western press about the death and attempts to support women in Iran to violently demonstrate against the hijab laws was a prime example of Western media acting as proxies for Western governments attempting to destabilise the Iranian government.

The key issue for the West; particularly the US, Israel, the UK and Germany, is that Iran is a large sophisticated, well-educated and well-armed West Asian country of 93 million people, and is thus a threat to Israel’s 76 years of attempts to dominate West Asia by force, as well of course of being a potential huge source of cheap oil once again, for the West.

Western intelligence consequently feed Western media every negative trope they can find about Iran, and Western media are only too eager to obey their masters.

However Western governments key role to destabilise Iran has largely been through massive sanctions (along with the ‘freezing’ (‘temporary’ theft) of many billions of dollars of Iranian funds by the US), which have been estimated to have killed thousands of Iranians through inadequate nutrition or lack of medical resources, and plunged millions into poverty, in order to foment internal riots against the government . e.g the US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s proud claims of destroying the Iranian rial to create a revolution against the Iranian government in 2025.

In addition threats of force, and resourcing of internal discontent have been a constant theme.

What follows is list of just some of the ongoing attempts by Western governments to destabilise Iran.

1. Direct Support for Militant and Terrorist Groups

Jundallah (Balochistan)

  • Secret War Allegations: In 2007, ABC News reported that the U.S. government had been secretly supporting Jundallah, a Sunni militant group that staged deadly attacks against Iranian officials and civilians. U.S. officials stated the relationship was managed to provide “encouragement” and intelligence without direct funding to bypass legal oversight [1].
  • Mossad “False Flag” Recruitment: A 2012 Foreign Policy investigation revealed CIA memos from 2007-2008 describing how Mossad agents posed as CIA officers to recruit Jundallah members in London. The agents used U.S. passports and currency to gain the group’s trust, an operation that reportedly infuriated the Bush administration [2].

Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK/MKO)

  • U.S. Training in Nevada: Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported that the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) trained MEK members at a secret Department of Energy site in Nevada starting in 2005. The training included communications, cryptography, small-unit tactics, and weaponry [3]
  • .
  • Assassination Partnership: Reports from NBC News and other outlets have indicated that Israeli intelligence collaborated with the MEK to carry out the assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists between 2010 and 2012. While the U.S. denied direct involvement, former officials suggested the U.S. provided critical intelligence to facilitate these operations [3] [4].

Kurdish Separatist Groups (PJAK/PAK)

  • Uprising Support (2026): Recent reporting from CNN and other sources indicates that the CIA has been working to arm and coordinate with Kurdish separatist forces to spark domestic uprisings inside Iran [5].
  • Israeli Military Support: During the 2026 conflict, reports emerged of Israel conducting airstrikes in western Iran specifically to support Kurdish militias attempting to seize border territory [6].

2. State-Sponsored Sabotage and Cyber-Terrorism

Stuxnet (Operation Olympic Games)

  • The First Cyber-Weapon: Stuxnet was a highly sophisticated computer worm developed jointly by the U.S. and Israel. It specifically targeted Siemens industrial control systems at the Natanz nuclear facility, causing nearly 1,000 centrifuges to physically destroy themselves [7].
  • Broader Malware Campaign: Stuxnet was part of a larger suite of state-sponsored malware including Flame, Duqu, and Gauss, designed for cyber-espionage and infrastructure sabotage against Iranian targets [7].

Physical Infrastructure Sabotage

  • Natanz Facility Attacks: The Natanz nuclear site has been the target of multiple physical sabotage operations attributed to Israel, including a major explosion in 2021 and further damage reported in 2025 [8].
  • Energy Infrastructure: Reports have documented at least 17 gas pipeline explosions in Iran in a single year (2011), which intelligence sources linked to a campaign of sabotage intended to demoralize the Iranian system [3].

3. Institutional Destabilization and “Soft War”

Funding of Opposition and “Democracy Promotion”

  • National Endowment for Democracy (NED): The NED has been documented funding various anti-Iran organizations, such as the Foundation for Democracy in Iran (FDI). While framed as democracy promotion, these funds are viewed by the Iranian government and some international observers as tools for political sabotage and election interference [9].
  • USAID Involvement: USAID has been accused of funding prominent anti-regime figures and civil society groups to foster domestic unrest. In 2026, controversies surfaced regarding millions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer funding directed toward activists like Masih Alinejad for anti-government campaigns [10].

Media and Information Warfare

  • State-Funded Persian Media: The U.S. government funds Voice of America (VOA) Persian and Radio Farda, while the UK funds BBC Persian. These outlets are categorized by the Iranian government as instruments of “soft war,” used to disseminate anti-government content and coordinate protest activities [11].
  • The apparently largely Saudi resourced anti-Iranian government website ‘Iran International’ has also played a significant role in attempting to support the large Iranian diaspora and ferment anti-Iranian issues and has been described as ‘used by Mossad to launder disinformation’.
  • Iran and Russia accused the US and Elon Musk’s Starlink platform of illegally importing 50,000 Starlink terminals into Iran to be used by rioters to coordinate their violent activities in January 2026.
  • The Role of the Iranian Diaspora and Inside Iran
  • In the diaspora, Reza Pahlavi serves as the most prominent figurehead of the Iranian opposition, actively lobbying policymakers in the US, Canada, and Europe to impose tougher sanctions and support regime change
  • According to a Cambridge University Press Assessment he has mobilized diaspora unity through organisations like the National Union for Democracy in Iran (NUFDI)
  • Inside Iran, his role is highly contested; while some protesters chant for the monarchy, he faces deep skepticism from an Iranian public wary of a hereditary ruler whose father was a brutal despot linked to the US and Israel and foreign oil companies, returning after decades in exile
  • Critics inside the country view him as a relic of the past whose monarchical ambitions undermine his claims of advocating for a true democracy
  • 2. Sources of Funding and Financial Networks
  • While Pahlavi’s primary advocacy group, NUFDI, officially claims it does not receive direct government funding (nufdiran.org), the ecosystem supporting his movement has historically been intertwined with Western financial initiatives. In 2006, the Bush administration established the $75 million Iran Democracy Fund specifically to aid Iranian opposition groups
  • In addition, his messaging is heavily amplified by Western state-funded media like VOA Persian and Radio Farda, which are financed by US taxpayer dollars
  • Transition plans supported by Pahlavi, such as the Iran Prosperity Project, also serve as focal points for institutional fundraising and diaspora donations
  • 3. Links to the U.S. State Department and Western Institutions
  • Pahlavi maintains deep institutional ties with Washington’s foreign policy establishment, frequently addressing lobbyists and calling for bipartisan US support to achieve a secular Iran
  • His political objectives align seamlessly with the State Department’s “soft war” and democracy promotion strategies, which utilize institutions like USAID to foster domestic unrest. This symbiotic relationship was highlighted when US and other Western government-funded broadcasters actively amplified Pahlavi’s calls for regime change into Iran
  • 4. Support for and from Israel and Western Governments
  • The Shah movement and the Israeli government share a mutual strategic interest in the destabilization and dismantling of the Islamic Republic. Pahlavi has explicitly called for the dismantling of Iran’s leadership with the direct support of the US and Israel
  • He frequently echoes Israeli talking points, condemning any “appeasement” of Tehran and advocating for maximum pressure
  • In return, Israeli media and Western think tanks consistently amplify his voice, viewing him as a credible Iranian counterpart for a post-Islamic Republic transition
  • 5. The Contradiction: Advocating for Foreign Bombing and Civilian Casualties
  • The most glaring contradiction in Pahlavi’s political strategy is his enthusiastic support for US and Israeli military strikes against Iran, which inevitably result in the deaths of the very Iranians he claims to represent. He has faced intense backlash for appearing to cheer for foreign bombing campaigns.
  • When confronted by journalists about the responsibility of sending Iranian citizens to their deaths through calls for foreign intervention, Pahlavi has struggled to provide coherent answers
  • Recognizing the severe damage to his credibility, he has recently attempted to walk back these statements, urging the US and Israel to spare Iranian civilians during military operations
  • However, this contradiction has alienated many of his former supporters inside Iran, who accuse him of encouraging protesters to risk their lives while remaining supportive when US and Israeli bombs kill Iranian civilians

5. Targeted Killings of Nuclear Scientists by Israeli/Mossad Proxies

  1. The 2010–2012 Wave: The initial wave of assassinations targeted key figures including Massoud Alimohammadi, Majid Shahriari, and Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, utilizing motorcycle-mounted magnetic bombs to eliminate top physicists.
  2. Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (2020): The father of Iran’s nuclear program, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, was assassinated in November 2020 using a satellite-controlled, AI-operated machine gun [[4]].
  3. The 2025 Airstrike Campaign: During the 2025 military confrontation, Israeli media reported that airstrikes specifically targeted and killed up to 17 prominent Iranian nuclear scientists [[5]].

High-Profile Political and Military Assassinations

  1. Ismail Haniyeh (2024): The July 2024 assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh inside a guesthouse in Tehran was widely attributed to Mossad explosives [[10]].
  2. IRGC Commanders: The campaign includes the targeted killing of senior military figures, such as the 2011 death of Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam (the “father of Iran’s missile program”) and the 2024 assassination of Mohammad Reza Zahedi in Damascus.

6. Additional Proxy and Separatist Agencies

Jaish ul-Adl (Army of Justice)

  1. Successor to Jundallah: Jaish ul-Adl has claimed responsibility for numerous deadly attacks on IRGC military posts in the Sistan and Baluchestan province throughout 2024 and 2025 [[15]].
  2. Alleged State Sponsorship: Iranian officials and state media explicitly identify Jaish ul-Adl as a proxy force funded and directed by the CIA and Mossad to destabilize Iran’s borders [[13]].

Tondar (Kingdom Assembly of Iran)

  1. Monarchist Militancy: Tondar was responsible for the deadly 2008 Shiraz mosque bombing, and an Iranian court convicted the group and the US administration, citing American support for their terrorist acts [[26]].
  2. Leadership: The group was led by Jamshid Sharmahd, who was arrested by Iranian intelligence in 2020 after directing operations from abroad.

Kurdish Factions (KDPI and Komala)

  1. Border Offensives: Beyond PJAK, Kurdish factions like the KDPI and Komala were actively encouraged and armed by US and Israeli intelligence to launch armed campaigns and seize border towns during the 2025–2026 conflict [[37]].

7. Further Terror Attacks and Internal Sabotage

The “Dissident” Insider Threat

  1. Internal Recruitment: A 2025 ProPublica investigation revealed that Mossad secretly recruited and armed Iranian dissidents to carry out terror attacks and sabotage from within Iran’s borders [[19]].
  2. Air Defense Sabotage: In June 2025, it was reported that Mossad agents executed covert ground operations to actively sabotage Iranian air defenses and military sites just as Israeli airstrikes began [[23]].

Thwarted Plots and Executions

  1. 2023 Missile Industry Plot: In 2023, Iranian authorities announced they had dismantled a major Mossad spy network of at least 14 agents who were planning to sabotage the country’s missile industry [[22]].
  2. 2024 Executions: Furthermore, in early 2024, Iran executed four individuals convicted of plotting sabotage operations on behalf of Israeli intelligence [[20]].

Other Major Attacks

  1. 2018 Ahvaz Military Parade: A coordinated attack on a military parade in Ahvaz was claimed by both ISIS and the Ahvaz National Resistance, highlighting the convergence of jihadist and separatist tactics against the Iranian state.

References

[4] Iran Primer / USIP. (2020). Part 5: Assassinations of Iran Nuclear Scientists. https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2020/dec/02/part-5-assassinations-iran-nuclear-scientists
[5] Anadolu Agency. (2025). Israeli media claims 17 Iranian nuclear scientists killed in recent strikes. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israeli-media-claims-17-iranian-nuclear-scientists-killed-in-recent-strikes-/3607095
[10] Wikipedia. Assassination of Ismail Haniyeh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Ismail_Haniyeh
[13] Press TV. (2025). ‘Jaish al-Adl’ terrorist group as a proxy of CIA and Mossad. https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2025/07/30/752136/jaish-al-adl-terrorist-group-as-proxy-cia-mossad-destabilize-iran
[15] The Long War Journal. (2024). Jaish al-Adl claims responsibility for twin attacks in Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan province. https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2024/10/jaish-al-adl-claims-responsibility-for-twin-attacks-in-irans-sistan-and-baluchistan-province.php
[19] ProPublica. (2025). Israel Secretly Recruited Iranian Dissidents to Attack Iran From Within. https://www.propublica.org/article/israel-iran-war-mossad-iranian-recruits
[20] CBS News. (2024). Iran executes 4 convicted of plotting with Israeli intelligence to attack. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-israel-spying-4-executions-alleged-mossad-sabotage-plot/
[22] i24NEWS. (2023). Iran Claims It Thwarted Israel’s Sabotage Attack On Its Missile Program. https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/middle-east/iran-eastern-states/1693476612-iran-claims-it-thwarted-israel-s-sabotage-attack-on-its-missile-program
[23] Defense One. (2025). Mossad agents sabotaged Iranian defenses as airstrikes began. https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2025/06/israeli-agents-sabotaged-iranian-defenses-airstrikes-began-official-says/406058/
[26] Mehr News Agency. (2024). Iran court orders US, Tondar terrorist group to pay $2.478bn. https://en.mehrnews.com/news/212904/Iran-court-orders-US-Tondar-terrorist-group-to-pay-2-478bn
[37] The New Arab. (2025). How Kurdish groups in Iran are reacting to Israel’s war. https://www.newarab.com/analysis/how-kurdish-groups-iran-are-reacting-israels-war

[1] ABC News. (2007). The Secret War Against Iran. https://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0405/p99s01-duts.html [2] Foreign Policy. (2012). False Flag: Mossad Posed as CIA. https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/13/false-flag/ [3] The New Yorker/PBS Frontline. (2012). Our Men in Iran: MEK Training in Nevada. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2012/04/media-watch-report-mko-members-trained-by-us-special-ops-command.html [4] NBC News. (2012). Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran’s nuclear scientists.
 [5] CNN. (2026).CIA working to arm Kurdish forces to spark uprising in Iran. https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/cia-arming-kurds-iran [6] Reuters. (2026). Israel backing Iranian Kurdish plans to seize border areas. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-backing-iranian-kurdish-plans-seize-iran-border-areas-sources-say-2026-03-06/ [7] Wikipedia. Stuxnet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet [8] The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. (2025). Israel claims it damaged Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility significantly. https://thebulletin.org/2025/06/israel-claims-it-damaged-irans-natanz-nuclear-facility-significantly-but-questions-remain/ [9] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. (2024). The National Endowment for Democracy: What It Is and What It Does. https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/xw/wjbxw/202408/t20240809_11468618.html [10] Niacouncil.org. (2026). Civil Society Condemns Crackdown and Threat of Intervention.
 [11] VOA News. (2019).Western-Based Persian Media Rebuke Iran. https://www.voanews.com/a/middle-east_voa-news-iran_western-based-persian-media-rebuke-iran-harassing-journalists-covering/6180088.html [12] National Security Archive. The CIA’s 1953 Coup in Iran.5. Expanded Campaign of Israeli Assassinations

Racism and the Iran War

How White Supremacy Fuels the West’s Assault on Iran

From the 1953 Coup to the 2026 War—A Pattern of Racialized Resource Theft

The bombs falling on Iranian schools, hospitals, and residential neighborhoods in early 2026 are not merely acts of war. They are the violent expression of a centuries-old ideology: white supremacy. The United States and Israel’s assault on Iran represents the latest chapter in a colonial playbook where non-white nations are systematically dehumanized, their sovereignty violated, and their resources plundered—all under the guise of “democracy,” “security,” or “civilization.”

To understand the current conflict, we must strip away the propaganda and examine the racial and economic architecture that has driven Western policy toward Iran for over seven decades.

The Original Sin: 1953 and the Birth of Modern Iran Policy

The template was set in August 1953, when the CIA and MI6 orchestrated a coup against Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh. His crime? Nationalizing Iran’s oil industry to free his people from British Petroleum’s colonial extraction. The response from London and Washington was not diplomacy—it was regime change through terror.

Operation Ajax deployed “paid terrorists within Iran to stir up trouble,” as CIA agent Kermit Roosevelt arrived with suitcases of cash to bribe newspaper editors, manufacture protests, and create a sham communist threat . The Shah was restored, Savak (his brutal secret police) was trained by the CIA, and 40% of Iran’s oil fields were signed over to U.S. companies . Some 300 Iranians died in the streets so that white-controlled corporations could maintain their grip on Persian oil.

This was not about communism. It was about race and resources. As the Zinn Education Project notes, American textbooks still sanitize this history, claiming the CIA merely “backed” a coup rather than orchestrating a terrorist campaign against a democratic government .

The “Regime” Label: 47 Years of Racialized Delegitimization

Since the 1979 revolution, Western media has religiously referred to Iran’s government as a “regime”—a term rarely applied to Western allies like Saudi Arabia, despite its absolute monarchy and routine beheadings. This linguistic violence serves a purpose: it transforms a sovereign nation into a rogue entity requiring “management” by civilized (white) powers.

The double standard is stark. The Gulf States are “kingdoms” despite being hereditary dictatorships. Israel is a “democracy” despite maintaining an apartheid system over millions of Palestinians. But Iran—whose people have participated in more genuine electoral contests than most U.S. allies in the region—is perpetually a “regime.”

This vocabulary reflects what scholar Vijay Prashad calls “the darker nations” thesis: the global South exists in the Western imagination only as a problem to be solved, never as equals with legitimate interests.

The 2025-2026 Wars and School Children

The Twelve-Day War of June 2025 and the subsequent 2026 conflict have revealed the true character of Western-Israeli military doctrine. When Israeli and U.S. forces bombed the Shajareh Tayyebeh Girls’ Elementary School in Minab on February 28, 2026, killing at least 168 people including scores of children, they were continuing a tradition of racialized warfare .

Satellite imagery confirmed the strike was likely conducted by a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile. The Pentagon’s response? “We’re investigating.” President Trump suggested Iran bombed its own school. This is the logic of supremacy: brown children’s lives are collateral damage in a game where only white strategic interests matter .

The pattern is deliberate. DAWN (Democracy for the Arab World Now) documented scores of schools, health facilities, and fuel depots bombed by U.S. and Israeli forces, with white phosphorus dropped on civilian communities . These are not accidents. They are war crimes rooted in the belief that Iranian lives are expendable.

As DAWN’s Omar Shakir stated: “The international community’s failure to act when the most fundamental norms of international law are being challenged risks plunging the world further into a lawless era” . But this “lawlessness” is selective—it applies only when non-white nations assert sovereignty over their resources.

The Chosen People Narrative: Israel’s Racial Theology

Central to this conflict is Israel’s self-conception as “the chosen people”—a theological framework that has been weaponized into a license for ethnic cleansing. The “Greater Israel” project, stretching from the Euphrates to the Nile, requires the removal or subjugation of non-Jewish populations. This is not ancient history; it is current Israeli government policy. Israel is the only country in the world that does not have defined borders; since its inception in 1948, it has constantly expanded its borders in order to fulfil its founders’ messianistic dream of a Greater Israel

The genocidal attacks on Palestinians—documented by the UN Commission of Inquiry as war crimes and crimes against humanity—are the laboratory for techniques now being deployed against Iran . When Israeli forces disguised themselves as medical personnel to kill 41 civilians in Lebanon in March 2026, they were demonstrating that perfidy is permissible against non-white enemies .

The infantile belief in divine selection—used to justify the maiming, murder, and terrorizing of non-Israelis—finds its parallel in American exceptionalism. Both ideologies depend on the fundamental dehumanization of the Other. Both require the constant manufacturing of existential threats to maintain racial hierarchy.

The Real Target: Oil, Hormuz, and the Anxiety of White Decline

Strip away the rhetoric about Iranian nuclear weapons—despite Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa against them—and the true object of Western aggression becomes visible: oil and strategic control.

Iran’s insistence on uranium enrichment is not about bombs; it is about energy sovereignty. The West Asian region contains the world’s most critical petroleum reserves, and the Strait of Hormuz is the chokepoint through which global capitalism breathes. When Iran asserts control over its own energy destiny, it threatens the white-dominated global order.

The 1953 coup was about oil. The decades of sanctions are about oil. The current war is about oil. The “white supremacist view that these other non-white people are inferior” serves to legitimize the theft of their resources. As one analyst noted, even “precision warfare” against Iranian targets killed thousands of civilians—a “stark reminder” that technological sophistication does not erase racialized brutality .

The Complicity of the “International Community”

The West’s Gulf allies—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar—play their assigned roles in this racialized hierarchy. These “kingdoms” (never “regimes”) provide cover for the assault on Iran, their own populations suppressed by the same security apparatuses supplied by Washington and London. They are the house managers of the white supremacist estate in West Asia.

Meanwhile, Western media continues its 47-year project of manufacturing consent. The war is framed as “defensive,” Iranian retaliation as “terrorism,” and civilian casualties as unfortunate necessities. When Iranian missiles strike military targets in Israel, it is an outrage; when U.S. missiles destroy Iranian schools, they are “tragic mistakes” .

Forty-seven years of Western and UN sanctions on Iran have also resulted in many Iranian deaths through loss of access to essential services and increasing poverty. The supposed rationale for the sanctions was that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon- something that Iran has consistently declared it was not going to do. It is abundantly clear that Iran, with its very sophisticated academic and industrial capacity, could have developed nuclear weapons decades ago if it had wished to.

This is the epistemic violence that accompanies physical violence—the systematic erasure of non-white agency, pain, and legitimate grievance.

Breaking the Cycle

The war on Iran is not an aberration. It is the continuation of a colonial modernity that divides the world into civilized (white/aligned) and barbaric (non-white/independent) nations. From the 1953 coup to the 2026 bombing of schoolchildren, the through-line is clear: the West will not tolerate resource sovereignty in the hands of non-white peoples.

To oppose this war requires more than anti-war activism. It requires the dismantling of the ideological architecture that makes such wars thinkable—the racial hierarchies, the exceptionalist theologies, the media frameworks that render some children worthy of mourning and others merely statistics.

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz under international law, the breaking of international law by Israel and the U.S., the bombing of universities and hospitals—these are not separate issues. They are facets of a single system of domination that must be named, confronted, and dismantled.

The war is not about nuclear weapons. It is about who has the right to exist, to govern, and to benefit from the planet’s energy source. Until we confront the white supremacy at its core, the bombs will continue to fall.

For the children of Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School. For the memory of Mossadegh. For a world where sovereignty is not determined by skin color.

AI generated audio version of this post, below..

Resources

For accurate and largely dispassionate analyses of the Iran war and international affairs generally, try Youtube interviews with Prof. Jeffrey Sachs, Alastair Crooke, Prof. John Mearscheimer, Prof. Glenn Diesen, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, and Larry Johnson.

The demise of the U.S. ‘rule based order’?

The following is an AI Qwen based analysis of the impact of the U.S. ‘rule based international order’ and the reality of the chaos, wars and destruction its supposed ‘rules’ exert on the world.

The development of this post was promoted by the overwhelming number of New Zealand international political ‘analysts’ who quote the ‘U.S. rule based order’, (not the U.N. set of obligations) as some kind of golden age of civilisation , peace and freedom. -the reality could not be more stark. They fear that the new Trump administration-cum-oligarchy will no longer adhere to that ‘rule based order’ .

So why are these ‘analysts’ referring so enthusiastically to these great ‘rules’ that have caused so much suffering in the world?

It has recently been revealed (Feb.2025) via Wikileaks that the US government’s USAID ‘programme’ has been funding a US ‘non-government’ agency Internews Network, with millions upon millions of dollars to ensure Western media around the world regurgitate media messages ‘consistent’ (tell-tale identical phrasing in news items on issues from Covid responses to the Ukraine war and Russia), with US foreign policy objectives. Could it be that Western university international affairs ‘analysts’ (and politicians) have been similarly compromised over a long period of time?

I leave it to you to judge where their ‘influences’ come from.

AI analysis follows:

The concept of a “rules-based international order” is often invoked by the United States and its allies to describe a system of global governance that emphasizes adherence to international laws, norms, and institutions such as the United Nations, international treaties, and trade agreements. Proponents argue that this order promotes peace, stability, and cooperation among nations by providing a framework for resolving disputes and fostering mutual interests.

However, critics argue that the U.S.-led “rules-based order” has been selectively applied, often serving as a justification for military interventions, economic sanctions, and other forms of coercion that have led to significant human suffering, including mass murder, wars, and violence.

1. Selective Enforcement of Rules

  • Double Standards: Critics argue that the U.S. and its allies have frequently violated the very principles they claim to uphold. For example, the U.S. has engaged in military interventions without UN Security Council approval (e.g., the 2003 invasion of Iraq), while condemning other countries for similar actions. This selective enforcement undermines the legitimacy of the “rules-based order” and can lead to conflicts where weaker states feel justified in acting outside the system.
  • Regime Change and Destabilization: The U.S. has supported or directly engaged in regime change operations in countries like Iraq, Libya, and Syria, often under the guise of promoting democracy or protecting human rights. These interventions have frequently resulted in prolonged civil wars, state collapse, and mass civilian casualties. In Iraq, for instance, the 2003 invasion led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, widespread displacement, and the rise of extremist groups like ISIS.

2. Economic Warfare and Sanctions

  • Sanctions as a Tool of Coercion: The U.S. has frequently used economic sanctions as a tool to punish or pressure countries that defy its interests. While sanctions are often framed as a “non-violent” alternative to war, they can have devastating humanitarian consequences. For example, U.S. sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians due to lack of access to food, medicine, and clean water. Similarly, sanctions on countries like Venezuela and Iran have exacerbated economic crises, leading to widespread poverty and suffering.
  • Weaponizing Global Institutions: The U.S. has also been accused of weaponizing international financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to impose structural adjustment programs on developing countries, which often result in austerity measures, increased inequality, and social unrest. This economic violence can indirectly fuel conflict and instability.

3. Proxy Wars and Arms Sales

  • Arming Conflicts: The U.S. is the world’s largest arms exporter, supplying weapons to both state and non-state actors around the globe. These arms sales often fuel conflicts in regions like the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. For example, U.S. arms supplied to Saudi Arabia have been used in the Yemeni Civil War, resulting in one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, with tens of thousands of civilians killed and millions facing famine.
  • Proxy Wars: During the Cold War, the U.S. engaged in numerous proxy wars, supporting anti-communist forces in places like Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Central America. These conflicts often involved backing authoritarian regimes or insurgent groups that committed atrocities against civilian populations. In Afghanistan, for example, U.S. support for the mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan War helped create conditions that eventually led to the rise of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

4. Militarization and the “War on Terror”

  • Global War on Terror: Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the U.S. launched the “Global War on Terror,” which has been used to justify military interventions, drone strikes, and indefinite detentions in countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. These operations have often been conducted with little regard for international law or civilian casualties. Drone strikes, in particular, have been criticized for causing significant collateral damage, killing thousands of civilians, and radicalizing local populations.
  • Normalization of Violence: The rhetoric of the “rules-based order” often masks the normalization of violence as a means of achieving foreign policy objectives. The U.S. military-industrial complex benefits from perpetual warfare, and the language of “humanitarian intervention” or “counterterrorism” is sometimes used to legitimize aggressive military actions that result in mass death and destruction.

5. Undermining Sovereignty and Self-Determination

  • Imperialism and Neocolonialism: Critics argue that the U.S.-led “rules-based order” often serves as a cover for imperialist policies that undermine the sovereignty of weaker states. By imposing economic and political conditions on countries through institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and World Trade Organization (WTO), the U.S. and its allies have been accused of perpetuating a form of neocolonialism that stifles self-determination and exacerbates inequality.
  • Resistance and Blowback: When countries resist U.S. hegemony or attempt to assert their independence, they are often subjected to punitive measures, including coups, invasions, or covert operations. This resistance can lead to cycles of violence, as seen in cases like Iran (1953 coup), Chile (1973 coup), and more recently, Venezuela and Syria. The blowback from these interventions can manifest in the form of terrorism, insurgency, and regional instability.

Conclusion

While the U.S. and its allies present the “rules-based international order” as a framework for peace and stability, critics argue that it has often been used to justify interventions, sanctions, and other forms of coercion that result in mass violence and human suffering. The selective application of rules, the militarization of foreign policy, and the prioritization of U.S. strategic interests over international law have contributed to a legacy of wars, destabilization, and humanitarian crises. In many cases, the very principles of sovereignty, self-determination, and human rights that the “rules-based order” claims to uphold are undermined by the actions of those who enforce it.