#ramadanwar — Public Fediverse posts

AISC Red Paper #2: The Multiple Fronts of Iranian Anti-Imperialism

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective (AISC) offers an analysis of the Ramadan War and the multiple fronts of Iranian anti- imperialism. It uses anti-imperialist methodology, grounded in dialectical and historical materialism. This is part one (1) of two (2) parts.

——-

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective’s Red Paper Series takes on the pressing issues of our time with urgency and principled clarity. We are at the frontlines of the battle of ideas and we use anti- imperialist methodology to clarify the stakes, intensify the contradictions, challenge the propaganda, and defend the Resistance.

We, the Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective (AISC), condemn in the strongest terms possible the U.S. imperialist attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The U.S. launched the Ramadan War on February 28, 2026, assassinating Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and killing hundreds of Iranians on that day, including over 160 children and staff at the elementary school Shajareh Tayebeh in Minab, Iran. After 39 days of direct combat, Iran dealt a strategic defeat to the imperialist-zionist forces, leading to a fragile ‘ceasefire’ that has involved, to date, a U.S. blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and ongoing air raids of Lebanon and Palestine. We stand firmly with the Iranian people, their revolutionary state, and the forces of the Axis of Resistance as they defend their sovereign right to self- determination in the ongoing battle for national and regional liberation from zionist imperialism. As an organization committed to challenging U.S.-led imperialism and supporting the sovereignty and national liberation of the Global Majority, AISC calls on all anti-imperialist forces across the world to continue to unite in defense of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the people of West Asia.

The Multiple Fronts of Iranian Anti-Imperialism

At the regional scale, the Ramadan war comes on the heels of Operation Al Aqsa Flood, which commenced on October 7, 2023, in response to over 100 years of imperialist-backed settler colonial genocide, ethnic cleansing, and land dispossession of the Palestinian people; the ongoing regional resistance against the genocidal zionist entity since that date; the Mossad-orchestrated urban war against Iran in January 2026; and the U.S.-zionist 12-Day War that Iran defeated in June 2025. The Axis of Resistance’s historic struggle against U.S. imperialism spans decades and stands on the shoulders of previous wars of national liberation against Western imperialism in Viet Nam, Korea, South Africa, Algeria, Cuba, and Haiti, among others.

In Red Paper #2, we offer an analysis of the Ramadan War and the multiple fronts of Iranian anti- imperialism through AISC’s anti-imperialist methodology, grounded in dialectical and historical materialism. Our analysis proceeds in five parts. First, “Iranian Anti-Imperialism: The Military Front,” examines how Iran and the Axis of Resistance have delivered a blow to the U.S.-Zionist war machine through asymmetric attrition, coordinated multi-front warfare, and the strategic attacks on U.S. military assets across West Asia. Second, “A Resistance Economy: The Political Economy of Iranian Sovereignty,” analyzes how Iran built a nationalist-developmentalist economy under siege, defying neoliberal and comprador models through delinking, state-directed development, and the strategic assertion of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. Third, “A People’s War: The Social Basis of Iranian National Resistance,” explores how the Iranian masses, rooted in a century of anti-imperialist struggle and Shi’i liberation theology, have defended their sovereignty, transforming the war into a popular uprising against U.S. imperialism. Fourth, “Multipolarity as Anti-Imperialist Delinking,” examines how Iran’s strategic alignment with China, Russia, and the broader Global South has contributed to breaking down the petrodollar’s stranglehold and accelerating the path towards an anti-imperialist multipolar world order. Fifth, “The Diplomatic Front: Anti-Imperialist Foreign Policy,” analyzes how Iran has waged diplomatic struggle alongside military resistance, navigating decades of U.S. treachery from the “nuclear deal” to the present, demonstrating that diplomacy is inextricably connected to armed struggle and is an indispensable front in the war against imperialism.[1]

I. Iranian Anti-Imperialism: The Military Front

The multi-front logic of Iranian anti-imperialism finds its most concrete expression on the battlefield. The military dimension of Iran’s anti-imperialist strategy, our first analytical front, demonstrates how coordinated resistance can turn asymmetric force into strategic defeat. When U.S.-zionist forces began their assault on February 28, 2026, launching the 40 days of the Ramadan War, Iran and the Axis of Resistance immediately mobilized and systematically retaliated with defensive attacks on U.S.-zionist military installations and economic interests across West Asia. Despite inflicting another unprovoked attack on Iran amid ongoing negotiations in late February, the U.S. and its allies were dealt a strategic defeat that was demonstrated by their desperate need for a “ceasefire,” commenced on April 7. Iran has since been able to rebuild schools, bridges, and other infrastructure damaged during the War. However, the ceasefire has not translated into an end of U.S. and zionist attacks. As of this writing, the U.S. has imposed a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, essentially strangling the global economy, in an act of war that violates the ceasefire. In parallel, the U.S. and the zionist entity continue their genocidal violence against the Palestinian people, spreading to Lebanon, committing further violations of two ceasefire agreements.

A. The Ramadan War

The Ramadan War was launched with U.S.-zionist air raids across Iran. As part of their opening salvo, the aggressors struck the Shajareh Tayebeh Elementary School, killing over 160 children and adult staff. The U.S. also targeted a sports hall in Lamerd, martyring at least 21 people, including members of a teenage volleyball team (Jaafari 2026). U.S. forces likely used a new weapon, the Precision Strike Missile, in the latter attack (Thomas 2026). On the same morning, the U.S. and zionist entity struck the home and office of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with a massive attack, assassinating him along with his daughter, granddaughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, and several colleagues and staff. Other key leaders in Iran, including Ali Shamkhani, Ali Larijani, Abdolrahim Mousavi, and Alireza Tangsiri have since been brazenly assassinated as well.

The civilian toll of the war on Iran has been significant. The death toll stands at 3,375 civilians in Iran only (WANA 2026). The imperialist-zionist forces struck approximately 1,300 schools, 24 bridges and intersections, and 240 medical facilities, damaging at least 50 hospitals and 50 emergency centers (PressTV April 27, 2026). They also bombed over 100 museums and cultural heritage sites across Iran, including UNESCO-listed monuments and museums, and the 12,000-seat stadium located at Tehran’s Azadi Sports Complex. Despite this targeting, the Iranian State was prepared, providing free medical treatment to the injured, treating 40,000 people since the war began. Moreover, 775 of the damaged schools have already been repaired.

These brutal and often indiscriminate attacks are consistent with official U.S. statements that they will show “no quarter” and have “no mercy.” The U.S. empire has made clear its intentions to commit war crimes against the Islamic Republic of Iran (PressTV April 7, 2026), including carrying out President Donald Trump’s threat to “destroy [Iranian] civilization.”

Iran immediately defended itself under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which recognizes the right of individual or collective self-defense in response to an armed attack against a U.N. member.[1] Operation True Promise IV, which began within an hour of the initial U.S.-zionist attacks, involved strikes against U.S. bases in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula. These bases are hosted by family dictatorships in Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan against the will of their citizens. The bases were rendered inoperable by Iranian missile and drone strikes working with other members of the Axis of Resistance, which ultimately forced U.S. troops and intelligence personnel to evacuate military bases and embassies in the region (Nereim 2026).

At the beginning of Operation True Promise IV, Iran targeted U.S. radar installations and interceptor batteries in order to blind the imperialist-zionist forces. After Iran destroyed five U.S.

THAAD radars— four in Saudi Arabia and a $300 million AN/TPY-2 in Jordan—the United States was forced to reroute replacement radar assets and interceptors from its vassal state South Korea’s THAAD systems to the Middle East, as the Ramadan War had heavily depleted and damaged existing regional air defenses. This redeployment reveals the direct link between U.S. wars in West Asia and its strategic posture toward East Asia. Having achieved this qualitative success against enemy air defenses, the Islamic Republic turned to U.S. aircraft that perpetrated the war on Iran, including refueling planes and early warning aircraft. Iran and the Axis of Resistance (AoR) have achieved documented successes in damaging or outright destroying numerous enemy forces aircrafts. Iran consistently targeted intelligence facilities linked to weapons manufacturers and industrial sites in the zionist entity as well.

While severe censorship limits the U.S. public’s knowledge of these operations and their success, the material costs (discussed more below) tell only part of the story. Equally significant is the increasing flight of zionist settlers from the region—returning to their original homes in the West—a sign that the material and psychological costs of the war have contributed to breaking the zionist will. The United States and its proxies in West Asia have tried hard to manufacture regional support for their imperialist effort to no avail.

In what appears to be a resurgence of Arab nationalism inspired by Al Aqsa Flood and intensified by the Ramadan War, Arabs across the region – including in Gulf states – have demonstrated ardent support of Iran’s efforts despite collaboration by their comprador ruling classes with imperialist- zionist forces. Such a resurgence is deeply organic and expresses the religious, ethnic, and ideological breadth of the region in a manner that unifies rather than fragments it along sectarian lines. Thus, the Ramadan War has deepened ties among Iranians, Arabs, and the other peoples of the region, challenging the divide and rule sectarian logic that has long been the tool of imperialists and colonizers. While the comprador family dictatorships in the Persian Gulf and Jordan have responded with severe repression, the peoples of the region remain steadfast in their commitment to anti- imperialist resistance.

B. The Axis of Resistance and the Unity of Fields

The Islamic Republic of Iran is not facing the imperialist-zionists alone. The Ramadan War was waged through the Unity of the Fields in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Palestine, and Syria. Together, the resistance forces in these states comprise the Axis of Resistance.

This coalition connects Iran with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, Ansar Allah in Yemen, and the Palestinian resistance forces, expanded to now include new Syrian resistance groups such as the Al-Karrar Brigade in the Levant, which has declared jihad against Israeli occupation forces in southern Syria (MintPress News 2026). The organizing principle of the Axis of Resistance is known as “Unity of Fields”, perhaps more accurately described today as “Unity of Fronts” This framework connects resistance forces across “national” lines in a larger regional battlefield against the common enemy, U.S. imperialism-zionism. When the zionist entity bombs Gaza, Hezbollah strikes northern occupied Palestine and forces settlers to flee. When the U.S. attacks Iran, Iraqi militias hit U.S. bases in Syria and Jordan. And when the zionist entity tightens its genocidal blockade on Gaza, Yemen imposes a blockade against “Israel” in the Red Sea.

Hence, the Axis of Resistance has not only thwarted attempts by imperialist forces to fragment the region, it has transformed the tactics of regional resistance forces into a coordinated, multi-front war through a dialectical historical process precipitated by Al Aqsa Flood. The zionist genocidal response to Al Aqsa Flood quickly led to Hezbollah’s entry into the battle under AoR commander and martyr Seyed Hassan Nasrallah, followed by Ansar Allah’s crucial participation in the Red Sea (Ghasemi Tari 2025). The ongoing zionist-imperialist genocidal aggression against Palestine and the region, and its direct targeting of Iran in June 2025, culminated in an anti-imperialist war that continues to unfold, transforming the regional and global geopolitical map and creating new political possibilities, including decolonization. As the martyred Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised, any attack on Iran would lead to a broader anti-imperialist war in the region. Given the centrality of the region to the world economy, that anti-imperialist war has undoubtedly gone global.

Over the course of the Ramadan War, the Axis of Resistance has operationally perfected a strategy of asymmetric attrition, leveraging a staggering cost disparity to bleed its adversaries. In the first month of the war, Iran launched 5,471 missiles and drone attacks targeting U.S. bases and critical sites across seven countries. The backbone of this strategy is Iran’s Shahed-series drone, a product of reverse engineering and endogenous development that emerged in response to decades of Western sanctions. Each Shahed drone unit costs between US$ 20,000 and US$ 50,000 (Arranz et. al. 2026). The U.S. has been forced to intercept them using Patriot air-defense missiles that cost around US$ 4 million per interceptor, a cost ratio of up to 228:1 in detriment of the empire (White 2026). This economic imbalance has turned the conflict into a war of attrition where the outcome depends less on who has the most advanced technology and more on whose weapons deplete first.

The numbers bear this out. In the War’s first four weeks, the U.S. had already fired more than 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles, yet only a few hundred are manufactured annually, raising concerns inside the Pentagon about dwindling stockpiles. As a Pentagon official admitted, U.S. military stocks in the Middle East are “alarmingly low” and nearing “Winchester”—a military slang for running out of ammunition (Palestine Chronicle Staff 2026). The U.S. is also running low on standoff munitions launched from fighter jets and bombers outside of Iranian airspace. U.S. forces have only 425 remaining AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, commonly known as the JASSM-ER (Honrada 2026). These missiles allow for the bombing of Iranian sites without entering the country’s airspace and risking interception by air defenses. Once depleted, U.S. and Israeli aircraft will have to make riskier missions into Iran in order to strike targets.

This depletion is not confined to West Asia, as the loss of five THAAD radars has forced the U.S. to cannibalize its global air defense network. The U.S. has diverted stockpiles from other theaters— notably the Pacific and the Caribbean—to sustain its campaign against Iran, revealing a global military stretched thin (The Washington Post Editorial Board 2026). The material toll on imperialist- zionist forces has been staggering. In addition to the depletions outlined above, U.S. air assets have suffered historic losses. Three F-15 Strike Eagles were shot down by friendly fire in response to Iranian incursions above U.S. bases, and a fourth was downed by Iran; an F-35A was clipped for the first time in combat; an F-18 was nearly downed by a shoulder-fired missile; multiple KC-135 Stratotankers were destroyed; and twenty-four MQ-9 Reaper drones were shot down (with Iranian estimates as high as 100) (NDTV World Staff 2026). In total, the U.S. lost close to $2.6 billion from 42 aircraft losses alone (Nigerian Journal of Sustainability Research 2026).

The empire’s ill-fated Isfahan operation, a sequence of confusing U.S. military activity in Iran between April 2 and April 5, 2026, was justified as a pilot rescue operation but was more likely a larger operation to pilfer Iran’s highly enriched uranium. The operation led to further aircraft losses – including two MC-130J transport planes, an A-10C Warthog, and four MH-6M Little Bird helicopters (Sofuoglu 2026). Two HH-60W Black Hawk helicopters were also damaged in the failed operation (Ellis-Jones 2026). The Iranian air force inflicted its own damage as well. An Iranian F-5 fighter jet struck the U.S. Camp Buehring base in Kuwait during the war’s opening salvos (D’Urso 2026). Most critically, the IRGC destroyed an E-3 AWACS airborne early warning aircraft around March 30th— cutting the plane in half on the runway of the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia—and damaging a second aircraft. The U.S. has 16 of these E-3 AWACS aircrafts in total, of which only eight are operational at any given time.

The Iraqi resistance, operating under the Islamic Resistance in Iraq umbrella, has executed hundreds of strikes on U.S. targets in Iraq and the region since the start of the War. Hezbollah has carried out more than two thousand operations in South Lebanon and northern occupied Palestine (at its peak reaching 87 operations in a single day, breaking its own record) as of April 16, 2026 (News Desk 2026). Yemen entered the war with ballistic missiles and long-range drones targeting the zionist entity, while demonstrating before the Ramadan War that it can close the Bab al-Mandeb and effectively dissect the Suez Canal.

The most dramatic consequence of this unified resistance has been the material decolonization of West Asia, especially through the expulsion or weakening of U.S. military forces from a region it has dominated for decades. At the start of the Ramadan War, nearly 40,000 U.S. troops were stationed across two dozen bases surrounding Iran. After five weeks of sustained AoR strikes, at least 13 U.S. military bases were rendered “all but uninhabitable” (Gibbons-Neff 2026). U.S. troops have scattered across hotels and office spaces in the region, hiding in civilian buildings in further violation of international law. Even bourgeois media propaganda outlets like the New York Times had no choice but to report that “much of the [U.S.] land-based military is, in essence, fighting the war while working remotely” (Cooper and Schmitt 2026). The Pentagon has been forced to withdraw many forces to Europe, using Ramstein Air Base in Germany as the new nerve center for the war. Yet while U.S. forces retreat, Trump peddles fantasy. Despite his fallacious claims that Iran’s military has been “shattered,” classified U.S. intelligence assessments report that Iran retains approximately 70 percent of its pre-war missile stockpile and mobile launchers, has regained operational access to 30 of 33 missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, and has restored nearly 90 percent of its underground missile facilities to partially or fully operational status following the February 28–April 7 Ramadan War (Press TV 2026).

Sustaining this military capacity requires a political economy built for resistance—one that rejects comprador dependency. This is the topic to which we now turn.

II. A Resistance Economy: The Political Economy of Iranian Sovereignty

Iran’s political economy is best understood as a resistance economy — a nationalist-developmentalist formation that is state-driven, resource-anchored, and organized around the strategic priority of sovereignty under conditions of protracted imperialist assault. The resistance economy is a defensive doctrine born of necessity: facing continuous imperialist economic warfare since 1979, Iran has built domestic productive capacity in strategic sectors, including food, medicine, energy, and defense, in order to reduce vulnerability to sanctions and force the enemy into retreat. This dynamic is not unique to Iran. As Setareh Sadeqi Mohammadi and Christopher Weaver argue, sanctions often backfire by empowering targeted states to “transform external pressure into opportunities for growth and autonomy” (Sadeqi Mohammadi & Weaver, 2025). Iran, like Cuba, exemplifies this process, as sanctions have inadvertently “produced resistance economies by strengthening domestic potentials, inspiring national unity and resistance, and driving diplomatic realignment” (Sadeqi Mohammadi & Weaver, 2025).

This section grounds the concept of the resistance economy in material reality, analyzing Iran’s financial, oil and gas, agricultural, and defense sectors, and concluding with the Strait of Hormuz as the strategic node where economic sovereignty is enforced.

A. Delinking: The Financial Basis of the Resistance Economy

In February 2014, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei formally codified the “Resistance Economy” (eghtesad-e moqavemati) as a set of general policies for the country (Ali Khamenei 2014). The doctrine rests on three pillars: self-sufficiency in strategic goods such as food, medicine, energy, and defense equipment; economic independence to reduce vulnerability to sanctions by building domestic alternatives; and indigenous industrial capacity to produce what cannot be imported. This is a defensive doctrine: Iran has faced continuous imperialist economic warfare since 1979. The signing of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, briefly eased conditions, but the U.S. withdrawal in May 2018 and reimposition of “maximum pressure” sanctions—including blocking Iran from using the international SWIFT banking system— reinforced the IRGC’s insistence on self-reliance. As Supreme Leader Khamenei explained, the framework of the “resistance economy” aims to “increase the power of resistance and reduc[e] the vulnerability of the country’s economy” by developing strategic regional ties and utilizing economic diplomacy (Ibid.). If Iran followed this doctrine, he stated, “not only will it overcome all economic problems and force the enemy into retreat and defeat; but it will also manage to achieve an economy based on science, technology and justice” (Ibid.).

Both neoconservative and Western Marxist analysts have converged in their mischaracterization of Iran’s economy, routinely dismissing it as either neoliberal or a dysfunctional hybrid of rentier capitalism. This convergence in analysis is suspicious, and reflects a theoretically underdeveloped and empirically unsustainable approach that obscures the role of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in making the resistance economy. Yet it has gained traction among those who mistake the presence of market mechanisms, which exist in all contemporary economies, for the structural subordination of social reproduction to financialized global capital. This is the defining feature of contemporary neoliberalism, not the mere presence of market mechanisms. Even some Western Marxists, trained to see any deviation from an idealized model of revolutionary rupture as capitulation, have reproduced this misreading.

In contrast to the “hollow and highly erratic growth” that Ali Kadri identifies in neoliberalized, comprador economies, where structural adjustment, trade and capital account liberalization, and dependency on foreign finance have undermined sovereignty, the Islamic Republic of Iran, like China, has built a political economy that prioritizes national autonomy over integration into global markets. Iran directs resources through state institutions, anchors development in domestic capacities, and organizes production around the imperative of social reproduction under relentless imperialist assault. It is an economy that effectively “lock[s] in resources and re-circulate[s] the social surplus nationally” (Ibid. 21). That is, capital accumulation in the Islamic Republic occurs primarily through state-directed allocation and institutions, not globally integrated financial markets. This is what Kadri identifies as the core of any genuine developmentalist project, not a neoliberal one.

Similar to the impact of sanctions on the Russia economy, the sanctions regime imposed on Iran accelerated the state’s delinking. Samir Amin defines delinking as the process through which countries in the Global South subordinate “outside relations to the logic of internal development,” rather than organizing their economies around the needs of imperial capital. Amin insisted that delinking involves breaking from the mechanisms of imperialist domination that sustain the global hierarchy of capitalism, not retreating “to the moon” (Amin 2014, 40). Central to this process was overcoming what Amin called the imperial core’s “five monopolies” over finance, technology, natural resources, communications, and military power–thereby allowing peripheral states to pursue “autocentric” and sovereign development rather than “disarticulated” accumulation subordinated to foreign capital (Amin 1990, 62-67).Amin maintained that the struggle for a “polycentric world” was inseparable from anti-imperialist resistance, warning that Washington viewed “even the slightest desire to open up some margin of autonomy in the system” as “anathema” (Amin 2006, 48). For Amin, delinking was ultimately a class project rooted in popular struggles against comprador elites and monopoly capital, and aimed at retaining surplus value within the Global South while redirecting production toward domestic social needs as part of a broader transition toward socialism.

Iran possesses all the components of a sovereign, nationalist-developmentalist state: near food sovereignty achieved through adapted arid-climate farming systems; a diversified domestic industrial base anchored by state-directed oil revenues and parastatal enterprises like Khatam al-Anbiya; a protected internal market sustained by capital account restrictions and state-owned banking; and a fully indigenous military-industrial complex capable of producing over 90 percent of its defense equipment domestically. The Islamic Republic’s political economy is structured around the strategic priority of national sovereignty under imperialist assault—a project that cannot be understood, let alone dismissed, through the label of “neoliberalism.”

The Western left’s eagerness to label Iran “neoliberal” reflects a deeper theoretical problem: the conflation of any market activity or private sector presence with neoliberalism proper. What distinguishes actually existing neoliberalism is not the presence of markets but the subordination and integration of the state to western-dominated finance capital, the opening of the capital account to speculative flows, and the retreat of the state from productive investments in favor of austerity.

On each of these measures, Iran’s trajectory has been the opposite. Its capital account remains restricted given sanctions placed on it by the western states that dominate the global financial architecture. Its most productive sectors, including oil, gas, defense, minerals, and major infrastructure, remain under direct state or parastatal control. According to the International Monetary Fund, state-owned banks dominate Iran’s financial sector, holding approximately 80 percent of the country’s total wealth deposits as of 2011 (International Monetary Fund 2007). While private banks have been permitted to operate since 2001, the state still controls major commercial and specialized banks, with 100 percent state ownership of the Central Bank of Iran. State-owned commercial and specialized banks dominate the banking system, holding about 98 percent of deposits. In sum, neither the actions of Iranian leaders nor the structure of the Iranian economy reflect a comprador ruling class that capitulates to imperialist domination.

By contrast, the neighboring Gulf sheikhdoms exemplify the classic comprador model. The comprador class “chokes the developing state and its assets become the liquidated national wealth stock lodged abroad in dollar form” (Kadri 2021). Examining the role of Western vassals in the Persian Gulf, particularly the colonial-era sheikhdoms, reveals how British colonial heritage created a comprador class whose economic and political dependence on Western nations has persisted from the 1980–1988 war to the current U.S. imperialist war on Iran (Ghasemian 2021). The sheikhdoms’ dependence on Western powers has conditioned them to align with U.S. imperialism in the ongoing war, just as it caused them, with the direct and indirect support of Saddam Hussein, to actively expand conflict and insecurity in the Persian Gulf decades ago. The Islamic Republic of Iran, in stark contrast, is carrying out a world historical war against imperialism, using its sovereign economy as a critical weapon. A sovereign economy is a prerequisite for sovereign military and technology sectors. A subordinate monetary and economic system cannot block the drain of surplus value nor invest that surplus in indigenous military and technology productive capacity. Without control over one’s own currency, finance, and industrial base, the military ultimately remains dependent on foreign powers for self-defense. This is precisely why Iran’s push to de-dollarize, and its development of domestic manufacturing of everything from turbines to oil tankers, is central to its resistance economy and anti-imperialist strategy.

As Iranian parliamentarian Ebrahim Azizi stated in a phone conversation on May 7th with his South Korean counterpart Kim Soo Kyu, “Reliance on rented security from foreign powers is nothing more than a mirage. The future belongs to those who, by relying on their nation’s will, separate their path from the unilateralism of the domination system… Strategic independence is the only way to guarantee national interests in Asia” (Ebrahim Azizi 2026). Notably, South Korea does not have a sovereign military, as a 4-star U.S. General ultimately commands the South Korean military during wartime. Economic sovereignty and military sovereignty are not separate struggles but two sides of the same coin.

B. Sovereignty at the Sectoral Scale

Oil revenues play an important role in the political economy of Iran. On average, 60 percent of Iranian government revenues and 90 percent of export revenues originate from oil and gas resources (Farzanegan 2011). Iran’s constitution explicitly prohibits private ownership of natural resources. Its Principles 43 and 45 dictate that all natural resources, including oil and gas, are considered public wealth or Anfal, and controlled solely by the State on behalf of the nation (Ibid.). The National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), which was under the control of Western corporations until the 1979 Revolution, remains a fully State-owned enterprise with a public monopoly over oil production, sales, and exports.

Western unilateral sanctions have reinforced this condition by restricting Iran’s integration into global financial circuits, thereby reducing exposure to volatile cross-border capital flows and the disciplinary mechanisms of international finance. Citing Enfu and Xiaoqin (2017), Kadri notes that “regulated financial flows are the safety latch” of sovereign development” (Kadri 2020). Iran’s relative insulation has enabled the government to preserve a degree of policy autonomy and shield the economy from the destabilizing effects of financialization: debt-driven growth, asset bubbles, and dependence on the imperialist financial system. In this sense, Iran’s limited financialization is not a sign of backwardness but reflects a form of peripheral resistance to the subordination of the economy to finance capital—a contradiction borne by imperialist siege against Iran itself!

Beyond oil, Iran’s economy is structured around a relatively diversified set of sectors. Agriculture accounts for roughly 13 percent of GDP (Clark 2026) and employs around 15 percent of the labor force, reflecting its social significance beyond its output share (FAO 2026). Industry, including construction, gas, and manufacturing, comprises about 36 percent of GDP, a comparatively large share for a developing economy and one that reflects the centrality of

hydrocarbons alongside state- supported manufacturing (The Global Economy 2024). Between 70 and 85 percent of Iran’s oil and petrochemical equipment, including turbines, pumps, catalysts, refineries, drilling rigs, and offshore platforms, is produced domestically, with 95 percent localization achieved at South Pars refineries and in fixed petrochemical equipment (Abbaszadeh 2025; Heidari 2025; Saqafi 2025). Services make up approximately 50 percent of output but are less financialized and more domestically oriented than in many comparable economies (Statistical Center of Iran 2025).

Taken together, this structure reflects a mixed political economy in which productive sectors, particularly industry and resource extraction, retain a central role rather than being subordinated to finance. Employment also remains anchored in productive activity. The service sector, though dominant in GDP terms, does not exhibit the speculative characteristics of financialized service economies. Iran’s agricultural sector has similarly benefited from imperial-core delinking, with the state investing in farming systems uniquely adapted to its arid climate, achieving remarkable self- sufficiency as part of its resistance economy. The country now produces approximately 85 percent of its agricultural products and basic goods domestically (Vanguard Staff 2026).

Iran is the world’s dominant producer of saffron, contributing the highest share of global output. The global saffron market is projected to reach close to $ 800 million by 2032 (MMR Statistic Research Team 2026). Premium Grade I saffron, which meets high ISO quality standards, accounted for over 52 percent of total revenue in 2025. Iran is also a global powerhouse in pistachio production, serving as the biggest rival to California almonds on the world market. Between March and December 2025, Iran exported approximately 100,000 tons of pistachio products to 67 countries, generating revenues of around $ 730 million (Tehran Times 2026). Major importers included India, Russia, Kazakhstan, and China. In all of 2024, Iran exported over 175,000 tons valued at $ 1.7 billion. The specimen star of this industry is the Akbari variety, an exceptionally long pistachio with a distinctive pink-purple shell, widely grown in Kerman province even on harsh saline soils. Iranian farmers continue to favor traditional harvesting methods, handpicking nuts or gently striking branches with wooden sticks to protect the trees for the next season (Taher 2026).

Iran also produces more than one million tons of dates annually, roughly 15 percent of global supply, and ranks fourth globally with a sheep population of approximately 53.8 million head (Tehran Times 2025, TV Brics 2025). This livestock sector supports the multi-billion dollar Persian carpet industry through ancient nomadic herding traditions, which were the basis for Persian integration into medieval silk trade routes. The sheep are raised on drought-resistant plants and wild herbs across the Zagros mountains, producing lean, flavorful meat and the high-protein, high-fat milk used for traditional Leghvan cheese. The wool is harvested using hand-forged steel shears to produce ultra- fine kurk fiber, the essential material behind Persian carpets that can sell for tens of thousands of dollars in luxury markets (Business Insider 2022).Iran’s agrarian economy directly counters neoliberal logic, preserving rural livelihoods and national food security as components of a broader project of sovereign development.

C. Self-Defense as Sovereignty

This same logic of self-reliance and material delinking extends beyond agriculture to defense, where the Islamic Republic has built an indigenous military industry rooted in the revolutionary institutions forged during the Iran-Iraq War. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was born from the 1979 Iranian revolution. When the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was overthrown, Iran’s new leaders did not fully trust the existing military. The regular army, known as the Artesh, had served the monarchy and its officers had trained with Western allies. In a fragile moment, loyalty mattered more than tradition. Ayatollah Khomeini and his allies wanted a force committed not just to defending borders, but to defending the revolution itself. So the IRGC was formed on May 5, 1979, by direct decree of Khomeini. At first, it was a small ideological guard. Then came the Iran–Iraq War in the 1980s. The war consolidated the organization, expanded its ranks, and turned it into a central pillar of the new Islamic Republic (Chakrabarty 2026). Khomeini also recalled the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup that overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh after he nationalized Iran’s oil industry. A military whose officers had ties to the West was a perpetual counter-revolutionary threat. To protect and consolidate the revolution, the state was compelled to develop alternative military institutions, including the IRGC and the Basij. The latter was a volunteer force established by Khomeini in November 1979.

Iran’s defense capacity developed under difficult conditions. The Iran-Iraq War, which lasted from September 1980 to August 1988, was an existential conflict for the Islamic Revolution. The war produced three enduring institutional features: engineering and logistics expertise developed under fire, organizational autonomy from the regular military chain of command, and the doctrine of self- reliance (khodkafa’i). The latter is a strategic commitment to indigenous production that has shaped Iranian defense policy for decades (Farnia 2025). At this time, Iran received military assistance from Syria, Libya, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Iran’s stockpile never exceeded more than seven or eight missiles. Yet rather than deploying all the missiles received from other countries, Iran set aside a few for research and reverse engineering. This practice became the basis for Iran’s now-robust ballistic missile program (Hajizadeh 2025).

The Iran-Iraq War also transformed the IRGC into a conventional fighting force, even while it maintained its asymmetric strategic trajectory. By 1985, the IRGC had established its own navy and air force, independent of the regular military. Artesh also became fully subordinated under the revolutionary state. The formative experience of the war also forged a deep ideological commitment to national unity. The IRGC has consistently emphasized that synergy between the Iranian government, nation, and Armed Forces is the key to building a strong and advanced country, a principle cemented during the sacred national defense against the Iraqi invasion (Sayyari 2025).

Imperialist sanctions pushed Iran toward industrial self-sufficiency, pursued within an asymmetric warfare doctrine, achieving remarkable military self-sufficiency both under, and given, the severe consequences of imperialist sanctions. Iran has maintained a steadfast commitment to self-reliance even when opportunities arise to acquire weapons. Over 90 percent of the equipment and systems used by the Armed Forces have been completely designed and manufactured by industrial enterprises under the Defense Ministry and the Armed Force’s collaborating networks. Naval systems have achieved over 90 percent domestic manufacturing of submarine parts as of December 2025. This very success, the transformation of Iranian scientists and engineers into the architects of an autonomous, indigenous military-industrial base, has made them primary targets of imperialist- zionist assassination campaigns, which have killed over a dozen senior nuclear and defense scientists since 2010 (Iran Press 2026; Xinhua 2024).

Asymmetric capabilities constitute a hallmark of Iranian defense doctrine. Iran’s leadership recognized the futility of pursuing conventional weapons, including fighter jets and tanks, soon after the Revolution, deciding decades ago that it would not attempt to match its adversaries tank-for-tank or plane-for-plane, but would instead build an asymmetric deterrent from scratch (The Cradle 2025, PressTV 2026). Had Iran pursued a conventional defensive development path, it would have remained generations behind its imperialist adversaries. Instead, Iran focused on ballistic missile technology and other non-conventional programs. This would come to include unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Iran’s vaunted UAV program is now emulated by allies and adversaries alike.

The IRGC has broadly prioritized the preservation and enhancement of its defensive and security capabilities, playing an active role in Iran’s resistance economy. As a result of this commitment, Iran’s military industry has achieved levels of indigenous production that few, if any, peer nations can match. These achievements were forged through praxis, learned from the Iran-Iraq War years, which “remain embedded in doctrine: survival depends not on a single battle but on a combination of resilience, redundancy, and the capacity to absorb pressure while preserving command structures” (Tehran Times 2026).

The Islamic Republic of Iran has built a political economy that defies neoliberal and comprador bourgeois logic: state-anchored banking, domestic industrial development, agricultural sovereignty, and endogenous scientific and defense development. Its political economy illustrates a concrete process of asserting sovereignty over strategic sectors that include finance, energy, defense production, and technological development under conditions of sanctions, siege warfare, and financial isolation. Practically speaking, Iran’s political economy cannot be undermined by neoliberal financial warfare given its exclusion from the western-dominated global financial system and architecture; and it cannot be claimed that Iran is ruled or managed by comprador elites who, based on their collaborationist function within the imperialist system, do not and cannot build resistance economies based on self-reliance and sufficiency.

D. Sovereignty Over the Strait of Hormuz

Iranian self-reliance finds a powerful lever at the Strait of Hormuz, where the Islamic Republic has transformed a geographic chokepoint into a material instrument of sovereignty and surplus value accumulation in the form of reparations. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow shipping lane through which more than one-third of the world’s crude oil, one-third of the global fertilizer trade, one-fifth of liquefied natural gas, and nearly half of the world’s sulfur passes through. The Strait is between 33 to 48 kilometers wide, and the deeper channels favorable for shipping lay closer to Iran’s shorelands. On the other side of the Strait is the Musandam Peninsula, an Omani governorate. Oman maintains a permanent military presence on Musandam, while Iran controls the Strait to the north.

Iran has asserted sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, imposing a toll on all passing ships while banning vessels from aggressor states including the United States, the zionist entity, the United Kingdom, France, and Gulf Arab states—including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain—entirely. Iran’s parliament has drafted legislation making this situation permanent, in effect reversing the currency collapse the U.S. attempted to impose on it earlier this year. “The Law on Establishing Iran’s Sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz” authorizes Iran to collect tolls for passage through the Strait, among other clauses (PressTV 2026).

Iran’s newly established sovereign authority over the Strait of Hormuz has had irreversible impacts on the global economy across multiple sectors. From oil and gas to agriculture and the “FIRE” sector (finance / insurance / real estate), the effects continue to be realized. Some states (United News of India 2026) have expressed their willingness to abide by Iran’s regulations controlling Hormuz, but the U.S.’s imperialist blockade has effectively prevented the full implementation of the tolling system and blocked access to key supplies powering the global economy.

According to the International Energy Agency, the world is facing the largest energy crisis in history (Angelo 2026). In March, the International Energy Agency released 400 million barrels of emergency oil stocks (IEA 2026) and the U.S. Department of Energy released 172 million barrels (Energy.gov 2026). Inflation has already impacted working class communities although the downstream effects have been slow to hit the macroeconomy of the United States. But analysts believe the worst is yet to come (Power 2026).

Global food systems stand to be severely impacted by shortages in fertilizer, threatening global food inflation and a food crisis (Bazillian 2026). Some insurers have already begun to require ships to follow Iranian-approved routes through Hormuz in order to receive war-risk coverage, which has skyrocketed from one to five percent of hull value (Eaglesham 2026). But the U.S. blockade of Hormuz effectively prevents the removal of mines, deterring some insurers and halting traffic. Even if hostile conditions come to a decisive end–unlikely in the near future–pre-war traffic patterns could take months or years to resume, with a long-term impact on supply chains.

The Gulf dictatorships, longtime U.S. vassals hated by their own populations, now realize that the U.S. military bases used to stage and support the war of aggression against Iran made them targets rather than protectees. These vassal regimes, whose survival depended for decades on Washington’s military umbrella, now find themselves increasingly exposed and vulnerable. The Axis of Resistance has effectively scuttled any remaining prospects for Saudi-Israeli normalization and forced the Gulf monarchies into a defensive crouch, with news reports of some quietly reconsidering their longstanding strategic dependence on the United States (Reuters 2026). As the IRGC has declared, after this war the Persian Gulf will no longer serve as a platform for U.S. imperialist aggression.

The Axis of Resistance is not merely defending Iran and its crucial regional role in upholding Palestinian resistance; it is actively restructuring the regional and global balance of forces. By controlling the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of globally traded oil passed before the War—the vast majority of which was sold in dollars (along with 80 percent of all transactions in the global oil market)—Iran is now requiring ships to pay passage fees in Chinese yuan or other non- dollar currencies (Power 2026). In doing so, Tehran has forced the U.S.-led imperialist system to reckon with the material reality of supply chains, contributed to the unfolding global process of de- dollarization, is exporting oil at higher prices (World is One News Staff 2026) and has undermined the entire sanctions regime.

Through diplomatic coordination with Russia and China, Iran has integrated West Asian anti- imperialism into broader efforts of Global Majority delinking, hastening the transition from U.S. unipolarity to a de-imperialized multipolar world order. Perhaps most importantly, the Axis of Resistance has demonstrated that a network of popular militias and a revolutionary state, powered by indigenous knowledge and productive capacity, can outlast the world’s most powerful military, inflicting the kind of multi-billion-dollar losses not seen since World War II.

In effect, the Axis has provided a template for sovereignty that reaches far beyond West Asia, on the military, economic and ideological fronts alike. The Unity of Fields has proven that when the oppressed fight as one, they can do serious damage to even the most seemingly invincible empires— not in a single cataclysmic battle, but in a thousand coordinated blows across a single, indivisible front. The Strait of Hormuz is one such blow. It is a turning point in the War, and a proof of General Võ Nguyên Giáp’s concept of people’s war, “a war fought for the people by the people” and where the goal is “to wear out the enemy forces, gradually reverse the balance of forces, turning our weakness into strength” (Giáp, 1962/1968).

(To be continued…)

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective is a group of scholars committed to challenging US-led imperialism and supporting liberation movements of the Global Majority through critical knowledge production and international solidarity.  https://www.anti-imperialists.com/

source: Black Agenda Report

AISC Red Paper #2: The Multiple Fronts of Iranian Anti-Imperialism

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective (AISC) offers an analysis of the Ramadan War and the multiple fronts of Iranian anti- imperialism. It uses anti-imperialist methodology, grounded in dialectical and historical materialism. This is part one (1) of two (2) parts.

——-

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective’s Red Paper Series takes on the pressing issues of our time with urgency and principled clarity. We are at the frontlines of the battle of ideas and we use anti- imperialist methodology to clarify the stakes, intensify the contradictions, challenge the propaganda, and defend the Resistance.

We, the Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective (AISC), condemn in the strongest terms possible the U.S. imperialist attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran. The U.S. launched the Ramadan War on February 28, 2026, assassinating Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and killing hundreds of Iranians on that day, including over 160 children and staff at the elementary school Shajareh Tayebeh in Minab, Iran. After 39 days of direct combat, Iran dealt a strategic defeat to the imperialist-zionist forces, leading to a fragile ‘ceasefire’ that has involved, to date, a U.S. blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and ongoing air raids of Lebanon and Palestine. We stand firmly with the Iranian people, their revolutionary state, and the forces of the Axis of Resistance as they defend their sovereign right to self- determination in the ongoing battle for national and regional liberation from zionist imperialism. As an organization committed to challenging U.S.-led imperialism and supporting the sovereignty and national liberation of the Global Majority, AISC calls on all anti-imperialist forces across the world to continue to unite in defense of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the people of West Asia.

The Multiple Fronts of Iranian Anti-Imperialism

At the regional scale, the Ramadan war comes on the heels of Operation Al Aqsa Flood, which commenced on October 7, 2023, in response to over 100 years of imperialist-backed settler colonial genocide, ethnic cleansing, and land dispossession of the Palestinian people; the ongoing regional resistance against the genocidal zionist entity since that date; the Mossad-orchestrated urban war against Iran in January 2026; and the U.S.-zionist 12-Day War that Iran defeated in June 2025. The Axis of Resistance’s historic struggle against U.S. imperialism spans decades and stands on the shoulders of previous wars of national liberation against Western imperialism in Viet Nam, Korea, South Africa, Algeria, Cuba, and Haiti, among others.

In Red Paper #2, we offer an analysis of the Ramadan War and the multiple fronts of Iranian anti- imperialism through AISC’s anti-imperialist methodology, grounded in dialectical and historical materialism. Our analysis proceeds in five parts. First, “Iranian Anti-Imperialism: The Military Front,” examines how Iran and the Axis of Resistance have delivered a blow to the U.S.-Zionist war machine through asymmetric attrition, coordinated multi-front warfare, and the strategic attacks on U.S. military assets across West Asia. Second, “A Resistance Economy: The Political Economy of Iranian Sovereignty,” analyzes how Iran built a nationalist-developmentalist economy under siege, defying neoliberal and comprador models through delinking, state-directed development, and the strategic assertion of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz. Third, “A People’s War: The Social Basis of Iranian National Resistance,” explores how the Iranian masses, rooted in a century of anti-imperialist struggle and Shi’i liberation theology, have defended their sovereignty, transforming the war into a popular uprising against U.S. imperialism. Fourth, “Multipolarity as Anti-Imperialist Delinking,” examines how Iran’s strategic alignment with China, Russia, and the broader Global South has contributed to breaking down the petrodollar’s stranglehold and accelerating the path towards an anti-imperialist multipolar world order. Fifth, “The Diplomatic Front: Anti-Imperialist Foreign Policy,” analyzes how Iran has waged diplomatic struggle alongside military resistance, navigating decades of U.S. treachery from the “nuclear deal” to the present, demonstrating that diplomacy is inextricably connected to armed struggle and is an indispensable front in the war against imperialism.[1]

I. Iranian Anti-Imperialism: The Military Front

The multi-front logic of Iranian anti-imperialism finds its most concrete expression on the battlefield. The military dimension of Iran’s anti-imperialist strategy, our first analytical front, demonstrates how coordinated resistance can turn asymmetric force into strategic defeat. When U.S.-zionist forces began their assault on February 28, 2026, launching the 40 days of the Ramadan War, Iran and the Axis of Resistance immediately mobilized and systematically retaliated with defensive attacks on U.S.-zionist military installations and economic interests across West Asia. Despite inflicting another unprovoked attack on Iran amid ongoing negotiations in late February, the U.S. and its allies were dealt a strategic defeat that was demonstrated by their desperate need for a “ceasefire,” commenced on April 7. Iran has since been able to rebuild schools, bridges, and other infrastructure damaged during the War. However, the ceasefire has not translated into an end of U.S. and zionist attacks. As of this writing, the U.S. has imposed a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, essentially strangling the global economy, in an act of war that violates the ceasefire. In parallel, the U.S. and the zionist entity continue their genocidal violence against the Palestinian people, spreading to Lebanon, committing further violations of two ceasefire agreements.

A. The Ramadan War

The Ramadan War was launched with U.S.-zionist air raids across Iran. As part of their opening salvo, the aggressors struck the Shajareh Tayebeh Elementary School, killing over 160 children and adult staff. The U.S. also targeted a sports hall in Lamerd, martyring at least 21 people, including members of a teenage volleyball team (Jaafari 2026). U.S. forces likely used a new weapon, the Precision Strike Missile, in the latter attack (Thomas 2026). On the same morning, the U.S. and zionist entity struck the home and office of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with a massive attack, assassinating him along with his daughter, granddaughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, and several colleagues and staff. Other key leaders in Iran, including Ali Shamkhani, Ali Larijani, Abdolrahim Mousavi, and Alireza Tangsiri have since been brazenly assassinated as well.

The civilian toll of the war on Iran has been significant. The death toll stands at 3,375 civilians in Iran only (WANA 2026). The imperialist-zionist forces struck approximately 1,300 schools, 24 bridges and intersections, and 240 medical facilities, damaging at least 50 hospitals and 50 emergency centers (PressTV April 27, 2026). They also bombed over 100 museums and cultural heritage sites across Iran, including UNESCO-listed monuments and museums, and the 12,000-seat stadium located at Tehran’s Azadi Sports Complex. Despite this targeting, the Iranian State was prepared, providing free medical treatment to the injured, treating 40,000 people since the war began. Moreover, 775 of the damaged schools have already been repaired.

These brutal and often indiscriminate attacks are consistent with official U.S. statements that they will show “no quarter” and have “no mercy.” The U.S. empire has made clear its intentions to commit war crimes against the Islamic Republic of Iran (PressTV April 7, 2026), including carrying out President Donald Trump’s threat to “destroy [Iranian] civilization.”

Iran immediately defended itself under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which recognizes the right of individual or collective self-defense in response to an armed attack against a U.N. member.[1] Operation True Promise IV, which began within an hour of the initial U.S.-zionist attacks, involved strikes against U.S. bases in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula. These bases are hosted by family dictatorships in Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan against the will of their citizens. The bases were rendered inoperable by Iranian missile and drone strikes working with other members of the Axis of Resistance, which ultimately forced U.S. troops and intelligence personnel to evacuate military bases and embassies in the region (Nereim 2026).

At the beginning of Operation True Promise IV, Iran targeted U.S. radar installations and interceptor batteries in order to blind the imperialist-zionist forces. After Iran destroyed five U.S.

THAAD radars— four in Saudi Arabia and a $300 million AN/TPY-2 in Jordan—the United States was forced to reroute replacement radar assets and interceptors from its vassal state South Korea’s THAAD systems to the Middle East, as the Ramadan War had heavily depleted and damaged existing regional air defenses. This redeployment reveals the direct link between U.S. wars in West Asia and its strategic posture toward East Asia. Having achieved this qualitative success against enemy air defenses, the Islamic Republic turned to U.S. aircraft that perpetrated the war on Iran, including refueling planes and early warning aircraft. Iran and the Axis of Resistance (AoR) have achieved documented successes in damaging or outright destroying numerous enemy forces aircrafts. Iran consistently targeted intelligence facilities linked to weapons manufacturers and industrial sites in the zionist entity as well.

While severe censorship limits the U.S. public’s knowledge of these operations and their success, the material costs (discussed more below) tell only part of the story. Equally significant is the increasing flight of zionist settlers from the region—returning to their original homes in the West—a sign that the material and psychological costs of the war have contributed to breaking the zionist will. The United States and its proxies in West Asia have tried hard to manufacture regional support for their imperialist effort to no avail.

In what appears to be a resurgence of Arab nationalism inspired by Al Aqsa Flood and intensified by the Ramadan War, Arabs across the region – including in Gulf states – have demonstrated ardent support of Iran’s efforts despite collaboration by their comprador ruling classes with imperialist- zionist forces. Such a resurgence is deeply organic and expresses the religious, ethnic, and ideological breadth of the region in a manner that unifies rather than fragments it along sectarian lines. Thus, the Ramadan War has deepened ties among Iranians, Arabs, and the other peoples of the region, challenging the divide and rule sectarian logic that has long been the tool of imperialists and colonizers. While the comprador family dictatorships in the Persian Gulf and Jordan have responded with severe repression, the peoples of the region remain steadfast in their commitment to anti- imperialist resistance.

B. The Axis of Resistance and the Unity of Fields

The Islamic Republic of Iran is not facing the imperialist-zionists alone. The Ramadan War was waged through the Unity of the Fields in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Palestine, and Syria. Together, the resistance forces in these states comprise the Axis of Resistance.

This coalition connects Iran with Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces, Ansar Allah in Yemen, and the Palestinian resistance forces, expanded to now include new Syrian resistance groups such as the Al-Karrar Brigade in the Levant, which has declared jihad against Israeli occupation forces in southern Syria (MintPress News 2026). The organizing principle of the Axis of Resistance is known as “Unity of Fields”, perhaps more accurately described today as “Unity of Fronts” This framework connects resistance forces across “national” lines in a larger regional battlefield against the common enemy, U.S. imperialism-zionism. When the zionist entity bombs Gaza, Hezbollah strikes northern occupied Palestine and forces settlers to flee. When the U.S. attacks Iran, Iraqi militias hit U.S. bases in Syria and Jordan. And when the zionist entity tightens its genocidal blockade on Gaza, Yemen imposes a blockade against “Israel” in the Red Sea.

Hence, the Axis of Resistance has not only thwarted attempts by imperialist forces to fragment the region, it has transformed the tactics of regional resistance forces into a coordinated, multi-front war through a dialectical historical process precipitated by Al Aqsa Flood. The zionist genocidal response to Al Aqsa Flood quickly led to Hezbollah’s entry into the battle under AoR commander and martyr Seyed Hassan Nasrallah, followed by Ansar Allah’s crucial participation in the Red Sea (Ghasemi Tari 2025). The ongoing zionist-imperialist genocidal aggression against Palestine and the region, and its direct targeting of Iran in June 2025, culminated in an anti-imperialist war that continues to unfold, transforming the regional and global geopolitical map and creating new political possibilities, including decolonization. As the martyred Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei promised, any attack on Iran would lead to a broader anti-imperialist war in the region. Given the centrality of the region to the world economy, that anti-imperialist war has undoubtedly gone global.

Over the course of the Ramadan War, the Axis of Resistance has operationally perfected a strategy of asymmetric attrition, leveraging a staggering cost disparity to bleed its adversaries. In the first month of the war, Iran launched 5,471 missiles and drone attacks targeting U.S. bases and critical sites across seven countries. The backbone of this strategy is Iran’s Shahed-series drone, a product of reverse engineering and endogenous development that emerged in response to decades of Western sanctions. Each Shahed drone unit costs between US$ 20,000 and US$ 50,000 (Arranz et. al. 2026). The U.S. has been forced to intercept them using Patriot air-defense missiles that cost around US$ 4 million per interceptor, a cost ratio of up to 228:1 in detriment of the empire (White 2026). This economic imbalance has turned the conflict into a war of attrition where the outcome depends less on who has the most advanced technology and more on whose weapons deplete first.

The numbers bear this out. In the War’s first four weeks, the U.S. had already fired more than 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles, yet only a few hundred are manufactured annually, raising concerns inside the Pentagon about dwindling stockpiles. As a Pentagon official admitted, U.S. military stocks in the Middle East are “alarmingly low” and nearing “Winchester”—a military slang for running out of ammunition (Palestine Chronicle Staff 2026). The U.S. is also running low on standoff munitions launched from fighter jets and bombers outside of Iranian airspace. U.S. forces have only 425 remaining AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, commonly known as the JASSM-ER (Honrada 2026). These missiles allow for the bombing of Iranian sites without entering the country’s airspace and risking interception by air defenses. Once depleted, U.S. and Israeli aircraft will have to make riskier missions into Iran in order to strike targets.

This depletion is not confined to West Asia, as the loss of five THAAD radars has forced the U.S. to cannibalize its global air defense network. The U.S. has diverted stockpiles from other theaters— notably the Pacific and the Caribbean—to sustain its campaign against Iran, revealing a global military stretched thin (The Washington Post Editorial Board 2026). The material toll on imperialist- zionist forces has been staggering. In addition to the depletions outlined above, U.S. air assets have suffered historic losses. Three F-15 Strike Eagles were shot down by friendly fire in response to Iranian incursions above U.S. bases, and a fourth was downed by Iran; an F-35A was clipped for the first time in combat; an F-18 was nearly downed by a shoulder-fired missile; multiple KC-135 Stratotankers were destroyed; and twenty-four MQ-9 Reaper drones were shot down (with Iranian estimates as high as 100) (NDTV World Staff 2026). In total, the U.S. lost close to $2.6 billion from 42 aircraft losses alone (Nigerian Journal of Sustainability Research 2026).

The empire’s ill-fated Isfahan operation, a sequence of confusing U.S. military activity in Iran between April 2 and April 5, 2026, was justified as a pilot rescue operation but was more likely a larger operation to pilfer Iran’s highly enriched uranium. The operation led to further aircraft losses – including two MC-130J transport planes, an A-10C Warthog, and four MH-6M Little Bird helicopters (Sofuoglu 2026). Two HH-60W Black Hawk helicopters were also damaged in the failed operation (Ellis-Jones 2026). The Iranian air force inflicted its own damage as well. An Iranian F-5 fighter jet struck the U.S. Camp Buehring base in Kuwait during the war’s opening salvos (D’Urso 2026). Most critically, the IRGC destroyed an E-3 AWACS airborne early warning aircraft around March 30th— cutting the plane in half on the runway of the Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia—and damaging a second aircraft. The U.S. has 16 of these E-3 AWACS aircrafts in total, of which only eight are operational at any given time.

The Iraqi resistance, operating under the Islamic Resistance in Iraq umbrella, has executed hundreds of strikes on U.S. targets in Iraq and the region since the start of the War. Hezbollah has carried out more than two thousand operations in South Lebanon and northern occupied Palestine (at its peak reaching 87 operations in a single day, breaking its own record) as of April 16, 2026 (News Desk 2026). Yemen entered the war with ballistic missiles and long-range drones targeting the zionist entity, while demonstrating before the Ramadan War that it can close the Bab al-Mandeb and effectively dissect the Suez Canal.

The most dramatic consequence of this unified resistance has been the material decolonization of West Asia, especially through the expulsion or weakening of U.S. military forces from a region it has dominated for decades. At the start of the Ramadan War, nearly 40,000 U.S. troops were stationed across two dozen bases surrounding Iran. After five weeks of sustained AoR strikes, at least 13 U.S. military bases were rendered “all but uninhabitable” (Gibbons-Neff 2026). U.S. troops have scattered across hotels and office spaces in the region, hiding in civilian buildings in further violation of international law. Even bourgeois media propaganda outlets like the New York Times had no choice but to report that “much of the [U.S.] land-based military is, in essence, fighting the war while working remotely” (Cooper and Schmitt 2026). The Pentagon has been forced to withdraw many forces to Europe, using Ramstein Air Base in Germany as the new nerve center for the war. Yet while U.S. forces retreat, Trump peddles fantasy. Despite his fallacious claims that Iran’s military has been “shattered,” classified U.S. intelligence assessments report that Iran retains approximately 70 percent of its pre-war missile stockpile and mobile launchers, has regained operational access to 30 of 33 missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, and has restored nearly 90 percent of its underground missile facilities to partially or fully operational status following the February 28–April 7 Ramadan War (Press TV 2026).

Sustaining this military capacity requires a political economy built for resistance—one that rejects comprador dependency. This is the topic to which we now turn.

II. A Resistance Economy: The Political Economy of Iranian Sovereignty

Iran’s political economy is best understood as a resistance economy — a nationalist-developmentalist formation that is state-driven, resource-anchored, and organized around the strategic priority of sovereignty under conditions of protracted imperialist assault. The resistance economy is a defensive doctrine born of necessity: facing continuous imperialist economic warfare since 1979, Iran has built domestic productive capacity in strategic sectors, including food, medicine, energy, and defense, in order to reduce vulnerability to sanctions and force the enemy into retreat. This dynamic is not unique to Iran. As Setareh Sadeqi Mohammadi and Christopher Weaver argue, sanctions often backfire by empowering targeted states to “transform external pressure into opportunities for growth and autonomy” (Sadeqi Mohammadi & Weaver, 2025). Iran, like Cuba, exemplifies this process, as sanctions have inadvertently “produced resistance economies by strengthening domestic potentials, inspiring national unity and resistance, and driving diplomatic realignment” (Sadeqi Mohammadi & Weaver, 2025).

This section grounds the concept of the resistance economy in material reality, analyzing Iran’s financial, oil and gas, agricultural, and defense sectors, and concluding with the Strait of Hormuz as the strategic node where economic sovereignty is enforced.

A. Delinking: The Financial Basis of the Resistance Economy

In February 2014, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei formally codified the “Resistance Economy” (eghtesad-e moqavemati) as a set of general policies for the country (Ali Khamenei 2014). The doctrine rests on three pillars: self-sufficiency in strategic goods such as food, medicine, energy, and defense equipment; economic independence to reduce vulnerability to sanctions by building domestic alternatives; and indigenous industrial capacity to produce what cannot be imported. This is a defensive doctrine: Iran has faced continuous imperialist economic warfare since 1979. The signing of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, briefly eased conditions, but the U.S. withdrawal in May 2018 and reimposition of “maximum pressure” sanctions—including blocking Iran from using the international SWIFT banking system— reinforced the IRGC’s insistence on self-reliance. As Supreme Leader Khamenei explained, the framework of the “resistance economy” aims to “increase the power of resistance and reduc[e] the vulnerability of the country’s economy” by developing strategic regional ties and utilizing economic diplomacy (Ibid.). If Iran followed this doctrine, he stated, “not only will it overcome all economic problems and force the enemy into retreat and defeat; but it will also manage to achieve an economy based on science, technology and justice” (Ibid.).

Both neoconservative and Western Marxist analysts have converged in their mischaracterization of Iran’s economy, routinely dismissing it as either neoliberal or a dysfunctional hybrid of rentier capitalism. This convergence in analysis is suspicious, and reflects a theoretically underdeveloped and empirically unsustainable approach that obscures the role of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in making the resistance economy. Yet it has gained traction among those who mistake the presence of market mechanisms, which exist in all contemporary economies, for the structural subordination of social reproduction to financialized global capital. This is the defining feature of contemporary neoliberalism, not the mere presence of market mechanisms. Even some Western Marxists, trained to see any deviation from an idealized model of revolutionary rupture as capitulation, have reproduced this misreading.

In contrast to the “hollow and highly erratic growth” that Ali Kadri identifies in neoliberalized, comprador economies, where structural adjustment, trade and capital account liberalization, and dependency on foreign finance have undermined sovereignty, the Islamic Republic of Iran, like China, has built a political economy that prioritizes national autonomy over integration into global markets. Iran directs resources through state institutions, anchors development in domestic capacities, and organizes production around the imperative of social reproduction under relentless imperialist assault. It is an economy that effectively “lock[s] in resources and re-circulate[s] the social surplus nationally” (Ibid. 21). That is, capital accumulation in the Islamic Republic occurs primarily through state-directed allocation and institutions, not globally integrated financial markets. This is what Kadri identifies as the core of any genuine developmentalist project, not a neoliberal one.

Similar to the impact of sanctions on the Russia economy, the sanctions regime imposed on Iran accelerated the state’s delinking. Samir Amin defines delinking as the process through which countries in the Global South subordinate “outside relations to the logic of internal development,” rather than organizing their economies around the needs of imperial capital. Amin insisted that delinking involves breaking from the mechanisms of imperialist domination that sustain the global hierarchy of capitalism, not retreating “to the moon” (Amin 2014, 40). Central to this process was overcoming what Amin called the imperial core’s “five monopolies” over finance, technology, natural resources, communications, and military power–thereby allowing peripheral states to pursue “autocentric” and sovereign development rather than “disarticulated” accumulation subordinated to foreign capital (Amin 1990, 62-67).Amin maintained that the struggle for a “polycentric world” was inseparable from anti-imperialist resistance, warning that Washington viewed “even the slightest desire to open up some margin of autonomy in the system” as “anathema” (Amin 2006, 48). For Amin, delinking was ultimately a class project rooted in popular struggles against comprador elites and monopoly capital, and aimed at retaining surplus value within the Global South while redirecting production toward domestic social needs as part of a broader transition toward socialism.

Iran possesses all the components of a sovereign, nationalist-developmentalist state: near food sovereignty achieved through adapted arid-climate farming systems; a diversified domestic industrial base anchored by state-directed oil revenues and parastatal enterprises like Khatam al-Anbiya; a protected internal market sustained by capital account restrictions and state-owned banking; and a fully indigenous military-industrial complex capable of producing over 90 percent of its defense equipment domestically. The Islamic Republic’s political economy is structured around the strategic priority of national sovereignty under imperialist assault—a project that cannot be understood, let alone dismissed, through the label of “neoliberalism.”

The Western left’s eagerness to label Iran “neoliberal” reflects a deeper theoretical problem: the conflation of any market activity or private sector presence with neoliberalism proper. What distinguishes actually existing neoliberalism is not the presence of markets but the subordination and integration of the state to western-dominated finance capital, the opening of the capital account to speculative flows, and the retreat of the state from productive investments in favor of austerity.

On each of these measures, Iran’s trajectory has been the opposite. Its capital account remains restricted given sanctions placed on it by the western states that dominate the global financial architecture. Its most productive sectors, including oil, gas, defense, minerals, and major infrastructure, remain under direct state or parastatal control. According to the International Monetary Fund, state-owned banks dominate Iran’s financial sector, holding approximately 80 percent of the country’s total wealth deposits as of 2011 (International Monetary Fund 2007). While private banks have been permitted to operate since 2001, the state still controls major commercial and specialized banks, with 100 percent state ownership of the Central Bank of Iran. State-owned commercial and specialized banks dominate the banking system, holding about 98 percent of deposits. In sum, neither the actions of Iranian leaders nor the structure of the Iranian economy reflect a comprador ruling class that capitulates to imperialist domination.

By contrast, the neighboring Gulf sheikhdoms exemplify the classic comprador model. The comprador class “chokes the developing state and its assets become the liquidated national wealth stock lodged abroad in dollar form” (Kadri 2021). Examining the role of Western vassals in the Persian Gulf, particularly the colonial-era sheikhdoms, reveals how British colonial heritage created a comprador class whose economic and political dependence on Western nations has persisted from the 1980–1988 war to the current U.S. imperialist war on Iran (Ghasemian 2021). The sheikhdoms’ dependence on Western powers has conditioned them to align with U.S. imperialism in the ongoing war, just as it caused them, with the direct and indirect support of Saddam Hussein, to actively expand conflict and insecurity in the Persian Gulf decades ago. The Islamic Republic of Iran, in stark contrast, is carrying out a world historical war against imperialism, using its sovereign economy as a critical weapon. A sovereign economy is a prerequisite for sovereign military and technology sectors. A subordinate monetary and economic system cannot block the drain of surplus value nor invest that surplus in indigenous military and technology productive capacity. Without control over one’s own currency, finance, and industrial base, the military ultimately remains dependent on foreign powers for self-defense. This is precisely why Iran’s push to de-dollarize, and its development of domestic manufacturing of everything from turbines to oil tankers, is central to its resistance economy and anti-imperialist strategy.

As Iranian parliamentarian Ebrahim Azizi stated in a phone conversation on May 7th with his South Korean counterpart Kim Soo Kyu, “Reliance on rented security from foreign powers is nothing more than a mirage. The future belongs to those who, by relying on their nation’s will, separate their path from the unilateralism of the domination system… Strategic independence is the only way to guarantee national interests in Asia” (Ebrahim Azizi 2026). Notably, South Korea does not have a sovereign military, as a 4-star U.S. General ultimately commands the South Korean military during wartime. Economic sovereignty and military sovereignty are not separate struggles but two sides of the same coin.

B. Sovereignty at the Sectoral Scale

Oil revenues play an important role in the political economy of Iran. On average, 60 percent of Iranian government revenues and 90 percent of export revenues originate from oil and gas resources (Farzanegan 2011). Iran’s constitution explicitly prohibits private ownership of natural resources. Its Principles 43 and 45 dictate that all natural resources, including oil and gas, are considered public wealth or Anfal, and controlled solely by the State on behalf of the nation (Ibid.). The National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), which was under the control of Western corporations until the 1979 Revolution, remains a fully State-owned enterprise with a public monopoly over oil production, sales, and exports.

Western unilateral sanctions have reinforced this condition by restricting Iran’s integration into global financial circuits, thereby reducing exposure to volatile cross-border capital flows and the disciplinary mechanisms of international finance. Citing Enfu and Xiaoqin (2017), Kadri notes that “regulated financial flows are the safety latch” of sovereign development” (Kadri 2020). Iran’s relative insulation has enabled the government to preserve a degree of policy autonomy and shield the economy from the destabilizing effects of financialization: debt-driven growth, asset bubbles, and dependence on the imperialist financial system. In this sense, Iran’s limited financialization is not a sign of backwardness but reflects a form of peripheral resistance to the subordination of the economy to finance capital—a contradiction borne by imperialist siege against Iran itself!

Beyond oil, Iran’s economy is structured around a relatively diversified set of sectors. Agriculture accounts for roughly 13 percent of GDP (Clark 2026) and employs around 15 percent of the labor force, reflecting its social significance beyond its output share (FAO 2026). Industry, including construction, gas, and manufacturing, comprises about 36 percent of GDP, a comparatively large share for a developing economy and one that reflects the centrality of

hydrocarbons alongside state- supported manufacturing (The Global Economy 2024). Between 70 and 85 percent of Iran’s oil and petrochemical equipment, including turbines, pumps, catalysts, refineries, drilling rigs, and offshore platforms, is produced domestically, with 95 percent localization achieved at South Pars refineries and in fixed petrochemical equipment (Abbaszadeh 2025; Heidari 2025; Saqafi 2025). Services make up approximately 50 percent of output but are less financialized and more domestically oriented than in many comparable economies (Statistical Center of Iran 2025).

Taken together, this structure reflects a mixed political economy in which productive sectors, particularly industry and resource extraction, retain a central role rather than being subordinated to finance. Employment also remains anchored in productive activity. The service sector, though dominant in GDP terms, does not exhibit the speculative characteristics of financialized service economies. Iran’s agricultural sector has similarly benefited from imperial-core delinking, with the state investing in farming systems uniquely adapted to its arid climate, achieving remarkable self- sufficiency as part of its resistance economy. The country now produces approximately 85 percent of its agricultural products and basic goods domestically (Vanguard Staff 2026).

Iran is the world’s dominant producer of saffron, contributing the highest share of global output. The global saffron market is projected to reach close to $ 800 million by 2032 (MMR Statistic Research Team 2026). Premium Grade I saffron, which meets high ISO quality standards, accounted for over 52 percent of total revenue in 2025. Iran is also a global powerhouse in pistachio production, serving as the biggest rival to California almonds on the world market. Between March and December 2025, Iran exported approximately 100,000 tons of pistachio products to 67 countries, generating revenues of around $ 730 million (Tehran Times 2026). Major importers included India, Russia, Kazakhstan, and China. In all of 2024, Iran exported over 175,000 tons valued at $ 1.7 billion. The specimen star of this industry is the Akbari variety, an exceptionally long pistachio with a distinctive pink-purple shell, widely grown in Kerman province even on harsh saline soils. Iranian farmers continue to favor traditional harvesting methods, handpicking nuts or gently striking branches with wooden sticks to protect the trees for the next season (Taher 2026).

Iran also produces more than one million tons of dates annually, roughly 15 percent of global supply, and ranks fourth globally with a sheep population of approximately 53.8 million head (Tehran Times 2025, TV Brics 2025). This livestock sector supports the multi-billion dollar Persian carpet industry through ancient nomadic herding traditions, which were the basis for Persian integration into medieval silk trade routes. The sheep are raised on drought-resistant plants and wild herbs across the Zagros mountains, producing lean, flavorful meat and the high-protein, high-fat milk used for traditional Leghvan cheese. The wool is harvested using hand-forged steel shears to produce ultra- fine kurk fiber, the essential material behind Persian carpets that can sell for tens of thousands of dollars in luxury markets (Business Insider 2022).Iran’s agrarian economy directly counters neoliberal logic, preserving rural livelihoods and national food security as components of a broader project of sovereign development.

C. Self-Defense as Sovereignty

This same logic of self-reliance and material delinking extends beyond agriculture to defense, where the Islamic Republic has built an indigenous military industry rooted in the revolutionary institutions forged during the Iran-Iraq War. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was born from the 1979 Iranian revolution. When the Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was overthrown, Iran’s new leaders did not fully trust the existing military. The regular army, known as the Artesh, had served the monarchy and its officers had trained with Western allies. In a fragile moment, loyalty mattered more than tradition. Ayatollah Khomeini and his allies wanted a force committed not just to defending borders, but to defending the revolution itself. So the IRGC was formed on May 5, 1979, by direct decree of Khomeini. At first, it was a small ideological guard. Then came the Iran–Iraq War in the 1980s. The war consolidated the organization, expanded its ranks, and turned it into a central pillar of the new Islamic Republic (Chakrabarty 2026). Khomeini also recalled the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup that overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh after he nationalized Iran’s oil industry. A military whose officers had ties to the West was a perpetual counter-revolutionary threat. To protect and consolidate the revolution, the state was compelled to develop alternative military institutions, including the IRGC and the Basij. The latter was a volunteer force established by Khomeini in November 1979.

Iran’s defense capacity developed under difficult conditions. The Iran-Iraq War, which lasted from September 1980 to August 1988, was an existential conflict for the Islamic Revolution. The war produced three enduring institutional features: engineering and logistics expertise developed under fire, organizational autonomy from the regular military chain of command, and the doctrine of self- reliance (khodkafa’i). The latter is a strategic commitment to indigenous production that has shaped Iranian defense policy for decades (Farnia 2025). At this time, Iran received military assistance from Syria, Libya, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Iran’s stockpile never exceeded more than seven or eight missiles. Yet rather than deploying all the missiles received from other countries, Iran set aside a few for research and reverse engineering. This practice became the basis for Iran’s now-robust ballistic missile program (Hajizadeh 2025).

The Iran-Iraq War also transformed the IRGC into a conventional fighting force, even while it maintained its asymmetric strategic trajectory. By 1985, the IRGC had established its own navy and air force, independent of the regular military. Artesh also became fully subordinated under the revolutionary state. The formative experience of the war also forged a deep ideological commitment to national unity. The IRGC has consistently emphasized that synergy between the Iranian government, nation, and Armed Forces is the key to building a strong and advanced country, a principle cemented during the sacred national defense against the Iraqi invasion (Sayyari 2025).

Imperialist sanctions pushed Iran toward industrial self-sufficiency, pursued within an asymmetric warfare doctrine, achieving remarkable military self-sufficiency both under, and given, the severe consequences of imperialist sanctions. Iran has maintained a steadfast commitment to self-reliance even when opportunities arise to acquire weapons. Over 90 percent of the equipment and systems used by the Armed Forces have been completely designed and manufactured by industrial enterprises under the Defense Ministry and the Armed Force’s collaborating networks. Naval systems have achieved over 90 percent domestic manufacturing of submarine parts as of December 2025. This very success, the transformation of Iranian scientists and engineers into the architects of an autonomous, indigenous military-industrial base, has made them primary targets of imperialist- zionist assassination campaigns, which have killed over a dozen senior nuclear and defense scientists since 2010 (Iran Press 2026; Xinhua 2024).

Asymmetric capabilities constitute a hallmark of Iranian defense doctrine. Iran’s leadership recognized the futility of pursuing conventional weapons, including fighter jets and tanks, soon after the Revolution, deciding decades ago that it would not attempt to match its adversaries tank-for-tank or plane-for-plane, but would instead build an asymmetric deterrent from scratch (The Cradle 2025, PressTV 2026). Had Iran pursued a conventional defensive development path, it would have remained generations behind its imperialist adversaries. Instead, Iran focused on ballistic missile technology and other non-conventional programs. This would come to include unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Iran’s vaunted UAV program is now emulated by allies and adversaries alike.

The IRGC has broadly prioritized the preservation and enhancement of its defensive and security capabilities, playing an active role in Iran’s resistance economy. As a result of this commitment, Iran’s military industry has achieved levels of indigenous production that few, if any, peer nations can match. These achievements were forged through praxis, learned from the Iran-Iraq War years, which “remain embedded in doctrine: survival depends not on a single battle but on a combination of resilience, redundancy, and the capacity to absorb pressure while preserving command structures” (Tehran Times 2026).

The Islamic Republic of Iran has built a political economy that defies neoliberal and comprador bourgeois logic: state-anchored banking, domestic industrial development, agricultural sovereignty, and endogenous scientific and defense development. Its political economy illustrates a concrete process of asserting sovereignty over strategic sectors that include finance, energy, defense production, and technological development under conditions of sanctions, siege warfare, and financial isolation. Practically speaking, Iran’s political economy cannot be undermined by neoliberal financial warfare given its exclusion from the western-dominated global financial system and architecture; and it cannot be claimed that Iran is ruled or managed by comprador elites who, based on their collaborationist function within the imperialist system, do not and cannot build resistance economies based on self-reliance and sufficiency.

D. Sovereignty Over the Strait of Hormuz

Iranian self-reliance finds a powerful lever at the Strait of Hormuz, where the Islamic Republic has transformed a geographic chokepoint into a material instrument of sovereignty and surplus value accumulation in the form of reparations. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow shipping lane through which more than one-third of the world’s crude oil, one-third of the global fertilizer trade, one-fifth of liquefied natural gas, and nearly half of the world’s sulfur passes through. The Strait is between 33 to 48 kilometers wide, and the deeper channels favorable for shipping lay closer to Iran’s shorelands. On the other side of the Strait is the Musandam Peninsula, an Omani governorate. Oman maintains a permanent military presence on Musandam, while Iran controls the Strait to the north.

Iran has asserted sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, imposing a toll on all passing ships while banning vessels from aggressor states including the United States, the zionist entity, the United Kingdom, France, and Gulf Arab states—including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain—entirely. Iran’s parliament has drafted legislation making this situation permanent, in effect reversing the currency collapse the U.S. attempted to impose on it earlier this year. “The Law on Establishing Iran’s Sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz” authorizes Iran to collect tolls for passage through the Strait, among other clauses (PressTV 2026).

Iran’s newly established sovereign authority over the Strait of Hormuz has had irreversible impacts on the global economy across multiple sectors. From oil and gas to agriculture and the “FIRE” sector (finance / insurance / real estate), the effects continue to be realized. Some states (United News of India 2026) have expressed their willingness to abide by Iran’s regulations controlling Hormuz, but the U.S.’s imperialist blockade has effectively prevented the full implementation of the tolling system and blocked access to key supplies powering the global economy.

According to the International Energy Agency, the world is facing the largest energy crisis in history (Angelo 2026). In March, the International Energy Agency released 400 million barrels of emergency oil stocks (IEA 2026) and the U.S. Department of Energy released 172 million barrels (Energy.gov 2026). Inflation has already impacted working class communities although the downstream effects have been slow to hit the macroeconomy of the United States. But analysts believe the worst is yet to come (Power 2026).

Global food systems stand to be severely impacted by shortages in fertilizer, threatening global food inflation and a food crisis (Bazillian 2026). Some insurers have already begun to require ships to follow Iranian-approved routes through Hormuz in order to receive war-risk coverage, which has skyrocketed from one to five percent of hull value (Eaglesham 2026). But the U.S. blockade of Hormuz effectively prevents the removal of mines, deterring some insurers and halting traffic. Even if hostile conditions come to a decisive end–unlikely in the near future–pre-war traffic patterns could take months or years to resume, with a long-term impact on supply chains.

The Gulf dictatorships, longtime U.S. vassals hated by their own populations, now realize that the U.S. military bases used to stage and support the war of aggression against Iran made them targets rather than protectees. These vassal regimes, whose survival depended for decades on Washington’s military umbrella, now find themselves increasingly exposed and vulnerable. The Axis of Resistance has effectively scuttled any remaining prospects for Saudi-Israeli normalization and forced the Gulf monarchies into a defensive crouch, with news reports of some quietly reconsidering their longstanding strategic dependence on the United States (Reuters 2026). As the IRGC has declared, after this war the Persian Gulf will no longer serve as a platform for U.S. imperialist aggression.

The Axis of Resistance is not merely defending Iran and its crucial regional role in upholding Palestinian resistance; it is actively restructuring the regional and global balance of forces. By controlling the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of globally traded oil passed before the War—the vast majority of which was sold in dollars (along with 80 percent of all transactions in the global oil market)—Iran is now requiring ships to pay passage fees in Chinese yuan or other non- dollar currencies (Power 2026). In doing so, Tehran has forced the U.S.-led imperialist system to reckon with the material reality of supply chains, contributed to the unfolding global process of de- dollarization, is exporting oil at higher prices (World is One News Staff 2026) and has undermined the entire sanctions regime.

Through diplomatic coordination with Russia and China, Iran has integrated West Asian anti- imperialism into broader efforts of Global Majority delinking, hastening the transition from U.S. unipolarity to a de-imperialized multipolar world order. Perhaps most importantly, the Axis of Resistance has demonstrated that a network of popular militias and a revolutionary state, powered by indigenous knowledge and productive capacity, can outlast the world’s most powerful military, inflicting the kind of multi-billion-dollar losses not seen since World War II.

In effect, the Axis has provided a template for sovereignty that reaches far beyond West Asia, on the military, economic and ideological fronts alike. The Unity of Fields has proven that when the oppressed fight as one, they can do serious damage to even the most seemingly invincible empires— not in a single cataclysmic battle, but in a thousand coordinated blows across a single, indivisible front. The Strait of Hormuz is one such blow. It is a turning point in the War, and a proof of General Võ Nguyên Giáp’s concept of people’s war, “a war fought for the people by the people” and where the goal is “to wear out the enemy forces, gradually reverse the balance of forces, turning our weakness into strength” (Giáp, 1962/1968).

(To be continued…)

The Anti-Imperialist Scholars Collective is a group of scholars committed to challenging US-led imperialism and supporting liberation movements of the Global Majority through critical knowledge production and international solidarity.  https://www.anti-imperialists.com/

source: Black Agenda Report

US Soldiers Attempt Suicide as Iran Exposes American Weakness

A senior adviser to the chief commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the recent US-Israeli aggression against Iran has exposed the US military as “weaker than what we perceived,” stressing that Iran emerged victorious after defeating Washington’s main objectives.

In an interview with American broadcaster PBS published on Tuesday, Mohammad Reza Naqdi said the past five months had given Iran a clearer picture of the capabilities of the US military.

“In these five months, … we have also seen how the American military is weaker than what we perceived,” he said.

Naqdi stressed that Iran had won the war, saying the longer it lasts, the more experience Iran gains.

“Certainly, victory is on our side, after the defeat of America’s two main objectives, the toppling of the leadership and the breaking up of Iran,” he said.

Naqdi said the US response was marked by “confusion and bewilderment,” stating that Washington lacked a clear strategy and repeatedly changed its objectives.

He pointed to US threats to invade Kharg Island and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the mobilization of US warships, saying Iran had emerged victorious from each attempt.

“Everything they tried, we can show how we were victorious,” he said.

Naqdi stressed that Iran’s objective is to “attain deterrence” so that the country can “live in security” and prevent its enemies from contemplating another attack.

He said one way to achieve that goal would be to prolong the war, impose attrition on the US and ensure that any future aggressor understands that attacking Iran would come at a cost.

A senior advisor to the IRGC’s chief commander says Iran’s production of ballistic missiles and drones exceeds the rate at which the hardware is deployed.

Until the last day of war, Iran’s rockets will be launched

Asked about the number of missiles in Iran’s stockpile, Naqdi stressed that the Islamic Republic does not rely solely on missiles and drones, saying its faith has been central to its ability to prevail.

“First of all, we are not reliant on missiles and drones. If we are victorious, we relied on our faith to be victorious. God is with us,” he said.

He dismissed US and Israeli efforts to count Iran’s missiles, saying the country is capable of producing more missiles each day than it launches.

“Even if this war lasts for years, until the last day, Iran’s rockets will be launched,” he said.

He warned that even if Iran were to run out of missiles, the country would pose an even greater danger to the US because of Washington’s extensive economic interests around the world.

“If there comes a day when Iran has no more missiles left, that’s when we will be even more dangerous for America. Because America has thousands of economic interests throughout the world, and all of them can be easily destroyed,” he said.

Naqdi also said US President Donald Trump and his administration “work for their own interests,” stating that the war coincided with the closure of the stock market, while US officials “send positive messages” when the market opens to raise stock prices.

“If I was in the place of the American Congress, I would call for an investigative committee to compare the assets of Mr. Trump, his family, and his inner circle before the war to their assets after the war,” he said.

The commander also warned that any US nuclear attack on Iran “can end up being a mistake for them.”

“The morning after they use a bomb, all of America’s military bases around the world will be occupied. Today, things are different than World War II. The people of the world have awakened. No one in the world will allow for such a crime to be committed, because the next time it could be themselves,” he said.

Naqdi emphasized that Iran has “no enmity with the people of America,” explaining that the slogan “Death to America” refers to the US leadership.

“Death to America means death to America’s leadership, a leadership that has invaded or violated more than 70 countries since becoming a superpower,” he said.

Iran doesn’t need nuclear bombs

Naqdi stressed that Iran does not pursue a nuclear bomb and does not need one.

“Our nuclear bomb is the hearts of the people of the world that we won fighting oppression. Islamic values and the divine values of the Islamic Revolution are taking over the world. There is no need for nuclear bombs. There is no need for slaughter,” he said.

Asked why the new Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, has not been seen in public since the assassination of his father, the martyred Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on the first day of the US-Israeli aggression on February 28, Naqdi said his absence was due to security reasons.

“The strategy belongs to him. Our enemy is criminal and doesn’t abide by any law,” he said, adding, “Naturally, it is due to security. Certainly, there is no other reason.”

Asked about allegations that the IRGC had refused to speak to US media, Naqdi said, “We never received a request to reject it. We would like for our voice to reach the ears of people in Western countries. It’s Western media that don’t like our voice to be heard,” he said.

“There’s nothing we do that’s indefensible and outside the values of humanity that we would want to cover up or not discuss.”

Naqdi’s remarks came against the backdrop of the ongoing US-Israeli aggression against Iran, which began on February 28 and prompted Tehran to launch daily missile and drone strikes against US and Israeli military targets across the region before Tehran and Washington signed the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on June 17.

Renewed US strikes in recent weeks and other violations of the MoU have, however, once again drawn an Iranian military response and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

In other news, reports have emerged that sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln attempted to jump overboard have intensified concerns over the mental health and living conditions of the carrier’s roughly 5,000 sailors and Marines, as its deployment has stretched into a ninth month amid the US’s ongoing violations targeting Iran.

On Tuesday, The Navy Times and Stars and Stripes reported multiple thwarted incidents involving sailors attempting to jump from the carrier. The crew has spent 250 consecutive days without making land, according to the reports, described as a record for a US aircraft carrier in modern times.

Families confront Navy leadership

About 200 relatives of Lincoln personnel attended a town hall meeting with Navy officials in San Diego last Thursday, where concerns over the prolonged deployment and sailors’ wellbeing were raised directly with acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and other officials.

One spouse said her husband had texted her that day saying “he hopes he doesn’t wake up tomorrow.”

Another woman told Cao that the Navy had “broken trust between us and the leadership,” Stars and Stripes reported.

The Navy Times quoted Annabelle Loma as saying her husband had attempted to jump overboard after his deployment was repeatedly extended.

“He’s scared. He thinks he’ll get a dishonorable discharge, and just because he was burnt out his 13-year career is ruined, just like that,” she said.

The publication also quoted another sailor’s wife, who said her husband had prevented a fellow crewmember from jumping by grabbing the person and bringing them back onto the deck.

Lawmakers criticize conditions

Democratic Congressman Mike Levin of California described conditions aboard the carrier as “moldy showers, broken toilets, laundry down for weeks, long stretches with no hot water, a meal that came down to half a cup of rice and two tortillas. No soap, deodorant, or toothpaste.”

Congressman Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, said the strain on personnel and their families was “building week by week.”

The Lincoln left San Diego on November 21 and was originally intended for the Pacific before being redirected to West Asia after the United States and the Israeli regime began their latest bout of wholesale unprovoked aggression against Iran.

Its deployment, initially scheduled to end in May, has since been extended.

Hegseth in denial

Earlier complaints about food, water, mold, and broken laundry facilities were dismissed by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth as “more fake news.”

Levin responded, “The least their country owes them (the personnel) is hot water, a working toilet, and a real meal. Hegseth cannot even manage that, and he has the nerve to look their families in the eye and call them liars.”

The reports came amid a separate account of a deadly confrontation aboard the Abraham Lincoln in which seven sailors were reportedly killed and several others wounded.

US Soldiers Attempt Suicide as Iran Exposes American Weakness

A senior adviser to the chief commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the recent US-Israeli aggression against Iran has exposed the US military as “weaker than what we perceived,” stressing that Iran emerged victorious after defeating Washington’s main objectives.

In an interview with American broadcaster PBS published on Tuesday, Mohammad Reza Naqdi said the past five months had given Iran a clearer picture of the capabilities of the US military.

“In these five months, … we have also seen how the American military is weaker than what we perceived,” he said.

Naqdi stressed that Iran had won the war, saying the longer it lasts, the more experience Iran gains.

“Certainly, victory is on our side, after the defeat of America’s two main objectives, the toppling of the leadership and the breaking up of Iran,” he said.

Naqdi said the US response was marked by “confusion and bewilderment,” stating that Washington lacked a clear strategy and repeatedly changed its objectives.

He pointed to US threats to invade Kharg Island and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, as well as the mobilization of US warships, saying Iran had emerged victorious from each attempt.

“Everything they tried, we can show how we were victorious,” he said.

Naqdi stressed that Iran’s objective is to “attain deterrence” so that the country can “live in security” and prevent its enemies from contemplating another attack.

He said one way to achieve that goal would be to prolong the war, impose attrition on the US and ensure that any future aggressor understands that attacking Iran would come at a cost.

A senior advisor to the IRGC’s chief commander says Iran’s production of ballistic missiles and drones exceeds the rate at which the hardware is deployed.

Until the last day of war, Iran’s rockets will be launched

Asked about the number of missiles in Iran’s stockpile, Naqdi stressed that the Islamic Republic does not rely solely on missiles and drones, saying its faith has been central to its ability to prevail.

“First of all, we are not reliant on missiles and drones. If we are victorious, we relied on our faith to be victorious. God is with us,” he said.

He dismissed US and Israeli efforts to count Iran’s missiles, saying the country is capable of producing more missiles each day than it launches.

“Even if this war lasts for years, until the last day, Iran’s rockets will be launched,” he said.

He warned that even if Iran were to run out of missiles, the country would pose an even greater danger to the US because of Washington’s extensive economic interests around the world.

“If there comes a day when Iran has no more missiles left, that’s when we will be even more dangerous for America. Because America has thousands of economic interests throughout the world, and all of them can be easily destroyed,” he said.

Naqdi also said US President Donald Trump and his administration “work for their own interests,” stating that the war coincided with the closure of the stock market, while US officials “send positive messages” when the market opens to raise stock prices.

“If I was in the place of the American Congress, I would call for an investigative committee to compare the assets of Mr. Trump, his family, and his inner circle before the war to their assets after the war,” he said.

The commander also warned that any US nuclear attack on Iran “can end up being a mistake for them.”

“The morning after they use a bomb, all of America’s military bases around the world will be occupied. Today, things are different than World War II. The people of the world have awakened. No one in the world will allow for such a crime to be committed, because the next time it could be themselves,” he said.

Naqdi emphasized that Iran has “no enmity with the people of America,” explaining that the slogan “Death to America” refers to the US leadership.

“Death to America means death to America’s leadership, a leadership that has invaded or violated more than 70 countries since becoming a superpower,” he said.

Iran doesn’t need nuclear bombs

Naqdi stressed that Iran does not pursue a nuclear bomb and does not need one.

“Our nuclear bomb is the hearts of the people of the world that we won fighting oppression. Islamic values and the divine values of the Islamic Revolution are taking over the world. There is no need for nuclear bombs. There is no need for slaughter,” he said.

Asked why the new Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, has not been seen in public since the assassination of his father, the martyred Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on the first day of the US-Israeli aggression on February 28, Naqdi said his absence was due to security reasons.

“The strategy belongs to him. Our enemy is criminal and doesn’t abide by any law,” he said, adding, “Naturally, it is due to security. Certainly, there is no other reason.”

Asked about allegations that the IRGC had refused to speak to US media, Naqdi said, “We never received a request to reject it. We would like for our voice to reach the ears of people in Western countries. It’s Western media that don’t like our voice to be heard,” he said.

“There’s nothing we do that’s indefensible and outside the values of humanity that we would want to cover up or not discuss.”

Naqdi’s remarks came against the backdrop of the ongoing US-Israeli aggression against Iran, which began on February 28 and prompted Tehran to launch daily missile and drone strikes against US and Israeli military targets across the region before Tehran and Washington signed the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on June 17.

Renewed US strikes in recent weeks and other violations of the MoU have, however, once again drawn an Iranian military response and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

In other news, reports have emerged that sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln attempted to jump overboard have intensified concerns over the mental health and living conditions of the carrier’s roughly 5,000 sailors and Marines, as its deployment has stretched into a ninth month amid the US’s ongoing violations targeting Iran.

On Tuesday, The Navy Times and Stars and Stripes reported multiple thwarted incidents involving sailors attempting to jump from the carrier. The crew has spent 250 consecutive days without making land, according to the reports, described as a record for a US aircraft carrier in modern times.

Families confront Navy leadership

About 200 relatives of Lincoln personnel attended a town hall meeting with Navy officials in San Diego last Thursday, where concerns over the prolonged deployment and sailors’ wellbeing were raised directly with acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and other officials.

One spouse said her husband had texted her that day saying “he hopes he doesn’t wake up tomorrow.”

Another woman told Cao that the Navy had “broken trust between us and the leadership,” Stars and Stripes reported.

The Navy Times quoted Annabelle Loma as saying her husband had attempted to jump overboard after his deployment was repeatedly extended.

“He’s scared. He thinks he’ll get a dishonorable discharge, and just because he was burnt out his 13-year career is ruined, just like that,” she said.

The publication also quoted another sailor’s wife, who said her husband had prevented a fellow crewmember from jumping by grabbing the person and bringing them back onto the deck.

Lawmakers criticize conditions

Democratic Congressman Mike Levin of California described conditions aboard the carrier as “moldy showers, broken toilets, laundry down for weeks, long stretches with no hot water, a meal that came down to half a cup of rice and two tortillas. No soap, deodorant, or toothpaste.”

Congressman Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, said the strain on personnel and their families was “building week by week.”

The Lincoln left San Diego on November 21 and was originally intended for the Pacific before being redirected to West Asia after the United States and the Israeli regime began their latest bout of wholesale unprovoked aggression against Iran.

Its deployment, initially scheduled to end in May, has since been extended.

Hegseth in denial

Earlier complaints about food, water, mold, and broken laundry facilities were dismissed by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth as “more fake news.”

Levin responded, “The least their country owes them (the personnel) is hot water, a working toilet, and a real meal. Hegseth cannot even manage that, and he has the nerve to look their families in the eye and call them liars.”

The reports came amid a separate account of a deadly confrontation aboard the Abraham Lincoln in which seven sailors were reportedly killed and several others wounded.

Iran’s Resistance Against US Aggression Echoes China’s Korean War Experience, Signaling End of Western Hegemony

Today, Iran’s remarkable success in its response to the aggression of the United States and Israel has earned it worldwide respect. For the Chinese people in particular, the situation easily evokes empathy, as Iran’s current situation bears striking similarities to that of China 76 years ago. At that time, China also faced a war in which it was forced to resist aggression, with the United States as its primary adversary.

The US military had just emerged from World War II as the main force of the Allied Powers and was widely regarded around the world as virtually invincible. Meanwhile, China had established the People’s Republic less than two years earlier when war broke out on the Korean Peninsula.

Due to the prolonged impact of warfare within the country, China at the time could be described as “poor and barefoot.” Few believed that China could successfully resist the US-led coalition of 17 countries, especially one operating under the banner of the United Nations, on the battlefield.

Yet the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army succeeded in repelling US aggression. How was this achieved? Two ambush battles in China that are nearly household names – the Iron Plate Ambush and the Hwachon Ambush – provide compelling real-life examples of how this was accomplished.

In the later stages of the Fifth Campaign, General Matthew Ridgway, Commander-in-Chief of the United Nations Forces, had already identified the logistical vulnerabilities of the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army. He employed a “magnetic” tactic to exhaust the Volunteer Army’s offensive, and then, leveraging the superior mobility of the Allied forces, seized the opportunity to launch a “scorched-earth pursuit,” swiftly penetrating deep into the Volunteer Army’s lines.

The Iron Triangle served as an essential passage for nearly 300,000 Volunteer Army troops withdrawing from the entire Western Front, as well as a critical supply hub. Nearly 50,000 elite US troops, personally led by James Van Fleet, commander of the US Eighth Army, had already approached the Iron Triangle. The Volunteer Army’s 63rd Army received an urgent order to hold the Iron Triangle for 15 to 20 days, thereby securing vital time for the withdrawal of the 300,000 Volunteer Army troops.

The 63rd Army had just completed the Fifth Campaign, having dwindled from 35,000 personnel at the start of the campaign to just 24,000. It was therefore a severely exhausted force that had originally been preparing to withdraw and resupply. US forces outnumbered the 63rd Army two to one, while their firepower was dozens of times greater. For the 63rd Army, the task was nearly impossible.

The situation was particularly daunting for the 189th Division, which had been the first unit to engage the enemy and consisted of only 9,400 men. It was ordered to resist US forces for three days and three nights, without prior preparation or fortifications, thereby providing sufficient time for the other units to construct robust defensive positions. How could the 189th Division possibly accomplish this?

Its commander, Cai Changyuan, devised a tactic that was rare in military history and, on the surface, appeared to defy conventional military doctrine: he divided the 9,400-man force into more than 200 blocking detachments, which were then widely dispersed along a combat line spanning more than 20 kilometers. The tactic forced the enemy to fight a series of point-by-point engagements, thereby buying time for the other two divisions of the 63rd Army.

However, this strategy was extremely brutal. Once a blocking unit came under enemy attack, it was almost certain to suffer total annihilation. All the participating Chinese Volunteer Army troops were fully aware of this risk, yet they understood that this was the only viable way to accomplish their mission. Consequently, the 9,400 soldiers of the 189th Division threw themselves onto the battlefield without hesitation.

Ultimately, the 189th Division suffered 2,719 casualties in the battle, with approximately 4,000 wounded – accounting for 79% of the 8,500 total casualties sustained by the 63rd Army during the blocking operation. Across the entire Iron Triangle blocking battle, Allied casualties amounted to approximately 21,000 personnel. Military historians generally estimate that the blocking operations conducted by the 189th Division inflicted between 7,000 and 9,000 casualties on the Allied forces, a figure close to the losses suffered by the 189th Division itself.

Almost simultaneously with the Battle of the Iron Triangle on the Western Front, the Volunteer Army on the Eastern Front faced a similar critical situation. Huachuan served as an essential passage for more than 100,000 Volunteer Army troops on the Eastern Front. Meanwhile, the US 7th Corps, the Korean 6th Division, a Canadian brigade, and a detachment from the US Marine Corps 1st Division had already arrived near Huachuan, ahead of the main force of the Volunteer Army on the Eastern Front.

The Volunteer Army’s 58th Division had originally received orders to retreat and happened to be passing through Huachuan. Under intense bombardment, division commander Huang Chaotian and political commissar Zhang Yonggeng realized that enemy forces had approached Huachuan.

Had they simply followed their original orders to retreat, there would have been no problem whatsoever. However, drawing on their battlefield experience, they quickly reached a different conclusion: if Huachuan fell into enemy hands, the units following behind could be surrounded and face the risk of total annihilation.

Because communications had been cut, they could neither report back in time nor receive further orders from higher command. After just a few minutes of discussion, Huang Chaotian, Zhang Yonggeng, and the other commanders took the risk and decisively chose to remain in position and intercept the enemy.

At the time, the 58th Division consisted of only slightly more than 7,000 men, yet it was tasked with confronting an enemy force of 28,000 – four times its own size. After 12 days of intense combat, the 58th Division successfully completed its interception mission, suffering 2,795 casualties while inflicting an estimated 7,400 casualties on the enemy. In doing so, it successfully facilitated the withdrawal of more than 100,000 troops of the Volunteer Army’s main force on the Eastern Front.

The Chinese People’s Volunteer Army did not defeat the US military through fearless courage alone; it also relied on exceptional military wisdom. For example, the Volunteer Army made full use of the mountainous terrain of Korea, significantly undermining the advantage provided by the US military’s mechanized forces.

At the time, China was treated as a second-class citizen on the world stage and faced discrimination everywhere. The military achievements of the Volunteer Army earned China international respect and significantly elevated its standing in the world. This legacy continues to inspire the Chinese people to overcome one challenge after another even today. Even a hundred or two hundred years from now, the military accomplishments of the Volunteer Army will remain one of China’s most precious spiritual legacies.

Today, after the United States abducted democratically elected Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro through military force, it seeks to instill fear in many countries around the world. And after years of blockades and sanctions, few believed that Iran could achieve such military success against the United States and Israel.

Yet Iran’s performance in this war has shocked the entire world. Both the Iranian military and civilian population have demonstrated not only a fearless willingness to sacrifice but also exceptional military wisdom. Like the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army, they have made full use of Iran’s mountainous terrain, concealing large numbers of missiles, drones, and production facilities inside caves, thereby significantly undermining the airpower advantage of the US and Israeli forces.

The military achievements of Iran’s armed forces and civilian population will likewise become a tremendous source of spiritual wealth for the Iranian people. Even decades or centuries from now, the Iranian people will undoubtedly remember the sacrifices made by their military and civilians for the nation. Furthermore, Iran’s international standing will be significantly elevated as a result of these military successes.

After approximately nine months of fighting, both the US military and the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army came to realize that neither side could defeat the other, prompting the two sides to begin ceasefire negotiations. However, it took another two full years of negotiations, conducted alongside continued military operations, before a formal armistice agreement was signed and the ceasefire officially took effect.

On the Iranian front, after nearly 160 days of American aggression and Iranian resistance, the United States has begun to feel that it can no longer sustain the war against Iran and is therefore engaging in negotiations. However, bringing the war to an end may still be a protracted process involving negotiations alongside continued military action. Iran needs to be fully psychologically prepared for such a scenario.

Seventy-six years ago, during the Korean War, the US military suffered defeats at the hands of the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army, marking the first major setback in the rise of American military hegemony. General Mark Wayne Clark, the Commander-in-Chief of the UN Forces who ultimately signed the armistice agreement, wrote in his memoirs: “I attained an unenviable distinction: I became the first United States Army commander in history to sign an armistice without achieving victory. I felt a profound sense of disappointment. I believe that my predecessors, Generals MacArthur and Ridgway, must have shared this sentiment.”

The current US-Israel war against Iran – once a genuine ceasefire is finally reached – may well signify the beginning of the end of American military hegemony. This war has left America with a massive pit, one that may ultimately bury American hegemony itself.

From the Korean War to today’s war between the United States, Israel, and Iran, this entire period may ultimately serve as a historical testament to the decline of American imperialist hegemony.

Why is the United States so cavalier about war?

During the war to resist US aggression and aid Korea, although the United States had clearly realized that it could not win the war, it still behaved arrogantly in negotiations, demanding exorbitant terms. At the time, Chinese leader Mao Zedong commented on the United States: “It is not easy to negotiate peace with them. The American imperialists are very arrogant; wherever they can avoid reasoning, they certainly do so; if they attempt to reason at all, it is only because they have no choice.”

Over the course of two years of negotiations conducted alongside continued military engagements, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army ultimately compelled the United States to sign a ceasefire agreement through repeated and devastating military strikes against the US-led UN forces.

Today, the United States is clearly unable to win the war, yet it continues to behave arrogantly, break its promises, and demonstrate a lack of credibility. It resumed hostilities immediately after a memorandum was signed. Therefore, unless the United States is thoroughly defeated, it will not truly agree to a ceasefire that it can be expected to honor and implement effectively.

Whether the war against China or the current war against Iran – none of them have served any genuine national interest of the United States. Rather, they were instigated by forces from other places that were able to easily draw the United States into these wars. Why, then, has the United States been so willing to go to war, seemingly without regard for the consequences? This phenomenon is closely linked to the historical trajectory of Western colonial plunder.

The modern Western world was the first to achieve the Industrial Revolution and therefore gained a significant advantage in weaponry and military technology over the nations it colonized. This technological advantage enabled Western powers to compensate for deficiencies or mistakes in military strategy and tactics, allowing them to prevail regardless of the approach they took.

As a result, when making decisions, they often had little need to consider the risks associated with war. Once they initiated acts of aggression, the outcome would typically be an opportunity for gain. The sooner they launched a war, the sooner they could reap those gains.

Among the various colonial powers, wars and conflicts among them were particularly frequent. These included the War of the Polish Succession, the War of the Austrian Succession, the Seven Years’ War, several Russo-Turkish Wars in the European theater, the Balkan Wars, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Greek War of Independence, the Crimean War, the Prussian-Dutch War, the Austro-Prussian War, the Franco-Prussian War, numerous other Balkan conflicts, and the Irish Rebellion.

Of particular note are the two World Wars, which plunged much of Europe into devastating crisis. Even after World War II, Europe experienced further wars, including the Kosovo War. Objectively, these wars helped ensure that Europe and the United States maintained a leading position in military power for an extended period.

The United States’ unique and advantageous geographical position has also contributed to a relatively low perception of war risk among its population. The country is separated from both Europe and Asia by vast oceans. More importantly, within a radius of several thousand kilometers of the US mainland’s eastern Pacific and western Atlantic approaches, there are relatively few islands belonging to other countries.

To the north lies Canada; to the southeast, the Gulf of Mexico provides a natural barrier; and to the southwest lies Mexico, which has historically been considerably weaker militarily.

As a result, the United States enjoys an exceptionally favorable national security environment. This strategic position has repeatedly placed the country in a situation where the US military can project force against adversaries while those adversaries face enormous difficulties in attacking the US mainland. For example, during the Pacific Theater of World War II, the United States could launch sustained attacks against Japan’s homeland, while Japan was unable to mount a comparable attack against the US mainland.

This highly asymmetric strategic geography has, over time, contributed to a national tendency in the United States to assess the risks of war with an unusual degree of confidence and ease.

Back then, China was extremely reluctant to go to war with the United States. When the question of whether to send troops to Korea was discussed, all the Chinese generals and commanders present unanimously opposed sending troops. These were seasoned military leaders who had just endured decades of warfare and repeatedly faced life-and-death situations; they were certainly not afraid of sacrifice.

However, when confronted with the overwhelming military power of the United States at the time, they deeply resisted the idea of sacrificing their soldiers. Had the US forces not ignored China’s repeated appeals, easily crossed the 38th Parallel, and sent aircraft to bomb Dandong in China, we might genuinely have decided not to send troops at that time. Yet the US military showed no awareness of the risks of war, ignored all warnings, and repeatedly crossed every boundary.

Today, Iran is likewise unwilling to go to war with the United States. In response to previous provocations by the U.S. and Israel, Iran repeatedly exercised restraint. Had the United States and Israel not committed the utterly reckless act of assassinating Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Iran might have continued to exercise restraint.

However, the American perception of the risks of war is remarkably casual. Since the United States has already entered the war, it is unlikely to seriously consider ending it unless it suffers massive military casualties, its war-making capabilities are thoroughly destroyed, and its military is pushed to the point where the entire country experiences genuine fear and profound distress.

During the Korean War, in the period before negotiations began, which centered primarily on the Five Battles, the Chinese and North Korean armies inflicted more than 233,500 casualties on the US-led forces. By contrast, during the two years and 17 days following the start of negotiations, the Chinese and North Korean armies inflicted more than 860,000 casualties on the UN forces – approximately 3.7 times the losses inflicted during the period before negotiations began.

The US military did not readily accept defeat. Over those two years, it resorted to various measures that crossed ethical boundaries in an attempt to salvage its position, including the use of biological weapons, threats to use atomic bombs, and the continued provocation of military confrontations. However, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army remained steadfast in resisting these hostile actions by the US military.

China’s resolute resistance won the respect and support of anti-American forces around the world, including the Soviet Union, as well as enthusiastic support from the Chinese public.

In battles such as Shangganling and Jincheng, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army fought alongside the Korean People’s Army, inflicting heavy losses on the US-led UN forces and the South Korean army and ultimately forcing the opposing side to sign a ceasefire agreement.

Therefore, if, in the current war, Iran does not inflict significant losses on US and Israeli forces, particularly destroying their active combat forces, then neither the US nor Israel will seriously consider ending the war. Iran should be clear about this.

The end of the traditional Western colonial and exploitative history

The response by the Iranian military and civilian population to the aggression of the United States and Israel may well prove to be a decisive battle marking the end of the Western era of colonialism and plunder.

Its historical significance is profound. The global historical era is undergoing a fundamental transformation, and the period in which Western colonial powers dominated the course of history through their control of the Industrial Revolution is coming to an end.

1. China has comprehensively surpassed the West in industrial civilization

China has not only completed its industrialization but has also moved ahead of the West along the path of the Industrial Revolution.

China’s military-industrial capabilities have likewise advanced dramatically and now surpass those of the US military in many respects. This marks the first time in human history that an emerging industrial power has comprehensively surpassed the military capabilities of the traditional Western colonial powers.

Just ten years ago, such a scenario would have been difficult to imagine.

In 1996, the US Navy deployed just two aircraft carrier strike groups to deter the Chinese military across the Taiwan Strait, forcing the Chinese Navy to transport army artillery aboard civilian vessels to compensate for its lack of naval firepower.

Ultimately, because of the enormous disparity in military capabilities between the two sides – the two US carrier strike groups were considered capable of virtually annihilating China’s entire naval and air forces – the Chinese side chose to withdraw from the military standoff.

In 2016, during the military standoff between the Chinese and American navies in the South China Sea, the US military again deployed two aircraft carrier strike groups. By then, China had acquired weapons such as the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile. However, in addition to deploying DF-21D missiles, China mobilized nearly 100 warships from all three major naval fleets, recalled retired naval personnel to active service, and required all participating personnel to write farewell messages.

At the time, China was fully prepared for a decisive confrontation with the US military, ultimately forcing the two US carrier strike groups to withdraw.

By May 2025, China not only possessed the Fujian-class aircraft carrier, which was technologically more advanced than the US carriers, but also the Type 055 large destroyer, which IS capable of destroying an entire US carrier strike group on its own.

The Chinese Navy has already achieved comprehensive technological superiority over the US military. On November 8, 2024, Pete Hegseth – then a Fox News host – stated on his podcast, The Shawn Ryan Show: “If 15 hypersonic missiles hit, the conflict could potentially destroy 10 US aircraft carriers within the first 20 minutes.”

Although China’s naval and air forces still need to catch up with the United States in terms of quantity, China already holds a significant advantage in quality.

By May 2025, four Chinese aircraft carriers will form a “two-to-two” force posture against the US Navy. China will not only have the capability to prevent the US Navy from approaching its coastline, but will also possess numerous weapons systems capable of sinking US carrier strike groups, such as the YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile.

China has more than ten types of weapons that could sink US carrier strike groups while posing severe, or in some cases potentially overwhelming, defensive challenges for the US Navy and Air Force. These include anti-ship ballistic and hypersonic missiles such as the DF-21D, DF-26, DF-27, DF-17, KD-21, YJ-21, YJ-20, YJ-17, and YJ-19. Supersonic anti-ship missiles that could also pose significant defensive challenges include the YJ-12, YJ-12A, YJ-12B, YJ-15, YJ-91, YJ-100, and YJ-18.

From China’s perspective, the US Navy has made relatively little progress over the past 30 years. Many active US Navy warships have relatively long service histories, whereas Chinese naval vessels tend to be newer.

More importantly, over the past decade, the Chinese Navy has commissioned 79 large and medium-sized warships while retiring 23, compared with 34 commissioned and 32 retired by the US Navy. Overall, China added a net 56 large and medium-sized warships during these ten years, while the United States added only two.

Comparison of the number of large and medium-sized warships commissioned and decommissioned by the Chinese and U.S. navies between 2016 and 2026:

On July 29, 2026, China released the trailer for its multimedia documentary Winning, commemorating the 99th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army. The trailer featured a few seconds of footage showing an HT-1 vertical launch system on the bow deck of a Type 052D destroyer launching a YJ-20 missile, marking the first public appearance of imagery showing a Type 052D firing this missile.

To date, 35 Type 052D destroyers have been officially commissioned, along with 10 Type 055 destroyers already in operational service. This means that in the near future, China could have more than 50 major surface combatants capable, according to these claims, of striking US carrier strike groups from outside the effective range of US defenses.

2. Iran has already surpassed West in fields such as hypersonic missiles.

Iran’s industrial and technological capabilities are far greater than the Western world has generally assumed. During the peak period for annual STEM graduates in Iran, roughly from 2014 to 2017, the number reached approximately 330,000-340,000 per year. Although this figure has declined somewhat in recent years, it has remained at around 280,000-300,000 annually.

In contrast, the United States produces approximately 118,000-120,000 engineering graduates each year. The key distinction is that while the United States produces roughly 220,000-250,000 STEM graduates annually, Iran produces approximately 200,000-234,000. In the United States, around 13%-14% of STEM graduates are international students, with international students accounting for nearly 40% of master’s and doctoral degree holders. In Iran, by contrast, STEM graduates are predominantly domestic.

Therefore, Iran’s engineering and R&D capabilities are far from as weak as they are often portrayed. When measured by the number of STEM graduates per 100,000 people, Iran significantly outperforms the United States, Germany, and France.

This strong educational base provides Iran with a substantial domestic pool of technical talent in critical fields such as missile technology, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), aerospace, and nuclear technology.

Many years ago, in an article, I argued that the global development of high-speed hypersonic missiles could be divided into four tiers.

The first tier consists of China, which possesses the world’s most advanced wind-tunnel testing facilities and the most mature technologies for wave-riding vehicles and double-cone warheads.

The second tier consists of Iran and North Korea, which possess operational capabilities and fielded systems involving hypersonic warheads with wave-riding and double-cone configurations.

The third tier consists of Russia and Yemen’s Ansarullah movement, which possess combat-ready systems equipped with dual-cone warheads.

The fourth tier consists of the United States. The Air Force’s AGM-183A ARRW has experienced multiple test failures and has not been deployed. The Air Force previously announced that it “does not intend to procure” the system, although production was revived in its fiscal year 2026 budget request; no final decision has yet been made.

The Navy’s CPS (Conventional Prompt Strike) and the Army’s LRHW “Dark Eagle” share a common hypersonic glide body (C-HGB) and a two-stage booster. Like the Army’s Dark Eagle (LRHW), these systems have only been described as being “approaching deployment.”

Whether they will ultimately be successfully fielded for actual combat remains highly uncertain. Their speed is at least Mach 5, with the glide body transitioning to powered glide after separation, and their range is approximately 2,775 kilometers. Overall, the US military does have developed systems in this field, but these weapons have not yet achieved full operational combat readiness.

Europe, Japan, and Israel have not yet qualified for inclusion in this ranking.

When these views were first proposed, many people dismissed them as a joke. However, practical experience in recent years has, in my view, demonstrated that in the field of hypersonic missiles, the United States and Israel are indeed far behind Iran, by at least two generations.

These factors help explain why Iran has been able to carry out effective retaliatory and devastating strikes against US and Israeli targets during this war imposed on Iran.

Wang Tao

source: Press TV

Iran’s Resistance Against US Aggression Echoes China’s Korean War Experience, Signaling End of Western Hegemony

Today, Iran’s remarkable success in its response to the aggression of the United States and Israel has earned it worldwide respect. For the Chinese people in particular, the situation easily evokes empathy, as Iran’s current situation bears striking similarities to that of China 76 years ago. At that time, China also faced a war in which it was forced to resist aggression, with the United States as its primary adversary.

The US military had just emerged from World War II as the main force of the Allied Powers and was widely regarded around the world as virtually invincible. Meanwhile, China had established the People’s Republic less than two years earlier when war broke out on the Korean Peninsula.

Due to the prolonged impact of warfare within the country, China at the time could be described as “poor and barefoot.” Few believed that China could successfully resist the US-led coalition of 17 countries, especially one operating under the banner of the United Nations, on the battlefield.

Yet the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army succeeded in repelling US aggression. How was this achieved? Two ambush battles in China that are nearly household names – the Iron Plate Ambush and the Hwachon Ambush – provide compelling real-life examples of how this was accomplished.

In the later stages of the Fifth Campaign, General Matthew Ridgway, Commander-in-Chief of the United Nations Forces, had already identified the logistical vulnerabilities of the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army. He employed a “magnetic” tactic to exhaust the Volunteer Army’s offensive, and then, leveraging the superior mobility of the Allied forces, seized the opportunity to launch a “scorched-earth pursuit,” swiftly penetrating deep into the Volunteer Army’s lines.

The Iron Triangle served as an essential passage for nearly 300,000 Volunteer Army troops withdrawing from the entire Western Front, as well as a critical supply hub. Nearly 50,000 elite US troops, personally led by James Van Fleet, commander of the US Eighth Army, had already approached the Iron Triangle. The Volunteer Army’s 63rd Army received an urgent order to hold the Iron Triangle for 15 to 20 days, thereby securing vital time for the withdrawal of the 300,000 Volunteer Army troops.

The 63rd Army had just completed the Fifth Campaign, having dwindled from 35,000 personnel at the start of the campaign to just 24,000. It was therefore a severely exhausted force that had originally been preparing to withdraw and resupply. US forces outnumbered the 63rd Army two to one, while their firepower was dozens of times greater. For the 63rd Army, the task was nearly impossible.

The situation was particularly daunting for the 189th Division, which had been the first unit to engage the enemy and consisted of only 9,400 men. It was ordered to resist US forces for three days and three nights, without prior preparation or fortifications, thereby providing sufficient time for the other units to construct robust defensive positions. How could the 189th Division possibly accomplish this?

Its commander, Cai Changyuan, devised a tactic that was rare in military history and, on the surface, appeared to defy conventional military doctrine: he divided the 9,400-man force into more than 200 blocking detachments, which were then widely dispersed along a combat line spanning more than 20 kilometers. The tactic forced the enemy to fight a series of point-by-point engagements, thereby buying time for the other two divisions of the 63rd Army.

However, this strategy was extremely brutal. Once a blocking unit came under enemy attack, it was almost certain to suffer total annihilation. All the participating Chinese Volunteer Army troops were fully aware of this risk, yet they understood that this was the only viable way to accomplish their mission. Consequently, the 9,400 soldiers of the 189th Division threw themselves onto the battlefield without hesitation.

Ultimately, the 189th Division suffered 2,719 casualties in the battle, with approximately 4,000 wounded – accounting for 79% of the 8,500 total casualties sustained by the 63rd Army during the blocking operation. Across the entire Iron Triangle blocking battle, Allied casualties amounted to approximately 21,000 personnel. Military historians generally estimate that the blocking operations conducted by the 189th Division inflicted between 7,000 and 9,000 casualties on the Allied forces, a figure close to the losses suffered by the 189th Division itself.

Almost simultaneously with the Battle of the Iron Triangle on the Western Front, the Volunteer Army on the Eastern Front faced a similar critical situation. Huachuan served as an essential passage for more than 100,000 Volunteer Army troops on the Eastern Front. Meanwhile, the US 7th Corps, the Korean 6th Division, a Canadian brigade, and a detachment from the US Marine Corps 1st Division had already arrived near Huachuan, ahead of the main force of the Volunteer Army on the Eastern Front.

The Volunteer Army’s 58th Division had originally received orders to retreat and happened to be passing through Huachuan. Under intense bombardment, division commander Huang Chaotian and political commissar Zhang Yonggeng realized that enemy forces had approached Huachuan.

Had they simply followed their original orders to retreat, there would have been no problem whatsoever. However, drawing on their battlefield experience, they quickly reached a different conclusion: if Huachuan fell into enemy hands, the units following behind could be surrounded and face the risk of total annihilation.

Because communications had been cut, they could neither report back in time nor receive further orders from higher command. After just a few minutes of discussion, Huang Chaotian, Zhang Yonggeng, and the other commanders took the risk and decisively chose to remain in position and intercept the enemy.

At the time, the 58th Division consisted of only slightly more than 7,000 men, yet it was tasked with confronting an enemy force of 28,000 – four times its own size. After 12 days of intense combat, the 58th Division successfully completed its interception mission, suffering 2,795 casualties while inflicting an estimated 7,400 casualties on the enemy. In doing so, it successfully facilitated the withdrawal of more than 100,000 troops of the Volunteer Army’s main force on the Eastern Front.

The Chinese People’s Volunteer Army did not defeat the US military through fearless courage alone; it also relied on exceptional military wisdom. For example, the Volunteer Army made full use of the mountainous terrain of Korea, significantly undermining the advantage provided by the US military’s mechanized forces.

At the time, China was treated as a second-class citizen on the world stage and faced discrimination everywhere. The military achievements of the Volunteer Army earned China international respect and significantly elevated its standing in the world. This legacy continues to inspire the Chinese people to overcome one challenge after another even today. Even a hundred or two hundred years from now, the military accomplishments of the Volunteer Army will remain one of China’s most precious spiritual legacies.

Today, after the United States abducted democratically elected Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro through military force, it seeks to instill fear in many countries around the world. And after years of blockades and sanctions, few believed that Iran could achieve such military success against the United States and Israel.

Yet Iran’s performance in this war has shocked the entire world. Both the Iranian military and civilian population have demonstrated not only a fearless willingness to sacrifice but also exceptional military wisdom. Like the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army, they have made full use of Iran’s mountainous terrain, concealing large numbers of missiles, drones, and production facilities inside caves, thereby significantly undermining the airpower advantage of the US and Israeli forces.

The military achievements of Iran’s armed forces and civilian population will likewise become a tremendous source of spiritual wealth for the Iranian people. Even decades or centuries from now, the Iranian people will undoubtedly remember the sacrifices made by their military and civilians for the nation. Furthermore, Iran’s international standing will be significantly elevated as a result of these military successes.

After approximately nine months of fighting, both the US military and the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army came to realize that neither side could defeat the other, prompting the two sides to begin ceasefire negotiations. However, it took another two full years of negotiations, conducted alongside continued military operations, before a formal armistice agreement was signed and the ceasefire officially took effect.

On the Iranian front, after nearly 160 days of American aggression and Iranian resistance, the United States has begun to feel that it can no longer sustain the war against Iran and is therefore engaging in negotiations. However, bringing the war to an end may still be a protracted process involving negotiations alongside continued military action. Iran needs to be fully psychologically prepared for such a scenario.

Seventy-six years ago, during the Korean War, the US military suffered defeats at the hands of the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army, marking the first major setback in the rise of American military hegemony. General Mark Wayne Clark, the Commander-in-Chief of the UN Forces who ultimately signed the armistice agreement, wrote in his memoirs: “I attained an unenviable distinction: I became the first United States Army commander in history to sign an armistice without achieving victory. I felt a profound sense of disappointment. I believe that my predecessors, Generals MacArthur and Ridgway, must have shared this sentiment.”

The current US-Israel war against Iran – once a genuine ceasefire is finally reached – may well signify the beginning of the end of American military hegemony. This war has left America with a massive pit, one that may ultimately bury American hegemony itself.

From the Korean War to today’s war between the United States, Israel, and Iran, this entire period may ultimately serve as a historical testament to the decline of American imperialist hegemony.

Why is the United States so cavalier about war?

During the war to resist US aggression and aid Korea, although the United States had clearly realized that it could not win the war, it still behaved arrogantly in negotiations, demanding exorbitant terms. At the time, Chinese leader Mao Zedong commented on the United States: “It is not easy to negotiate peace with them. The American imperialists are very arrogant; wherever they can avoid reasoning, they certainly do so; if they attempt to reason at all, it is only because they have no choice.”

Over the course of two years of negotiations conducted alongside continued military engagements, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army ultimately compelled the United States to sign a ceasefire agreement through repeated and devastating military strikes against the US-led UN forces.

Today, the United States is clearly unable to win the war, yet it continues to behave arrogantly, break its promises, and demonstrate a lack of credibility. It resumed hostilities immediately after a memorandum was signed. Therefore, unless the United States is thoroughly defeated, it will not truly agree to a ceasefire that it can be expected to honor and implement effectively.

Whether the war against China or the current war against Iran – none of them have served any genuine national interest of the United States. Rather, they were instigated by forces from other places that were able to easily draw the United States into these wars. Why, then, has the United States been so willing to go to war, seemingly without regard for the consequences? This phenomenon is closely linked to the historical trajectory of Western colonial plunder.

The modern Western world was the first to achieve the Industrial Revolution and therefore gained a significant advantage in weaponry and military technology over the nations it colonized. This technological advantage enabled Western powers to compensate for deficiencies or mistakes in military strategy and tactics, allowing them to prevail regardless of the approach they took.

As a result, when making decisions, they often had little need to consider the risks associated with war. Once they initiated acts of aggression, the outcome would typically be an opportunity for gain. The sooner they launched a war, the sooner they could reap those gains.

Among the various colonial powers, wars and conflicts among them were particularly frequent. These included the War of the Polish Succession, the War of the Austrian Succession, the Seven Years’ War, several Russo-Turkish Wars in the European theater, the Balkan Wars, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Greek War of Independence, the Crimean War, the Prussian-Dutch War, the Austro-Prussian War, the Franco-Prussian War, numerous other Balkan conflicts, and the Irish Rebellion.

Of particular note are the two World Wars, which plunged much of Europe into devastating crisis. Even after World War II, Europe experienced further wars, including the Kosovo War. Objectively, these wars helped ensure that Europe and the United States maintained a leading position in military power for an extended period.

The United States’ unique and advantageous geographical position has also contributed to a relatively low perception of war risk among its population. The country is separated from both Europe and Asia by vast oceans. More importantly, within a radius of several thousand kilometers of the US mainland’s eastern Pacific and western Atlantic approaches, there are relatively few islands belonging to other countries.

To the north lies Canada; to the southeast, the Gulf of Mexico provides a natural barrier; and to the southwest lies Mexico, which has historically been considerably weaker militarily.

As a result, the United States enjoys an exceptionally favorable national security environment. This strategic position has repeatedly placed the country in a situation where the US military can project force against adversaries while those adversaries face enormous difficulties in attacking the US mainland. For example, during the Pacific Theater of World War II, the United States could launch sustained attacks against Japan’s homeland, while Japan was unable to mount a comparable attack against the US mainland.

This highly asymmetric strategic geography has, over time, contributed to a national tendency in the United States to assess the risks of war with an unusual degree of confidence and ease.

Back then, China was extremely reluctant to go to war with the United States. When the question of whether to send troops to Korea was discussed, all the Chinese generals and commanders present unanimously opposed sending troops. These were seasoned military leaders who had just endured decades of warfare and repeatedly faced life-and-death situations; they were certainly not afraid of sacrifice.

However, when confronted with the overwhelming military power of the United States at the time, they deeply resisted the idea of sacrificing their soldiers. Had the US forces not ignored China’s repeated appeals, easily crossed the 38th Parallel, and sent aircraft to bomb Dandong in China, we might genuinely have decided not to send troops at that time. Yet the US military showed no awareness of the risks of war, ignored all warnings, and repeatedly crossed every boundary.

Today, Iran is likewise unwilling to go to war with the United States. In response to previous provocations by the U.S. and Israel, Iran repeatedly exercised restraint. Had the United States and Israel not committed the utterly reckless act of assassinating Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Iran might have continued to exercise restraint.

However, the American perception of the risks of war is remarkably casual. Since the United States has already entered the war, it is unlikely to seriously consider ending it unless it suffers massive military casualties, its war-making capabilities are thoroughly destroyed, and its military is pushed to the point where the entire country experiences genuine fear and profound distress.

During the Korean War, in the period before negotiations began, which centered primarily on the Five Battles, the Chinese and North Korean armies inflicted more than 233,500 casualties on the US-led forces. By contrast, during the two years and 17 days following the start of negotiations, the Chinese and North Korean armies inflicted more than 860,000 casualties on the UN forces – approximately 3.7 times the losses inflicted during the period before negotiations began.

The US military did not readily accept defeat. Over those two years, it resorted to various measures that crossed ethical boundaries in an attempt to salvage its position, including the use of biological weapons, threats to use atomic bombs, and the continued provocation of military confrontations. However, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army remained steadfast in resisting these hostile actions by the US military.

China’s resolute resistance won the respect and support of anti-American forces around the world, including the Soviet Union, as well as enthusiastic support from the Chinese public.

In battles such as Shangganling and Jincheng, the Chinese People’s Volunteer Army fought alongside the Korean People’s Army, inflicting heavy losses on the US-led UN forces and the South Korean army and ultimately forcing the opposing side to sign a ceasefire agreement.

Therefore, if, in the current war, Iran does not inflict significant losses on US and Israeli forces, particularly destroying their active combat forces, then neither the US nor Israel will seriously consider ending the war. Iran should be clear about this.

The end of the traditional Western colonial and exploitative history

The response by the Iranian military and civilian population to the aggression of the United States and Israel may well prove to be a decisive battle marking the end of the Western era of colonialism and plunder.

Its historical significance is profound. The global historical era is undergoing a fundamental transformation, and the period in which Western colonial powers dominated the course of history through their control of the Industrial Revolution is coming to an end.

1. China has comprehensively surpassed the West in industrial civilization

China has not only completed its industrialization but has also moved ahead of the West along the path of the Industrial Revolution.

China’s military-industrial capabilities have likewise advanced dramatically and now surpass those of the US military in many respects. This marks the first time in human history that an emerging industrial power has comprehensively surpassed the military capabilities of the traditional Western colonial powers.

Just ten years ago, such a scenario would have been difficult to imagine.

In 1996, the US Navy deployed just two aircraft carrier strike groups to deter the Chinese military across the Taiwan Strait, forcing the Chinese Navy to transport army artillery aboard civilian vessels to compensate for its lack of naval firepower.

Ultimately, because of the enormous disparity in military capabilities between the two sides – the two US carrier strike groups were considered capable of virtually annihilating China’s entire naval and air forces – the Chinese side chose to withdraw from the military standoff.

In 2016, during the military standoff between the Chinese and American navies in the South China Sea, the US military again deployed two aircraft carrier strike groups. By then, China had acquired weapons such as the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile. However, in addition to deploying DF-21D missiles, China mobilized nearly 100 warships from all three major naval fleets, recalled retired naval personnel to active service, and required all participating personnel to write farewell messages.

At the time, China was fully prepared for a decisive confrontation with the US military, ultimately forcing the two US carrier strike groups to withdraw.

By May 2025, China not only possessed the Fujian-class aircraft carrier, which was technologically more advanced than the US carriers, but also the Type 055 large destroyer, which IS capable of destroying an entire US carrier strike group on its own.

The Chinese Navy has already achieved comprehensive technological superiority over the US military. On November 8, 2024, Pete Hegseth – then a Fox News host – stated on his podcast, The Shawn Ryan Show: “If 15 hypersonic missiles hit, the conflict could potentially destroy 10 US aircraft carriers within the first 20 minutes.”

Although China’s naval and air forces still need to catch up with the United States in terms of quantity, China already holds a significant advantage in quality.

By May 2025, four Chinese aircraft carriers will form a “two-to-two” force posture against the US Navy. China will not only have the capability to prevent the US Navy from approaching its coastline, but will also possess numerous weapons systems capable of sinking US carrier strike groups, such as the YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship missile.

China has more than ten types of weapons that could sink US carrier strike groups while posing severe, or in some cases potentially overwhelming, defensive challenges for the US Navy and Air Force. These include anti-ship ballistic and hypersonic missiles such as the DF-21D, DF-26, DF-27, DF-17, KD-21, YJ-21, YJ-20, YJ-17, and YJ-19. Supersonic anti-ship missiles that could also pose significant defensive challenges include the YJ-12, YJ-12A, YJ-12B, YJ-15, YJ-91, YJ-100, and YJ-18.

From China’s perspective, the US Navy has made relatively little progress over the past 30 years. Many active US Navy warships have relatively long service histories, whereas Chinese naval vessels tend to be newer.

More importantly, over the past decade, the Chinese Navy has commissioned 79 large and medium-sized warships while retiring 23, compared with 34 commissioned and 32 retired by the US Navy. Overall, China added a net 56 large and medium-sized warships during these ten years, while the United States added only two.

Comparison of the number of large and medium-sized warships commissioned and decommissioned by the Chinese and U.S. navies between 2016 and 2026:

On July 29, 2026, China released the trailer for its multimedia documentary Winning, commemorating the 99th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army. The trailer featured a few seconds of footage showing an HT-1 vertical launch system on the bow deck of a Type 052D destroyer launching a YJ-20 missile, marking the first public appearance of imagery showing a Type 052D firing this missile.

To date, 35 Type 052D destroyers have been officially commissioned, along with 10 Type 055 destroyers already in operational service. This means that in the near future, China could have more than 50 major surface combatants capable, according to these claims, of striking US carrier strike groups from outside the effective range of US defenses.

2. Iran has already surpassed West in fields such as hypersonic missiles.

Iran’s industrial and technological capabilities are far greater than the Western world has generally assumed. During the peak period for annual STEM graduates in Iran, roughly from 2014 to 2017, the number reached approximately 330,000-340,000 per year. Although this figure has declined somewhat in recent years, it has remained at around 280,000-300,000 annually.

In contrast, the United States produces approximately 118,000-120,000 engineering graduates each year. The key distinction is that while the United States produces roughly 220,000-250,000 STEM graduates annually, Iran produces approximately 200,000-234,000. In the United States, around 13%-14% of STEM graduates are international students, with international students accounting for nearly 40% of master’s and doctoral degree holders. In Iran, by contrast, STEM graduates are predominantly domestic.

Therefore, Iran’s engineering and R&D capabilities are far from as weak as they are often portrayed. When measured by the number of STEM graduates per 100,000 people, Iran significantly outperforms the United States, Germany, and France.

This strong educational base provides Iran with a substantial domestic pool of technical talent in critical fields such as missile technology, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), aerospace, and nuclear technology.

Many years ago, in an article, I argued that the global development of high-speed hypersonic missiles could be divided into four tiers.

The first tier consists of China, which possesses the world’s most advanced wind-tunnel testing facilities and the most mature technologies for wave-riding vehicles and double-cone warheads.

The second tier consists of Iran and North Korea, which possess operational capabilities and fielded systems involving hypersonic warheads with wave-riding and double-cone configurations.

The third tier consists of Russia and Yemen’s Ansarullah movement, which possess combat-ready systems equipped with dual-cone warheads.

The fourth tier consists of the United States. The Air Force’s AGM-183A ARRW has experienced multiple test failures and has not been deployed. The Air Force previously announced that it “does not intend to procure” the system, although production was revived in its fiscal year 2026 budget request; no final decision has yet been made.

The Navy’s CPS (Conventional Prompt Strike) and the Army’s LRHW “Dark Eagle” share a common hypersonic glide body (C-HGB) and a two-stage booster. Like the Army’s Dark Eagle (LRHW), these systems have only been described as being “approaching deployment.”

Whether they will ultimately be successfully fielded for actual combat remains highly uncertain. Their speed is at least Mach 5, with the glide body transitioning to powered glide after separation, and their range is approximately 2,775 kilometers. Overall, the US military does have developed systems in this field, but these weapons have not yet achieved full operational combat readiness.

Europe, Japan, and Israel have not yet qualified for inclusion in this ranking.

When these views were first proposed, many people dismissed them as a joke. However, practical experience in recent years has, in my view, demonstrated that in the field of hypersonic missiles, the United States and Israel are indeed far behind Iran, by at least two generations.

These factors help explain why Iran has been able to carry out effective retaliatory and devastating strikes against US and Israeli targets during this war imposed on Iran.

Wang Tao

source: Press TV

Iran executes two individuals convicted of spying for Israel’s Mossad during recent conflicts

ANI | Updated: Aug 03, 2026 13:35 IST Tehran [Iran], August 3 (ANI): Iran on Monday executed two…
#Conflict #Conflicts #War #12-daywar #exécution #Farsnewsagency #humanrights #intelligencegathering #Iran #Israel #mossad #Omidbehzad #Pouriasafvat #RamadanWar #spying
https://www.europesays.com/3176927/

How Iran’s Two-Week Retaliatory Strikes Exposed Cracks in US Military Architecture in Persian Gulf

The two-week exchange of fire between the United States and Iran, triggered by Washington’s attempt to force open an illegal southern corridor through the Strait of Hormuz, represented the most consequential direct military confrontation between them since the 40-day war.

The Iranian response to the unprovoked and illegal American aggression was not a chaotic escalation but a methodical, layered military campaign that drew on years of doctrinal development, weapons investment, and operational planning.

The efforts of the Islamic Republic’s armed forces, spearheaded by the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) aerospace and naval branches, executed a decisive and swift response.

What unfolded was a layered operation with nine distinct but interlocking lines of effort. Each line reinforced the others. Infrastructure degradation reduced American operational tempo; area denial forced repositioning that compounded the effects of that degradation; extended-range precision strikes demonstrated that repositioning offered no sanctuary; ISR attrition blinded American targeting systems; terrorist suppression closed the land flank, while strikes on utility infrastructure imposed costs on host nations and denied services to American bases.

One can employ the open-source reporting, satellite imagery, and the observable pattern of strikes to examine each dimension of Iran’s military response in detail, and construct a coherent operational picture. It is getting exceedingly clear that the ceasefire period has very likely translated to a window for reconstitution and preparation in Iranian strategic calculus.

The primacy of solid-fuel tactical ballistic missiles

Iran’s decision to anchor its retaliatory campaign in solid-fuel tactical ballistic missiles was not accidental. It reflected a decade-long investment in a specific capability designed precisely for this kind of confrontation. Solid-fuel ballistic missiles offer decisive operational advantages over their liquid-fuel predecessors. They require no fueling time at the launch site, dramatically compressing the window between a launch order and missile departure.

This matters enormously in a sensitive environment where adversary assets, particularly MQ-9 Reaper drones and maritime patrol aircraft, are actively hunting for launch preparations.

A liquid-fuel missile requires a visible, time-consuming fueling sequence that creates a detectable signature. A solid-fuel missile can be transported, erected, and fired in a fraction of that time, often before a targeting solution can be developed and a strike authorized.

These missiles are road-mobile, launched from transporter-erector-launchers (TELs) that can disperse across Iran’s mountainous terrain, making pre-emptive targeting extremely difficult.

Having destroyed much of the air defense systems belonging to the US and its Arab allies using the older, less sophisticated liquid fuel missiles in previous wars, Iran’s strikes this time primarily relied on its tactical solid-fuel ballistic missile inventory, meaning the various variants of the Fateh family.

Simply put, the choice of solid-fuel systems reflected a calculated assessment of the adversary’s weakened interception capacity, an assessment that proved accurate.

The air defense inventory crisis

Perhaps the single most consequential factor shaping the operational environment was the state of US and allied air defense missile inventories.

The United States entered this round of military aggression with critically depleted stocks of its most capable interceptors. The Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) and Standard Missile-6 (SM-6), which arm Aegis-equipped destroyers and cruisers and provide the American Navy’s primary ballistic missile defense capability at sea, have been drawn down through a combination of expenditure in the Red Sea campaign against Yemen, the costly defense of Israel during two previous wars, and the simple reality that production rates have never kept pace with consumption.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, which provides upper-tier defense against medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, is similarly constrained.

The decision not to employ Aegis and THAAD at full capacity was therefore a forced one. The United States simply could not spend its remaining meager inventory of SM-3 and THAAD interceptors against Iranian tactical ballistic missiles, which, while accurate and damaging, are not the only threats to American interests.

Doing so would have left the United States strategically exposed against another serious contingency in East Asia or Europe. The calculus was that American military bases had to absorb more hits to preserve the interceptors.

Moreover, the Patriot system, which bore the brunt of terminal-phase defense in recent weeks across the region, was in no better condition. Years of expenditure across Ukraine, the occupied territories, the Persian Gulf, and the Red Sea mission have drawn PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE stocks to extremely low levels.

The Pentagon’s response was telling. Rather than accelerating full-capability PAC-3 MSE production, it has chosen to pursue the cheaper, less capable PAC-3ACE Cost Reduction Initiative variant. More revealing still were the recent PAC-2 GEM-T orders, an older interceptor not procured by the US in decades, signaling just how severely stocks had been exhausted.

That the world’s most sophisticated air defense enterprise was compelled to resurrect a 1990s-era design to sustain basic readiness is the starkest indicator of the American munitions crisis that Iranian planners appear to have understood, measured, and exploited with precision.

The situation among Persian Gulf states was equally dire. Saudi Arabia and the UAE had expended substantial portions of their Patriot PAC-3 interceptor stocks during years of Yemeni military missile and drone attacks, and entered the 40-day imposed war with depleted inventories. The situation is even direr in Kuwait and Bahrain, with the Persian Gulf microstates effectively running out of Patriots, being forced to solely rely on American-operated systems.

PAC-3, the most capable variant of the Patriot system against ballistic missiles, has effectively been exhausted in several batteries. PAC-2, the older and less capable variant, is the only available option in certain areas against Iranian missiles, and even that missile is running low as well. The collective air defense architecture of the Persian Gulf states, which had appeared formidable on paper, has been effectively hollowed out.

Iranian operational planners were aware of these facts. The sequencing and volume of Iranian missile salvos during the exchange reflected a deliberate attempt to exploit the gap between what the defense could theoretically intercept and what it could actually intercept given real-world inventory constraints.

Iran’s multi-layered operational strategy

What distinguished Iran’s response from a simple missile barrage was its architectural coherence. Iranian planners did not merely fire missiles at American targets; they executed a phased, multi-domain retaliatory campaign with distinct operational objectives at each stage, each phase creating the conditions for the next.

The campaign can be understood as having five interlocking lines of effort: infrastructure degradation, area denial and operational displacement, precision strike at extended range, ISR and logistics attrition, and proxy terrorist force suppression.

Together, they constituted a campaign design far more sophisticated than most Western analysts had publicly credited Iran with possessing.

The overarching logic was one of progressive operational constriction. Rather than attempting to destroy US forces – an objective beyond Iran’s reach given American conventional superiority – the campaign aimed to degrade, displace, and exhaust them.

Each successful strike reduced American operational capacity; forced repositioning that consumed time and resources, and demonstrated to regional partners that proximity to American occupation forces carried real costs.

Infrastructure degradation

The first phase of the Iranian retaliatory campaign targeted the physical infrastructure of American military power in the Persian Gulf region. This was not indiscriminate bombardment. Satellite imagery and post-strike assessments revealed a pattern of targeting that prioritized specific high-value nodes: radar installations, fuel and ammunition storage facilities, maintenance hangars, and communications infrastructure.

Radar systems were a particular priority. The ability to detect, track, and target Iranian missiles and UAVs depends on a layered network of radar systems. By striking radar installations at air bases, Iran degraded the situational awareness that underpins both offensive operations and defensive intercepts. A radar that is destroyed or forced offline creates a coverage gap that cascades through the entire air defense architecture.

Logistics infrastructure was targeted with equal deliberateness. Fuel depots, ammunition storage sites, and maintenance facilities at American bases around the Persian Gulf were struck with sufficient accuracy to cause meaningful operational disruption.

An air force that cannot fuel its aircraft, rearm them, or repair battle damage cannot sustain sortie rates. The targeting of logistics was a direct attack on the tempo of American air operations to derail the American aggression against Iranian sites and reduce the pressure on Iranian forces.

The accuracy of these strikes, achieved at ranges of several hundred kilometers, validated the operational utility of Iran’s solid-fuel ballistic missile force and demonstrated that the IRGC aerospace force had developed the targeting data, launch procedures, and quality control necessary to achieve consistent results against fixed infrastructure.

The anti-access/area denial campaign

The most strategically significant dimension of the Iranian retaliatory campaign was its systematic execution of an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy that progressively pushed American air operations out of the Persian Gulf and into increasingly distant and operationally constrained locations.

The logic of A2/AD in this context was straightforward. The closer American aircraft operate to Iran, the shorter their flight times, the larger their payloads, the less refueling they require, and the more sorties they can generate per day.

Conversely, every additional hundred kilometers of distance imposes compounding costs: greater tanker support, longer mission times, reduced payload, increased crew fatigue, and more complex coordination. By rendering the Persian Gulf operationally untenable for American air assets, Iran systematically degraded the offensive capacity of the aggressors.

The first displacement was from the Persian Gulf itself. Sustained missile and drone attacks against air bases made sustained operations from those locations unfeasible. The American response was to shift primary air operations to bases in Jordan – Al-Azraq and Muwaffaq Salti –which offered greater distance from Iranian missile systems.

Iran’s response was to extend its reach to Jordan. Multiple strikes against American bases, documented by US casualties and satellite imagery showing damaged hangars and destroyed aircraft, demonstrated that Iran had the capability to contest operations from that distance.

The retaliatory strikes destroyed American aircraft, damaged infrastructure, and forced the US war machine to reconsider the viability of Jordan as a primary operating location.

The second displacement was to the occupied territories. American air assets, including tanker aircraft critical to sustaining long-range strike operations, were pushed further west to Israeli military bases.

This displacement carried its own operational costs. The distance from Iranian targets increased further, and the concentration of American assets in the occupied territories created its own targeting opportunities for Iran, which has demonstrated both the willingness and capability to strike at extended ranges.

A particularly telling indicator of this displacement dynamic was the repositioning of the RQ-4 Global Hawk strategic reconnaissance aircraft, which had been operating from Al Dhafra in the UAE and from Jordanian facilities, to Sigonella Naval Air Station in Sicily.

The Global Hawk, with its long endurance and high-altitude sensors, is a critical ISR asset for tracking Iranian missile launches and providing targeting data. Its displacement to Sicily represented a dramatic reduction in persistent surveillance coverage over Iran and the Persian Gulf, with direct consequences for the effectiveness of American strike operations.

A qualitative leap in extended-range precision

One of the most significant revelations of the recent round of US aggression and Iran’s retaliation was the demonstrated accuracy of Iranian ballistic missiles at ranges exceeding 1,000 kilometers. Previous assessments of Iranian ballistic missile accuracy had generally been skeptical about the ability to achieve consistent precision at such distances. The strikes on Jordanian targets, located well over 1,000 kilometers from Iranian launch sites, completely shattered that skepticism.

The circular error probable (CEP) – the radius within which 50 percent of strikes fall – observed in the Jordanian strikes was dramatically smaller than what Iranian missiles had previously demonstrated at comparable ranges. Strikes that hit specific buildings, specific aircraft shelters, and specific sections of structures, rather than simply landing somewhere on a base, indicated a qualitative improvement in guidance accuracy that demands explanation.

Several hypotheses present themselves, and the evidence suggests that the answer likely involves a combination of all of them. First are technical improvements. Iran may have upgraded the terminal guidance systems on its Kheibarshekan, Haj Qasem, and Fattah variants, potentially incorporating improved inertial navigation, satnav receivers, or optical terminal seekers that allow the missile to better correct its trajectory in the final phase of flight.

Second are tactical improvements. Iranian launch crews may have refined their pre-launch survey procedures, improving the accuracy of the initial position fix that the missile’s inertial navigation system uses as its reference point. Third are software improvements, which mean updates to the missile’s flight control algorithms could improve trajectory optimization and reduce the accumulated errors that degrade accuracy over long distances.

The most likely explanation is a combination of all three – a systematic program of improvement across the technical, procedural, and software dimensions of missile accuracy that had been underway for years and was now being demonstrated operationally for the first time at this range, following the experiences of the 40-day war.

The MQ-9 hunt

The MQ-9 Reaper drone occupied a central and uniquely vulnerable position in American military offensives against Iran. The Reaper is not merely a strike platform but the primary persistent ISR asset used to locate and track mobile Iranian missile launchers, particularly after the heavy attrition of similar Israeli military systems.

Without the MQ-9’s ability to loiter for extended periods, the capacity to find and destroy TELs before they fire, or to conduct battle damage assessment after strikes, is dramatically reduced.

Iran understood this dependency and targeted it systematically during this campaign. The campaign against MQ-9 assets operated on multiple levels. Ground-based air defense systems, which had previously demonstrated the ability to engage high-altitude targets, were used to engage Reapers operating over Iranian territory and adjacent areas.

But Iran also struck the ground infrastructure that supports MQ-9 operations: the maintenance facilities, fuel systems, satellite communication ground stations, and launch-and-recovery equipment that allow the aircraft to operate.

Western media reporting confirmed the destruction of a number of MQ-9 aircraft on the ground at Jordanian bases and, in a particularly striking detail, the destruction of some aircraft while still in their transport canisters before assembly.

This achievement indicates that Iran has developed targeting intelligence on the logistics chain supporting drone operations, not merely the operational bases themselves. Destroying aircraft before they are assembled and made operational is a force multiplication achievement. It eliminates capability before it can be employed, at a point when the aircraft is most vulnerable and least defended.

The cumulative effect of the MQ-9 campaign was a significant degradation of American persistent ISR coverage over Iran. This directly reduced the effectiveness of the hunt for mobile missile launchers, allowing Iranian TELs greater freedom of movement and survivability.

Suppressing proxy terrorist forces in Iraq

From the first day of the exchange, Iran conducted daily retaliatory strikes against armed terrorist groups in Iraq that had the capability and potential motivation to conduct land attacks against Iranian territory or to serve as a forward platform for American-directed operations.

This campaign was methodical and comprehensive, targeting personnel concentrations, weapons storage facilities, and command infrastructure.

Iran’s western flank, which includes the border with Iraq, represents a potential vulnerability. Armed terrorist groups in Iraq, some with historical ties to American intelligence, could in theory conduct cross-border raids, provide intelligence for American strikes, or serve as a distraction that forced Iran to divert defensive resources.

By striking these groups preemptively and continuously, Iran sought to exhaust their operational capacity before it could be brought to bear.

The daily rhythm of these retaliatory strikes was itself a message. It demonstrated that Iran had persistent targeting intelligence on these groups’ locations, that it was willing to expend munitions on this secondary campaign even while conducting the primary campaign against American forces, and that it intended to maintain pressure regardless of any ceasefire negotiations that might be underway.

The logic of reciprocity

Iran’s retaliatory strikes on electrical and water infrastructure in Kuwait represented a deliberate response that operated on two distinct logics simultaneously.

The first was reciprocity: Iran’s own civilian infrastructure had been targeted, and the strikes on Kuwaiti infrastructure were a direct signal that such targeting would not be absorbed without response to the aggressor and its facilitators.

The second was military utility. American forces in the Persian Gulf region depend on host nations’ electrical grids and water supplies for base operations. Infrastructure that serves both civilian and military purposes is, under the laws of armed conflict, a legitimate military target when the military use is substantial and the strike is proportionate.

The targeting of Kuwait’s infrastructure was also a message to Persian Gulf states more broadly. Kuwait, like Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, hosts American military facilities and had provided varying degrees of support to American operations.

By demonstrating the ability and willingness to strike Kuwaiti infrastructure, Iran was communicating that the costs of hosting American forces were not abstract. They were concrete, immediate, and would be borne by the host nation as well as the American military.

The pillars of operational success

Iran’s two-week retaliatory campaign against American aggression and attempts to force open an illegal southern corridor through the Strait of Hormuz largely succeeded on every dimension that its operational planners had identified.

The exchange demonstrated that Iran had developed, over decades of institutional study and investment, a military capability genuinely capable of contesting American power projection in the Persian Gulf region, even after two high-intensity wars.

It demonstrated something relevant to the strategic environment of the region – that the costs of American military aggression in the Persian Gulf had increased substantially; that the infrastructure of American power projection was more vulnerable than pre-war assessments had suggested; and that Iran possessed both the capability and the operational sophistication to exploit those vulnerabilities in a systematic and disciplined manner.

Mohammad Molaei

source: Press TV

How Iran’s Two-Week Retaliatory Strikes Exposed Cracks in US Military Architecture in Persian Gulf

The two-week exchange of fire between the United States and Iran, triggered by Washington’s attempt to force open an illegal southern corridor through the Strait of Hormuz, represented the most consequential direct military confrontation between them since the 40-day war.

The Iranian response to the unprovoked and illegal American aggression was not a chaotic escalation but a methodical, layered military campaign that drew on years of doctrinal development, weapons investment, and operational planning.

The efforts of the Islamic Republic’s armed forces, spearheaded by the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) aerospace and naval branches, executed a decisive and swift response.

What unfolded was a layered operation with nine distinct but interlocking lines of effort. Each line reinforced the others. Infrastructure degradation reduced American operational tempo; area denial forced repositioning that compounded the effects of that degradation; extended-range precision strikes demonstrated that repositioning offered no sanctuary; ISR attrition blinded American targeting systems; terrorist suppression closed the land flank, while strikes on utility infrastructure imposed costs on host nations and denied services to American bases.

One can employ the open-source reporting, satellite imagery, and the observable pattern of strikes to examine each dimension of Iran’s military response in detail, and construct a coherent operational picture. It is getting exceedingly clear that the ceasefire period has very likely translated to a window for reconstitution and preparation in Iranian strategic calculus.

The primacy of solid-fuel tactical ballistic missiles

Iran’s decision to anchor its retaliatory campaign in solid-fuel tactical ballistic missiles was not accidental. It reflected a decade-long investment in a specific capability designed precisely for this kind of confrontation. Solid-fuel ballistic missiles offer decisive operational advantages over their liquid-fuel predecessors. They require no fueling time at the launch site, dramatically compressing the window between a launch order and missile departure.

This matters enormously in a sensitive environment where adversary assets, particularly MQ-9 Reaper drones and maritime patrol aircraft, are actively hunting for launch preparations.

A liquid-fuel missile requires a visible, time-consuming fueling sequence that creates a detectable signature. A solid-fuel missile can be transported, erected, and fired in a fraction of that time, often before a targeting solution can be developed and a strike authorized.

These missiles are road-mobile, launched from transporter-erector-launchers (TELs) that can disperse across Iran’s mountainous terrain, making pre-emptive targeting extremely difficult.

Having destroyed much of the air defense systems belonging to the US and its Arab allies using the older, less sophisticated liquid fuel missiles in previous wars, Iran’s strikes this time primarily relied on its tactical solid-fuel ballistic missile inventory, meaning the various variants of the Fateh family.

Simply put, the choice of solid-fuel systems reflected a calculated assessment of the adversary’s weakened interception capacity, an assessment that proved accurate.

The air defense inventory crisis

Perhaps the single most consequential factor shaping the operational environment was the state of US and allied air defense missile inventories.

The United States entered this round of military aggression with critically depleted stocks of its most capable interceptors. The Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) and Standard Missile-6 (SM-6), which arm Aegis-equipped destroyers and cruisers and provide the American Navy’s primary ballistic missile defense capability at sea, have been drawn down through a combination of expenditure in the Red Sea campaign against Yemen, the costly defense of Israel during two previous wars, and the simple reality that production rates have never kept pace with consumption.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system, which provides upper-tier defense against medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, is similarly constrained.

The decision not to employ Aegis and THAAD at full capacity was therefore a forced one. The United States simply could not spend its remaining meager inventory of SM-3 and THAAD interceptors against Iranian tactical ballistic missiles, which, while accurate and damaging, are not the only threats to American interests.

Doing so would have left the United States strategically exposed against another serious contingency in East Asia or Europe. The calculus was that American military bases had to absorb more hits to preserve the interceptors.

Moreover, the Patriot system, which bore the brunt of terminal-phase defense in recent weeks across the region, was in no better condition. Years of expenditure across Ukraine, the occupied territories, the Persian Gulf, and the Red Sea mission have drawn PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE stocks to extremely low levels.

The Pentagon’s response was telling. Rather than accelerating full-capability PAC-3 MSE production, it has chosen to pursue the cheaper, less capable PAC-3ACE Cost Reduction Initiative variant. More revealing still were the recent PAC-2 GEM-T orders, an older interceptor not procured by the US in decades, signaling just how severely stocks had been exhausted.

That the world’s most sophisticated air defense enterprise was compelled to resurrect a 1990s-era design to sustain basic readiness is the starkest indicator of the American munitions crisis that Iranian planners appear to have understood, measured, and exploited with precision.

The situation among Persian Gulf states was equally dire. Saudi Arabia and the UAE had expended substantial portions of their Patriot PAC-3 interceptor stocks during years of Yemeni military missile and drone attacks, and entered the 40-day imposed war with depleted inventories. The situation is even direr in Kuwait and Bahrain, with the Persian Gulf microstates effectively running out of Patriots, being forced to solely rely on American-operated systems.

PAC-3, the most capable variant of the Patriot system against ballistic missiles, has effectively been exhausted in several batteries. PAC-2, the older and less capable variant, is the only available option in certain areas against Iranian missiles, and even that missile is running low as well. The collective air defense architecture of the Persian Gulf states, which had appeared formidable on paper, has been effectively hollowed out.

Iranian operational planners were aware of these facts. The sequencing and volume of Iranian missile salvos during the exchange reflected a deliberate attempt to exploit the gap between what the defense could theoretically intercept and what it could actually intercept given real-world inventory constraints.

Iran’s multi-layered operational strategy

What distinguished Iran’s response from a simple missile barrage was its architectural coherence. Iranian planners did not merely fire missiles at American targets; they executed a phased, multi-domain retaliatory campaign with distinct operational objectives at each stage, each phase creating the conditions for the next.

The campaign can be understood as having five interlocking lines of effort: infrastructure degradation, area denial and operational displacement, precision strike at extended range, ISR and logistics attrition, and proxy terrorist force suppression.

Together, they constituted a campaign design far more sophisticated than most Western analysts had publicly credited Iran with possessing.

The overarching logic was one of progressive operational constriction. Rather than attempting to destroy US forces – an objective beyond Iran’s reach given American conventional superiority – the campaign aimed to degrade, displace, and exhaust them.

Each successful strike reduced American operational capacity; forced repositioning that consumed time and resources, and demonstrated to regional partners that proximity to American occupation forces carried real costs.

Infrastructure degradation

The first phase of the Iranian retaliatory campaign targeted the physical infrastructure of American military power in the Persian Gulf region. This was not indiscriminate bombardment. Satellite imagery and post-strike assessments revealed a pattern of targeting that prioritized specific high-value nodes: radar installations, fuel and ammunition storage facilities, maintenance hangars, and communications infrastructure.

Radar systems were a particular priority. The ability to detect, track, and target Iranian missiles and UAVs depends on a layered network of radar systems. By striking radar installations at air bases, Iran degraded the situational awareness that underpins both offensive operations and defensive intercepts. A radar that is destroyed or forced offline creates a coverage gap that cascades through the entire air defense architecture.

Logistics infrastructure was targeted with equal deliberateness. Fuel depots, ammunition storage sites, and maintenance facilities at American bases around the Persian Gulf were struck with sufficient accuracy to cause meaningful operational disruption.

An air force that cannot fuel its aircraft, rearm them, or repair battle damage cannot sustain sortie rates. The targeting of logistics was a direct attack on the tempo of American air operations to derail the American aggression against Iranian sites and reduce the pressure on Iranian forces.

The accuracy of these strikes, achieved at ranges of several hundred kilometers, validated the operational utility of Iran’s solid-fuel ballistic missile force and demonstrated that the IRGC aerospace force had developed the targeting data, launch procedures, and quality control necessary to achieve consistent results against fixed infrastructure.

The anti-access/area denial campaign

The most strategically significant dimension of the Iranian retaliatory campaign was its systematic execution of an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy that progressively pushed American air operations out of the Persian Gulf and into increasingly distant and operationally constrained locations.

The logic of A2/AD in this context was straightforward. The closer American aircraft operate to Iran, the shorter their flight times, the larger their payloads, the less refueling they require, and the more sorties they can generate per day.

Conversely, every additional hundred kilometers of distance imposes compounding costs: greater tanker support, longer mission times, reduced payload, increased crew fatigue, and more complex coordination. By rendering the Persian Gulf operationally untenable for American air assets, Iran systematically degraded the offensive capacity of the aggressors.

The first displacement was from the Persian Gulf itself. Sustained missile and drone attacks against air bases made sustained operations from those locations unfeasible. The American response was to shift primary air operations to bases in Jordan – Al-Azraq and Muwaffaq Salti –which offered greater distance from Iranian missile systems.

Iran’s response was to extend its reach to Jordan. Multiple strikes against American bases, documented by US casualties and satellite imagery showing damaged hangars and destroyed aircraft, demonstrated that Iran had the capability to contest operations from that distance.

The retaliatory strikes destroyed American aircraft, damaged infrastructure, and forced the US war machine to reconsider the viability of Jordan as a primary operating location.

The second displacement was to the occupied territories. American air assets, including tanker aircraft critical to sustaining long-range strike operations, were pushed further west to Israeli military bases.

This displacement carried its own operational costs. The distance from Iranian targets increased further, and the concentration of American assets in the occupied territories created its own targeting opportunities for Iran, which has demonstrated both the willingness and capability to strike at extended ranges.

A particularly telling indicator of this displacement dynamic was the repositioning of the RQ-4 Global Hawk strategic reconnaissance aircraft, which had been operating from Al Dhafra in the UAE and from Jordanian facilities, to Sigonella Naval Air Station in Sicily.

The Global Hawk, with its long endurance and high-altitude sensors, is a critical ISR asset for tracking Iranian missile launches and providing targeting data. Its displacement to Sicily represented a dramatic reduction in persistent surveillance coverage over Iran and the Persian Gulf, with direct consequences for the effectiveness of American strike operations.

A qualitative leap in extended-range precision

One of the most significant revelations of the recent round of US aggression and Iran’s retaliation was the demonstrated accuracy of Iranian ballistic missiles at ranges exceeding 1,000 kilometers. Previous assessments of Iranian ballistic missile accuracy had generally been skeptical about the ability to achieve consistent precision at such distances. The strikes on Jordanian targets, located well over 1,000 kilometers from Iranian launch sites, completely shattered that skepticism.

The circular error probable (CEP) – the radius within which 50 percent of strikes fall – observed in the Jordanian strikes was dramatically smaller than what Iranian missiles had previously demonstrated at comparable ranges. Strikes that hit specific buildings, specific aircraft shelters, and specific sections of structures, rather than simply landing somewhere on a base, indicated a qualitative improvement in guidance accuracy that demands explanation.

Several hypotheses present themselves, and the evidence suggests that the answer likely involves a combination of all of them. First are technical improvements. Iran may have upgraded the terminal guidance systems on its Kheibarshekan, Haj Qasem, and Fattah variants, potentially incorporating improved inertial navigation, satnav receivers, or optical terminal seekers that allow the missile to better correct its trajectory in the final phase of flight.

Second are tactical improvements. Iranian launch crews may have refined their pre-launch survey procedures, improving the accuracy of the initial position fix that the missile’s inertial navigation system uses as its reference point. Third are software improvements, which mean updates to the missile’s flight control algorithms could improve trajectory optimization and reduce the accumulated errors that degrade accuracy over long distances.

The most likely explanation is a combination of all three – a systematic program of improvement across the technical, procedural, and software dimensions of missile accuracy that had been underway for years and was now being demonstrated operationally for the first time at this range, following the experiences of the 40-day war.

The MQ-9 hunt

The MQ-9 Reaper drone occupied a central and uniquely vulnerable position in American military offensives against Iran. The Reaper is not merely a strike platform but the primary persistent ISR asset used to locate and track mobile Iranian missile launchers, particularly after the heavy attrition of similar Israeli military systems.

Without the MQ-9’s ability to loiter for extended periods, the capacity to find and destroy TELs before they fire, or to conduct battle damage assessment after strikes, is dramatically reduced.

Iran understood this dependency and targeted it systematically during this campaign. The campaign against MQ-9 assets operated on multiple levels. Ground-based air defense systems, which had previously demonstrated the ability to engage high-altitude targets, were used to engage Reapers operating over Iranian territory and adjacent areas.

But Iran also struck the ground infrastructure that supports MQ-9 operations: the maintenance facilities, fuel systems, satellite communication ground stations, and launch-and-recovery equipment that allow the aircraft to operate.

Western media reporting confirmed the destruction of a number of MQ-9 aircraft on the ground at Jordanian bases and, in a particularly striking detail, the destruction of some aircraft while still in their transport canisters before assembly.

This achievement indicates that Iran has developed targeting intelligence on the logistics chain supporting drone operations, not merely the operational bases themselves. Destroying aircraft before they are assembled and made operational is a force multiplication achievement. It eliminates capability before it can be employed, at a point when the aircraft is most vulnerable and least defended.

The cumulative effect of the MQ-9 campaign was a significant degradation of American persistent ISR coverage over Iran. This directly reduced the effectiveness of the hunt for mobile missile launchers, allowing Iranian TELs greater freedom of movement and survivability.

Suppressing proxy terrorist forces in Iraq

From the first day of the exchange, Iran conducted daily retaliatory strikes against armed terrorist groups in Iraq that had the capability and potential motivation to conduct land attacks against Iranian territory or to serve as a forward platform for American-directed operations.

This campaign was methodical and comprehensive, targeting personnel concentrations, weapons storage facilities, and command infrastructure.

Iran’s western flank, which includes the border with Iraq, represents a potential vulnerability. Armed terrorist groups in Iraq, some with historical ties to American intelligence, could in theory conduct cross-border raids, provide intelligence for American strikes, or serve as a distraction that forced Iran to divert defensive resources.

By striking these groups preemptively and continuously, Iran sought to exhaust their operational capacity before it could be brought to bear.

The daily rhythm of these retaliatory strikes was itself a message. It demonstrated that Iran had persistent targeting intelligence on these groups’ locations, that it was willing to expend munitions on this secondary campaign even while conducting the primary campaign against American forces, and that it intended to maintain pressure regardless of any ceasefire negotiations that might be underway.

The logic of reciprocity

Iran’s retaliatory strikes on electrical and water infrastructure in Kuwait represented a deliberate response that operated on two distinct logics simultaneously.

The first was reciprocity: Iran’s own civilian infrastructure had been targeted, and the strikes on Kuwaiti infrastructure were a direct signal that such targeting would not be absorbed without response to the aggressor and its facilitators.

The second was military utility. American forces in the Persian Gulf region depend on host nations’ electrical grids and water supplies for base operations. Infrastructure that serves both civilian and military purposes is, under the laws of armed conflict, a legitimate military target when the military use is substantial and the strike is proportionate.

The targeting of Kuwait’s infrastructure was also a message to Persian Gulf states more broadly. Kuwait, like Bahrain, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, hosts American military facilities and had provided varying degrees of support to American operations.

By demonstrating the ability and willingness to strike Kuwaiti infrastructure, Iran was communicating that the costs of hosting American forces were not abstract. They were concrete, immediate, and would be borne by the host nation as well as the American military.

The pillars of operational success

Iran’s two-week retaliatory campaign against American aggression and attempts to force open an illegal southern corridor through the Strait of Hormuz largely succeeded on every dimension that its operational planners had identified.

The exchange demonstrated that Iran had developed, over decades of institutional study and investment, a military capability genuinely capable of contesting American power projection in the Persian Gulf region, even after two high-intensity wars.

It demonstrated something relevant to the strategic environment of the region – that the costs of American military aggression in the Persian Gulf had increased substantially; that the infrastructure of American power projection was more vulnerable than pre-war assessments had suggested; and that Iran possessed both the capability and the operational sophistication to exploit those vulnerabilities in a systematic and disciplined manner.

Mohammad Molaei

source: Press TV

https://www.europesays.com/iran/230152/ Tehran warns of legal action against supporters of alleged coup plotters #Dey1404Coup #Iran #Israel #January2026Unrest #protesters #RamadanWar #Tehran #TehranProsecutor #usa #warning

Yemen Vows Relentless Strikes on Saudi, Continues Attacks

Yemen will not cease military operations against Saudi Arabia until Riyadh completely lifts its long-standing siege, says a senior official.

Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a senior member of the Ansarullah political bureau, firmly rejected Saudi attempts to deflect blame for recent airspace violations and the bombing of the Sana’a International Airport.

Recent escalation has seen Yemeni forces strike critical Saudi oil facilities and down hostile drones violating Yemen’s airspace.

Riyadh has sought to attribute the presence of a hostile drone over Yemeni territory to inside opponents, attempting to frame the aggression as an internal Yemeni conflict.

“Any violation of Yemen’s sovereignty will not exempt Saudi Arabia from punishment,” Bukhaiti said. “Our weapons will never be pointed at internal opponents; they are reserved exclusively for the Saudi enemy.”

Yemen’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the Saudi violation of Yemeni airspace as an unacceptable act of aggression that will be met with a decisive response guaranteed by all international regulations.

The ministry said in a statement that the successful downing of Saudi drones within Yemen’s borders serves as undeniable proof of Riyadh’s ongoing violations as well as Yemen’s sovereign right to reciprocate.

Addressing international critics who condemn Yemen’s defense of its airspace, the ministry said, “Open your own airspace to Saudi aviation, let it roam freely, and allow it to target whomever it wishes.”

The ministry also underscored the “unity of arenas” with the Axis of Resistance as a religious, strategic principle.

Furthermore, it strongly condemned recent Saudi threats against neighboring Iraq, warning Riyadh that its policy of antagonizing its Arab and Islamic neighbors will ultimately result in catastrophic losses for the kingdom.

The diplomatic and military warnings follow a series of precision strikes by the Yemeni Armed Forces targeting sensitive crude oil supply and transport sites linking eastern Saudi Arabia to the critical Red Sea export hub of Yanbu.

Military spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the operations were a direct response to Saudi drone incursions.

The strikes on the Yanbu corridor are particularly significant.

Following the outbreak of the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran in February, and Iran’s subsequent enforcement of its sovereign rights in the Strait of Hormuz, Saudi Arabia has been forced to reroute its crude output to Yanbu via its east-west pipeline to bypass the disrupted waterway.

In response to the 12-year siege, Yemen recently announced a comprehensive maritime blockade of Saudi oil industry in the Red Sea, a legitimate measure that has sent shockwaves through global energy markets and placed immense economic pressure on Riyadh.

Desperate to break the blockade, Saudi Arabia resumed airstrikes on Yemen’s vital port of Hodeidah, hypocritically claiming the attacks were necessary to “protect shipping” while continuing to strangle Yemen’s own lifelines.

This latest flare-up marks the most significant exchange of fire between Yemen and Saudi Arabia in years, effectively shattering the remnants of the 2022 UN-brokered truce.

Yemen Vows Relentless Strikes on Saudi, Continues Attacks

Yemen will not cease military operations against Saudi Arabia until Riyadh completely lifts its long-standing siege, says a senior official.

Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a senior member of the Ansarullah political bureau, firmly rejected Saudi attempts to deflect blame for recent airspace violations and the bombing of the Sana’a International Airport.

Recent escalation has seen Yemeni forces strike critical Saudi oil facilities and down hostile drones violating Yemen’s airspace.

Riyadh has sought to attribute the presence of a hostile drone over Yemeni territory to inside opponents, attempting to frame the aggression as an internal Yemeni conflict.

“Any violation of Yemen’s sovereignty will not exempt Saudi Arabia from punishment,” Bukhaiti said. “Our weapons will never be pointed at internal opponents; they are reserved exclusively for the Saudi enemy.”

Yemen’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the Saudi violation of Yemeni airspace as an unacceptable act of aggression that will be met with a decisive response guaranteed by all international regulations.

The ministry said in a statement that the successful downing of Saudi drones within Yemen’s borders serves as undeniable proof of Riyadh’s ongoing violations as well as Yemen’s sovereign right to reciprocate.

Addressing international critics who condemn Yemen’s defense of its airspace, the ministry said, “Open your own airspace to Saudi aviation, let it roam freely, and allow it to target whomever it wishes.”

The ministry also underscored the “unity of arenas” with the Axis of Resistance as a religious, strategic principle.

Furthermore, it strongly condemned recent Saudi threats against neighboring Iraq, warning Riyadh that its policy of antagonizing its Arab and Islamic neighbors will ultimately result in catastrophic losses for the kingdom.

The diplomatic and military warnings follow a series of precision strikes by the Yemeni Armed Forces targeting sensitive crude oil supply and transport sites linking eastern Saudi Arabia to the critical Red Sea export hub of Yanbu.

Military spokesman Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the operations were a direct response to Saudi drone incursions.

The strikes on the Yanbu corridor are particularly significant.

Following the outbreak of the US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran in February, and Iran’s subsequent enforcement of its sovereign rights in the Strait of Hormuz, Saudi Arabia has been forced to reroute its crude output to Yanbu via its east-west pipeline to bypass the disrupted waterway.

In response to the 12-year siege, Yemen recently announced a comprehensive maritime blockade of Saudi oil industry in the Red Sea, a legitimate measure that has sent shockwaves through global energy markets and placed immense economic pressure on Riyadh.

Desperate to break the blockade, Saudi Arabia resumed airstrikes on Yemen’s vital port of Hodeidah, hypocritically claiming the attacks were necessary to “protect shipping” while continuing to strangle Yemen’s own lifelines.

This latest flare-up marks the most significant exchange of fire between Yemen and Saudi Arabia in years, effectively shattering the remnants of the 2022 UN-brokered truce.

Ansarallah Targets Aramco Sites in Retaliation for Saudi Attacks on Hodeidah

The Yemeni Armed Forces, affiliated with Ansarallah, announced on Saturday that they carried out two large-scale military operations targeting Saudi Aramco facilities, describing the attacks as retaliation for Saudi Arabia’s “blatant and criminal aggression” against Yemen.

Asarallah military spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the first operation targeted sensitive Aramco facilities in Jizan with dozens of ballistic missiles and drones, while the second struck Aramco-linked facilities in Yanbu using ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones.

According to Saree, both operations achieved their objectives by delivering “accurate and direct strikes” on their intended targets.

Following the reported attacks, social media footage showed thick plumes of smoke rising from Saudi Aramco’s refinery in Jizan, while NASA’s FIRMS/VIIRS satellite monitoring system detected multiple fire hotspots at the facility.

Response to Saudi Strikes

Saree said the operations came in direct response to overnight Saudi airstrikes targeting the port city of Hodeidah, Kamaran Island, and other civilian facilities in western Yemen.

He described the Saudi attacks as a violation of Yemen’s sovereignty that caused both material damage and broader harm to the country.

The military spokesperson also said Yemeni air defenses confronted Saudi warplanes after they entered Yemeni airspace, forcing them to withdraw before carrying out what he described as additional attacks.

“The latest aggression demonstrates Saudi Arabia’s determination to continue its blockade of Yemen and violate its sovereignty,” Saree said.

He stressed that the Yemeni Armed Forces remain committed to defending the country and warned that the naval blockade imposed on Saudi Arabia would remain in effect.

“We will not hesitate to expand our operations and escalate our actions based on developments in the coming hours and days, within the equation of a blockade for a blockade and an escalation for an escalation,” he added.

Ansarallah Condemns Saudi Escalation

Earlier, Ansarallah’s Political Bureau condemned Saudi strikes on Hodeidah province and Kamaran Island, describing them as a dangerous escalation and an extension of the blockade imposed on Yemen.

The movement said Riyadh had deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure in an attempt to compensate for its military and political failures.

It warned that the attacks “will not pass without a response,” reiterating that the Yemeni deterrence strategy of “blockade for blockade, ports for ports, and escalation for escalation” remains in force.

Sana’a: Saudi Arabia Must Bear the Consequences

Yemen’s Foreign Ministry in Sana’a likewise warned that Saudi Arabia would bear responsibility for the consequences of its latest attacks.

The ministry accused Riyadh of choosing military escalation instead of responding to repeated Yemeni demands to end the blockade that has entered its twelfth year.

It warned that the strikes marked a new phase in the confrontation and would alter the course of the conflict.

Abdul Salam: Riyadh Keeps Yemen Under Siege

Mohammed Abdul Salam, head of Sana’a’s negotiating delegation, said recent Saudi actions demonstrate that Riyadh remains committed to maintaining the blockade on Yemen.

He pointed to the Saudi strike on Sana’a International Airport earlier this month as evidence that the kingdom intends to keep the airport closed unless it authorizes flights itself.

Abdul Salam accused Saudi Arabia of violating Yemen’s sovereignty while simultaneously claiming to defend it, saying Riyadh was attempting to compensate for its failure during years of war by continuing the blockade.

He also condemned the latest attacks on Hodeidah and Kamaran Island, warning that “any aggression against Yemen will not pass without a response and the Saudi regime must bear the consequences of its criminal acts.”

‘Forcing Yemen to Surrender Is Impossible’

Meanwhile, Nasser al-Amer, head of Yemen’s SABA News Agency, told Al Mayadeen that the Yemeni response to the latest Saudi escalation would be significant.

“The Yemeni response to Saudi escalation will be significant,” he said, adding that “forcing the Yemeni people to surrender is impossible, and the Saudi side must lift the blockade.”

The latest exchange marks one of the most significant direct confrontations between Saudi Arabia and Yemen in recent months, raising tensions around the Red Sea as both sides signal that further escalation is likely.

Ansarallah Targets Aramco Sites in Retaliation for Saudi Attacks on Hodeidah

The Yemeni Armed Forces, affiliated with Ansarallah, announced on Saturday that they carried out two large-scale military operations targeting Saudi Aramco facilities, describing the attacks as retaliation for Saudi Arabia’s “blatant and criminal aggression” against Yemen.

Asarallah military spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said the first operation targeted sensitive Aramco facilities in Jizan with dozens of ballistic missiles and drones, while the second struck Aramco-linked facilities in Yanbu using ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones.

According to Saree, both operations achieved their objectives by delivering “accurate and direct strikes” on their intended targets.

Following the reported attacks, social media footage showed thick plumes of smoke rising from Saudi Aramco’s refinery in Jizan, while NASA’s FIRMS/VIIRS satellite monitoring system detected multiple fire hotspots at the facility.

Response to Saudi Strikes

Saree said the operations came in direct response to overnight Saudi airstrikes targeting the port city of Hodeidah, Kamaran Island, and other civilian facilities in western Yemen.

He described the Saudi attacks as a violation of Yemen’s sovereignty that caused both material damage and broader harm to the country.

The military spokesperson also said Yemeni air defenses confronted Saudi warplanes after they entered Yemeni airspace, forcing them to withdraw before carrying out what he described as additional attacks.

“The latest aggression demonstrates Saudi Arabia’s determination to continue its blockade of Yemen and violate its sovereignty,” Saree said.

He stressed that the Yemeni Armed Forces remain committed to defending the country and warned that the naval blockade imposed on Saudi Arabia would remain in effect.

“We will not hesitate to expand our operations and escalate our actions based on developments in the coming hours and days, within the equation of a blockade for a blockade and an escalation for an escalation,” he added.

Ansarallah Condemns Saudi Escalation

Earlier, Ansarallah’s Political Bureau condemned Saudi strikes on Hodeidah province and Kamaran Island, describing them as a dangerous escalation and an extension of the blockade imposed on Yemen.

The movement said Riyadh had deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure in an attempt to compensate for its military and political failures.

It warned that the attacks “will not pass without a response,” reiterating that the Yemeni deterrence strategy of “blockade for blockade, ports for ports, and escalation for escalation” remains in force.

Sana’a: Saudi Arabia Must Bear the Consequences

Yemen’s Foreign Ministry in Sana’a likewise warned that Saudi Arabia would bear responsibility for the consequences of its latest attacks.

The ministry accused Riyadh of choosing military escalation instead of responding to repeated Yemeni demands to end the blockade that has entered its twelfth year.

It warned that the strikes marked a new phase in the confrontation and would alter the course of the conflict.

Abdul Salam: Riyadh Keeps Yemen Under Siege

Mohammed Abdul Salam, head of Sana’a’s negotiating delegation, said recent Saudi actions demonstrate that Riyadh remains committed to maintaining the blockade on Yemen.

He pointed to the Saudi strike on Sana’a International Airport earlier this month as evidence that the kingdom intends to keep the airport closed unless it authorizes flights itself.

Abdul Salam accused Saudi Arabia of violating Yemen’s sovereignty while simultaneously claiming to defend it, saying Riyadh was attempting to compensate for its failure during years of war by continuing the blockade.

He also condemned the latest attacks on Hodeidah and Kamaran Island, warning that “any aggression against Yemen will not pass without a response and the Saudi regime must bear the consequences of its criminal acts.”

‘Forcing Yemen to Surrender Is Impossible’

Meanwhile, Nasser al-Amer, head of Yemen’s SABA News Agency, told Al Mayadeen that the Yemeni response to the latest Saudi escalation would be significant.

“The Yemeni response to Saudi escalation will be significant,” he said, adding that “forcing the Yemeni people to surrender is impossible, and the Saudi side must lift the blockade.”

The latest exchange marks one of the most significant direct confrontations between Saudi Arabia and Yemen in recent months, raising tensions around the Red Sea as both sides signal that further escalation is likely.

Iranian Strikes Forced US to Halt, Revisit Regional Strategy: Army Spokesman

Iran’s decisive retaliatory strikes in the face of the United States’ violations have forced Washington to halt and revisit its regional strategy, Army spokesman says.

Brigadier General Mohammad Akraminia made the remarks during a televised interview on Saturday, stating that coordinated operations by the Army and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), including airstrikes, missile strikes, and drone operations against US positions in Kuwait, Qatar, and Erbil, Iraq, have brought Washington’s regional strategy to a halt and forced it to alter its strategic approach.

Over the past 15 days, he said, the operations focused on US military bases in Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain, describing them as among Washington’s most important military installations in the region.

According to the spokesperson, decades of US investment in regional military infrastructure, particularly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, had made those facilities strategically significant.

However, as a result of Iran’s reprisal, many US facilities across the region have suffered damage severe enough to prevent them from carrying out their previous missions, he stated.

Akraminia cited the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain as a case in point. “There is now virtually nothing left of this base,” he said, hailing the Iranian operations for rendering the outpost effectively unusable.

The spokesman referred to US President Donald Trump’s acknowledgement that Washington had supplied weapons to counterrevolutionary elements based in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, but noted that Iranian strikes has robbed those elements of their operational capability and virtually destroyed the American military infrastructure in Erbil.

The official credited the success of the drone strikes among the operations to Iran’s employing a new generation of loitering munitions, citing deployment of the country’s Arash-2 drones.

‘Retaliatory deterrence’

The Army spokesperson described Iran’s military strategy in the face of the American violations as one of “retaliatory deterrence.”

He said the Islamic Republic’s objective was to raise the cost of aggression sufficiently to deter future attacks.

In the face of the retaliation, the United States has reached a strategic impasse, lacking a coherent strategy either to continue the war or bring it to an end, Akraminia said. The official cited contradictory statements by the US president as evidence of strategic confusion.

Akraminia, meanwhile, said the United States would also bear the greatest long-term strategic costs of the cycle arising out of its violations in light of the significant economic, geopolitical, and security consequences that have resulted from the Islamic Republic’s reprisal.

Elsewhere in his remarks, the spokesperson noted how the United States and the Israeli regime also failed to achieve either their declared or broader objectives during their unprovoked aggression against the Islamic Republic that took place from February 28 to April 7.

He noted that Washington’s publicly stated goals included destroying Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities and eliminating the regional Resistance Front, besides reminding how the US president had also demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender” during the early stages of the aggression.

According to the official, the adversaries also pursued broader objectives, including overthrowing Iran’s Islamic establishment, partitioning the country, and advancing the so-called “Greater Israel” project that features Tel Aviv’s expansionist ambitions.

None of those objectives was, however, achieved, he stated, attributing the outcome to public support, the Islamic Republic’s sagacious leadership, and the performance of the country’s Armed Forces.

“Tonight marks the 147th consecutive night of the people’s presence and support for the Islamic establishment, and this steadfastness demonstrates that the enemy has failed to accomplish its objectives,” the spokesman said, referring to unfailing presence across the country’s streets in support of the Islamic Republic and its defensive and retaliatory operations.

Iranian Strikes Forced US to Halt, Revisit Regional Strategy: Army Spokesman

Iran’s decisive retaliatory strikes in the face of the United States’ violations have forced Washington to halt and revisit its regional strategy, Army spokesman says.

Brigadier General Mohammad Akraminia made the remarks during a televised interview on Saturday, stating that coordinated operations by the Army and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), including airstrikes, missile strikes, and drone operations against US positions in Kuwait, Qatar, and Erbil, Iraq, have brought Washington’s regional strategy to a halt and forced it to alter its strategic approach.

Over the past 15 days, he said, the operations focused on US military bases in Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain, describing them as among Washington’s most important military installations in the region.

According to the spokesperson, decades of US investment in regional military infrastructure, particularly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, had made those facilities strategically significant.

However, as a result of Iran’s reprisal, many US facilities across the region have suffered damage severe enough to prevent them from carrying out their previous missions, he stated.

Akraminia cited the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain as a case in point. “There is now virtually nothing left of this base,” he said, hailing the Iranian operations for rendering the outpost effectively unusable.

The spokesman referred to US President Donald Trump’s acknowledgement that Washington had supplied weapons to counterrevolutionary elements based in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region, but noted that Iranian strikes has robbed those elements of their operational capability and virtually destroyed the American military infrastructure in Erbil.

The official credited the success of the drone strikes among the operations to Iran’s employing a new generation of loitering munitions, citing deployment of the country’s Arash-2 drones.

‘Retaliatory deterrence’

The Army spokesperson described Iran’s military strategy in the face of the American violations as one of “retaliatory deterrence.”

He said the Islamic Republic’s objective was to raise the cost of aggression sufficiently to deter future attacks.

In the face of the retaliation, the United States has reached a strategic impasse, lacking a coherent strategy either to continue the war or bring it to an end, Akraminia said. The official cited contradictory statements by the US president as evidence of strategic confusion.

Akraminia, meanwhile, said the United States would also bear the greatest long-term strategic costs of the cycle arising out of its violations in light of the significant economic, geopolitical, and security consequences that have resulted from the Islamic Republic’s reprisal.

Elsewhere in his remarks, the spokesperson noted how the United States and the Israeli regime also failed to achieve either their declared or broader objectives during their unprovoked aggression against the Islamic Republic that took place from February 28 to April 7.

He noted that Washington’s publicly stated goals included destroying Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities and eliminating the regional Resistance Front, besides reminding how the US president had also demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender” during the early stages of the aggression.

According to the official, the adversaries also pursued broader objectives, including overthrowing Iran’s Islamic establishment, partitioning the country, and advancing the so-called “Greater Israel” project that features Tel Aviv’s expansionist ambitions.

None of those objectives was, however, achieved, he stated, attributing the outcome to public support, the Islamic Republic’s sagacious leadership, and the performance of the country’s Armed Forces.

“Tonight marks the 147th consecutive night of the people’s presence and support for the Islamic establishment, and this steadfastness demonstrates that the enemy has failed to accomplish its objectives,” the spokesman said, referring to unfailing presence across the country’s streets in support of the Islamic Republic and its defensive and retaliatory operations.

Ansarallah Renews Strikes on Ships Violating Blockade

The Yemeni Armed Forces announced a military operation targeting two Saudi oil tankers, identified as “ENCELIA” and “LAYLA”, noting that the vessels had violated a ban imposed by the Yemeni side.

Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree said the operation was carried out using a number of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as drones, adding that the strikes accurately hit their targets.

Saree said the operation came as part of ongoing maritime operations, adding that the Yemeni Armed Forces had also forced approximately 10 ships to retreat and return.

Later, the Saudi General Authority for Transport admitted that the Saudi-operated vessel ENCELIA came under attack while sailing in the Red Sea, causing a fire to break out in the ship’s bow.

The authority confirmed that all crew members are safe, adding that the relevant authorities have taken all necessary measures to secure the vessel and its crew.

Yemen warns KSA against any blunders

Meanwhile, the military spokesperson vowed that the Yemeni Armed Forces would continue their maritime operations against the Saudi enemy and maintain a “blockade for blockade” response.

The Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson warned Saudi Arabia against carrying out any blunders or aggression against Yemen, saying any such action would be met with major operations deep inside Saudi territory.

The statement did not provide further details on the reported condition of the two tankers or whether there were any casualties or material damage.

Sanaa cautions Saudi amid enforced seige

Major General Mohammad Al-Qadri, commander of Yemen’s Coastal Defense Forces, announced on Tuesday that the decision to impose the maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia had entered into force as of Monday afternoon, stressing that economic security can no longer be separated from military security and that all options remain open, with the highest level of readiness maintained.

According to al-Qadri, the Yemeni naval forces possess the combat capability required to enforce the decision, just as they previously acted against the Israeli enemy by preventing its vessels from passing through the Red Sea and Arabian Sea.

He said Yemen had become a formidable regional power, with military capabilities that enable it to establish new deterrence equations.

The two options facing Saudi Arabia

The Coastal Defense Forces commander stressed that Saudi Arabia now faces only two options: either lift the blockade and end its intervention, or continue escalating, which he warned would come at Riyadh’s own peril.

He affirmed full readiness to implement the equation of “blockade for blockade, airports for airports, and ports for ports.”

Al-Qadri said that, four years after the truce, the Saudi regime continues to engage in maneuvering, stalling, and evading implementation of the agreement reached under UN and Omani auspices, forcing Yemen to move toward direct, field-based deterrence measures.

He also said that Sanaa is more committed than any other Arab capital to avoiding confrontation with any country in the region, but that Saudi Arabia had left Yemen with no other option.

Ansarallah Renews Strikes on Ships Violating Blockade

The Yemeni Armed Forces announced a military operation targeting two Saudi oil tankers, identified as “ENCELIA” and “LAYLA”, noting that the vessels had violated a ban imposed by the Yemeni side.

Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree said the operation was carried out using a number of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as drones, adding that the strikes accurately hit their targets.

Saree said the operation came as part of ongoing maritime operations, adding that the Yemeni Armed Forces had also forced approximately 10 ships to retreat and return.

Later, the Saudi General Authority for Transport admitted that the Saudi-operated vessel ENCELIA came under attack while sailing in the Red Sea, causing a fire to break out in the ship’s bow.

The authority confirmed that all crew members are safe, adding that the relevant authorities have taken all necessary measures to secure the vessel and its crew.

Yemen warns KSA against any blunders

Meanwhile, the military spokesperson vowed that the Yemeni Armed Forces would continue their maritime operations against the Saudi enemy and maintain a “blockade for blockade” response.

The Yemeni Armed Forces spokesperson warned Saudi Arabia against carrying out any blunders or aggression against Yemen, saying any such action would be met with major operations deep inside Saudi territory.

The statement did not provide further details on the reported condition of the two tankers or whether there were any casualties or material damage.

Sanaa cautions Saudi amid enforced seige

Major General Mohammad Al-Qadri, commander of Yemen’s Coastal Defense Forces, announced on Tuesday that the decision to impose the maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia had entered into force as of Monday afternoon, stressing that economic security can no longer be separated from military security and that all options remain open, with the highest level of readiness maintained.

According to al-Qadri, the Yemeni naval forces possess the combat capability required to enforce the decision, just as they previously acted against the Israeli enemy by preventing its vessels from passing through the Red Sea and Arabian Sea.

He said Yemen had become a formidable regional power, with military capabilities that enable it to establish new deterrence equations.

The two options facing Saudi Arabia

The Coastal Defense Forces commander stressed that Saudi Arabia now faces only two options: either lift the blockade and end its intervention, or continue escalating, which he warned would come at Riyadh’s own peril.

He affirmed full readiness to implement the equation of “blockade for blockade, airports for airports, and ports for ports.”

Al-Qadri said that, four years after the truce, the Saudi regime continues to engage in maneuvering, stalling, and evading implementation of the agreement reached under UN and Omani auspices, forcing Yemen to move toward direct, field-based deterrence measures.

He also said that Sanaa is more committed than any other Arab capital to avoiding confrontation with any country in the region, but that Saudi Arabia had left Yemen with no other option.

Ansarallah Imposes Naval Blockade on Saudi, Signaling Total West Asian Oil Embargo

Yemen’s Armed Forces announced an immediate maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia, military spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said on Monday. The armed forces said the move came in response to the continued blockade and aggression against Yemen, adding that the country’s leadership had been left with no alternative but to act.

Saree explained that Saudi Arabia had continued its unjust blockade against the Yemeni people for nearly 12 years through the restriction of ports and airports by land, sea, and air, as well as the targeting of Sanaa International Airport.

This, according to Saree, has entitled the Yemenis to confront the measures “by all available means.”

He declared that the decision followed calls made during the “Warning and Mobilization Friday” million-man demonstrations, as well as tribal gatherings and rallies held across the country.

“The Yemeni Armed Forces announce a ban on maritime navigation by the criminal Saudi enemy under the equation of blockade for blockade. This decision shall take effect immediately upon the issuance of this statement,” Saree stressed.

He added, “We affirm the right of our great people to confront blockade with blockade and comprehensive escalation with comprehensive escalation and to uphold this equation.”

The Yemeni official also said they were fully prepared for all possible scenarios and warned against further escalation.

“The Yemeni Armed Forces affirm their full readiness for all options. Any reckless action undertaken by the foolish Saudi enemy through comprehensive escalation will be met with a comprehensive and severe escalation, by the will and power of Allah,” he said.

Fully ready for all scenarios

Saree called on Yemenis to continue general mobilization, maintain preparedness, and reinforce the frontlines by joining the fight.

“We call upon the sons of our great people to continue general mobilization, maintain a state of general preparedness, remain fully ready for all scenarios and developments, and reinforce the frontlines by joining the fight,” he stated.

Saree also praised participants in the “Warning and Mobilization” rallies and pledged to continue efforts to end the blockade.

“We extend our greetings, with pride and reverence, to the sons of our great Yemeni people who participated in the ‘Warning and Mobilization’ million-man rally in an unparalleled manner. We affirm to them that we will spare no effort in restoring their usurped rights and ending the unjust blockade imposed upon them, regardless of the consequences and repercussions, seeking Allah’s help and placing our trust in Him,” he concluded.

Yemen compelled to impose maritime ban on Saudi Arabia after prolonged delays: Sanaa

The head of the Sanaa negotiating delegation, Mohammed Abdulsalam, said the Yemeni Armed Forces’ decision to impose a maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia was a step Yemen was compelled to take.

Abdulsalam said Saudi Arabia had been given a lengthy period to fulfill its obligations and address the repercussions of its aggression against Yemen.

He accused the Saudi government of choosing “ignorance, procrastination, and waiting out the situation” in order to avoid meeting its obligations, adding that Riyadh had sought to deny its role in the blockade imposed on Yemen.

Abdulsalam said Saudi Arabia was responsible for the continued closure of Sanaa International Airport over the past years and was the main instigator behind the maritime blockade.

He warned that the belief that the blockade could be prolonged indefinitely was “a mistaken assumption and a losing bet,” saying the Yemeni people had delivered a decisive message through “unprecedented mass demonstrations” that the period granted to Saudi Arabia had ended.

“The Saudi regime bears responsibility for the consequences of any escalation,” Abdulsalam said, adding that “a blockade in response to a blockade is the natural, legal, and moral response to Saudi intransigence.”

He said Yemen’s military position was aimed at pressuring Saudi Arabia to “comply with the truth and fully lift the blockade.”

What you need to know

Large demonstrations were held across Yemen last Friday under the slogan “Warning and Mobilization Friday,” with thousands gathering in Sanaa’s Al-Sabeen Square and in hundreds of locations across several provinces.

Yemeni officials and religious leaders said the rallies reflected support for measures aimed at confronting the Saudi-led blockade, with Supreme Political Council President Mahdi al-Mashat and Yemeni Scholars Association head Sheikh Shams al-Din Sharaf al-Din emphasizing Yemen’s readiness to respond to further developments.

The rallies followed Saudi aggression on Sanaa International Airport and a subsequent Yemeni operation targeting Abha International Airport in Saudi Arabia. Yemeni officials and Ansar Allah leader Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi warned of further escalation, reiterating the “blockade for blockade” and “airports for airports” equation, while the Yemeni Armed Forces urged airlines to avoid Saudi airspace until restrictions on Sanaa International Airport are lifted.

In tandem with Iran’s blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, this new action solidifies a near total blockade of energy sources from the region.

Ansarallah Imposes Naval Blockade on Saudi, Signaling Total West Asian Oil Embargo

Yemen’s Armed Forces announced an immediate maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia, military spokesperson Brigadier General Yahya Saree said on Monday. The armed forces said the move came in response to the continued blockade and aggression against Yemen, adding that the country’s leadership had been left with no alternative but to act.

Saree explained that Saudi Arabia had continued its unjust blockade against the Yemeni people for nearly 12 years through the restriction of ports and airports by land, sea, and air, as well as the targeting of Sanaa International Airport.

This, according to Saree, has entitled the Yemenis to confront the measures “by all available means.”

He declared that the decision followed calls made during the “Warning and Mobilization Friday” million-man demonstrations, as well as tribal gatherings and rallies held across the country.

“The Yemeni Armed Forces announce a ban on maritime navigation by the criminal Saudi enemy under the equation of blockade for blockade. This decision shall take effect immediately upon the issuance of this statement,” Saree stressed.

He added, “We affirm the right of our great people to confront blockade with blockade and comprehensive escalation with comprehensive escalation and to uphold this equation.”

The Yemeni official also said they were fully prepared for all possible scenarios and warned against further escalation.

“The Yemeni Armed Forces affirm their full readiness for all options. Any reckless action undertaken by the foolish Saudi enemy through comprehensive escalation will be met with a comprehensive and severe escalation, by the will and power of Allah,” he said.

Fully ready for all scenarios

Saree called on Yemenis to continue general mobilization, maintain preparedness, and reinforce the frontlines by joining the fight.

“We call upon the sons of our great people to continue general mobilization, maintain a state of general preparedness, remain fully ready for all scenarios and developments, and reinforce the frontlines by joining the fight,” he stated.

Saree also praised participants in the “Warning and Mobilization” rallies and pledged to continue efforts to end the blockade.

“We extend our greetings, with pride and reverence, to the sons of our great Yemeni people who participated in the ‘Warning and Mobilization’ million-man rally in an unparalleled manner. We affirm to them that we will spare no effort in restoring their usurped rights and ending the unjust blockade imposed upon them, regardless of the consequences and repercussions, seeking Allah’s help and placing our trust in Him,” he concluded.

Yemen compelled to impose maritime ban on Saudi Arabia after prolonged delays: Sanaa

The head of the Sanaa negotiating delegation, Mohammed Abdulsalam, said the Yemeni Armed Forces’ decision to impose a maritime navigation ban on Saudi Arabia was a step Yemen was compelled to take.

Abdulsalam said Saudi Arabia had been given a lengthy period to fulfill its obligations and address the repercussions of its aggression against Yemen.

He accused the Saudi government of choosing “ignorance, procrastination, and waiting out the situation” in order to avoid meeting its obligations, adding that Riyadh had sought to deny its role in the blockade imposed on Yemen.

Abdulsalam said Saudi Arabia was responsible for the continued closure of Sanaa International Airport over the past years and was the main instigator behind the maritime blockade.

He warned that the belief that the blockade could be prolonged indefinitely was “a mistaken assumption and a losing bet,” saying the Yemeni people had delivered a decisive message through “unprecedented mass demonstrations” that the period granted to Saudi Arabia had ended.

“The Saudi regime bears responsibility for the consequences of any escalation,” Abdulsalam said, adding that “a blockade in response to a blockade is the natural, legal, and moral response to Saudi intransigence.”

He said Yemen’s military position was aimed at pressuring Saudi Arabia to “comply with the truth and fully lift the blockade.”

What you need to know

Large demonstrations were held across Yemen last Friday under the slogan “Warning and Mobilization Friday,” with thousands gathering in Sanaa’s Al-Sabeen Square and in hundreds of locations across several provinces.

Yemeni officials and religious leaders said the rallies reflected support for measures aimed at confronting the Saudi-led blockade, with Supreme Political Council President Mahdi al-Mashat and Yemeni Scholars Association head Sheikh Shams al-Din Sharaf al-Din emphasizing Yemen’s readiness to respond to further developments.

The rallies followed Saudi aggression on Sanaa International Airport and a subsequent Yemeni operation targeting Abha International Airport in Saudi Arabia. Yemeni officials and Ansar Allah leader Sayyed Abdul-Malik al-Houthi warned of further escalation, reiterating the “blockade for blockade” and “airports for airports” equation, while the Yemeni Armed Forces urged airlines to avoid Saudi airspace until restrictions on Sanaa International Airport are lifted.

In tandem with Iran’s blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, this new action solidifies a near total blockade of energy sources from the region.

Iran Continues Imposing Costs on US Imperial Forces

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy has conducted simultaneous strikes on three fronts against US positions in Bahrain and Kuwait in response to the criminal American aggression against Iran.

In a statement released on Monday, the IRGC’s Public Relations Department said that the operation dealt heavy blows to the terrorist US forces in the region.

The first phase of the attack targeted drone maintenance and repair hangars used by US forces stationed at Bahrain’s Al-Sakhir Air Base, destroying the facilities, it added.

The second strike hit preparation hangars for Task Force 59 (TF59) vessels at Bahrain’s Port Salman and inflicted heavy damage on the vessels.

The IRGC also said the third phase of the operation targeted and set ablaze the facilities used to station, support, and equip US special naval commando forces at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, destroying them completely.

It said its crushing attacks, involving barrages of missiles and drones, continue in retaliation for the acts of aggression by the child-killing US army.

The new strikes came one day after Donald Trump, the US president, claimed Iran has “lost everything almost militarily. They’ve got very little left. They’ve got some missiles, they’ve got some drones, they’ve got some manufacturing ability, not much.”

The IRGC said the “foolish” US president, who has repeatedly acknowledged his lack of understanding of world affairs, once again “displayed his ignorance and poor judgment by claiming that Iran has only a limited number of missiles and drones left and that its stockpiles are nearly exhausted.”

“Let the murderous president of the United States know that even if this war lasts for years, God willing, our missiles and drones will continue to rain down on the American criminals until the very last day of the conflict,” the elite military force declared.

For nine consecutive nights, the US military conducted waves of deadly aerial assaults on Iran, targeting civilian sites in a blatant war crime.

In response, Iranian armed forces launched heavy reprisal attacks against strategic American targets across West Asia.

The United States and the zionist regime waged their illegal war of aggression against Iran on February 28. However, forty days later, on April 8, the enemies were forced to accept a ceasefire amid Iran’s brave resistance and successful retaliatory operations.

On June 17, Tehran and Washington signed the Pakistan-brokered Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to end all hostilities and prepare for further negotiations.

However, Washington violated all provisions of the understanding, prompting Iran to deliver a firm response.

Iran’s army spokesman says the war will continue until a “full” deterrence is achieved to prevent the enemies from daring to launch another aggression against the country.

“Rationality requires that the war continues to the point that leads to creating full deterrence for the Iranian nation,” Brigadier General Mohammad Akraminia said on Monday.

“Otherwise, the enemy, through its miscalculations, will again conduct an aggression against the soil of [our] beloved Iran,” he added.

“Continuing the war until achieving full deterrence is not based on excitement and belligerence, but rather on experience and rationality,” he stated.

Elsewhere in his remarks, the spokesman warned the neighboring Arab countries against getting involved in the aggression against Iran.

He condemned the involvement of some Persian Gulf states, “which have benefited from the capacity of the Strait of Hormuz for years, selling billions of dollars of oil and importing goods,” in the US attacks against Iran as “unfair” and “unacceptable” action that cannot continue.

The spokesman warned that these countries will definitely face problems transiting through the Strait of Hormuz.

Stressing that the Iranian armed forces are the sole party that maintains control over the Strait of Hormuz, he stated, “It is not possible for equipment that can be used against the Iranian nation to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.”

Over the past few days, the US military has conducted waves of deadly strikes on southern Iran and reinstated a blockade of Iranian ports in flagrant violation of a ceasefire deal signed last month.

In response, Iranian armed forces have launched heavy reprisal attacks against strategic American targets across the region, declaring the strategic waterway closed “until further notice” and at least until “the end of US interference in the region.”

Iranian authorities say at least 57 people have been killed and more than 500 injured in US strikes over the past three weeks.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has vowed to teach the United States such an unforgettable lesson that would deter anyone seeking to carry out aggression against Iran.

In a statement issued on Monday, the IRGC’s High Command said the force will continue to obey the directives and commands of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, in defending Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The statement came in response to a recent message by Ayatollah Khamenei in which the Leader called for national unity in the face of renewed US aggression against the country.

The message came after the US launched aerial bombardments on Iran’s southern regions, violating a tentative agreement it had signed with Iran last month to permanently end its joint aggression with Israel against the country.

“Now that criminal America has once again chosen the path of error, aggression, and adventurism, we are firmly bound to this covenant: that we will teach it the ‘unforgettable lesson’ that you promised… a lesson that will deter any aggressor from repeating its wrongdoing,” read a part of the statement.

The IRGC said the force will never trust the US and its promises for reaching a settlement with Iran through negotiations.

“We pledge that… we will never tie the destiny of this country to the promises of a child-killing enemy whose record is filled with breach of faith, deceit, and rancor toward the nation of Iran.”

The statement said Iran’s honor will only be guaranteed through resistance, vigilance, and might, adding that the experience of past years has proven that the enemy cannot be trusted at all.

Ayatollah Khamenei said in his message that renewed US attacks on Iran proved just how worthless the signature of a US president is.

Ayatollah Khamenei vowed in the message that Iran and allied resistance forces in the region would teach an “unforgettable lesson” to the US for its renewed aggression against the country.

Iran Continues Imposing Costs on US Imperial Forces

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy has conducted simultaneous strikes on three fronts against US positions in Bahrain and Kuwait in response to the criminal American aggression against Iran.

In a statement released on Monday, the IRGC’s Public Relations Department said that the operation dealt heavy blows to the terrorist US forces in the region.

The first phase of the attack targeted drone maintenance and repair hangars used by US forces stationed at Bahrain’s Al-Sakhir Air Base, destroying the facilities, it added.

The second strike hit preparation hangars for Task Force 59 (TF59) vessels at Bahrain’s Port Salman and inflicted heavy damage on the vessels.

The IRGC also said the third phase of the operation targeted and set ablaze the facilities used to station, support, and equip US special naval commando forces at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, destroying them completely.

It said its crushing attacks, involving barrages of missiles and drones, continue in retaliation for the acts of aggression by the child-killing US army.

The new strikes came one day after Donald Trump, the US president, claimed Iran has “lost everything almost militarily. They’ve got very little left. They’ve got some missiles, they’ve got some drones, they’ve got some manufacturing ability, not much.”

The IRGC said the “foolish” US president, who has repeatedly acknowledged his lack of understanding of world affairs, once again “displayed his ignorance and poor judgment by claiming that Iran has only a limited number of missiles and drones left and that its stockpiles are nearly exhausted.”

“Let the murderous president of the United States know that even if this war lasts for years, God willing, our missiles and drones will continue to rain down on the American criminals until the very last day of the conflict,” the elite military force declared.

For nine consecutive nights, the US military conducted waves of deadly aerial assaults on Iran, targeting civilian sites in a blatant war crime.

In response, Iranian armed forces launched heavy reprisal attacks against strategic American targets across West Asia.

The United States and the zionist regime waged their illegal war of aggression against Iran on February 28. However, forty days later, on April 8, the enemies were forced to accept a ceasefire amid Iran’s brave resistance and successful retaliatory operations.

On June 17, Tehran and Washington signed the Pakistan-brokered Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to end all hostilities and prepare for further negotiations.

However, Washington violated all provisions of the understanding, prompting Iran to deliver a firm response.

Iran’s army spokesman says the war will continue until a “full” deterrence is achieved to prevent the enemies from daring to launch another aggression against the country.

“Rationality requires that the war continues to the point that leads to creating full deterrence for the Iranian nation,” Brigadier General Mohammad Akraminia said on Monday.

“Otherwise, the enemy, through its miscalculations, will again conduct an aggression against the soil of [our] beloved Iran,” he added.

“Continuing the war until achieving full deterrence is not based on excitement and belligerence, but rather on experience and rationality,” he stated.

Elsewhere in his remarks, the spokesman warned the neighboring Arab countries against getting involved in the aggression against Iran.

He condemned the involvement of some Persian Gulf states, “which have benefited from the capacity of the Strait of Hormuz for years, selling billions of dollars of oil and importing goods,” in the US attacks against Iran as “unfair” and “unacceptable” action that cannot continue.

The spokesman warned that these countries will definitely face problems transiting through the Strait of Hormuz.

Stressing that the Iranian armed forces are the sole party that maintains control over the Strait of Hormuz, he stated, “It is not possible for equipment that can be used against the Iranian nation to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.”

Over the past few days, the US military has conducted waves of deadly strikes on southern Iran and reinstated a blockade of Iranian ports in flagrant violation of a ceasefire deal signed last month.

In response, Iranian armed forces have launched heavy reprisal attacks against strategic American targets across the region, declaring the strategic waterway closed “until further notice” and at least until “the end of US interference in the region.”

Iranian authorities say at least 57 people have been killed and more than 500 injured in US strikes over the past three weeks.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has vowed to teach the United States such an unforgettable lesson that would deter anyone seeking to carry out aggression against Iran.

In a statement issued on Monday, the IRGC’s High Command said the force will continue to obey the directives and commands of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, in defending Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The statement came in response to a recent message by Ayatollah Khamenei in which the Leader called for national unity in the face of renewed US aggression against the country.

The message came after the US launched aerial bombardments on Iran’s southern regions, violating a tentative agreement it had signed with Iran last month to permanently end its joint aggression with Israel against the country.

“Now that criminal America has once again chosen the path of error, aggression, and adventurism, we are firmly bound to this covenant: that we will teach it the ‘unforgettable lesson’ that you promised… a lesson that will deter any aggressor from repeating its wrongdoing,” read a part of the statement.

The IRGC said the force will never trust the US and its promises for reaching a settlement with Iran through negotiations.

“We pledge that… we will never tie the destiny of this country to the promises of a child-killing enemy whose record is filled with breach of faith, deceit, and rancor toward the nation of Iran.”

The statement said Iran’s honor will only be guaranteed through resistance, vigilance, and might, adding that the experience of past years has proven that the enemy cannot be trusted at all.

Ayatollah Khamenei said in his message that renewed US attacks on Iran proved just how worthless the signature of a US president is.

Ayatollah Khamenei vowed in the message that Iran and allied resistance forces in the region would teach an “unforgettable lesson” to the US for its renewed aggression against the country.

IRGC Attacks Increasingly Inflict Damage on US Imperial Forces

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced on Saturday that it had targeted a depot housing US unmanned surface vessels (USVs) in Bahrain and struck the country’s main artificial intelligence center, adding that both sites were destroyed during the 17th wave of its “Nasr 2” operation.

According to the IRGC’s Statement No. 25, the operation was launched in response to overnight US strikes that it said targeted several bridges in Iran, killing and injuring civilians.

IRGC strikes on US military and technological assets in Bahrain

The IRGC said its forces struck a US depot storing unmanned surface vessels in Bahrain, revealing that a large number of the vessels were destroyed by fire.

It also announced that multiple ballistic missiles and dozens of drones targeted Bahrain’s main artificial intelligence center, alleging the facility had been used to assist US forces in selecting targets for attacks on Iran. The IRGC said the site was “completely destroyed.”

Iran warns of broader campaign against US-linked infrastructure

In its statement, the IRGC warned that any further US attacks on Iranian bridges or transportation infrastructure would be met by strikes against the “most important industrial, information technology, and artificial intelligence assets” belonging to companies with American shareholders across the region.

The statement added that Tehran would target “the most valuable investments” of US companies in countries hosting American military bases, regardless of their location.

The IRGC also declared that all regional states hosting US military bases are “partners” in US war crimes.

Regional operations expand beyond Bahrain

The latest announcement comes as Iranian military operations have widened across the region amid the continued collapse of the June Memorandum of Understanding and ceasefire.

Earlier on Friday, the IRGC announced that it had targeted the US special operations command at the al-Tanf garrison in southeastern Syria in a surprise operation. The announcement followed reports from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights citing local sources that an attack had occurred in the al-Tanf area of Homs province, where the US-led coalition maintains a military presence despite announcing a force repositioning last November.

Iran also said its retaliatory operations targeted the AL-Azraq Airbase in Jordan, Al-Udeid Airbase in Qatar, and US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait. Saudi Arabia was also attacked for the first time.

Iranian Navy reports missile strike on vessel in the Indian Ocean

Separately, the Iranian Army announced that its Navy launched a land-to-sea cruise missile against  a vessel belonging to the “aggressor enemy” in the northern Indian Ocean.

According to the military, the strike formed part of the 13th phase of Operation “Sa’eqa” (“Thunderbolt”) and forced the vessel to withdraw after causing panic among its crew.

The announcement comes as US forces have continued concentrated aggression against southern Iran over recent days, prompting Tehran to expand military operations against US military bases, assets, and naval deployments throughout the region.

As the confrontation enters its second week, both sides continue to exchange strikes while diplomatic efforts remain deadlocked, with Washington insisting on negotiations under the pressure of its blockade and Tehran maintaining that talks cannot resume until military operations cease and sanctions are lifted.

Iran issues new warning

Iran’s approach has shifted following renewed US attacks, military adviser Major General Mohsen Rezai said, warning that continued strikes would move the Iranian armed forces beyond deterrence and reciprocal responses.

“The policy of ‘war and negotiations together’ has completely ended,” Rezai warned, adding that Iran’s strategy is now based on “decisive deterrence” and an “eye for an eye” response to missile attacks.

“If the attacks continue during the next two days, the Iranian armed forces will move beyond the stage of deterrence and reciprocity,” he warned. “The armed forces will move to the stage of ‘attack and complete destruction.'”

Strait of Hormuz will not be managed by US

According to the top military official, the Islamabad understanding no longer exists “neither in name nor in practice,” accusing the United States of committing a second violation of the agreement by encouraging ships to cross the Strait of Hormuz illegally and without Iranian oversight.

Iran, he added, would confront the scheme of unlawful navigation in the strategic waterway, saying the closure and control of the Strait of Hormuz serves two objectives: safeguarding national security and protecting the security of the global economy.

Rezai rejected US proposals for joint management of the strait, warning that such an arrangement would amount to Washington controlling a major global energy route.

He further argued that allowing US participation in managing the waterway would give Washington influence over global oil prices and could trigger a wider confrontation with major powers, including China and Russia.

Tehran’s non-negotiables in potential talks

“If negotiations begin, I expect that America wants to write a new understanding with new amendments,” Rezai said.

Rezai also identified two issues he described as non-negotiable in Iran’s confrontation with the United States: Tehran’s legal claims and demand for full compensation over damages, as well as retribution for the killing of the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Ali Khamenei.

Navy approach zero hour

Iran says all US military movements and equipment in regional waters are under the full surveillance of the country’s naval units, warning that American forces are moving closer to the “zero hour” of a potential Iranian operation.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy issued the warning in a statement on Friday amid a sharp escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf between following US acts of aggression on Iranian civilian sites and Iran’s retaliatory operations against the US bases in the region.

“The movements and equipment belonging to the terrorist American army are being closely monitored by Iran’s naval units,” it said, while releasing an image showing US naval vessels under watch.

“The Americans are drawing closer every moment to the zero hour of the Iranian armed forces’ operation against CENTCOM [US Central Command] naval units in the region’s waters,” the IRGC added.

The IRGC Navy did not provide further details about the nature or timing of any potential operation but issued a brief warning directed at US forces, saying: “Wait for it …”

The IRGC statement comes despite repeated claims by the United States that it has completely destroyed Iran’s naval capabilities, infrastructure, vessels and military assets since the outbreak of the US-Israeli military aggression in late February 2026.

Iranian authorities have rejected such claims, emphasizing that their naval forces remain fully operational and continue to monitor and patrol regional waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has also announced that its military capabilities, including those of the Navy and the IRGC Navy, remain intact despite US attacks.

IRGC Attacks Increasingly Inflict Damage on US Imperial Forces

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced on Saturday that it had targeted a depot housing US unmanned surface vessels (USVs) in Bahrain and struck the country’s main artificial intelligence center, adding that both sites were destroyed during the 17th wave of its “Nasr 2” operation.

According to the IRGC’s Statement No. 25, the operation was launched in response to overnight US strikes that it said targeted several bridges in Iran, killing and injuring civilians.

IRGC strikes on US military and technological assets in Bahrain

The IRGC said its forces struck a US depot storing unmanned surface vessels in Bahrain, revealing that a large number of the vessels were destroyed by fire.

It also announced that multiple ballistic missiles and dozens of drones targeted Bahrain’s main artificial intelligence center, alleging the facility had been used to assist US forces in selecting targets for attacks on Iran. The IRGC said the site was “completely destroyed.”

Iran warns of broader campaign against US-linked infrastructure

In its statement, the IRGC warned that any further US attacks on Iranian bridges or transportation infrastructure would be met by strikes against the “most important industrial, information technology, and artificial intelligence assets” belonging to companies with American shareholders across the region.

The statement added that Tehran would target “the most valuable investments” of US companies in countries hosting American military bases, regardless of their location.

The IRGC also declared that all regional states hosting US military bases are “partners” in US war crimes.

Regional operations expand beyond Bahrain

The latest announcement comes as Iranian military operations have widened across the region amid the continued collapse of the June Memorandum of Understanding and ceasefire.

Earlier on Friday, the IRGC announced that it had targeted the US special operations command at the al-Tanf garrison in southeastern Syria in a surprise operation. The announcement followed reports from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights citing local sources that an attack had occurred in the al-Tanf area of Homs province, where the US-led coalition maintains a military presence despite announcing a force repositioning last November.

Iran also said its retaliatory operations targeted the AL-Azraq Airbase in Jordan, Al-Udeid Airbase in Qatar, and US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait. Saudi Arabia was also attacked for the first time.

Iranian Navy reports missile strike on vessel in the Indian Ocean

Separately, the Iranian Army announced that its Navy launched a land-to-sea cruise missile against  a vessel belonging to the “aggressor enemy” in the northern Indian Ocean.

According to the military, the strike formed part of the 13th phase of Operation “Sa’eqa” (“Thunderbolt”) and forced the vessel to withdraw after causing panic among its crew.

The announcement comes as US forces have continued concentrated aggression against southern Iran over recent days, prompting Tehran to expand military operations against US military bases, assets, and naval deployments throughout the region.

As the confrontation enters its second week, both sides continue to exchange strikes while diplomatic efforts remain deadlocked, with Washington insisting on negotiations under the pressure of its blockade and Tehran maintaining that talks cannot resume until military operations cease and sanctions are lifted.

Iran issues new warning

Iran’s approach has shifted following renewed US attacks, military adviser Major General Mohsen Rezai said, warning that continued strikes would move the Iranian armed forces beyond deterrence and reciprocal responses.

“The policy of ‘war and negotiations together’ has completely ended,” Rezai warned, adding that Iran’s strategy is now based on “decisive deterrence” and an “eye for an eye” response to missile attacks.

“If the attacks continue during the next two days, the Iranian armed forces will move beyond the stage of deterrence and reciprocity,” he warned. “The armed forces will move to the stage of ‘attack and complete destruction.'”

Strait of Hormuz will not be managed by US

According to the top military official, the Islamabad understanding no longer exists “neither in name nor in practice,” accusing the United States of committing a second violation of the agreement by encouraging ships to cross the Strait of Hormuz illegally and without Iranian oversight.

Iran, he added, would confront the scheme of unlawful navigation in the strategic waterway, saying the closure and control of the Strait of Hormuz serves two objectives: safeguarding national security and protecting the security of the global economy.

Rezai rejected US proposals for joint management of the strait, warning that such an arrangement would amount to Washington controlling a major global energy route.

He further argued that allowing US participation in managing the waterway would give Washington influence over global oil prices and could trigger a wider confrontation with major powers, including China and Russia.

Tehran’s non-negotiables in potential talks

“If negotiations begin, I expect that America wants to write a new understanding with new amendments,” Rezai said.

Rezai also identified two issues he described as non-negotiable in Iran’s confrontation with the United States: Tehran’s legal claims and demand for full compensation over damages, as well as retribution for the killing of the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Ali Khamenei.

Navy approach zero hour

Iran says all US military movements and equipment in regional waters are under the full surveillance of the country’s naval units, warning that American forces are moving closer to the “zero hour” of a potential Iranian operation.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Navy issued the warning in a statement on Friday amid a sharp escalation of tensions in the Persian Gulf between following US acts of aggression on Iranian civilian sites and Iran’s retaliatory operations against the US bases in the region.

“The movements and equipment belonging to the terrorist American army are being closely monitored by Iran’s naval units,” it said, while releasing an image showing US naval vessels under watch.

“The Americans are drawing closer every moment to the zero hour of the Iranian armed forces’ operation against CENTCOM [US Central Command] naval units in the region’s waters,” the IRGC added.

The IRGC Navy did not provide further details about the nature or timing of any potential operation but issued a brief warning directed at US forces, saying: “Wait for it …”

The IRGC statement comes despite repeated claims by the United States that it has completely destroyed Iran’s naval capabilities, infrastructure, vessels and military assets since the outbreak of the US-Israeli military aggression in late February 2026.

Iranian authorities have rejected such claims, emphasizing that their naval forces remain fully operational and continue to monitor and patrol regional waterways, including the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has also announced that its military capabilities, including those of the Navy and the IRGC Navy, remain intact despite US attacks.

IRGC Unleashes US Imperialist Assets in West Asia, Promises Quagmire

Iran’s Armed Forces have announced new rounds of retaliatory operations against US military targets in the region featuring missile and drone strikes against facilities in Kuwait and Jordan following overnight US attacks on the Iranian coastline and southern cities.

The operations, which were carried out on Wednesday, were accompanied by a warning from the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) that, for now, Iran’s reprisal remains focused on US offensive infrastructure in the region, but additional phases will follow.

‘Crushing blow’

Announcing its latest reprisal, the IRGC said that, during the eighth wave of its retaliatory Operation Nasr- (Victory) 2, its Navy and Aerospace Force carried out a combined missile-and-drone operation in response to “the enemy’s attacks last night on locations along the country’s southern coastline and in southern cities.”

According to the Corps, the operation targeted the early-warning radar of the C-RAM system at Kuwait’s Ali al-Salem Airbase as well as “a gathering point of the criminal soldiers of the terrorist US army.”

The reprisal, the announcement asserted, dealt US forces “a crushing blow.”

Addressing the Kuwaiti people, the IRGC reminded that the United States was using the Arab nation’s territory to carry out unprovoked acts of aggression against Iran, urging the nation to “rid your country of the presence of these aggressors and, by fulfilling your Islamic duty, preserve your historical honor and dignity.”

Separately, the Army of the Islamic Republic said it had launched a drone strike against US military facilities in Jordan during the ninth phase of its retaliatory Operation Saeqeh (Lightning).

According to the Army’s statement, loitering munitions targeted the fixed radar site, communications systems, and fuel depots of the US military at al-Azraq Airbase in Jordan. The statement described al-Azraq as a deployment site for missile defense systems and “one of the most important strategic and command centers for US forces operating in the West Asia region.”

The Army said the strike was carried out in retaliation for enemy attacks on parts of Iran, including the Bampur Army garrison in Iranshahr in the south, which led to the martyrdom of seven non-commissioned officers and soldiers of the Army’s Ground Force.

It condemned the enemy’s “barbaric attacks” on military barracks in Iranshahr, saying such actions reflected the enemy’s “inhuman nature.” Stressing that the attacks “will never be erased from the pages of history,” the statement added that Army personnel “will not retreat in the slightest from the honorable duty of defending the Iranian nation and the Islamic homeland or avenging the blood of the beloved martyrs.”

IRGC warns of further retaliatory phases

Meanwhile, commenting on the latest developments, IRGC spokesperson Brigadier General Hossein Mohebbi said the enemy should not expect to prolong the confrontation by turning it into a war of attrition.

“The enemy should not assume that it can sustain the current dynamics of the battlefield and turn the war into a war of attrition,” he wrote in a post on X.

“Iran’s operations are currently focused on destroying the US’s offensive infrastructure in the region. The next phases will then begin,” he added.

IRGC hunts down invading hostile drones

Separately, the IRGC announced that its air defense units had intercepted and shot down a US LUCAS unmanned aerial vehicle over the skies of Bandar Abbas in southern Iran. According to the Corps, the drone was detected by the country’s integrated air defense network before being struck by a surface-to-air missile system.

In another statement, the IRGC also said one enemy MQ-9 drone was also intercepted and destroyed over the southern Iranian city of Andimeshk by an advanced air defense system of the IRGC’s Aerospace Force.

The United States has perpetrated numerous violations against Iranian territory since April 7, when US President Donald Trump announced a unilateral ceasefire in the latest bout of wholesale American-Israeli aggression targeting the Islamic Republic.

The violations continued even after Washington and Tehran signed a Pakistan-mediated memorandum of understanding last month, whose first clause clearly mandates cessation of aggression on all fronts.

The US has also been trying to help vessels evade the maritime route designated by the Islamic Republic for safe and legal passage through the Strait of Hormuz, by seeking to escort trespassing vessels through an illegal passageway.

Iran’s Armed Forces have staged uncompromising retaliation in the face of each instance of violation, including those in support of illegal vessel movement in the Strait of Hormuz.

Military adviser warns of quagmire

A senior military adviser to the commander-in-chief of Iran’s armed forces has warned that the Axis of Resistance will draw the United States and the Israeli regime into a “quagmire,” saying that Iran and the resistance front will ultimately prevail against any aggression.

Speaking to Lebanon’s al-Mayadeen television network on Wednesday, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi said the Axis of Resistance extends from Iran to Lebanon and spans the Mediterranean Sea, the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and the Red Sea.

The resistance, he added, “will continue to play a pivotal role in shaping the region’s political and security equations without the presence of foreign powers.”

Rahim Safavi reiterated that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will undoubtedly emerge victorious in the face of any US-Israeli aggression.

He also hailed Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement as the guardian of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, saying Iranians and Lebanese of all faiths, including Muslims and Christians, would courageously defend their homelands.

Iran has repeatedly reaffirmed its support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Israel’s continued aggression against the country.

IRGC Unleashes US Imperialist Assets in West Asia, Promises Quagmire

Iran’s Armed Forces have announced new rounds of retaliatory operations against US military targets in the region featuring missile and drone strikes against facilities in Kuwait and Jordan following overnight US attacks on the Iranian coastline and southern cities.

The operations, which were carried out on Wednesday, were accompanied by a warning from the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) that, for now, Iran’s reprisal remains focused on US offensive infrastructure in the region, but additional phases will follow.

‘Crushing blow’

Announcing its latest reprisal, the IRGC said that, during the eighth wave of its retaliatory Operation Nasr- (Victory) 2, its Navy and Aerospace Force carried out a combined missile-and-drone operation in response to “the enemy’s attacks last night on locations along the country’s southern coastline and in southern cities.”

According to the Corps, the operation targeted the early-warning radar of the C-RAM system at Kuwait’s Ali al-Salem Airbase as well as “a gathering point of the criminal soldiers of the terrorist US army.”

The reprisal, the announcement asserted, dealt US forces “a crushing blow.”

Addressing the Kuwaiti people, the IRGC reminded that the United States was using the Arab nation’s territory to carry out unprovoked acts of aggression against Iran, urging the nation to “rid your country of the presence of these aggressors and, by fulfilling your Islamic duty, preserve your historical honor and dignity.”

Separately, the Army of the Islamic Republic said it had launched a drone strike against US military facilities in Jordan during the ninth phase of its retaliatory Operation Saeqeh (Lightning).

According to the Army’s statement, loitering munitions targeted the fixed radar site, communications systems, and fuel depots of the US military at al-Azraq Airbase in Jordan. The statement described al-Azraq as a deployment site for missile defense systems and “one of the most important strategic and command centers for US forces operating in the West Asia region.”

The Army said the strike was carried out in retaliation for enemy attacks on parts of Iran, including the Bampur Army garrison in Iranshahr in the south, which led to the martyrdom of seven non-commissioned officers and soldiers of the Army’s Ground Force.

It condemned the enemy’s “barbaric attacks” on military barracks in Iranshahr, saying such actions reflected the enemy’s “inhuman nature.” Stressing that the attacks “will never be erased from the pages of history,” the statement added that Army personnel “will not retreat in the slightest from the honorable duty of defending the Iranian nation and the Islamic homeland or avenging the blood of the beloved martyrs.”

IRGC warns of further retaliatory phases

Meanwhile, commenting on the latest developments, IRGC spokesperson Brigadier General Hossein Mohebbi said the enemy should not expect to prolong the confrontation by turning it into a war of attrition.

“The enemy should not assume that it can sustain the current dynamics of the battlefield and turn the war into a war of attrition,” he wrote in a post on X.

“Iran’s operations are currently focused on destroying the US’s offensive infrastructure in the region. The next phases will then begin,” he added.

IRGC hunts down invading hostile drones

Separately, the IRGC announced that its air defense units had intercepted and shot down a US LUCAS unmanned aerial vehicle over the skies of Bandar Abbas in southern Iran. According to the Corps, the drone was detected by the country’s integrated air defense network before being struck by a surface-to-air missile system.

In another statement, the IRGC also said one enemy MQ-9 drone was also intercepted and destroyed over the southern Iranian city of Andimeshk by an advanced air defense system of the IRGC’s Aerospace Force.

The United States has perpetrated numerous violations against Iranian territory since April 7, when US President Donald Trump announced a unilateral ceasefire in the latest bout of wholesale American-Israeli aggression targeting the Islamic Republic.

The violations continued even after Washington and Tehran signed a Pakistan-mediated memorandum of understanding last month, whose first clause clearly mandates cessation of aggression on all fronts.

The US has also been trying to help vessels evade the maritime route designated by the Islamic Republic for safe and legal passage through the Strait of Hormuz, by seeking to escort trespassing vessels through an illegal passageway.

Iran’s Armed Forces have staged uncompromising retaliation in the face of each instance of violation, including those in support of illegal vessel movement in the Strait of Hormuz.

Military adviser warns of quagmire

A senior military adviser to the commander-in-chief of Iran’s armed forces has warned that the Axis of Resistance will draw the United States and the Israeli regime into a “quagmire,” saying that Iran and the resistance front will ultimately prevail against any aggression.

Speaking to Lebanon’s al-Mayadeen television network on Wednesday, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi said the Axis of Resistance extends from Iran to Lebanon and spans the Mediterranean Sea, the Strait of Hormuz, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait and the Red Sea.

The resistance, he added, “will continue to play a pivotal role in shaping the region’s political and security equations without the presence of foreign powers.”

Rahim Safavi reiterated that Iran and the Axis of Resistance will undoubtedly emerge victorious in the face of any US-Israeli aggression.

He also hailed Lebanon’s Hezbollah resistance movement as the guardian of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, saying Iranians and Lebanese of all faiths, including Muslims and Christians, would courageously defend their homelands.

Iran has repeatedly reaffirmed its support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Israel’s continued aggression against the country.

‘Flames Will Engulf All’: Iran Warns Against Regional US Cooperation

Repeated US meddling attempts in the administration of the Strait of Hormuz, regional security, international trade, and the movement of oil tankers and commercial vessels have placed all of the aforementioned in grave danger, Brigadier General Ibrahim Zolfaghari, spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of Iran’s Armed Forces, said, describing Washington’s actions as “adventurism”.

The spokesperson further said that the complicity of some regional countries had increased the risk of the war expanding beyond its current scope.

He stated, “In line with our previous warnings, we will not allow the United States, under any circumstances, to meddle in the administration of the Strait of Hormuz, nor will we tolerate such interference.”

The spokesperson added, “The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond with the utmost firmness to any disruption or threat to the security of commercial shipping and oil tankers by the aggressive and thieving US military operating outside the route designated by Iran and without authorization from the Armed Forces. The decisive actions carried out by the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and the Iranian Army in recent days are evidence of this resolve.”

Iran warns regional states against backing US aggression on Hormuz

Zolfaghari also warned the leaders of regional states that any cooperation with the United States, or any logistical support provided to that country’s aggressive military, will be regarded as an act of war against Iran’s sovereignty and national security.

“Should the war widen across the region, its flames will consume all countries in the region,” he further warned.

The spokesperson concluded by stating that the United States and the countries cooperating with its “criminal military” bear responsibility for all acts of insecurity and for the expansion of the war in the region.

Iran strikes US military assets in Oman and Bahrain: IRGC

Earlier today, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) said it destroyed long-range radar systems in Oman, among other US military assets and installations, as part of the fifth phase of its retaliatory operations.

In a statement, the IRGC said that its naval forces carried out missile and drone strikes targeting an FPS long-range early warning radar and a ship-detection radar in Oman, destroying both systems. Concurrently, IRGC forces struck US military installations at the al-Juffair base in Bahrain, where fires are still raging.

“The decisive and powerful operations carried out by the Iranian armed forces have rendered the American military, which we have described as the aggressor, incapable,” the IRGC Public Relations Department stated.

US aggression reveals true anti-people nature: IRGC

The IRGC also condemned the sustained US aggression on Iran, asserting that American forces targeted an agricultural water pump in the city of Mahshahr.

“Targeting a farming water pump in Mahshahr reveals the true anti-people nature of the US military,” the statement said.

The IRGC further tied the status of international shipping in the Strait of Hormuz to US military behavior, declaring that “the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to shipping traffic is contingent upon stopping US military interventions in the strait and respecting the sovereignty of nations over their territorial waters.”

The IRGC issued a direct warning on global energy security, stating that “the continuation of these interventions will lead to greater repercussions for the global oil and gas sectors.”

‘Flames Will Engulf All’: Iran Warns Against Regional US Cooperation

Repeated US meddling attempts in the administration of the Strait of Hormuz, regional security, international trade, and the movement of oil tankers and commercial vessels have placed all of the aforementioned in grave danger, Brigadier General Ibrahim Zolfaghari, spokesperson for the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of Iran’s Armed Forces, said, describing Washington’s actions as “adventurism”.

The spokesperson further said that the complicity of some regional countries had increased the risk of the war expanding beyond its current scope.

He stated, “In line with our previous warnings, we will not allow the United States, under any circumstances, to meddle in the administration of the Strait of Hormuz, nor will we tolerate such interference.”

The spokesperson added, “The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond with the utmost firmness to any disruption or threat to the security of commercial shipping and oil tankers by the aggressive and thieving US military operating outside the route designated by Iran and without authorization from the Armed Forces. The decisive actions carried out by the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and the Iranian Army in recent days are evidence of this resolve.”

Iran warns regional states against backing US aggression on Hormuz

Zolfaghari also warned the leaders of regional states that any cooperation with the United States, or any logistical support provided to that country’s aggressive military, will be regarded as an act of war against Iran’s sovereignty and national security.

“Should the war widen across the region, its flames will consume all countries in the region,” he further warned.

The spokesperson concluded by stating that the United States and the countries cooperating with its “criminal military” bear responsibility for all acts of insecurity and for the expansion of the war in the region.

Iran strikes US military assets in Oman and Bahrain: IRGC

Earlier today, the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) said it destroyed long-range radar systems in Oman, among other US military assets and installations, as part of the fifth phase of its retaliatory operations.

In a statement, the IRGC said that its naval forces carried out missile and drone strikes targeting an FPS long-range early warning radar and a ship-detection radar in Oman, destroying both systems. Concurrently, IRGC forces struck US military installations at the al-Juffair base in Bahrain, where fires are still raging.

“The decisive and powerful operations carried out by the Iranian armed forces have rendered the American military, which we have described as the aggressor, incapable,” the IRGC Public Relations Department stated.

US aggression reveals true anti-people nature: IRGC

The IRGC also condemned the sustained US aggression on Iran, asserting that American forces targeted an agricultural water pump in the city of Mahshahr.

“Targeting a farming water pump in Mahshahr reveals the true anti-people nature of the US military,” the statement said.

The IRGC further tied the status of international shipping in the Strait of Hormuz to US military behavior, declaring that “the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to shipping traffic is contingent upon stopping US military interventions in the strait and respecting the sovereignty of nations over their territorial waters.”

The IRGC issued a direct warning on global energy security, stating that “the continuation of these interventions will lead to greater repercussions for the global oil and gas sectors.”

IRGC Announces the Closure of the Strait of Hormuz

In an official statement, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

IRGC Announces the Closure of the Strait of Hormuz

In an official statement, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

‘The War Has Not Ended’: Explosions across Iran Raise Fears of a New Escalation

Explosions were reported in several parts of southern Iran on Thursday evening as zionist and Iranian officials issued fresh warnings that the latest round of fighting may be far from over.

Iranian state media confirmed blasts near the southern city of Bushehr and the nearby town of Choghadak, while the Mehr News Agency also reported three explosions in the port city of Konarak.

No immediate information was released regarding the cause of the blasts or possible casualties.

The reports came hours after zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the zionist colonies military campaign against Iran “has not ended.”

Speaking during a zionist Air Force graduation ceremony at Hatzerim Air Base, Netanyahu said the regime now faced “new challenges,” adding that maintaining air superiority remained central to the zionist regime’s national security doctrine.

Zionist Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir echoed the message, saying the military campaign was “not over.”

“New plans are already on the drawing board,” Zamir said. “Major operations still lie ahead. Be prepared.”

The remarks followed two days of direct military exchanges between Iran and the United States after Washington declared the Pakistan-brokered Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding void and launched new strikes against Iranian targets.

Araghchi Warns against New ‘Military Adventure’

Amid the renewed tensions, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi launched a series of diplomatic consultations with regional partners while warning Washington against any further military action.

Araghchi spoke by telephone with Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, and Pakistan’s Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir to discuss the regional situation and efforts to preserve the ceasefire following the latest US attacks.

According to Iranian media, Araghchi condemned the American strikes on Iranian territory and warned against any new US “military adventure.”

His outreach followed Iran’s large-scale retaliation against American military assets in the Gulf.

Iranian forces said they carried out coordinated missile and drone strikes targeting strategic US facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, and other locations in response to the latest American attacks.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said the operation targeted Camp Arifjan and Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, along with Juffair Naval Base and Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain, before later announcing the destruction of a US regional command-and-control center and Al Azraq Air Base in Jordan using ballistic missiles.

Iranian media also circulated footage that it said showed the downing of a US MQ-9 Reaper drone over Khormoj in Bushehr Province following the American strikes.

‘The War Has Not Ended’: Explosions across Iran Raise Fears of a New Escalation

Explosions were reported in several parts of southern Iran on Thursday evening as zionist and Iranian officials issued fresh warnings that the latest round of fighting may be far from over.

Iranian state media confirmed blasts near the southern city of Bushehr and the nearby town of Choghadak, while the Mehr News Agency also reported three explosions in the port city of Konarak.

No immediate information was released regarding the cause of the blasts or possible casualties.

The reports came hours after zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the zionist colonies military campaign against Iran “has not ended.”

Speaking during a zionist Air Force graduation ceremony at Hatzerim Air Base, Netanyahu said the regime now faced “new challenges,” adding that maintaining air superiority remained central to the zionist regime’s national security doctrine.

Zionist Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir echoed the message, saying the military campaign was “not over.”

“New plans are already on the drawing board,” Zamir said. “Major operations still lie ahead. Be prepared.”

The remarks followed two days of direct military exchanges between Iran and the United States after Washington declared the Pakistan-brokered Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding void and launched new strikes against Iranian targets.

Araghchi Warns against New ‘Military Adventure’

Amid the renewed tensions, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi launched a series of diplomatic consultations with regional partners while warning Washington against any further military action.

Araghchi spoke by telephone with Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, and Pakistan’s Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir to discuss the regional situation and efforts to preserve the ceasefire following the latest US attacks.

According to Iranian media, Araghchi condemned the American strikes on Iranian territory and warned against any new US “military adventure.”

His outreach followed Iran’s large-scale retaliation against American military assets in the Gulf.

Iranian forces said they carried out coordinated missile and drone strikes targeting strategic US facilities in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, and other locations in response to the latest American attacks.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said the operation targeted Camp Arifjan and Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, along with Juffair Naval Base and Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain, before later announcing the destruction of a US regional command-and-control center and Al Azraq Air Base in Jordan using ballistic missiles.

Iranian media also circulated footage that it said showed the downing of a US MQ-9 Reaper drone over Khormoj in Bushehr Province following the American strikes.

Iran Targets Tankers in Hormuz, US Continues Aggression

A third tanker was struck in the Strait of Hormuz within a 24-hour period, the British maritime security agency UKMTO said on Tuesday.

“UKMTO has received a report of a further incident involving a tanker transiting the Strait of Hormuz. The tanker was struck by an unknown Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and has sustained minor structural damage. No casualties or environmental impact reported,” the agency said in a post on X.

Earlier, UKMTO said it had received a report of an incident involving a tanker traveling through the Strait of Hormuz.

The agency said the vessel was hit by an unidentified projectile and was believed to have sustained structural damage. No casualties or environmental impact were reported.

Not an isolated incident

A tanker was struck on Monday by an unknown projectile near Oman’s Limah, causing a fire onboard, according to the UK Maritime Trade Operations agency.

The vessel was traveling southbound in the Gulf of Oman when the incident occurred. No casualties have been reported so far, although reports indicate that the vessel suffered significant damage.

The incident comes as regional maritime tensions remain high amid ongoing Iran-US talks. Tehran has previously called on vessels to adhere to designated navigation requirements and avoid unauthorized routes.

Meanwhile, Iranian Press TV, citing an informed source, reported that maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is continuing according to arrangements set by Iran.

In total four or five ships were targeted for likely skirting Iran’s rules for the passage.

Multiple explosions were later  reported near the Iranian cities of Bandar Abbas, Qeshm, and Sirik, according to local media, shortly before the US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it had begun carrying out a series of “powerful strikes” against Iran.

IRIB correspondents reported that six explosions were heard near a village outside Qeshm, while seven blasts were reported near the village of Tahrovi in Sirik County. In Sirik, strikes targeted a commercial pier and a fishing port. The Iranian broadcaster also reported that several people were wounded by shrapnel at the commercial pier in Sirik.

Officials also said that attacks on Bandar Abbas targeted a fishing pier and set several fishing boats ablaze.

The reports came amid a US decision to reimpose sanctions on Iranian oil.

Zionist regime bombing hits southern Lebanon

Amid the reports of explosions in Iran and the CENTCOM announcement, zionist occupation forces launched airstrikes targeting the southern Lebanese town of Beit Yahoun and the area between Braachit and Beit Yahoun.

Zionist artillery targeted the outskirts of Nabatiyeh al-Fawqa and Meifadoun, while an airstrike hit the former.

The strikes added to the regional escalation as the US military attacks against Iran coincided with zionist attacks on southern Lebanon.

Iran condemns US sanctions move amid rising tensions

Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Ministry condemned Washington’s decision to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil sales, describing the move as a violation of Article 10 of the Islamabad Memorandum signed on June 28.

Tehran said the US decision to end the temporary sanctions waiver less than 20 days after the agreement demonstrated “bad faith, instability, and unreliability” of the US administration.

The ministry pointed to Washington’s repeated violations of the provisions of the memorandum, including through the actions of the zionist occupation against Lebanon, while stressing that Iran had fulfilled its commitments under the agreement in good faith.

Iran warned that the United States would bear responsibility for the consequences of breaching the agreement, adding that Tehran would take any measures it deemed necessary to protect its interests and national security.

The US reimposed sanctions after reports of attacks on vessels sailing through unauthorized routes via the Strait of Hormuz, with Washington describing the incidents as “wholly unacceptable” while stating that negotiations with Tehran remain ongoing.

Iran Targets Tankers in Hormuz, US Continues Aggression

A third tanker was struck in the Strait of Hormuz within a 24-hour period, the British maritime security agency UKMTO said on Tuesday.

“UKMTO has received a report of a further incident involving a tanker transiting the Strait of Hormuz. The tanker was struck by an unknown Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and has sustained minor structural damage. No casualties or environmental impact reported,” the agency said in a post on X.

Earlier, UKMTO said it had received a report of an incident involving a tanker traveling through the Strait of Hormuz.

The agency said the vessel was hit by an unidentified projectile and was believed to have sustained structural damage. No casualties or environmental impact were reported.

Not an isolated incident

A tanker was struck on Monday by an unknown projectile near Oman’s Limah, causing a fire onboard, according to the UK Maritime Trade Operations agency.

The vessel was traveling southbound in the Gulf of Oman when the incident occurred. No casualties have been reported so far, although reports indicate that the vessel suffered significant damage.

The incident comes as regional maritime tensions remain high amid ongoing Iran-US talks. Tehran has previously called on vessels to adhere to designated navigation requirements and avoid unauthorized routes.

Meanwhile, Iranian Press TV, citing an informed source, reported that maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is continuing according to arrangements set by Iran.

In total four or five ships were targeted for likely skirting Iran’s rules for the passage.

Multiple explosions were later  reported near the Iranian cities of Bandar Abbas, Qeshm, and Sirik, according to local media, shortly before the US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it had begun carrying out a series of “powerful strikes” against Iran.

IRIB correspondents reported that six explosions were heard near a village outside Qeshm, while seven blasts were reported near the village of Tahrovi in Sirik County. In Sirik, strikes targeted a commercial pier and a fishing port. The Iranian broadcaster also reported that several people were wounded by shrapnel at the commercial pier in Sirik.

Officials also said that attacks on Bandar Abbas targeted a fishing pier and set several fishing boats ablaze.

The reports came amid a US decision to reimpose sanctions on Iranian oil.

Zionist regime bombing hits southern Lebanon

Amid the reports of explosions in Iran and the CENTCOM announcement, zionist occupation forces launched airstrikes targeting the southern Lebanese town of Beit Yahoun and the area between Braachit and Beit Yahoun.

Zionist artillery targeted the outskirts of Nabatiyeh al-Fawqa and Meifadoun, while an airstrike hit the former.

The strikes added to the regional escalation as the US military attacks against Iran coincided with zionist attacks on southern Lebanon.

Iran condemns US sanctions move amid rising tensions

Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Ministry condemned Washington’s decision to revoke the temporary suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil sales, describing the move as a violation of Article 10 of the Islamabad Memorandum signed on June 28.

Tehran said the US decision to end the temporary sanctions waiver less than 20 days after the agreement demonstrated “bad faith, instability, and unreliability” of the US administration.

The ministry pointed to Washington’s repeated violations of the provisions of the memorandum, including through the actions of the zionist occupation against Lebanon, while stressing that Iran had fulfilled its commitments under the agreement in good faith.

Iran warned that the United States would bear responsibility for the consequences of breaching the agreement, adding that Tehran would take any measures it deemed necessary to protect its interests and national security.

The US reimposed sanctions after reports of attacks on vessels sailing through unauthorized routes via the Strait of Hormuz, with Washington describing the incidents as “wholly unacceptable” while stating that negotiations with Tehran remain ongoing.

Palestine in Sayyed Ali Khamenei’s Thought: The Heart of Resistance

As Iran marks the fourth day of funeral ceremonies for the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Ali Khamenei, with massive crowds taking part in the main farewell procession in Tehran, one cause stands out at the heart of his political and ideological legacy: Palestine.

Across decades of speeches, written positions, and direct messages to Palestinian Resistance leaders, Sayyed Khamenei presented Palestine not as a passing political file, a border dispute, or a cause limited to Palestinians alone, but as a central question of the Islamic Ummah, a human and moral issue, and the axis around which the wider movement of Resistance in West Asia revolved.

In his discourse, Palestine was not merely occupied land. It was the heart of the confrontation between the Islamic Ummah and the Front of Arrogance; a wound in the body of the Muslim world and in the conscience of humanity, whose liberation was tied to the restoration of dignity, independence, and authority for the region’s peoples.

This position was clearly reflected in his April 2018 response to a letter from the martyred Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, in which Sayyed Khamenei reaffirmed Palestine as an “important issue of the Islamic Ummah” and insisted that Resistance was not one option among many, but the only path capable of restoring Palestinian rights.

“No doubt, resistance is the only way to free an oppressed Palestine, and it is the only cure for wounds on the body of that brave and proud nation,” Sayyed Khamenei wrote.

Palestine as an Islamic, human, and moral issue

Sayyed Khamenei repeatedly described Palestine as the most important international issue facing the Islamic world. In one of his clearest formulations, he said:

“Undoubtedly, in Muslim life and across the world of Islam, nothing is as important and serious as the issue of Palestine.”

In his speeches, the occupation of Palestine is not presented as an isolated tragedy, but as part of a broader project aimed at weakening Muslim unity and imposing Western and Zionist domination on the region. He argued that the occupation created a hostile base at the heart of the Islamic world, separating its eastern and western parts and turning Palestinian land into a platform for pressure against surrounding Arab and Muslim nations.

Within this framework, Sayyed Khamenei situated the Zionist entity as the forward front of Western hegemony in West Asia, a project planted in the region to fracture Muslim unity, protect colonial interests, and extend the reach of global arrogance. This is also why he repeatedly treated the entity as historically unsustainable: not a natural state rooted in the will of the region’s peoples, but an artificial structure imposed by force, sustained by Western backing, and weakened by its own lack of legitimacy.

From this view, Palestine’s significance is religious, humanitarian, political, security-related, and economic. Religiously, Sayyed Khamenei frames the defense of Palestine as a duty because occupied Palestine is part of Muslim land. Humanitarianly, he presents Palestinians as a people denied their homeland, rights, and dignity. Politically and strategically, he sees the Zionist entity as a Western-backed project designed to dominate the region and prevent its peoples from achieving real independence.

One can clearly see here how Palestine became inseparable from the revolutionary identity of the Islamic Republic itself. Imam Khomeini’s designation of International Quds Day turned Palestine into a permanent revolutionary commitment, not a seasonal slogan or a diplomatic position. For Sayyed Khamenei, Quds Day embodied the Islamic Revolution’s wider doctrine of standing with the mustazafin, the oppressed and dispossessed, against the mustakbirin, the arrogant powers that seek domination over nations. Palestine, in this sense, was not only an Islamic cause but a test of humanity’s moral position toward occupation, dispossession, and resistance.

Al-Quds also occupies a central place in this vision. Sayyed Khamenei described al-Quds as “the capital city of Palestine,” stressing that the city belongs to the Palestinian people and the Islamic Ummah, and that defending it is inseparable from the wider struggle against occupation.

This is why Sayyed Khamenei consistently rejected efforts to reduce Palestine to negotiations, diplomatic formulas, or limited territorial arrangements. For him, the issue is not only about the 1967 borders but about the usurpation of Palestine itself and the denial of the Palestinian people’s right to determine their own future. As he put it:

“There is no difference between territories occupied before or after the year 1967. Every inch of Palestinian lands is part of Muslims’ homeland.”

Resistance as doctrine, not reaction

One of the clearest constants in Sayyed Khamenei’s speeches is his insistence that Resistance is the basis of any real solution. He repeatedly argued that negotiations with the Zionist entity only delay Palestinian victory and allow the occupation to strengthen itself.

In his 2018 letter to martyr Haniyeh, Sayyed Khamenei warned that “moving towards negotiations with the cunning, usurper, and untruthful regime is an irreversible mistake,” adding that such a path would “delay the victory of the Palestinian nation” and bring “nothing other than detriment” to the oppressed Palestinian people.

This language reflected a wider doctrine: Palestine could only be liberated by the steadfastness of Palestinians themselves, supported by Muslim nations and Resistance movements across the region. Elsewhere, Sayyed Khamenei put the matter more directly, saying:

“It is not possible to save Palestine through begging the United Nations and the domineering powers, or the Zionist regime for that matter. The only way to save Palestine is to resist.”

Sayyed Khamenei also emphasized that the Palestinian uprising was not manufactured from outside. In his view, the Intifada was born from Palestinian suffering, anger, faith, and determination.

“The Palestinian uprising was not caused by the Islamic Republic or the people of Lebanon…It was sparked by the people of Palestine.”

Iran’s role, as he framed it, was not to replace the Palestinian people by fighting in their stead, but to support their Resistance and prevent the cause from being buried under pressure, normalization, or compromise.

Arab betrayal and the politics of abandonment

Sayyed Khamenei’s response to martyr Haniyeh also directly addressed what the Hamas leader described as the betrayal of Palestine by some Arab states. Sayyed Khamenei confirmed that assessment, saying martyr Haniyeh had correctly pointed to “the conspiracy and hypocrisy of some Arab countries” and their “vicious plots” carried out behind the United States.

For Sayyed Khamenei, support for Palestine was not a temporary political position, nor something that could shift with regional alignments. “This [support of Palestine] is a religious duty and a humane responsibility that goes beyond political events and changes,” he wrote, adding that “all Muslim governments, Muslim nations, and Islamic movements” were obligated to carry out this task.

He linked Arab betrayal and negotiations with the occupation to the same objective: delaying Palestinian victory and weakening the Resistance. “The matter of Palestine is at the heart of all international challenges that the Islamic Ummah faces while fighting against the Front of Arrogance,” Sayyed Khamenei said, warning that negotiations with the Zionist entity would only harm the Palestinian people.

“[This] act of Betrayal by some Arab leaders, which is gradually revealing itself, pursues the same goal.”

For Sayyed Khamenei, normalization and Arab silence were not neutral positions. They formed part of a political chain that enabled the Zionist entity to continue its occupation, expand its crimes, and attempt to erase Palestine from regional and global consciousness.

In his wider speeches on Palestine, he argued that the silence of many Arab governments, and in some cases their open treachery, allowed the occupation to grow more aggressive and emboldened the Zionist project to speak openly once again about expansion.

This is why Sayyed Khamenei placed special emphasis on Muslim and Arab peoples, especially the youth. Even when governments retreated, he argued, nations remained capable of carrying the Palestinian cause forward. As he put it in the same letter:

“The only cure is strengthening the resistance within the Muslim World, reinforcing the fight against the usurper Zionist regime and its allies.”

The Axis of Resistance around Palestine

Sayyed Khamenei’s Palestine-centered worldview is also the ideological foundation of his approach to the Axis of Resistance. He did not treat the Resistance fronts in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Iran as disconnected arenas, but as parts of one broader confrontation with occupation, domination, and the US-backed Zionist project.

In this framework, Palestine is the compass. It is the cause that gives the Resistance axis its moral legitimacy and strategic direction. As Sayyed Khamenei put it, “Today the issue of Palestine is the pivot of this movement.”

Sayyed Khamenei has repeatedly pointed to the Lebanese Resistance as proof that steadfastness can force the Zionist entity to retreat without concessions. In his speeches, the liberation of southern Lebanon became a model for Palestinians and for the wider Islamic Ummah: a demonstration that armed Resistance, patience, and faith could achieve what negotiations and summits had failed to deliver.

“As a successful paradigm for the Islamic Ummah, resistance could for the first time liberate the occupied lands without making any concessions to Israel,” he said, presenting Lebanon’s experience as evidence that the Zionist entity could be forced into retreat through Resistance rather than compromise.

At the same time, Sayyed Khamenei sought to underline that Palestinian Resistance was not an imported project or the product of outside direction. Rather, he presented it as an organic uprising born from the Palestinian people’s own suffering, accumulated grievances, and determination to reclaim their rights. In this reading, Iran and Lebanon stood as supporters of an already existing Palestinian will to resist, not as the source of that will.

He also described Palestine as the pivot of Islamic Awakening, saying “the al-Aqsa Intifada managed to go beyond the borders of Palestine and engage all Muslim and Arab nations.” In this view, Palestine is not only a cause supported by the Resistance; it is the cause that helped shape the Resistance and gave the region’s movements a shared direction.

Against erasure and normalization

Another central theme in Sayyed Khamenei’s speeches is the struggle against forgetting Palestine. He warned that the Zionist entity and its supporters sought to erase the name of Palestine from history, political discourse, and public consciousness.

“Today the leaders of the usurping Zionist regime and their American supporters… are trying to erase the name of Palestine from history and from the minds of the world’s people.”

For this reason, he insisted that Palestine remain present in speeches, media, art, public mobilization, and political action. He argued that the global media system worked for decades to portray the occupier as the victim while concealing the suffering of Palestinians. In that context, he also called for cultural and artistic work to expose the reality of occupation.

“This must be expressed in an appropriate way. Films must be made in this regard, and artistic works have to be produced in order to tell the world what is happening in Palestine.”

This concern became even more urgent during the genocide in Gaza, as Sayyed Khamenei warned that attention must not be diverted from Palestine. In his view, distraction is itself a weapon used by the enemies of Palestine, especially when the scale of Israeli crimes produces global outrage.

A proposed political solution rooted in return

Although Sayyed Khamenei rejected negotiations with the Zionist entity as a path to liberation, he repeatedly presented a democratic political solution, consistent with international law and the right to self-determination: a referendum among the original people of Palestine, including Muslims, Christians, and Jews, whether they live inside Palestine or in exile.

“The logical solution is to hold a referendum among the people of Palestine, including all those who have been displaced from Palestine and who, of course, are willing to return to their homeland.”

Under this proposal, displaced Palestinians would return to their homeland, take part in determining the political system, and decide the future of the land. Sayyed Khamenei said the referendum should include “all those who used to live in Palestine before the year 1948,” including Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

He framed the proposal as a question of basic political rights, asking: “Why is democracy good for all people of the world, but not for the people of Palestine? Why is it that all people of the world have the right to determine their destiny, but not the people of Palestine?”

At the same time, he maintained that such a solution could not be achieved through reliance on the United States, Western governments, or international bodies that have shielded the occupation for decades. It required Resistance, pressure, unity, and the refusal to abandon Palestinian rights.

Palestine as destiny

In Sayyed Khamenei’s thought, Palestine was not only a symbol of oppression. It was also a symbol of certainty: the belief that occupation cannot last forever, that peoples who resist cannot be erased, and that the future belongs to those who remain steadfast.

His speeches repeatedly returned to one idea: Palestine will remain, while the Zionist entity is temporary.

“They will not be able to annihilate the name of Palestine,” he said, stressing that “Palestine and the Palestinian nation will stay.”

This conviction was tied to his belief that the occupation was facing not only a political struggle, but a historical reality it could not escape.

“Palestine belongs to the Palestinian nation,” Sayyed Khamenei said. “Sooner or later, the usurpers will inevitably surrender to this reality.”

That is why Palestine occupied such a central place in his worldview. It defined the confrontation with the United States and the Zionist entity. It exposed Arab normalization and betrayal. It united the Resistance fronts. It gave the Islamic Ummah a shared political and moral compass.

For Sayyed Khamenei, Palestine was not a memory to be preserved, nor a slogan to be repeated. It was the heart of the region’s struggle for liberation and the cause around which the Resistance continued to organize itself until victory.

Janna Kadri
Source: Al Mayadeen

Palestine in Sayyed Ali Khamenei’s Thought: The Heart of Resistance

As Iran marks the fourth day of funeral ceremonies for the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Sayyed Ali Khamenei, with massive crowds taking part in the main farewell procession in Tehran, one cause stands out at the heart of his political and ideological legacy: Palestine.

Across decades of speeches, written positions, and direct messages to Palestinian Resistance leaders, Sayyed Khamenei presented Palestine not as a passing political file, a border dispute, or a cause limited to Palestinians alone, but as a central question of the Islamic Ummah, a human and moral issue, and the axis around which the wider movement of Resistance in West Asia revolved.

In his discourse, Palestine was not merely occupied land. It was the heart of the confrontation between the Islamic Ummah and the Front of Arrogance; a wound in the body of the Muslim world and in the conscience of humanity, whose liberation was tied to the restoration of dignity, independence, and authority for the region’s peoples.

This position was clearly reflected in his April 2018 response to a letter from the martyred Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, in which Sayyed Khamenei reaffirmed Palestine as an “important issue of the Islamic Ummah” and insisted that Resistance was not one option among many, but the only path capable of restoring Palestinian rights.

“No doubt, resistance is the only way to free an oppressed Palestine, and it is the only cure for wounds on the body of that brave and proud nation,” Sayyed Khamenei wrote.

Palestine as an Islamic, human, and moral issue

Sayyed Khamenei repeatedly described Palestine as the most important international issue facing the Islamic world. In one of his clearest formulations, he said:

“Undoubtedly, in Muslim life and across the world of Islam, nothing is as important and serious as the issue of Palestine.”

In his speeches, the occupation of Palestine is not presented as an isolated tragedy, but as part of a broader project aimed at weakening Muslim unity and imposing Western and Zionist domination on the region. He argued that the occupation created a hostile base at the heart of the Islamic world, separating its eastern and western parts and turning Palestinian land into a platform for pressure against surrounding Arab and Muslim nations.

Within this framework, Sayyed Khamenei situated the Zionist entity as the forward front of Western hegemony in West Asia, a project planted in the region to fracture Muslim unity, protect colonial interests, and extend the reach of global arrogance. This is also why he repeatedly treated the entity as historically unsustainable: not a natural state rooted in the will of the region’s peoples, but an artificial structure imposed by force, sustained by Western backing, and weakened by its own lack of legitimacy.

From this view, Palestine’s significance is religious, humanitarian, political, security-related, and economic. Religiously, Sayyed Khamenei frames the defense of Palestine as a duty because occupied Palestine is part of Muslim land. Humanitarianly, he presents Palestinians as a people denied their homeland, rights, and dignity. Politically and strategically, he sees the Zionist entity as a Western-backed project designed to dominate the region and prevent its peoples from achieving real independence.

One can clearly see here how Palestine became inseparable from the revolutionary identity of the Islamic Republic itself. Imam Khomeini’s designation of International Quds Day turned Palestine into a permanent revolutionary commitment, not a seasonal slogan or a diplomatic position. For Sayyed Khamenei, Quds Day embodied the Islamic Revolution’s wider doctrine of standing with the mustazafin, the oppressed and dispossessed, against the mustakbirin, the arrogant powers that seek domination over nations. Palestine, in this sense, was not only an Islamic cause but a test of humanity’s moral position toward occupation, dispossession, and resistance.

Al-Quds also occupies a central place in this vision. Sayyed Khamenei described al-Quds as “the capital city of Palestine,” stressing that the city belongs to the Palestinian people and the Islamic Ummah, and that defending it is inseparable from the wider struggle against occupation.

This is why Sayyed Khamenei consistently rejected efforts to reduce Palestine to negotiations, diplomatic formulas, or limited territorial arrangements. For him, the issue is not only about the 1967 borders but about the usurpation of Palestine itself and the denial of the Palestinian people’s right to determine their own future. As he put it:

“There is no difference between territories occupied before or after the year 1967. Every inch of Palestinian lands is part of Muslims’ homeland.”

Resistance as doctrine, not reaction

One of the clearest constants in Sayyed Khamenei’s speeches is his insistence that Resistance is the basis of any real solution. He repeatedly argued that negotiations with the Zionist entity only delay Palestinian victory and allow the occupation to strengthen itself.

In his 2018 letter to martyr Haniyeh, Sayyed Khamenei warned that “moving towards negotiations with the cunning, usurper, and untruthful regime is an irreversible mistake,” adding that such a path would “delay the victory of the Palestinian nation” and bring “nothing other than detriment” to the oppressed Palestinian people.

This language reflected a wider doctrine: Palestine could only be liberated by the steadfastness of Palestinians themselves, supported by Muslim nations and Resistance movements across the region. Elsewhere, Sayyed Khamenei put the matter more directly, saying:

“It is not possible to save Palestine through begging the United Nations and the domineering powers, or the Zionist regime for that matter. The only way to save Palestine is to resist.”

Sayyed Khamenei also emphasized that the Palestinian uprising was not manufactured from outside. In his view, the Intifada was born from Palestinian suffering, anger, faith, and determination.

“The Palestinian uprising was not caused by the Islamic Republic or the people of Lebanon…It was sparked by the people of Palestine.”

Iran’s role, as he framed it, was not to replace the Palestinian people by fighting in their stead, but to support their Resistance and prevent the cause from being buried under pressure, normalization, or compromise.

Arab betrayal and the politics of abandonment

Sayyed Khamenei’s response to martyr Haniyeh also directly addressed what the Hamas leader described as the betrayal of Palestine by some Arab states. Sayyed Khamenei confirmed that assessment, saying martyr Haniyeh had correctly pointed to “the conspiracy and hypocrisy of some Arab countries” and their “vicious plots” carried out behind the United States.

For Sayyed Khamenei, support for Palestine was not a temporary political position, nor something that could shift with regional alignments. “This [support of Palestine] is a religious duty and a humane responsibility that goes beyond political events and changes,” he wrote, adding that “all Muslim governments, Muslim nations, and Islamic movements” were obligated to carry out this task.

He linked Arab betrayal and negotiations with the occupation to the same objective: delaying Palestinian victory and weakening the Resistance. “The matter of Palestine is at the heart of all international challenges that the Islamic Ummah faces while fighting against the Front of Arrogance,” Sayyed Khamenei said, warning that negotiations with the Zionist entity would only harm the Palestinian people.

“[This] act of Betrayal by some Arab leaders, which is gradually revealing itself, pursues the same goal.”

For Sayyed Khamenei, normalization and Arab silence were not neutral positions. They formed part of a political chain that enabled the Zionist entity to continue its occupation, expand its crimes, and attempt to erase Palestine from regional and global consciousness.

In his wider speeches on Palestine, he argued that the silence of many Arab governments, and in some cases their open treachery, allowed the occupation to grow more aggressive and emboldened the Zionist project to speak openly once again about expansion.

This is why Sayyed Khamenei placed special emphasis on Muslim and Arab peoples, especially the youth. Even when governments retreated, he argued, nations remained capable of carrying the Palestinian cause forward. As he put it in the same letter:

“The only cure is strengthening the resistance within the Muslim World, reinforcing the fight against the usurper Zionist regime and its allies.”

The Axis of Resistance around Palestine

Sayyed Khamenei’s Palestine-centered worldview is also the ideological foundation of his approach to the Axis of Resistance. He did not treat the Resistance fronts in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Iran as disconnected arenas, but as parts of one broader confrontation with occupation, domination, and the US-backed Zionist project.

In this framework, Palestine is the compass. It is the cause that gives the Resistance axis its moral legitimacy and strategic direction. As Sayyed Khamenei put it, “Today the issue of Palestine is the pivot of this movement.”

Sayyed Khamenei has repeatedly pointed to the Lebanese Resistance as proof that steadfastness can force the Zionist entity to retreat without concessions. In his speeches, the liberation of southern Lebanon became a model for Palestinians and for the wider Islamic Ummah: a demonstration that armed Resistance, patience, and faith could achieve what negotiations and summits had failed to deliver.

“As a successful paradigm for the Islamic Ummah, resistance could for the first time liberate the occupied lands without making any concessions to Israel,” he said, presenting Lebanon’s experience as evidence that the Zionist entity could be forced into retreat through Resistance rather than compromise.

At the same time, Sayyed Khamenei sought to underline that Palestinian Resistance was not an imported project or the product of outside direction. Rather, he presented it as an organic uprising born from the Palestinian people’s own suffering, accumulated grievances, and determination to reclaim their rights. In this reading, Iran and Lebanon stood as supporters of an already existing Palestinian will to resist, not as the source of that will.

He also described Palestine as the pivot of Islamic Awakening, saying “the al-Aqsa Intifada managed to go beyond the borders of Palestine and engage all Muslim and Arab nations.” In this view, Palestine is not only a cause supported by the Resistance; it is the cause that helped shape the Resistance and gave the region’s movements a shared direction.

Against erasure and normalization

Another central theme in Sayyed Khamenei’s speeches is the struggle against forgetting Palestine. He warned that the Zionist entity and its supporters sought to erase the name of Palestine from history, political discourse, and public consciousness.

“Today the leaders of the usurping Zionist regime and their American supporters… are trying to erase the name of Palestine from history and from the minds of the world’s people.”

For this reason, he insisted that Palestine remain present in speeches, media, art, public mobilization, and political action. He argued that the global media system worked for decades to portray the occupier as the victim while concealing the suffering of Palestinians. In that context, he also called for cultural and artistic work to expose the reality of occupation.

“This must be expressed in an appropriate way. Films must be made in this regard, and artistic works have to be produced in order to tell the world what is happening in Palestine.”

This concern became even more urgent during the genocide in Gaza, as Sayyed Khamenei warned that attention must not be diverted from Palestine. In his view, distraction is itself a weapon used by the enemies of Palestine, especially when the scale of Israeli crimes produces global outrage.

A proposed political solution rooted in return

Although Sayyed Khamenei rejected negotiations with the Zionist entity as a path to liberation, he repeatedly presented a democratic political solution, consistent with international law and the right to self-determination: a referendum among the original people of Palestine, including Muslims, Christians, and Jews, whether they live inside Palestine or in exile.

“The logical solution is to hold a referendum among the people of Palestine, including all those who have been displaced from Palestine and who, of course, are willing to return to their homeland.”

Under this proposal, displaced Palestinians would return to their homeland, take part in determining the political system, and decide the future of the land. Sayyed Khamenei said the referendum should include “all those who used to live in Palestine before the year 1948,” including Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

He framed the proposal as a question of basic political rights, asking: “Why is democracy good for all people of the world, but not for the people of Palestine? Why is it that all people of the world have the right to determine their destiny, but not the people of Palestine?”

At the same time, he maintained that such a solution could not be achieved through reliance on the United States, Western governments, or international bodies that have shielded the occupation for decades. It required Resistance, pressure, unity, and the refusal to abandon Palestinian rights.

Palestine as destiny

In Sayyed Khamenei’s thought, Palestine was not only a symbol of oppression. It was also a symbol of certainty: the belief that occupation cannot last forever, that peoples who resist cannot be erased, and that the future belongs to those who remain steadfast.

His speeches repeatedly returned to one idea: Palestine will remain, while the Zionist entity is temporary.

“They will not be able to annihilate the name of Palestine,” he said, stressing that “Palestine and the Palestinian nation will stay.”

This conviction was tied to his belief that the occupation was facing not only a political struggle, but a historical reality it could not escape.

“Palestine belongs to the Palestinian nation,” Sayyed Khamenei said. “Sooner or later, the usurpers will inevitably surrender to this reality.”

That is why Palestine occupied such a central place in his worldview. It defined the confrontation with the United States and the Zionist entity. It exposed Arab normalization and betrayal. It united the Resistance fronts. It gave the Islamic Ummah a shared political and moral compass.

For Sayyed Khamenei, Palestine was not a memory to be preserved, nor a slogan to be repeated. It was the heart of the region’s struggle for liberation and the cause around which the Resistance continued to organize itself until victory.

Janna Kadri
Source: Al Mayadeen

Millions Join Funeral Prayers for Shahid Ayatollah Khamenei

Millions of mourners from Iran and other countries performed funeral prayers for the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on Sunday as Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani led the prayers at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla, attended by large crowds of people.

As the interior of the prayer hall reached full capacity, all entrances to the complex were closed several hours prior to the prayer service held for the body of the martyred Leader.

The streets and pathways surrounding the prayer hall were filled with a significant number of individuals who have gathered to pay their respects and offer prayers for martyred Ayatollah Khamenei.

The funeral prayer was held in three stages. The first was offered for the martyred Leader. The second covered Martyr Seyyedeh Boshra Hosseini Khamenei, Martyr Mesbah al-Hoda Baqeri, and Martyr Zahra Haddad Adel, while the third will be offered for Zahra Mohammadi Golpayegani, the martyred Leader’s granddaughter.

The farewell ceremony began early Saturday at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla following the martyrdom of the Leader. The gathering has drawn massive crowds paying their final respects.

Ayatollah Khamenei was martyred following the launch of the latest bout of aggression by American-zionist forces against Iran on February 28.

Iran’s top security official said mourners attending the funeral of martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei en masse are united in their chants of “resistance against enemies” and “revenge for the blood” of the late Leader.

In a post on his X account on Sunday, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr said the large crowds participating in the farewell and funeral ceremonies of the martyred Leader reflect the resilience and determination of the Iranian nation.

“Keep your eyes on Iran these days. This is the same Iran that you thought you could bring to its knees in just a few days,” he added.

The SNSC secretary described the vast crowds as a “roaring sea of people” who demand revenge for the blood of late Ayatollah Khamenei and resistance against adversaries.

“This roaring sea of people is now shouting two slogans during the farewell and funeral of their Leader: resistance against enemies and revenge for the blood of Iran’s martyred Leader,” he pointed out.

Zolqadr’s post comes as millions of mourners from Iran and other countries performed funeral prayers for the late Ayatollah Khamenei on Sunday. Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani led the prayers at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla.

An Ansarallah member declared that the West assassinated the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, because of his leadership and efforts to support the liberation of Palestine.

During an interview on Sunday, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti said Ayatollah Khamenei’s influence extended far beyond Iran’s borders.

He described the martyred Leader as a symbol of resistance and freedom for nations seeking independence from American and Zionist domination.

“His intellectual and political vision across the Islamic world, together with his efforts to liberate Palestine, were among the main reasons the West became determined to assassinate him,” al-Bukhaiti said.

He added that the martyred Leader’s legacy would continue to inspire people striving for dignity, sovereignty, and resistance, saying his name and memory would remain a source of inspiration for future generations.

Millions of Iranians and supporters of the Axis of Resistance across the region mourned his martyrdom, holding ceremonies and tributes in his honor.

Iran’s top Navy commander said the Axis of Resistance is no longer confined by geography, warning that the zionist regime and the United States will face a united Islamic front following the martyrdom of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

Speaking to Yemen’s Al Masirah television, Rear Admiral Shahram Irani said the followers of the martyred Leader have “gathered today to renew the bond of brotherhood and unity they learned from his teachings.”

“Resistance is no longer limited to geographical boundaries,” he said, warning that the enemy “must understand that today it is not confronting a single country, but the greater Islamic nation and the Islamic Resistance.”

Irani also warned that the zionist regime and its allies should brace for retaliation by Muslim fighters seeking to avenge those martyred in the US-zionist war against Iran, saying they would face “a crushing blow that will shatter them.”

He made the remarks on the sidelines of the farewell ceremony for Ayatollah Khamenei in Tehran on Sunday.

In separate remarks to the Yemeni broadcaster, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior adviser to the late Leader, called on Muslim nations and “all free peoples” of the world to stand together against the oppression of the United States and the Israeli regime.

Safavi said he was confident that unity among Muslim nations and the Axis of Resistance would strengthen the Islamic world and elevate it into one of the world’s major centers of power.

Iranian Army Commander Major General Amir Hatami said in a public address that the late Sayyed Khamenei “drew a path of dignity and independence, and prepared for us all the means to follow it,” adding that the armed forces “will continue the path behind our commander Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei with unwavering strength and determination.”

Hatami further pledged that the Iranian public “will not allow the enemies to escape punishment” and that “they will be held accountable for their crimes.”

Separately, Deputy Commander of the Armed Forces Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said the commander “will remain alive in our minds forever” and that Iranian forces “will follow his recommendations.”

Sayyari added that Iran had “made a pledge to remain with our martyred leader and we renew that pledge today,” stressing that “the idea of vengeance is always present in our minds.”

He also said, “We promise our commander Sayyed Mojtaba that we will continue the path with high confidence, strong will, and resistance.”

In another statement, Advisor to the Supreme Leader and Assistant to the President Mohammad Mokhber said that “those who killed our martyred Imam will not die a natural death” and vowed that “the people and the system will take revenge on them.”

Mokhber added, “We will take revenge for our martyred leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, inevitably.”

Millions Join Funeral Prayers for Shahid Ayatollah Khamenei

Millions of mourners from Iran and other countries performed funeral prayers for the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, on Sunday as Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani led the prayers at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla, attended by large crowds of people.

As the interior of the prayer hall reached full capacity, all entrances to the complex were closed several hours prior to the prayer service held for the body of the martyred Leader.

The streets and pathways surrounding the prayer hall were filled with a significant number of individuals who have gathered to pay their respects and offer prayers for martyred Ayatollah Khamenei.

The funeral prayer was held in three stages. The first was offered for the martyred Leader. The second covered Martyr Seyyedeh Boshra Hosseini Khamenei, Martyr Mesbah al-Hoda Baqeri, and Martyr Zahra Haddad Adel, while the third will be offered for Zahra Mohammadi Golpayegani, the martyred Leader’s granddaughter.

The farewell ceremony began early Saturday at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla following the martyrdom of the Leader. The gathering has drawn massive crowds paying their final respects.

Ayatollah Khamenei was martyred following the launch of the latest bout of aggression by American-zionist forces against Iran on February 28.

Iran’s top security official said mourners attending the funeral of martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei en masse are united in their chants of “resistance against enemies” and “revenge for the blood” of the late Leader.

In a post on his X account on Sunday, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr said the large crowds participating in the farewell and funeral ceremonies of the martyred Leader reflect the resilience and determination of the Iranian nation.

“Keep your eyes on Iran these days. This is the same Iran that you thought you could bring to its knees in just a few days,” he added.

The SNSC secretary described the vast crowds as a “roaring sea of people” who demand revenge for the blood of late Ayatollah Khamenei and resistance against adversaries.

“This roaring sea of people is now shouting two slogans during the farewell and funeral of their Leader: resistance against enemies and revenge for the blood of Iran’s martyred Leader,” he pointed out.

Zolqadr’s post comes as millions of mourners from Iran and other countries performed funeral prayers for the late Ayatollah Khamenei on Sunday. Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani led the prayers at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosalla.

An Ansarallah member declared that the West assassinated the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, because of his leadership and efforts to support the liberation of Palestine.

During an interview on Sunday, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti said Ayatollah Khamenei’s influence extended far beyond Iran’s borders.

He described the martyred Leader as a symbol of resistance and freedom for nations seeking independence from American and Zionist domination.

“His intellectual and political vision across the Islamic world, together with his efforts to liberate Palestine, were among the main reasons the West became determined to assassinate him,” al-Bukhaiti said.

He added that the martyred Leader’s legacy would continue to inspire people striving for dignity, sovereignty, and resistance, saying his name and memory would remain a source of inspiration for future generations.

Millions of Iranians and supporters of the Axis of Resistance across the region mourned his martyrdom, holding ceremonies and tributes in his honor.

Iran’s top Navy commander said the Axis of Resistance is no longer confined by geography, warning that the zionist regime and the United States will face a united Islamic front following the martyrdom of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

Speaking to Yemen’s Al Masirah television, Rear Admiral Shahram Irani said the followers of the martyred Leader have “gathered today to renew the bond of brotherhood and unity they learned from his teachings.”

“Resistance is no longer limited to geographical boundaries,” he said, warning that the enemy “must understand that today it is not confronting a single country, but the greater Islamic nation and the Islamic Resistance.”

Irani also warned that the zionist regime and its allies should brace for retaliation by Muslim fighters seeking to avenge those martyred in the US-zionist war against Iran, saying they would face “a crushing blow that will shatter them.”

He made the remarks on the sidelines of the farewell ceremony for Ayatollah Khamenei in Tehran on Sunday.

In separate remarks to the Yemeni broadcaster, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior adviser to the late Leader, called on Muslim nations and “all free peoples” of the world to stand together against the oppression of the United States and the Israeli regime.

Safavi said he was confident that unity among Muslim nations and the Axis of Resistance would strengthen the Islamic world and elevate it into one of the world’s major centers of power.

Iranian Army Commander Major General Amir Hatami said in a public address that the late Sayyed Khamenei “drew a path of dignity and independence, and prepared for us all the means to follow it,” adding that the armed forces “will continue the path behind our commander Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei with unwavering strength and determination.”

Hatami further pledged that the Iranian public “will not allow the enemies to escape punishment” and that “they will be held accountable for their crimes.”

Separately, Deputy Commander of the Armed Forces Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said the commander “will remain alive in our minds forever” and that Iranian forces “will follow his recommendations.”

Sayyari added that Iran had “made a pledge to remain with our martyred leader and we renew that pledge today,” stressing that “the idea of vengeance is always present in our minds.”

He also said, “We promise our commander Sayyed Mojtaba that we will continue the path with high confidence, strong will, and resistance.”

In another statement, Advisor to the Supreme Leader and Assistant to the President Mohammad Mokhber said that “those who killed our martyred Imam will not die a natural death” and vowed that “the people and the system will take revenge on them.”

Mokhber added, “We will take revenge for our martyred leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei, inevitably.”

Iran’s Assembly of Experts Issues Critical Statement in Regards to MoU

1. We urge that, considering the experiences of past damaging negotiations, the negotiators will be extremely careful of the tricks of the deceitful and evil enemy and pay attention to the fact that observing the Leader’s red lines is a religious obligation and violating them is not permissible under any circumstances.

2. We emphasize the need to pursue revenge for the martyrdom of our dear Leader, and that Trump and Netanyahu must face justice by any means necessary.

3. Any breach of the MoU must be responded to immediately. Therefore, considering the continuation of ceasefire breaches by the Zionist regime in Lebanon, and the failure to withdraw from the occupied territories, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is contrary to the obligations of the officials and is considered a major strategic mistake, and will only embolden the enemy to continue its breach of the agreement.

4. We remind you again that according to the obligatory guidance of the Supreme Leader, the country’s nuclear rights should not be discussed nor disputed, and should be completely excluded from the negotiations.

5. Establishing management over the Strait of Hormuz, receiving compensation for war damages, the release of frozen assets, lifting all sanctions, and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region are inviolable demands of the Supreme Leader and the people, and they must be pursued. Any negligence in this regard will be met with a fierce reaction of the nation.

6. Officials should avoid any statements that cause the enemy to become more arrogant and makes the country appear weak and helpless. Especially since the resistance of our self-sacrificing warriors has driven the arrogant America to despair, no statements should be made that suggests the country’s weakness or helplessness.

7. Everyone, especially the esteemed government officials, knows that in the system of Wilayat Al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), the opinion and perspective of the Leader is the final word, and when informed of his definitive opinion, no official can or should act contrary to his opinion.

8. Based on all evidence, the enemy is merely seeking an opportunity to deploy additional forces and buy time for some matters, including the upcoming Midterm elections. After that, there will be a high probability of a new attack, and the issues raised in the MoU should be resolved within the stipulated 30-day and 60-day deadlines.=

9. We ask the dear nation to continue their steadfast presence on the streets, and while preserving sacred unity and avoiding any action that disrupts this unity, they should not pay attention to the divisive words of some ignorant people who seek to limit this divine mission. The presence of the people is essential and decisive as long as the Supreme Leader deems it necessary.

10. The Asssembly of Experts, as humble servants and part of the people, will remain with the esteemed Leadership and the entire nation, while wishing success to the respected government officials, awaiting the fulfillment of the conditions and promises, and will fulfill their religious duty when necessary.

Iran’s Assembly of Experts Issues Critical Statement in Regards to MoU

1. We urge that, considering the experiences of past damaging negotiations, the negotiators will be extremely careful of the tricks of the deceitful and evil enemy and pay attention to the fact that observing the Leader’s red lines is a religious obligation and violating them is not permissible under any circumstances.

2. We emphasize the need to pursue revenge for the martyrdom of our dear Leader, and that Trump and Netanyahu must face justice by any means necessary.

3. Any breach of the MoU must be responded to immediately. Therefore, considering the continuation of ceasefire breaches by the Zionist regime in Lebanon, and the failure to withdraw from the occupied territories, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz is contrary to the obligations of the officials and is considered a major strategic mistake, and will only embolden the enemy to continue its breach of the agreement.

4. We remind you again that according to the obligatory guidance of the Supreme Leader, the country’s nuclear rights should not be discussed nor disputed, and should be completely excluded from the negotiations.

5. Establishing management over the Strait of Hormuz, receiving compensation for war damages, the release of frozen assets, lifting all sanctions, and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the region are inviolable demands of the Supreme Leader and the people, and they must be pursued. Any negligence in this regard will be met with a fierce reaction of the nation.

6. Officials should avoid any statements that cause the enemy to become more arrogant and makes the country appear weak and helpless. Especially since the resistance of our self-sacrificing warriors has driven the arrogant America to despair, no statements should be made that suggests the country’s weakness or helplessness.

7. Everyone, especially the esteemed government officials, knows that in the system of Wilayat Al-Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist), the opinion and perspective of the Leader is the final word, and when informed of his definitive opinion, no official can or should act contrary to his opinion.

8. Based on all evidence, the enemy is merely seeking an opportunity to deploy additional forces and buy time for some matters, including the upcoming Midterm elections. After that, there will be a high probability of a new attack, and the issues raised in the MoU should be resolved within the stipulated 30-day and 60-day deadlines.=

9. We ask the dear nation to continue their steadfast presence on the streets, and while preserving sacred unity and avoiding any action that disrupts this unity, they should not pay attention to the divisive words of some ignorant people who seek to limit this divine mission. The presence of the people is essential and decisive as long as the Supreme Leader deems it necessary.

10. The Asssembly of Experts, as humble servants and part of the people, will remain with the esteemed Leadership and the entire nation, while wishing success to the respected government officials, awaiting the fulfillment of the conditions and promises, and will fulfill their religious duty when necessary.

IRGC says it Struck US Bases in Kuwait and Bahrain in Response to Aggression

The Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced in the early hours of Sunday that its naval forces and Aerospace Force carried out a joint missile and drone operation targeting eight major US military facilities.

In a statement, the IRGC said the operation took place between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m. local time and involved coordinated strikes against multiple strategic sites across the region.

The IRGC said the strikes hit Ali Al-Salem Air Base in Kuwait and the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet at Naval Support Activity Bahrain in the port of Salman, claiming the targets were destroyed.

The group said the operation was a direct response to recent US attacks.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it carried out additional strikes against Iranian military infrastructure in southern Iran, saying the operation was conducted in response to what Washington described as an Iranian attack on an oil tanker.

According to CENTCOM, the strikes targeted military surveillance infrastructure, communications systems, air defense sites, drone storage facilities, and naval mine-laying capabilities.

Escalation over Gulf security, Strait of Hormuz

The IRGC accused the United States of violating previous understandings and said Washington had carried out strikes on five Iranian coastal sites under the pretext of responding to maritime incidents involving the Strait of Hormuz.

It stressed that responsibility for organizing navigation in the strait falls under Iranian jurisdiction, according to what it described as the Islamabad memorandum.

The statement warned that any future attacks by the United States, regardless of justification or scale, would be met with a “much harsher” response.

It also said any breach of ceasefire arrangements would be considered a violation of the first clause of the Islamabad memorandum, adding that such violations would trigger a full halt of existing commitments.

IRGC says it Struck US Bases in Kuwait and Bahrain in Response to Aggression

The Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) announced in the early hours of Sunday that its naval forces and Aerospace Force carried out a joint missile and drone operation targeting eight major US military facilities.

In a statement, the IRGC said the operation took place between 2:00 and 3:00 a.m. local time and involved coordinated strikes against multiple strategic sites across the region.

The IRGC said the strikes hit Ali Al-Salem Air Base in Kuwait and the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet at Naval Support Activity Bahrain in the port of Salman, claiming the targets were destroyed.

The group said the operation was a direct response to recent US attacks.

The US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that it carried out additional strikes against Iranian military infrastructure in southern Iran, saying the operation was conducted in response to what Washington described as an Iranian attack on an oil tanker.

According to CENTCOM, the strikes targeted military surveillance infrastructure, communications systems, air defense sites, drone storage facilities, and naval mine-laying capabilities.

Escalation over Gulf security, Strait of Hormuz

The IRGC accused the United States of violating previous understandings and said Washington had carried out strikes on five Iranian coastal sites under the pretext of responding to maritime incidents involving the Strait of Hormuz.

It stressed that responsibility for organizing navigation in the strait falls under Iranian jurisdiction, according to what it described as the Islamabad memorandum.

The statement warned that any future attacks by the United States, regardless of justification or scale, would be met with a “much harsher” response.

It also said any breach of ceasefire arrangements would be considered a violation of the first clause of the Islamabad memorandum, adding that such violations would trigger a full halt of existing commitments.

Loss of Sovereignty: Hezbollah Slams Lebanon-Zionist Framework

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem has issued a forceful rejection of the new framework agreement signed by the Lebanese government and the zionist regime; denouncing it as a political surrender that hands concessions to the occupatiuon under US sponsorship.

In a strongly worded statement, Sheikh Qassem blasted the deal as a direct threat to Lebanon’s sovereignty, insisting that it reflects “submission to the demands of aggression” and full alignment with American-Zionist dictates.

Political failure and the loss of sovereignty

Sheikh Naim opened his statement with a blistering critique of the Lebanese authorities, questioning their legitimacy in handling ceasefire negotiations and regional diplomacy.

He accused the government of abandoning national responsibility, asking where its “trustworthiness and responsibility toward its people” had gone, particularly after they rejected regional understandings such as the Islamabad talks, which ultimately resulted in the zionist massacre of Black Wednesday, asserting that political missteps had led to widespread destruction and civilian casualties.

According to Sheikh Qassem, the authorities had effectively “stabbed the Resistance in the back,” stripping Lebanon of its ability to define friend and foe independently and serving the zionist regime hostile project.

Direct talks are illegitimate, popularly rejected

A central point in Sheikh Qassem’s statement was his outright rejection of direct negotiations with the zionist regime, which remain illegitimate, dangerous, and “pure, free concessions to ‘Israel,’” adding that they represent “meetings of submission to the demands of aggression.”

Such engagement, he said, is incompatible with Lebanon’s constitutional framework, where the zionist regime is defined as an enemy entity and normalization or political contact is treated as a punishable breach of law.

He further stated that the government’s position is also challenged on political grounds as it continues to act in opposition to a large segment of public opinion and proceeding “in dispute and disagreement with more than half of the Lebanese people.”

On Iran-US MoU

He also referred to the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran, which includes provisions for a ceasefire on multiple fronts, including in Lebanon. Iran, which has consistently advocated for Lebanon, even blocking the Strait of Hormuz when the zionsit regime committed any escalation in Lebanon, had successfully compelled the occupation against any misstep in the country.

The framework, Sheikh Naim recalled, included the “immediate and permanent cessation of military operations,” alongside commitments preventing renewed military aggression or the use of force against Lebanon’s sovereignty.

He further asserted that a 60-day negotiation period toward a final settlement was included in the agreement, which the Lebanese authorities ultimately rejected in a strategic miscalculation, thereby losing a “card of strength” that could have secured the zionist withdrawal.

“This is a gift of honor, dignity, and strength from steadfast and proud Iran to Lebanon, its people, and its Resistance,” he said, adding that the authorities had rejected this source of strength and the sacrifices of the Lebanese people, “and gave ‘Israel,’ free of charge, what it wanted.”

A ‘disastrous downfall’ as zionist regime dictates disarmament

The Hezbollah leader warned of the zionsit regime’s intentions to maintain control over Lebanon’s border areas under the pretext of so-called security arrangements, adding that Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently pushed for his regime’s continued presence in the security belt until the Resistance is “disarmed”.

“What is this disastrous downfall? What is this grave mistake of surrendering sovereignty to the ‘Israeli’ enemy?” he asked, noting that the zionist entity is allowing the Lebanese army to deploy its forces in two pilot zones, as it monitors the steps taken toward disarmament.

This, he said, is a condition that transformed withdrawal into a phased and conditional process with no clear timeline, and effectively requires Lebanon to obtain a “certificate of good conduct” from the Israeli regime itself before any transition to subsequent stages in a clear violation of the country’s sovereignty.

More strictly, Sheikh Naim stated that linking the zionist withdrawal to internal Lebanese disarmament transforms the country into a “plaything” rather than an independent sovereign state.

“The authorities are legitimizing the continuation of the occupation for many years, and this could even lead to the annexation of these territories to the Zionist entity!” he warned.

He asserted that under this pretext, Lebanon is expected to disarm the Resistance, “yet the weapons will certainly not be surrendered, and no one has the right to deprive the Lebanese people of their right to defend themselves and their land against the occupier of our land and the killer of our people.”

The final rejection, and a vow of continued resistance

“The Framework Agreement in Washington is one of humiliation, disgrace, and surrender of sovereignty. This agreement is null and void,” Sheikh Naim said in firm rejection, adding that the Iran-US MoU must be implemented.

He vowed that the Resistance will, by any means necessary, enforce the first provision of the MoU and the zionist withdrawal from Lebanon’s sovereign lands.

He also directly addressed the Lebanese government: “It is time for you to reverse your grave mistakes that are destroying Lebanon,” he said, adding that the Resistance is ready to cooperate with the authorities to ensure sovereignty, liberation, the expulsion of the occupier, the return of the detainees and residents, reconstruction, rebuilding the country, and reaching an understanding on a national security strategy.

At the same time, he stressed that the ceasefire “would never have been achieved were it not for the great sacrifices of the Resistance fighters, their families, and the Lebanese people,” pledging that their trust would not be broken, and that the battle would continue until the zionist enemy is expelled.

Loss of Sovereignty: Hezbollah Slams Lebanon-Zionist Framework

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem has issued a forceful rejection of the new framework agreement signed by the Lebanese government and the zionist regime; denouncing it as a political surrender that hands concessions to the occupatiuon under US sponsorship.

In a strongly worded statement, Sheikh Qassem blasted the deal as a direct threat to Lebanon’s sovereignty, insisting that it reflects “submission to the demands of aggression” and full alignment with American-Zionist dictates.

Political failure and the loss of sovereignty

Sheikh Naim opened his statement with a blistering critique of the Lebanese authorities, questioning their legitimacy in handling ceasefire negotiations and regional diplomacy.

He accused the government of abandoning national responsibility, asking where its “trustworthiness and responsibility toward its people” had gone, particularly after they rejected regional understandings such as the Islamabad talks, which ultimately resulted in the zionist massacre of Black Wednesday, asserting that political missteps had led to widespread destruction and civilian casualties.

According to Sheikh Qassem, the authorities had effectively “stabbed the Resistance in the back,” stripping Lebanon of its ability to define friend and foe independently and serving the zionist regime hostile project.

Direct talks are illegitimate, popularly rejected

A central point in Sheikh Qassem’s statement was his outright rejection of direct negotiations with the zionist regime, which remain illegitimate, dangerous, and “pure, free concessions to ‘Israel,’” adding that they represent “meetings of submission to the demands of aggression.”

Such engagement, he said, is incompatible with Lebanon’s constitutional framework, where the zionist regime is defined as an enemy entity and normalization or political contact is treated as a punishable breach of law.

He further stated that the government’s position is also challenged on political grounds as it continues to act in opposition to a large segment of public opinion and proceeding “in dispute and disagreement with more than half of the Lebanese people.”

On Iran-US MoU

He also referred to the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran, which includes provisions for a ceasefire on multiple fronts, including in Lebanon. Iran, which has consistently advocated for Lebanon, even blocking the Strait of Hormuz when the zionsit regime committed any escalation in Lebanon, had successfully compelled the occupation against any misstep in the country.

The framework, Sheikh Naim recalled, included the “immediate and permanent cessation of military operations,” alongside commitments preventing renewed military aggression or the use of force against Lebanon’s sovereignty.

He further asserted that a 60-day negotiation period toward a final settlement was included in the agreement, which the Lebanese authorities ultimately rejected in a strategic miscalculation, thereby losing a “card of strength” that could have secured the zionist withdrawal.

“This is a gift of honor, dignity, and strength from steadfast and proud Iran to Lebanon, its people, and its Resistance,” he said, adding that the authorities had rejected this source of strength and the sacrifices of the Lebanese people, “and gave ‘Israel,’ free of charge, what it wanted.”

A ‘disastrous downfall’ as zionist regime dictates disarmament

The Hezbollah leader warned of the zionsit regime’s intentions to maintain control over Lebanon’s border areas under the pretext of so-called security arrangements, adding that Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently pushed for his regime’s continued presence in the security belt until the Resistance is “disarmed”.

“What is this disastrous downfall? What is this grave mistake of surrendering sovereignty to the ‘Israeli’ enemy?” he asked, noting that the zionist entity is allowing the Lebanese army to deploy its forces in two pilot zones, as it monitors the steps taken toward disarmament.

This, he said, is a condition that transformed withdrawal into a phased and conditional process with no clear timeline, and effectively requires Lebanon to obtain a “certificate of good conduct” from the Israeli regime itself before any transition to subsequent stages in a clear violation of the country’s sovereignty.

More strictly, Sheikh Naim stated that linking the zionist withdrawal to internal Lebanese disarmament transforms the country into a “plaything” rather than an independent sovereign state.

“The authorities are legitimizing the continuation of the occupation for many years, and this could even lead to the annexation of these territories to the Zionist entity!” he warned.

He asserted that under this pretext, Lebanon is expected to disarm the Resistance, “yet the weapons will certainly not be surrendered, and no one has the right to deprive the Lebanese people of their right to defend themselves and their land against the occupier of our land and the killer of our people.”

The final rejection, and a vow of continued resistance

“The Framework Agreement in Washington is one of humiliation, disgrace, and surrender of sovereignty. This agreement is null and void,” Sheikh Naim said in firm rejection, adding that the Iran-US MoU must be implemented.

He vowed that the Resistance will, by any means necessary, enforce the first provision of the MoU and the zionist withdrawal from Lebanon’s sovereign lands.

He also directly addressed the Lebanese government: “It is time for you to reverse your grave mistakes that are destroying Lebanon,” he said, adding that the Resistance is ready to cooperate with the authorities to ensure sovereignty, liberation, the expulsion of the occupier, the return of the detainees and residents, reconstruction, rebuilding the country, and reaching an understanding on a national security strategy.

At the same time, he stressed that the ceasefire “would never have been achieved were it not for the great sacrifices of the Resistance fighters, their families, and the Lebanese people,” pledging that their trust would not be broken, and that the battle would continue until the zionist enemy is expelled.

How the US-Iran MoU Could Collapse Over Gaza

While there has been significant focus on the importance of the Lebanon ceasefire within the broader Iran-US Memorandum of Understanding, little attention has been paid to the predicament of the Gaza Strip – the front from which the regional war began.

A recent call between Hamas official Bassem Naim and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi ended in assurances that the Gaza ceasefire is being discussed amidst the ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington. After all, the first clause of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) affirms that the war must end on all fronts.

Lebanon is the only front that is explicitly mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding, because of the fact that it was a battlezone that reactivated more recently, requiring the implementation of a real ceasefire agreement; especially as the Israelis had violated the previous ceasefire 15,400 times.

However, the issue of Gaza could in fact become more relevant to ending the regional war than even the predicament of Lebanon. One must not forget that is where this war began. Without the Hamas-led offensive on October 7, 2023, there never would have been a US-Israeli aggression on Iran. This is why the issue – beyond its moral implications – is of vital importance.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “seven fronts” war seeks “total victory” across all fronts, with the Iranian front being the most important. So far, he has proven incapable of achieving any decisive strategic victories, only a series of tactical victories, which have left them stuck. Some 92% of the Israeli population believe that Iran won the war, which is a dramatic shift from the polls conducted following the 12-Day war last year, when the majority of Israelis said they approved of the war and how it was managed.

This time around, Hezbollah’s choice to join and make an impressive comeback undid the Israeli propaganda that brainwashed its population into believing that they had defeated the Lebanese Resistance. Up until September of 2024, the Israelis were widely accepted to be stuck militarily, having failed to defeat the Palestinian Resistance in Gaza and also lacking any real options against Lebanon.

The terrorist pager attacks and assassinations of Hezbollah’s senior leadership ended up resulting in a series of tactical victories, giving way to a propaganda win that enabled the Israeli regime to sell its people the idea that they had achieved a strategic victory. Almost immediately after the November 27, 2024, ceasefire was declared in Lebanon, the government of neighboring Syria fell. Netanyahu spared no time in claiming this as his victory.

These two events managed to drastically change the balance of power regionally and give the illusion that Iran was severely weakened, its Axis of Resistance battered, and that it could be on the verge of collapse. As it turned out, that was far from the reality on the ground.

Washington and their allies in Tel Aviv tried almost everything they could to bring down the Iranian government, including fueling an armed rebellion inside Iran and then launching a full scale assault. None of this worked.

The Israeli plot has clearly been to expand its territorial control and achieve the so-called “Greater Israel Project”, but this all depends upon the collapse of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance.

Facing a predicament whereby the defeat of Iran and Hezbollah appears improbable, the Israelis now appear to be pivoting back to the Gaza Strip as their punching bag, aiming at eventually ethnically cleansing the population. Hamas and the other Palestinian resistance factions know this. The bottom line, they will not stand idly by. What this means is simple: A major operation will eventually be carried out by the Palestinian Resistance if it is left alone.

Iran has the opportunity to not only ensure that the front at the heart of the region’s primary cause remains, but that it can be granted leverage with which to negotiate. Left to its own devices, the only option available to the Palestinian Resistance is to launch another major offensive that will end up bringing the entire region back to step one. Therefore, Tehran understands that if it wants any ceasefire to truly hold, it is a requirement for Gaza to be part of it. Otherwise, it would be a strategic disaster.

The Zionist entity understands this. Therefore, it could end up choosing to pursue an agenda of going after the civilian population in Gaza once again, as a means of totally collapsing the MoU and ushering in a new phase of the conflict; believing that this will then grant them the upper hand.

Robert Inlakesh
Source: Al Mayadeen

How the US-Iran MoU Could Collapse Over Gaza

While there has been significant focus on the importance of the Lebanon ceasefire within the broader Iran-US Memorandum of Understanding, little attention has been paid to the predicament of the Gaza Strip – the front from which the regional war began.

A recent call between Hamas official Bassem Naim and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi ended in assurances that the Gaza ceasefire is being discussed amidst the ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington. After all, the first clause of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) affirms that the war must end on all fronts.

Lebanon is the only front that is explicitly mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding, because of the fact that it was a battlezone that reactivated more recently, requiring the implementation of a real ceasefire agreement; especially as the Israelis had violated the previous ceasefire 15,400 times.

However, the issue of Gaza could in fact become more relevant to ending the regional war than even the predicament of Lebanon. One must not forget that is where this war began. Without the Hamas-led offensive on October 7, 2023, there never would have been a US-Israeli aggression on Iran. This is why the issue – beyond its moral implications – is of vital importance.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “seven fronts” war seeks “total victory” across all fronts, with the Iranian front being the most important. So far, he has proven incapable of achieving any decisive strategic victories, only a series of tactical victories, which have left them stuck. Some 92% of the Israeli population believe that Iran won the war, which is a dramatic shift from the polls conducted following the 12-Day war last year, when the majority of Israelis said they approved of the war and how it was managed.

This time around, Hezbollah’s choice to join and make an impressive comeback undid the Israeli propaganda that brainwashed its population into believing that they had defeated the Lebanese Resistance. Up until September of 2024, the Israelis were widely accepted to be stuck militarily, having failed to defeat the Palestinian Resistance in Gaza and also lacking any real options against Lebanon.

The terrorist pager attacks and assassinations of Hezbollah’s senior leadership ended up resulting in a series of tactical victories, giving way to a propaganda win that enabled the Israeli regime to sell its people the idea that they had achieved a strategic victory. Almost immediately after the November 27, 2024, ceasefire was declared in Lebanon, the government of neighboring Syria fell. Netanyahu spared no time in claiming this as his victory.

These two events managed to drastically change the balance of power regionally and give the illusion that Iran was severely weakened, its Axis of Resistance battered, and that it could be on the verge of collapse. As it turned out, that was far from the reality on the ground.

Washington and their allies in Tel Aviv tried almost everything they could to bring down the Iranian government, including fueling an armed rebellion inside Iran and then launching a full scale assault. None of this worked.

The Israeli plot has clearly been to expand its territorial control and achieve the so-called “Greater Israel Project”, but this all depends upon the collapse of the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance.

Facing a predicament whereby the defeat of Iran and Hezbollah appears improbable, the Israelis now appear to be pivoting back to the Gaza Strip as their punching bag, aiming at eventually ethnically cleansing the population. Hamas and the other Palestinian resistance factions know this. The bottom line, they will not stand idly by. What this means is simple: A major operation will eventually be carried out by the Palestinian Resistance if it is left alone.

Iran has the opportunity to not only ensure that the front at the heart of the region’s primary cause remains, but that it can be granted leverage with which to negotiate. Left to its own devices, the only option available to the Palestinian Resistance is to launch another major offensive that will end up bringing the entire region back to step one. Therefore, Tehran understands that if it wants any ceasefire to truly hold, it is a requirement for Gaza to be part of it. Otherwise, it would be a strategic disaster.

The Zionist entity understands this. Therefore, it could end up choosing to pursue an agenda of going after the civilian population in Gaza once again, as a means of totally collapsing the MoU and ushering in a new phase of the conflict; believing that this will then grant them the upper hand.

Robert Inlakesh
Source: Al Mayadeen

Hezbollah Issues Third Statement About Ceasefire Violations, Zionist Casualties in Lebanon

The Islamic Resistance issued on Thursday a statement that highlighted the new zionist violation of the ceasefire in South Lebanon represented by the deliberate targeting of Lebanese civilians who were on their way to inspect their homes on the Zawtar Al-Sharqiyah–Maifadoun road, claiming that they posed a threat to its occupying forces.

The Islamic Resistance affirms that what the enemy has committed constitutes a blatant violation of the ceasefire, which it has adhered to until now, and that it is monitoring these violations, according to the statement.

What follows is the text of the statement:

The “Israeli” enemy army once again deliberately targeted Lebanese civilians who were on their way to inspect their homes on the Zawtar Al-Sharqiyah–Maifadoun road, claiming that they posed a threat to its occupying forces.

The treacherous attack, carried out at 14:40 by a missile strike launched from an enemy drone, resulted in the martyrdom of two civilian citizens who were directly targeted and the injury of a third.

For the third time, the Islamic Resistance affirms that what the enemy has committed constitutes a blatant violation of the ceasefire, which it has adhered to until now, and that it is monitoring these violations.

Zionists wounded

Four zionist soldiers were wounded, some critically, during fierce confrontations with Resistance fighters in the southern Lebanese town of Beit Yahoun, zionist media reported Thursday.

According to the reports, fighters ambushed a zionist nfantry unit with RPG rockets and gunfire, with the wounded belonging to the 769th Brigade. A military helicopter was subsequently dispatched to Rambam Hospital in Haifa to evacuate the casualties.

Earlier on Thursday, the zionist military confirmed the death of one soldier during what it described as “operational activity” in southern Lebanon, without providing further details.

Hezbollah Issues Third Statement About Ceasefire Violations, Zionist Casualties in Lebanon

The Islamic Resistance issued on Thursday a statement that highlighted the new zionist violation of the ceasefire in South Lebanon represented by the deliberate targeting of Lebanese civilians who were on their way to inspect their homes on the Zawtar Al-Sharqiyah–Maifadoun road, claiming that they posed a threat to its occupying forces.

The Islamic Resistance affirms that what the enemy has committed constitutes a blatant violation of the ceasefire, which it has adhered to until now, and that it is monitoring these violations, according to the statement.

What follows is the text of the statement:

The “Israeli” enemy army once again deliberately targeted Lebanese civilians who were on their way to inspect their homes on the Zawtar Al-Sharqiyah–Maifadoun road, claiming that they posed a threat to its occupying forces.

The treacherous attack, carried out at 14:40 by a missile strike launched from an enemy drone, resulted in the martyrdom of two civilian citizens who were directly targeted and the injury of a third.

For the third time, the Islamic Resistance affirms that what the enemy has committed constitutes a blatant violation of the ceasefire, which it has adhered to until now, and that it is monitoring these violations.

Zionists wounded

Four zionist soldiers were wounded, some critically, during fierce confrontations with Resistance fighters in the southern Lebanese town of Beit Yahoun, zionist media reported Thursday.

According to the reports, fighters ambushed a zionist nfantry unit with RPG rockets and gunfire, with the wounded belonging to the 769th Brigade. A military helicopter was subsequently dispatched to Rambam Hospital in Haifa to evacuate the casualties.

Earlier on Thursday, the zionist military confirmed the death of one soldier during what it described as “operational activity” in southern Lebanon, without providing further details.

Hezbollah says Zionist Project ‘Broken,’ Urges Full Withdrawal From Lebanon

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem says the resistance has reached a stage of “breaking the Israeli project,” and the occupation has no choice but to fully withdraw from all Lebanese territory.

“We are now in a new phase in the history of Lebanon, its Resistance, its army, its people, and its future, a phase called ‘Breaking the Israeli Project,'” Sheikh Qassem said in a televised address on Tuesday.

He said the project that sought to eliminate Hezbollah “militarily, politically, culturally, socially, and humanly” over the past two to three years had failed.

“This does not mean they will not try again or that there will not be other phases, but there was a major project called the military, political, cultural, social, and human elimination of Hezbollah, and erasing its existence and the existence of all those with it on the path to Greater Israel. This project has been broken.”

Sheikh Qassem said the Israeli occupation has no choice but to withdraw entirely from Lebanese soil.

“We now have a ceasefire. The withdrawal must take place according to a timetable. Israel has no choice but to fully withdraw from all Lebanese territory, without retaining an inch,” he said, referring to the Iran-US agreement, which stipulates an end to the war on Lebanon.

He said the ceasefire must be followed by a complete Israeli withdrawal, making way for the Lebanese Army to deploy south of the Litani River.

“Israel withdraws and the Lebanese Army deploys exclusively south of the Litani River.”

The Hezbollah chief rejected any arrangement that would allow the occupation to retain any part of Lebanese land under any pretext.

“We will not accept the occupation retaining a single inch under any title.”

He also put a premium on a complete end to aggression by land, sea and air, and the deployment of the Lebanese Army across the south.

‘Battlefield broke the project’

Sheikh Qassem credited the resistance’s steadfastness on the battlefield for the breakthrough.

“Had the Resistance not been on the battlefield, we would not have reached this result,” he said.

He acknowledged the heavy price paid. “Had we not had Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah and the martyred leaders, the wounded, the captives, and the great families that rallied around the Resistance, we would not have broken the project.”

He dismissed criticism from those who warned that the resistance was not stronger than Israel.

“Who said that we are stronger than the Israeli entity? We are saying that we are on the battlefield, and the Israeli entity on the battlefield will not endure, and cannot achieve its goals even if time drags on.”

He warned that “had the battlefield collapsed, the Israeli entity would have taken a step in its project to eliminate Hezbollah and achieve the ‘Greater Israel’ project.”

Sheikh Qassem also rejected any project for the disarmament of the resistance or the imposition of new political conditions.

‘Iran’s role decisive’

Sheikh Qassem underlined the crucial role played by Iran, saying the resistance entered the fight “based on Iran,” adding strength to its existing capabilities.

He said the US-Iran memorandum of understanding explicitly included in its first clause a cessation of aggression on Lebanon.

“Iran does not negotiate on behalf of Lebanon,” he said, “but rather calls for a ceasefire and then leaves the Lebanese to manage their own affairs.”

The Hezbollah chief criticised the performance of the Lebanese authorities in negotiations since November 2024, saying the occupation made no concessions.

The fifth round of Lebanon-Israel talks opened in Washington on Tuesday, with President Joseph Aoun saying the negotiations could be decisive but that Beirut would “accept nothing less than the complete end of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.”

However, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that Israeli forces would remain in southern Lebanon indefinitely.

The talks take place against the backdrop of a US-Iran memorandum of understanding signed on June 18, which includes a commitment to ending military operations on “all fronts,” including Lebanon.

Pakistan and Qatar have announced the creation of a “de-confliction cell” involving the US, Iran and Lebanon to ensure the cessation of attacks on Lebanon.

Despite the ceasefire, Israeli forces have continued strikes in southern Lebanon, with Lebanese media reporting two people killed by Israeli gunfire on Tuesday in the village of Nabatieh al-Fawqa, the first deadly attack in days.

Hezbollah has vowed to confront any violation.

Lebanon says Israeli attacks since March have killed more than 4,100 people.

source: Press TV

Hezbollah says Zionist Project ‘Broken,’ Urges Full Withdrawal From Lebanon

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem says the resistance has reached a stage of “breaking the Israeli project,” and the occupation has no choice but to fully withdraw from all Lebanese territory.

“We are now in a new phase in the history of Lebanon, its Resistance, its army, its people, and its future, a phase called ‘Breaking the Israeli Project,'” Sheikh Qassem said in a televised address on Tuesday.

He said the project that sought to eliminate Hezbollah “militarily, politically, culturally, socially, and humanly” over the past two to three years had failed.

“This does not mean they will not try again or that there will not be other phases, but there was a major project called the military, political, cultural, social, and human elimination of Hezbollah, and erasing its existence and the existence of all those with it on the path to Greater Israel. This project has been broken.”

Sheikh Qassem said the Israeli occupation has no choice but to withdraw entirely from Lebanese soil.

“We now have a ceasefire. The withdrawal must take place according to a timetable. Israel has no choice but to fully withdraw from all Lebanese territory, without retaining an inch,” he said, referring to the Iran-US agreement, which stipulates an end to the war on Lebanon.

He said the ceasefire must be followed by a complete Israeli withdrawal, making way for the Lebanese Army to deploy south of the Litani River.

“Israel withdraws and the Lebanese Army deploys exclusively south of the Litani River.”

The Hezbollah chief rejected any arrangement that would allow the occupation to retain any part of Lebanese land under any pretext.

“We will not accept the occupation retaining a single inch under any title.”

He also put a premium on a complete end to aggression by land, sea and air, and the deployment of the Lebanese Army across the south.

‘Battlefield broke the project’

Sheikh Qassem credited the resistance’s steadfastness on the battlefield for the breakthrough.

“Had the Resistance not been on the battlefield, we would not have reached this result,” he said.

He acknowledged the heavy price paid. “Had we not had Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah and the martyred leaders, the wounded, the captives, and the great families that rallied around the Resistance, we would not have broken the project.”

He dismissed criticism from those who warned that the resistance was not stronger than Israel.

“Who said that we are stronger than the Israeli entity? We are saying that we are on the battlefield, and the Israeli entity on the battlefield will not endure, and cannot achieve its goals even if time drags on.”

He warned that “had the battlefield collapsed, the Israeli entity would have taken a step in its project to eliminate Hezbollah and achieve the ‘Greater Israel’ project.”

Sheikh Qassem also rejected any project for the disarmament of the resistance or the imposition of new political conditions.

‘Iran’s role decisive’

Sheikh Qassem underlined the crucial role played by Iran, saying the resistance entered the fight “based on Iran,” adding strength to its existing capabilities.

He said the US-Iran memorandum of understanding explicitly included in its first clause a cessation of aggression on Lebanon.

“Iran does not negotiate on behalf of Lebanon,” he said, “but rather calls for a ceasefire and then leaves the Lebanese to manage their own affairs.”

The Hezbollah chief criticised the performance of the Lebanese authorities in negotiations since November 2024, saying the occupation made no concessions.

The fifth round of Lebanon-Israel talks opened in Washington on Tuesday, with President Joseph Aoun saying the negotiations could be decisive but that Beirut would “accept nothing less than the complete end of the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.”

However, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has insisted that Israeli forces would remain in southern Lebanon indefinitely.

The talks take place against the backdrop of a US-Iran memorandum of understanding signed on June 18, which includes a commitment to ending military operations on “all fronts,” including Lebanon.

Pakistan and Qatar have announced the creation of a “de-confliction cell” involving the US, Iran and Lebanon to ensure the cessation of attacks on Lebanon.

Despite the ceasefire, Israeli forces have continued strikes in southern Lebanon, with Lebanese media reporting two people killed by Israeli gunfire on Tuesday in the village of Nabatieh al-Fawqa, the first deadly attack in days.

Hezbollah has vowed to confront any violation.

Lebanon says Israeli attacks since March have killed more than 4,100 people.

source: Press TV

On the First Anniversary of the Martyrdom of the Great Commander “Saeed Ezzedine” (Hajj Ramadan): PFLP

On the First Anniversary of the Martyrdom of the Great Commander “Saeed Ezzedine” (Hajj Ramadan): PFLP

The Architecture of Endurance – Understanding Iran’s War Doctrine Beyond Western Narratives

The evidence demonstrates that Iran’s strategic focus is not battlefield dominance but endurance.

Led by Israel and Zionist allied “think tanks”, Western political leaders, military planners, and media institutions have portrayed Iran as an “irrational actor” driven by ideological extremism and regional aggression.

This deceptive narrative has served a strategic purpose by obscuring a more uncomfortable reality: Iran’s military doctrine is not built around conquest, expansion, or conventional battlefield dominance. It is built around survival.

Absent from much of the public discourse is the fact that Iran’s entire military structure evolved in response to isolation, sanctions, encirclement and repeated threats of regime change.

Following Iran’s historic 1979 Islamic Revolution, which overthrew a Western puppet and the devastating Western-imposed war by Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime on Iran, Tehran concluded that it could not compete directly with the overwhelming technological superiority of the United States and its allies. The result was the development of a doctrine focused on deterrence, endurance and resilience rather than conventional superiority.

What is routinely presented as aggression is often the visible component of a much broader strategy designed to impose costs on any adversary contemplating war. Iranian planners understand that they cannot defeat the United States or Israel in a traditional military confrontation. Their objective is therefore different. They seek to make military intervention so costly, prolonged and disruptive that political leaders in Washington or Tel Aviv reconsider the value of war itself.

While Western militaries often seek rapid, decisive victories through technological superiority and overwhelming firepower, Iran seeks to stretch conflict over time. The longer a conflict continues, the greater the financial, political and social burden imposed on its adversaries. Iranian strategists calculate that democratic societies possess lower tolerance for prolonged military and economic pain than Iran itself.

This explains Tehran’s enormous investment in missiles and drones.

The logic is simple. A relatively inexpensive drone can force an adversary to expend interceptor missiles costing many times more. The objective is not merely military damage. It is economic exhaustion. Every interception becomes a financial drain. Every wave of drones becomes a test of sustainability. The battlefield extends beyond military installations into budgets, supply chains and political patience.

This approach exposes a vulnerability rarely discussed in mainstream coverage. Advanced military technology often comes with extraordinary costs. Iran’s strategy seeks to weaponize that imbalance.

Another element routinely omitted from public discussion is the extent to which Iran has redefined the battlefield itself.

Through support for Hezbollah, Iraqi Resistance, the Houthis, and Palestinian liberation movements Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Iran has developed what it describes as an Axis of Resistance. Western governments portray these relationships exclusively through the language of proxy warfare. Yet from Tehran’s perspective, they represent strategic depth.

A conflict with Iran can thus no longer be confined to a single battlefield. It immediately becomes regional.

The beneficiaries of narratives that reduce these dynamics to simple “terrorism frameworks” are clear. Such framing eliminates historical context and removes discussion of broader regional security calculations. It simplifies a sophisticated deterrence architecture into a morality play that is easier to sell to domestic audiences.

Perhaps the most significant and least understood component of Iran’s doctrine is its decentralized command structure.

For decades, Western and Israeli military planning has relied heavily on leadership decapitation strategies. The assumption is straightforward. Remove key commanders and military organizations become ineffective.

Iran spent years studying the failures of Saddam Hussein’s military during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and concluded that centralized command structures were fatal vulnerabilities. The result was the development of the Mosaic Defense doctrine.

Under this model, Iran is divided into multiple semi-autonomous regional commands capable of functioning independently if central leadership is destroyed. Each command possesses local intelligence capabilities, logistics infrastructure, and operational authority. If communications collapse or senior leaders are eliminated, regional commanders are expected to continue fighting under preplanned directives.

If one commander is killed, another immediately assumes responsibility. The objective is simple: ensure that the military never stops functioning.

Iran’s military doctrine also treats geography as an active component of warfare.

Its mountainous terrain provides natural defensive barriers. Vast distances complicate any ground invasion. Underground missile complexes carved deep into mountains preserve critical assets from aerial bombardment.

Most importantly, Iran’s position alongside the Strait of Hormuz gives it leverage over one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints.

Western reporting frequently focuses on missile inventories and military hardware while giving far less attention to the strategic reality that geography itself remains one of Iran’s most powerful deterrents.

The ability to threaten disruptions to global energy markets transforms regional conflict into an international economic crisis. This expands the political costs of war far beyond the immediate participants.

And of course, modern warfare is fought through information as much as missiles.

Iran understands this reality and invests heavily in influence operations designed to shape domestic and international perceptions. State media networks, cyber capabilities and strategic messaging are deployed alongside conventional military assets. The goal is to ensure that Iranian actions are correctly framed as defensive responses while portraying adversaries as aggressors.

The United States, NATO members, Israel, Russia, and China all engage in similar information operations. Yet mainstream discussion often presents Western strategic communication as public diplomacy while framing Iranian messaging as propaganda. The distinction reflects power and narrative control more than objective analysis.

The most important lesson from Iran’s military doctrine is that it was never designed to produce a traditional military victory. Its purpose is deterrence and evidently has proven to be successful as we observe in how both the US and Israel have been pushed into a corner.

Iran’s planners have built a system designed to survive bombardment, absorb leadership losses, stretch conflicts over time and impose escalating economic and political costs on attackers.

This reality is frequently absent from public debate because it complicates prevailing narratives of “irrationality and aggression”.

It reveals a military doctrine shaped less by ambitions of conquest than by calculations of survival.

The evidence demonstrates that Iran’s strategic focus is not battlefield dominance but endurance. Its military architecture is designed to ensure that even if its leaders are killed, its cities attacked and its infrastructure damaged, the state remains capable of fighting.

Iqbal Jassat
Source: Palestine Chronicle

The Architecture of Endurance – Understanding Iran’s War Doctrine Beyond Western Narratives

The evidence demonstrates that Iran’s strategic focus is not battlefield dominance but endurance.

Led by Israel and Zionist allied “think tanks”, Western political leaders, military planners, and media institutions have portrayed Iran as an “irrational actor” driven by ideological extremism and regional aggression.

This deceptive narrative has served a strategic purpose by obscuring a more uncomfortable reality: Iran’s military doctrine is not built around conquest, expansion, or conventional battlefield dominance. It is built around survival.

Absent from much of the public discourse is the fact that Iran’s entire military structure evolved in response to isolation, sanctions, encirclement and repeated threats of regime change.

Following Iran’s historic 1979 Islamic Revolution, which overthrew a Western puppet and the devastating Western-imposed war by Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime on Iran, Tehran concluded that it could not compete directly with the overwhelming technological superiority of the United States and its allies. The result was the development of a doctrine focused on deterrence, endurance and resilience rather than conventional superiority.

What is routinely presented as aggression is often the visible component of a much broader strategy designed to impose costs on any adversary contemplating war. Iranian planners understand that they cannot defeat the United States or Israel in a traditional military confrontation. Their objective is therefore different. They seek to make military intervention so costly, prolonged and disruptive that political leaders in Washington or Tel Aviv reconsider the value of war itself.

While Western militaries often seek rapid, decisive victories through technological superiority and overwhelming firepower, Iran seeks to stretch conflict over time. The longer a conflict continues, the greater the financial, political and social burden imposed on its adversaries. Iranian strategists calculate that democratic societies possess lower tolerance for prolonged military and economic pain than Iran itself.

This explains Tehran’s enormous investment in missiles and drones.

The logic is simple. A relatively inexpensive drone can force an adversary to expend interceptor missiles costing many times more. The objective is not merely military damage. It is economic exhaustion. Every interception becomes a financial drain. Every wave of drones becomes a test of sustainability. The battlefield extends beyond military installations into budgets, supply chains and political patience.

This approach exposes a vulnerability rarely discussed in mainstream coverage. Advanced military technology often comes with extraordinary costs. Iran’s strategy seeks to weaponize that imbalance.

Another element routinely omitted from public discussion is the extent to which Iran has redefined the battlefield itself.

Through support for Hezbollah, Iraqi Resistance, the Houthis, and Palestinian liberation movements Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Iran has developed what it describes as an Axis of Resistance. Western governments portray these relationships exclusively through the language of proxy warfare. Yet from Tehran’s perspective, they represent strategic depth.

A conflict with Iran can thus no longer be confined to a single battlefield. It immediately becomes regional.

The beneficiaries of narratives that reduce these dynamics to simple “terrorism frameworks” are clear. Such framing eliminates historical context and removes discussion of broader regional security calculations. It simplifies a sophisticated deterrence architecture into a morality play that is easier to sell to domestic audiences.

Perhaps the most significant and least understood component of Iran’s doctrine is its decentralized command structure.

For decades, Western and Israeli military planning has relied heavily on leadership decapitation strategies. The assumption is straightforward. Remove key commanders and military organizations become ineffective.

Iran spent years studying the failures of Saddam Hussein’s military during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq and concluded that centralized command structures were fatal vulnerabilities. The result was the development of the Mosaic Defense doctrine.

Under this model, Iran is divided into multiple semi-autonomous regional commands capable of functioning independently if central leadership is destroyed. Each command possesses local intelligence capabilities, logistics infrastructure, and operational authority. If communications collapse or senior leaders are eliminated, regional commanders are expected to continue fighting under preplanned directives.

If one commander is killed, another immediately assumes responsibility. The objective is simple: ensure that the military never stops functioning.

Iran’s military doctrine also treats geography as an active component of warfare.

Its mountainous terrain provides natural defensive barriers. Vast distances complicate any ground invasion. Underground missile complexes carved deep into mountains preserve critical assets from aerial bombardment.

Most importantly, Iran’s position alongside the Strait of Hormuz gives it leverage over one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints.

Western reporting frequently focuses on missile inventories and military hardware while giving far less attention to the strategic reality that geography itself remains one of Iran’s most powerful deterrents.

The ability to threaten disruptions to global energy markets transforms regional conflict into an international economic crisis. This expands the political costs of war far beyond the immediate participants.

And of course, modern warfare is fought through information as much as missiles.

Iran understands this reality and invests heavily in influence operations designed to shape domestic and international perceptions. State media networks, cyber capabilities and strategic messaging are deployed alongside conventional military assets. The goal is to ensure that Iranian actions are correctly framed as defensive responses while portraying adversaries as aggressors.

The United States, NATO members, Israel, Russia, and China all engage in similar information operations. Yet mainstream discussion often presents Western strategic communication as public diplomacy while framing Iranian messaging as propaganda. The distinction reflects power and narrative control more than objective analysis.

The most important lesson from Iran’s military doctrine is that it was never designed to produce a traditional military victory. Its purpose is deterrence and evidently has proven to be successful as we observe in how both the US and Israel have been pushed into a corner.

Iran’s planners have built a system designed to survive bombardment, absorb leadership losses, stretch conflicts over time and impose escalating economic and political costs on attackers.

This reality is frequently absent from public debate because it complicates prevailing narratives of “irrationality and aggression”.

It reveals a military doctrine shaped less by ambitions of conquest than by calculations of survival.

The evidence demonstrates that Iran’s strategic focus is not battlefield dominance but endurance. Its military architecture is designed to ensure that even if its leaders are killed, its cities attacked and its infrastructure damaged, the state remains capable of fighting.

Iqbal Jassat
Source: Palestine Chronicle

Abu Obeida Praises Hezbollah after Failed Zionist Advance in South Lebanon

Abu Obeida, the military spokesman of Hamas’ Qassam Brigades, praised Hezbollah’s military operations in Lebanon and said Resistance fighters continue to inflict significant losses on zionist occupation forces.

He said Hezbollah’s actions come within the framework of “heroic resistance to the aggression against Lebanon, its people and its sovereignty,” describing resistance to occupation as “a right and a duty guaranteed by all laws.”

Abu Obeida argued that the zionist regime’s continued military operations are an attempt to compensate for failures across multiple fronts.

“The enemy is trying, through continuing its crimes and occupation, to compensate for its failure in various arenas,” he said.

He added that zionist efforts to separate the various Resistance fronts have not succeeded.

“The occupation is striving to separate the resistance fronts, but all its attempts are futile, as it has reaped nothing but disappointment and defeat for more than two and a half years,” Abu Obeida stated.

Remarks Come amid Ali al-Taher Battles

Abu Obeida’s comments came as fighting intensified in southern Lebanon, particularly along the Kfar Tebnit–Ali al-Taher axis.

Hezbollah has repeatedly stated that the area is “immune to enemy infiltration” and vowed to prevent Israeli forces from establishing positions on the strategic heights overlooking Nabatieh.

The Resistance recently announced that its fighters confronted zionist forces attempting to advance toward Ali al-Taher, luring troops into prepared ambushes and targeting armored vehicles and troop concentrations.

Zionist Media Acknowledge Setbacks

Zionist media acknowledged that occupation forces failed to seize the Ali al-Taher heights despite intensive military operations in the area.

Reports cited by Al Mayadeen indicated that anti-tank missiles and drone strikes targeted occupation armor and troop movements, forcing evacuations of casualties from the battlefield.

Zionist outlets also described the confrontations as among the most difficult faced by occupation forces in southern Lebanon in recent months.

The latest clashes occurred despite ongoing ceasefire arrangements linked to the Iran-US memorandum of understanding, under which Tehran has repeatedly insisted that any end to regional hostilities must include Lebanon.

source: Palestine Chronicle

Abu Obeida Praises Hezbollah after Failed Zionist Advance in South Lebanon

Abu Obeida, the military spokesman of Hamas’ Qassam Brigades, praised Hezbollah’s military operations in Lebanon and said Resistance fighters continue to inflict significant losses on zionist occupation forces.

He said Hezbollah’s actions come within the framework of “heroic resistance to the aggression against Lebanon, its people and its sovereignty,” describing resistance to occupation as “a right and a duty guaranteed by all laws.”

Abu Obeida argued that the zionist regime’s continued military operations are an attempt to compensate for failures across multiple fronts.

“The enemy is trying, through continuing its crimes and occupation, to compensate for its failure in various arenas,” he said.

He added that zionist efforts to separate the various Resistance fronts have not succeeded.

“The occupation is striving to separate the resistance fronts, but all its attempts are futile, as it has reaped nothing but disappointment and defeat for more than two and a half years,” Abu Obeida stated.

Remarks Come amid Ali al-Taher Battles

Abu Obeida’s comments came as fighting intensified in southern Lebanon, particularly along the Kfar Tebnit–Ali al-Taher axis.

Hezbollah has repeatedly stated that the area is “immune to enemy infiltration” and vowed to prevent Israeli forces from establishing positions on the strategic heights overlooking Nabatieh.

The Resistance recently announced that its fighters confronted zionist forces attempting to advance toward Ali al-Taher, luring troops into prepared ambushes and targeting armored vehicles and troop concentrations.

Zionist Media Acknowledge Setbacks

Zionist media acknowledged that occupation forces failed to seize the Ali al-Taher heights despite intensive military operations in the area.

Reports cited by Al Mayadeen indicated that anti-tank missiles and drone strikes targeted occupation armor and troop movements, forcing evacuations of casualties from the battlefield.

Zionist outlets also described the confrontations as among the most difficult faced by occupation forces in southern Lebanon in recent months.

The latest clashes occurred despite ongoing ceasefire arrangements linked to the Iran-US memorandum of understanding, under which Tehran has repeatedly insisted that any end to regional hostilities must include Lebanon.

source: Palestine Chronicle

‘Resistance Has Adapted’: Qassem Says Project to End Hezbollah Collapsed

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem declared on Friday that the movement will not surrender despite ongoing zionist military pressure and regional efforts aimed at weakening the Resistance.

“The death the enemy threatens us with as a weapon is not something we dread,” Qassem said during a speech at the central Ashura council.

Emphasizing Hezbollah’s determination to continue confronting the zionist regime, he added that “according to our principles, victory is defined by prevailing steadfastness,” arguing that “losses, no matter how massive, are better than capitulation.”

“As long as we are capable of steadfastness, why should we surrender?” he asked.

‘Most Dangerous Phase’

Qassem described the current period as one of the most dangerous stages in Lebanon’s modern history.

“The campaign led against us today aims to end the Resistance and its people and to completely eliminate its existence from Lebanon,” he said.

According to Qassem, the zionsit regime and the United States sought to exploit regional developments following the fall of Syria to alter the balance of power and intensify pressure on Hezbollah.

He argued that the strategy relied not only on military aggression but also on political, economic and social pressure designed to isolate the Resistance.

Pressure Campaign against Hezbollah

Qassem accused Hezbollah’s opponents of attempting to cut off all channels through which the movement could maintain its capabilities.

“They wanted to close the aerial, maritime, and land crossings to prevent any access to weapons, technologies, and everything that could strengthen the Resistance,” he said.

He also stated that efforts were made to obstruct reconstruction in southern Lebanon and other affected areas in order to keep residents displaced and weaken public support for Hezbollah.

In addition, Qassem said opponents attempted to impose a financial siege and provoke internal Lebanese tensions.

“They tried to incite strife between the army and the Resistance,” he said, while also accusing some regional and international actors of encouraging sectarian divisions.

“America is the maestro that leads this scheme with all its details and in all directions,” he added.

Resistance Has Adapted

Addressing Hezbollah’s military posture, Qassem said the movement has modified its combat methods and developed new capabilities based on battlefield experience.

“Our strong goal and project is our right to defend and liberate the land,” he said.

The Hezbollah leader stated that the Resistance had developed new weapons systems and drone capabilities, describing them as the product of the fighters’ experience and innovation.

He argued that these developments have allowed Hezbollah to continue confronting Israeli military operations despite significant challenges.

‘Project to End Hezbollah Has Collapsed’

Qassem concluded by asserting that efforts to eliminate Hezbollah have failed. “The project to end Hezbollah and consolidate occupation has collapsed,” he said.

He vowed that the Resistance would continue confronting zionist forces and insisted that “the ‘Israelis’ will be forced out of every last inch of our land.”

The remarks come amid continued tensions in southern Lebanon, ongoing zionist military operations, and renewed debate over the future of the Resistance following the Iran-US memorandum of understanding and its provisions regarding Lebanon.

Source: Palestine Chronicle

‘Resistance Has Adapted’: Qassem Says Project to End Hezbollah Collapsed

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem declared on Friday that the movement will not surrender despite ongoing zionist military pressure and regional efforts aimed at weakening the Resistance.

“The death the enemy threatens us with as a weapon is not something we dread,” Qassem said during a speech at the central Ashura council.

Emphasizing Hezbollah’s determination to continue confronting the zionist regime, he added that “according to our principles, victory is defined by prevailing steadfastness,” arguing that “losses, no matter how massive, are better than capitulation.”

“As long as we are capable of steadfastness, why should we surrender?” he asked.

‘Most Dangerous Phase’

Qassem described the current period as one of the most dangerous stages in Lebanon’s modern history.

“The campaign led against us today aims to end the Resistance and its people and to completely eliminate its existence from Lebanon,” he said.

According to Qassem, the zionsit regime and the United States sought to exploit regional developments following the fall of Syria to alter the balance of power and intensify pressure on Hezbollah.

He argued that the strategy relied not only on military aggression but also on political, economic and social pressure designed to isolate the Resistance.

Pressure Campaign against Hezbollah

Qassem accused Hezbollah’s opponents of attempting to cut off all channels through which the movement could maintain its capabilities.

“They wanted to close the aerial, maritime, and land crossings to prevent any access to weapons, technologies, and everything that could strengthen the Resistance,” he said.

He also stated that efforts were made to obstruct reconstruction in southern Lebanon and other affected areas in order to keep residents displaced and weaken public support for Hezbollah.

In addition, Qassem said opponents attempted to impose a financial siege and provoke internal Lebanese tensions.

“They tried to incite strife between the army and the Resistance,” he said, while also accusing some regional and international actors of encouraging sectarian divisions.

“America is the maestro that leads this scheme with all its details and in all directions,” he added.

Resistance Has Adapted

Addressing Hezbollah’s military posture, Qassem said the movement has modified its combat methods and developed new capabilities based on battlefield experience.

“Our strong goal and project is our right to defend and liberate the land,” he said.

The Hezbollah leader stated that the Resistance had developed new weapons systems and drone capabilities, describing them as the product of the fighters’ experience and innovation.

He argued that these developments have allowed Hezbollah to continue confronting Israeli military operations despite significant challenges.

‘Project to End Hezbollah Has Collapsed’

Qassem concluded by asserting that efforts to eliminate Hezbollah have failed. “The project to end Hezbollah and consolidate occupation has collapsed,” he said.

He vowed that the Resistance would continue confronting zionist forces and insisted that “the ‘Israelis’ will be forced out of every last inch of our land.”

The remarks come amid continued tensions in southern Lebanon, ongoing zionist military operations, and renewed debate over the future of the Resistance following the Iran-US memorandum of understanding and its provisions regarding Lebanon.

Source: Palestine Chronicle

Statement Of The ILPS In The Aftermath Of The US-Zionist War On Iran And Lebanon

Victory To The Axis Of Resistance! Stay Vigilant Against The US-Zionist Alliance And Wedge The Divide Further Through Our People Power!

The International League of Peoples’ Struggle lauds the steadfastness of the people of Iran and throughout the Axis of Resistance for forcing the United States to sign a memorandum of understanding to end the US-Zionist war of aggression against Iran and Lebanon. With all sanctions lifted on Iran along with an assurance of a $300 billion fund for reconstruction and Lebanon’s sovereignty, we uphold this as a victory for all peoples in the world fighting for national independence against imperialism. We also call on our members and all peoples to stay vigilant of any violation of this MoU by the genocidal US-Zionist alliance as the US-Iran talks in Geneva have been delayed due to the still ongoing Zionist aggression against Lebanon.

Despite the incessant beating of the war drums by US imperialism and the Zionist entity against Iran, this war of aggression has proven too costly for US imperialism in particular to continue due to its depleting military arsenal and the increasing prices for oil and all other commodities that has caused the masses to rise in anger across the world. Iran, Lebanon, and its people correctly assessed the war being one of attrition instead of a quick battle like the arrogant Americans and Zionists have.

Iran’s military has rendered the Gulf Cooperation Council as unstable partners of US imperialism, with several bases being destroyed by Iranian strikes, forcing them closer towards reneging on normalization with the Zionist entity. In Lebanon, Hezbollah has inflicted great losses against the Zionist occupation forces in South Lebanon, weakening any aspirations for a ‘Greater Israel’ as they are plunged deeper into crisis. Despite great losses, it has been affirmed more than ever that the common enemy of Iran, Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Yemen, and all countries under the boot of imperialism is one: the bloodthirsty and genocidal US-Zionist alliance.

US imperialism has suffered a great loss and is in sharpening contradiction with the Zionist entity, even with Section 224 of this year’s National Defense Authorization Act from the US proposing to intertwine the US and ‘Israeli’ militaries more than ever. Trump has openly said during the current G7 that without him, “there would be no Israel.” US imperialism sought to end the war as soon as possible due to its loss in profits and the Zionist entity is becoming more aggressive than ever in its death throes.

In ending this war, the US has suffered a great and humiliating defeat with the Memorandum of Understanding giving Iran $300 billion for reconstruction, for the US to lift all sanctions on it, to permanently ending military operations on all fronts including Lebanon, to respect Iran’s sovereignty, and for the US Navy to leave the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s nuclear program is allowed to continue with less restrictions than what was implemented in the 2016 Iran nuclear deal.

As we all remain vigilant on likely violations to this memorandum of understanding by the US imperialist and especially the Zionist entity which is not party to this MoU — violations of which have already happened — the International League of Peoples’ Struggle stands alongside the Iranian and Lebanese people along with the Axis of Resistance in its struggle against US imperialism and Zionist settler-colonialism. Even with fascist reaction raging stronger than ever, the people’s resistance through all forms of struggle has displayed that the US-Zionist forces can indeed be weakened and eventually defeated towards the final victory.

We call our ILPS member organizations to arouse, organize, and mobilize the masses in droves as the imperialist crisis worsens: to expose US imperialism as the primary cause of our peoples’ ills with Zionist fascism as its close partner; to mobilize the broad masses in militant opposition, and consolidate our ranks towards ultimately toppling imperialism and all reaction once and for all.

Signed,

International League of Peoples’ Struggle

6/19/2026

Source : https://peoplesstruggle.org/en/victory-to-the-axis-of-resistance-stay-vigilant-against-the-us-zionist-alliance-and-wedge-the-divide-further-through-our-people-power/

Statement Of The ILPS In The Aftermath Of The US-Zionist War On Iran And Lebanon

Victory To The Axis Of Resistance! Stay Vigilant Against The US-Zionist Alliance And Wedge The Divide Further Through Our People Power!

The International League of Peoples’ Struggle lauds the steadfastness of the people of Iran and throughout the Axis of Resistance for forcing the United States to sign a memorandum of understanding to end the US-Zionist war of aggression against Iran and Lebanon. With all sanctions lifted on Iran along with an assurance of a $300 billion fund for reconstruction and Lebanon’s sovereignty, we uphold this as a victory for all peoples in the world fighting for national independence against imperialism. We also call on our members and all peoples to stay vigilant of any violation of this MoU by the genocidal US-Zionist alliance as the US-Iran talks in Geneva have been delayed due to the still ongoing Zionist aggression against Lebanon.

Despite the incessant beating of the war drums by US imperialism and the Zionist entity against Iran, this war of aggression has proven too costly for US imperialism in particular to continue due to its depleting military arsenal and the increasing prices for oil and all other commodities that has caused the masses to rise in anger across the world. Iran, Lebanon, and its people correctly assessed the war being one of attrition instead of a quick battle like the arrogant Americans and Zionists have.

Iran’s military has rendered the Gulf Cooperation Council as unstable partners of US imperialism, with several bases being destroyed by Iranian strikes, forcing them closer towards reneging on normalization with the Zionist entity. In Lebanon, Hezbollah has inflicted great losses against the Zionist occupation forces in South Lebanon, weakening any aspirations for a ‘Greater Israel’ as they are plunged deeper into crisis. Despite great losses, it has been affirmed more than ever that the common enemy of Iran, Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Yemen, and all countries under the boot of imperialism is one: the bloodthirsty and genocidal US-Zionist alliance.

US imperialism has suffered a great loss and is in sharpening contradiction with the Zionist entity, even with Section 224 of this year’s National Defense Authorization Act from the US proposing to intertwine the US and ‘Israeli’ militaries more than ever. Trump has openly said during the current G7 that without him, “there would be no Israel.” US imperialism sought to end the war as soon as possible due to its loss in profits and the Zionist entity is becoming more aggressive than ever in its death throes.

In ending this war, the US has suffered a great and humiliating defeat with the Memorandum of Understanding giving Iran $300 billion for reconstruction, for the US to lift all sanctions on it, to permanently ending military operations on all fronts including Lebanon, to respect Iran’s sovereignty, and for the US Navy to leave the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s nuclear program is allowed to continue with less restrictions than what was implemented in the 2016 Iran nuclear deal.

As we all remain vigilant on likely violations to this memorandum of understanding by the US imperialist and especially the Zionist entity which is not party to this MoU — violations of which have already happened — the International League of Peoples’ Struggle stands alongside the Iranian and Lebanese people along with the Axis of Resistance in its struggle against US imperialism and Zionist settler-colonialism. Even with fascist reaction raging stronger than ever, the people’s resistance through all forms of struggle has displayed that the US-Zionist forces can indeed be weakened and eventually defeated towards the final victory.

We call our ILPS member organizations to arouse, organize, and mobilize the masses in droves as the imperialist crisis worsens: to expose US imperialism as the primary cause of our peoples’ ills with Zionist fascism as its close partner; to mobilize the broad masses in militant opposition, and consolidate our ranks towards ultimately toppling imperialism and all reaction once and for all.

Signed,

International League of Peoples’ Struggle

6/19/2026

Source : https://peoplesstruggle.org/en/victory-to-the-axis-of-resistance-stay-vigilant-against-the-us-zionist-alliance-and-wedge-the-divide-further-through-our-people-power/