Home Tags Posts tagged with "homepage_regional_middle_east_africa"
Tag:

homepage_regional_middle_east_africa

International

Guerre en Iran : Attaques pétrolières et tensions au Golfe Persique

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Tensions escalate in Gulf as Iran targets oil facilities, US weighs further deployments

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — A wave of attacks targeting oil and gas infrastructure across the Persian Gulf has dramatically escalated tensions in the region, prompting a build-up of U.S. military forces and raising fears of a wider conflict. The attacks, carried out by Iran, come in retaliation for a recent Israeli strike on its South Pars gas field, which accounts for as much as 75 percent of the country’s natural gas production.

On Friday, Iranian drone strikes ignited fires at Kuwait’s Mina al-Ahmadi oil refinery for a second consecutive day. Energy operations in Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates were also targeted, and Saudi Arabia confirmed its Samref refinery had been hit. Tehran had vowed to target Gulf oil and gas infrastructure following the Israeli attack on South Pars earlier this week.

The attacks on Qatar’s Ras Laffan liquefied natural gas facility have been particularly damaging, reducing exports by around 17 percent and costing roughly $20 billion in lost annual revenue, according to QatarEnergy CEO Saad al-Kaabi. Repairs are expected to take up to five years.

The United States is responding to the escalating crisis by increasing its military presence in the region. Unnamed U.S. military officials told The New York Times that three warships carrying 2,500 additional Marines are en route to the Middle East, supplementing troops already deployed from Japan. While President Donald Trump has publicly stated he has no intention of deploying “boots on the ground,” some Marine units are equipped for small-scale ground incursions and evacuation missions.

The situation is further complicated by international diplomacy. Six U.S. allies – France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom – have jointly demanded Iran halt its attacks and ensure the free passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global oil supplies.

Despite calls for restraint, Trump has taken a hard line, warning Iran against further attacks on Qatar. In a post on Truth Social, he threatened to “massively blow up the entirety of the South Pars Gas Field” if attacks continue. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at Trump’s behest, pledged to refrain from further strikes on South Pars, but the threat of further escalation remains high.

The United Kingdom has agreed to allow the U.S. military to use its bases for strikes related to the Strait of Hormuz, a decision prompted by Trump’s criticism of European allies for not doing enough to help.

Brent crude oil prices remained above $100 a barrel on Friday, driving up costs for gasoline, jet fuel, and diesel worldwide.

Other Developments:

Denmark prepares for potential U.S. action in Greenland: Denmark has taken steps to deter potential U.S. attempts to seize Greenland, a strategically important territory. According to Denmark’s public broadcaster DR, the Danish military dispatched explosives and blood supplies to Greenland in January. The deployment of Danish troops to Greenland for a military exercise was also part of a larger deterrence operation.

Alleged Iranian espionage in the UK: Two Iranian nationals appeared in a London court on Thursday facing charges of spying on Jewish and Israeli institutions in England on behalf of Tehran’s intelligence service.

Slovenian election on Sunday: Slovenians will head to the polls on Sunday in a parliamentary election that pits liberal Prime Minister Robert Golob against pro-Trump populist Janez Jansa. The election comes amid allegations of foreign interference, with Golob accusing “foreign services” of meddling after a report revealed visits by representatives of the Israeli spy firm Black Cube.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Guerre Israël-Iran : l’essor des deepfakes et de la désinformation

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Deepfakes Flood Social Media as Iran War Enters Third Week

By [Your Name], International Editor

The ongoing conflict between the U.S., Israel and Iran has spawned a surge of artificial intelligence-generated disinformation, overwhelming social media platforms with fabricated videos and images, according to reports from The New York Times. Just over two weeks into the war, a “torrent” of deepfakes is actively shaping – and distorting – perceptions of the conflict.

The deepfakes, particularly prevalent on X, Facebook, and TikTok, depict scenarios ranging from explosions in Tel Aviv and successful attacks on U.S. warships to fabricated scenes of Iranian victories and the aftermath of strikes. Some videos are highly polished, mimicking Hollywood-style action, while others present more subtle manipulations, such as falsely portraying events surrounding a U.S. strike that tragically hit the Shajarah Tayyebeh elementary school in Iran, killing at least 175 people, most of them children. While the attack itself was real, the video circulating was not.

According to a recent report by the firm Cyabra, which tracks influence campaigns, Iran is orchestrating this deepfake campaign. The goal is twofold: to bolster domestic support by portraying Iran as effectively retaliating against its adversaries, and to undermine the legitimacy of U.S. and Israeli operations on the international stage.

This isn’t an isolated incident. The use of deepfakes in wartime has become increasingly common. In March 2022, a fabricated video circulated purporting to show Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ordering his troops to surrender. Similarly, during the Israel-Hamas war in late 2023, deepfakes depicting suffering and alleged Israeli military actions emerged online. A November 2025 report to the U.S. Congress by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission highlighted China’s use of disinformation during a previous conflict between India and Pakistan.

Iran’s history of cyber-influence operations further underscores the deliberate nature of this campaign. The Handala hacking group, reportedly linked to Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security, has been implicated in compromising networks in Israel, the U.S., and allied nations, and is allegedly responsible for creating deepfakes targeting Israeli leaders.

Tehran appears to be targeting multiple audiences with this disinformation. Beyond boosting morale at home – particularly crucial given the regime’s recent struggles with economic hardship and protests – the campaign aims to sway international opinion and increase pressure on the United States and Israel to de-escalate the conflict. The effort also seeks to erode support for the war within the U.S., where public opposition is already significant.

Combating this wave of deepfakes requires a coordinated response. Experts suggest collaboration between governments and private companies to detect, debunk, and remove the fabricated content. However, the sheer volume of deepfakes being produced, coupled with the rapid proliferation of generative AI tools – including over 93,000 text-to-image models and 4,000 text-to-speech generators available on platforms like Hugging Face and GitHub – presents a significant challenge.

While U.S. government agencies are investing in deepfake detection technology, they are struggling to keep pace. Furthermore, social media platforms, which host the majority of this content, are often slow to respond, and their algorithmic recommendations can inadvertently amplify the spread of disinformation.

The situation highlights the need for increased investment in personnel and technology dedicated to combating deepfakes, as well as improved information sharing between governments, tech companies, and academic institutions. Even with these improvements, decision-makers must acknowledge that deepfakes will continue to shape perceptions of conflict, requiring them to make judgments with incomplete and potentially misleading information.

As the conflict with Iran demonstrates, the battle to control narratives – and to distinguish truth from fabrication – is becoming as critical as the fighting itself.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Iran : la fin du jeu de l’escalade ?

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Iran’s Escalation Gamble Risks Isolation and Regional Backlash

By [Your Name], International Editor, nouvelles-du-monde.com

TEHRAN – For decades, Iran has calculated that it could navigate escalations with the United States and regional rivals without triggering devastating consequences. That gamble appears to be failing, with Iran’s recent multi-pronged attacks drawing condemnation and raising the specter of wider conflict and long-term isolation.

Iran’s strategy, described by analysts as “escalate to de-escalate,” has historically involved limited strikes intended to signal resolve without causing significant casualties. Following the 2020 killing of Quds Force leader Qassem Suleimani, Iran launched missile strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq that deliberately avoided American fatalities. A similar approach was taken after strikes on Iranian nuclear sites last June, with a missile attack on a U.S. air base in Qatar designed to make a statement rather than provoke all-out war.

However, this month’s actions mark a significant departure. Iran has targeted not only Israeli and U.S. interests but also countries previously considered allies, including Oman, Qatar, and Turkey. The strikes have extended beyond military targets to include oil infrastructure, hotels, and airports – vital components of the region’s economy.

This broadening of targets is unlikely to achieve Iran’s apparent goal of pressuring the Trump administration to de-escalate, experts say. Historical precedents suggest such tactics often backfire. During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam Hussein’s missile attacks on Israel failed to fracture the U.S.-led coalition, and instead prompted a focused effort to neutralize the Iraqi threat. Similarly, recent Russian attempts to pressure NATO through airspace violations and covert operations have strengthened European resolve to support Ukraine.

The response from regional powers is already taking shape. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are reportedly considering retaliatory measures, and the countries targeted by Iran – Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Cyprus, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates – may be drawn into a broader confrontation. Gulf states possess substantial military capabilities, with Saudi Arabia’s defense budget reaching $78 billion in 2025, roughly three times that of Iran.

Beyond military responses, these nations could also leverage economic pressure, potentially freezing Iranian assets and limiting trade. Approximately 60 percent of Iran’s trade is currently conducted with its neighbors, making regional economic stability crucial to its survival.

The potential for wider repercussions extends beyond the Middle East. Much of Asia, including China, India, and Japan, relies on oil from the Persian Gulf, and the economic fallout from disruptions is already being felt globally. A desperate Iran could even resort to global terrorism, according to some analysts.

The United States, under President Trump, has demonstrated a consistent hawkish stance toward Iran. Trump has long advocated for a firm response to Iranian aggression, including military intervention, and views confronting Iran as a key foreign policy objective. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shares a similarly uncompromising position, having warned of the dangers posed by Iran for over three decades.

Given the personalities and political considerations involved, the prospect of diplomatic breakthroughs appears slim. Both Trump and Netanyahu are facing domestic political pressures and may see a military victory as beneficial to their electoral prospects.

Even if Iran were to achieve a temporary cessation of hostilities, the long-term consequences could be severe. The country risks becoming increasingly isolated, its economy further weakened, and its regional influence diminished. Iran’s actions this month could reverberate for generations, leaving it poorer, weaker, and more ostracized than ever before.

As one analyst noted, Iran’s pattern of strategic gambling carries inherent risks. Eventually, the odds catch up, and Iran appears to be on the verge of learning that lesson the hard way.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Guerre Iran : Détournement du détroit d’Ormuz et enquêtes américaines

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Iran War Escalates as Strait of Hormuz Becomes Key Battleground, Costs Mount

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The war between the United States, Israel and Iran has entered a dangerous new phase, with Iran effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global oil artery, and escalating costs already exceeding $11 billion for the U.S. alone in its first week, according to Pentagon estimates. The conflict, now 13 days old, is marked by uncertainty and shifting objectives from the Trump administration, raising concerns about its potential duration and wider implications.

The Strait of Hormuz has emerged as the central point of contention, with Iran utilizing it as leverage against the U.S. and its allies. Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, Iran’s new supreme leader, stated Thursday that blocking the strait “must undoubtedly continue to be used,” in his first public statement since assuming power. Reports from CNN and Reuters indicate Iran has begun laying mines in the waterway, and multiple oil tankers have reportedly been hit by “projectiles.”

Despite these reports, President Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have downplayed the threat, with Trump stating Wednesday he didn’t believe Iran had planted mines and Bessent claiming some Iranian-flagged tankers have safely transited the strait. U.S. Central Command reports destroying over 30 Iranian mine-laying ships, but experts caution that countering mines will be challenging, as the U.S. Navy decommissioned its minesweeper vessels in the Middle East last September.

Gregory Brew, an Iran expert at Eurasia Group, explained that Iran possesses a “variety of capabilities” beyond mines, including anti-ship ballistic missiles and drones. He warned that the strait is likely to remain closed for the rest of the month without rapid de-escalation.

The financial strain of the war is significant. The Pentagon has informed Congress that the first week of conflict cost more than $11 billion. This has led to speculation about the U.S. potentially reallocating military resources from other regions, with reports suggesting the movement of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system from South Korea to the Middle East. South Korean officials have expressed opposition to this move, though acknowledge their limited ability to prevent it.

Adding to the complexities, a preliminary Pentagon investigation, as reported by The New York Times, suggests the U.S. military was responsible for a February 28 missile strike on an Iranian elementary school that killed over 175 people, mostly children. The strike reportedly occurred due to outdated targeting information. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has not directly addressed the school attack, but alleges Iran has been firing missiles from schools and hospitals. More than 40 Democratic senators have demanded answers and the public release of investigation findings.

Beyond the Middle East, the U.S. continues lethal strikes against alleged drug boats in Latin America, and has launched a joint operation with Ecuador targeting organized crime.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Defense Department is facing a legal challenge from artificial intelligence company Anthropic, which is suing over being declared a supply chain risk. Tech giants Microsoft, Google, and OpenAI, along with former military officials, have publicly backed Anthropic in its legal battle.

Upcoming events to watch include a meeting of European Union energy ministers on March 16, a bilateral visit between U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, and an extraordinary session of the International Maritime Organization on the situation in the Middle East on March 18. A meeting between President Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi is scheduled for March 19.

The situation remains fluid and volatile, with the potential for further escalation and significant global repercussions.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Iran : Khamenei menace de bloquer le détroit d’Ormuz et de se venger

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Khamenei Vows Continued Closure of Strait of Hormuz, Escalating Tensions in Middle East

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — In his first public statement since succeeding his father, Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei vowed Thursday to continue blocking the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for global oil transport, as a means of pressuring adversaries. The declaration comes amid escalating regional tensions following the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in February and ongoing military operations by the United States and Israel.

“Iran will not refrain from avenging the blood of its martyrs,” Khamenei said, adding that Tehran will seek compensation from those it deems responsible for his father’s death “or destroy their assets accordingly.”

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has already brought maritime passage to a virtual standstill, with Iranian forces targeting commercial shipping vessels. This disruption has injected uncertainty into global energy supply flows, prompting the International Energy Agency to unanimously agree Wednesday to release 400 million barrels of oil from strategic reserves in an attempt to stabilize rising crude costs.

Despite the IEA’s efforts, an Iranian military official warned that the price of oil could reach $200 per barrel. However, Western powers appear less concerned following the reserve release. The European Commission stated Thursday it has no immediate concerns regarding the security of oil supplies, and U.S. President Donald Trump indicated that preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon is his priority, even if it means higher crude prices. “The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The conflict is also taking a financial toll. Pentagon officials told U.S. lawmakers Tuesday that the war has already cost over $11.3 billion in its first six days, excluding operational costs like hardware and personnel.

Escalating attacks by Iranian forces have targeted oil and civilian infrastructure in recent days. On Thursday, a suspected Iranian attack targeted two tankers in an Iraqi port, following strikes on three commercial ships in the Persian Gulf the previous day. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps claimed responsibility for an assault on the Mayuree Naree, a Thai-flagged bulk carrier, prompting a demand for an apology from Bangkok.

Qatar’s Defense Ministry reported thwarting several missile and drone attacks, while Saudi Arabia’s Defense Ministry said it intercepted two drones heading toward its Shaybah oil field.

The United States and Israel have continued their military operations in response. U.S. Central Command reported striking around 6,000 Iranian targets, including over 60 ships and 30 minelayers. Israel launched fresh attacks on alleged Hezbollah sites in Beirut, prompting the British government to issue a travel advisory urging citizens to leave Lebanon if their presence is not essential.

Amidst the escalating conflict, China’s National People’s Congress approved a new law Thursday promoting “ethnic unity,” a move experts warn could lead to forced assimilation of minority groups. The law mandates Mandarin Chinese in schools and official communications, potentially diluting minority cultures and languages.

Russia’s foreign ministry accused the United Kingdom of supplying Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles used in a strike in Bryansk, alleging British involvement in a “terrorist attack.” Ukraine maintains it targeted a factory producing Russian weapons.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Guerre mondiale : réalités et définitions

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

La rhétorique de la Troisième Guerre mondiale s’intensifie, mais les experts mettent en garde contre une confusion des conflits

PAR [Nom du journaliste, nouvelles-du-monde.com]

WASHINGTON – La crainte d’une Troisième Guerre mondiale est devenue un thème récurrent dans le discours politique et médiatique, alimentée par les conflits en Ukraine et au Moyen-Orient. Cependant, des analystes soulignent la nécessité de distinguer clairement les différents types de guerres pour éviter une escalade rhétorique inutile et prendre des décisions politiques éclairées.

Ces derniers mois, la possibilité d’une conflagration mondiale a été évoquée dans les médias britanniques, notamment en raison de discussions sur l’utilisation des bases aériennes britanniques par les États-Unis pour d’éventuelles frappes contre l’Iran. Des personnalités publiques comme John Mearsheimer, Tucker Carlson et Elon Musk ont également mis en garde contre les risques d’une escalade, notamment en ce qui concerne le soutien occidental à l’Ukraine. Un récent sondage Politico a révélé qu’une majorité de personnes interrogées en Grande-Bretagne, au Canada, en France et aux États-Unis estiment qu’une Troisième Guerre mondiale est probable au cours des cinq prochaines années.

Mais qu’est-ce qui constitue réellement une "guerre mondiale" ? Les experts affirment qu’il ne s’agit pas simplement d’un conflit de grande envergure, mais d’un affrontement qui remplit des critères spécifiques.

Selon l’analyse, une guerre mondiale implique la confrontation directe de la plupart des grandes puissances internationales, des opérations militaires menées sur au moins deux continents, une mobilisation totale des ressources militaires et économiques des pays impliqués, et des conséquences systémiques sur l’équilibre des pouvoirs mondiaux.

Les deux guerres mondiales du XXe siècle – 1914-1918 et 1939-1945 – répondent à ces critères. La Première Guerre mondiale a impliqué les principales puissances européennes, ainsi que l’Empire ottoman et les États-Unis, avec des combats en Europe, en Afrique et en Asie-Pacifique. La Seconde Guerre mondiale a été encore plus globale, impliquant des nations des Amériques, de l’Europe, de l’Asie et de l’Afrique. Les deux conflits ont entraîné des changements majeurs dans l’ordre mondial.

D’autres conflits, comme la guerre de Sept Ans (1756-1763), ont été proposés comme des exemples de guerres mondiales en raison de leur portée géographique, mais ils n’ont pas eu les mêmes conséquences systémiques que les deux guerres mondiales du XXe siècle.

Les conflits actuels, tels que l’invasion de l’Ukraine par la Russie et les tensions au Moyen-Orient, sont considérés comme des guerres régionales, malgré leurs conséquences importantes. Bien que la guerre en Ukraine ait des implications pour la sécurité européenne et l’économie mondiale, elle ne répond pas aux critères d’une guerre mondiale, car elle se limite géographiquement et n’implique pas une confrontation directe entre les grandes puissances.

De même, le conflit au Moyen-Orient, bien qu’il ait des répercussions sur les prix de l’énergie et le transport aérien international, reste une crise régionale. Des rapports indiquent que la Russie fournit à l’Iran des renseignements sur les cibles militaires américaines et utilise des drones iraniens en Ukraine, mais cela ne transforme pas les conflits en une guerre mondiale.

Les structures de pouvoir bipolaires, comme la rivalité entre les États-Unis et la Chine aujourd’hui, tendent à être plus stables que les systèmes multipolaires, et la présence d’armes nucléaires réduit également le risque d’une guerre à grande échelle.

Selon les analystes, le scénario le plus probable d’une guerre impliquant les superpuissances serait une confrontation entre les États-Unis et la Chine concernant Taïwan. Cependant, même un tel conflit pourrait rester limité, à condition qu’il ne dépasse pas le seuil de l’utilisation d’armes nucléaires et qu’il reste concentré dans la région du Pacifique occidental.

En fin de compte, la guerre, sous toutes ses formes, doit être évitée. Une escalade rhétorique ne fait qu’accroître les risques et compliquer la recherche de solutions pacifiques. Une analyse rigoureuse et une communication claire sont essentielles pour naviguer dans un monde de plus en plus chaotique.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

IEA libère 400M barils de pétrole face à la crise iranienne

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Global Oil Prices Surge as Iran Tensions Escalate, IEA Announces Emergency Reserve Release

WASHINGTON (AP) — Global crude oil prices are climbing amid escalating tensions in the Middle East, prompting an unprecedented response from the International Energy Agency (IEA). On Wednesday, the IEA announced its 32 member nations, including the United States, will collectively release 400 million barrels of oil from their strategic reserves in an effort to stabilize markets.

The move comes as commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for global oil transit, has largely ground to a halt following the outbreak of conflict 12 days ago. Roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil passes through the strait, and its effective closure has ignited uncertainty in energy markets.

“This is the largest-ever release of emergency oil stocks in our agency’s history,” IEA chief Fatih Birol said, adding the distribution aims to “offset the supply lost.” IEA nations hold a combined 1.2 billion barrels of oil in public stocks, plus another 600 million in mandatory commercial inventories – roughly 124 days’ worth of lost supply from the Persian Gulf.

While the IEA didn’t provide a specific timeline for the release, Japan confirmed it will distribute 15 days’ worth of oil from private stockpiles and another 30 days from government reserves starting Monday. This is the IEA’s first coordinated release since 2022, when 182 million barrels were released following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and its sixth major action since the agency’s founding in 1974.

However, the threat to global energy markets remains significant. Iranian officials have warned the U.S. to brace for further disruptions, with Ebrahim Zolfaqari, a spokesperson for Tehran’s military command, stating, “Get ready for oil to be $200 a barrel, because the oil price depends on regional security, which you have destabilized.”

Recent attacks on commercial vessels in and near the Strait of Hormuz have further fueled concerns. Projectiles struck two ships on Wednesday, and Tehran appeared to take responsibility for an assault on the Thai-flagged cargo ship Mayuree Naree. Global maritime trackers have confirmed at least 13 strikes on vessels in or around the strait since the conflict began.

U.S. Central Command warned Iranian civilians that U.S. forces cannot guarantee the safety of shipping ports in Hormuz, stating that civilian ports used for military operations lose protected status under international law. Iranian military spokesperson Abolfazl Shekarchi responded, threatening that Iranian ports would become legitimate targets if threatened.

Adding to the instability, two Iranian drones targeted Dubai International Airport on Wednesday, wounding four people. Fragments from an intercepted projectile also damaged Zayed International Airport in Abu Dhabi.

Chile Sworn In New Far-Right President

In separate news, José Antonio Kast was sworn in Wednesday as Chile’s new president, marking the country’s most significant rightward shift since its return to democracy in 1990. Kast, who secured a landslide victory in December against Communist Party candidate Jeannette Jara, campaigned on promises of stricter law enforcement, immigration controls, and traditional family values.

Kast has publicly expressed support for former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. On his first day in office, he is expected to sign agreements with the United States to bolster collaboration on critical minerals and security issues. Chile is the world’s largest copper producer and holds roughly one-third of global lithium reserves, positioning it as a key player in the competition between the U.S. and China for influence in Latin America.

North Korea Conducts Missile Tests

Meanwhile, North Korea test-fired strategic cruise missiles from a Choe Hyon-class warship on Tuesday, the second such launch in a week. Leader Kim Jong Un, accompanied by his daughter, oversaw the launch and reiterated the need for a “powerful and reliable nuclear war deterrent.” The tests coincided with joint U.S.-South Korean military drills, which Pyongyang denounced as a “provocative and aggressive war rehearsal.”

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Trump et la guerre avec l’Iran : un schéma familier

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Trump Administration’s War With Iran Echoes Past U.S. Interventions

WASHINGTON (AP) — The ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran, initiated by President Donald Trump’s administration, is unfolding with a troubling familiarity, mirroring patterns seen in previous U.S.-led regime-change efforts in the Middle East, according to analysts and recent reports. Trump, who campaigned on a promise to avoid new wars, authorized strikes against Iran on February 28, 2026, alongside Israel, a move that has drawn criticism given his past rhetoric.

The current war, like interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, appears to be following a predictable trajectory: the exaggeration of threats, inflated promises of swift benefits, and a likely underestimation of unintended consequences.

In announcing the war, Trump claimed to be acting against “imminent threats” from Iran, assertions that were quickly challenged. Secretary of State Marco Rubio later suggested the justification for war stemmed from the possibility of Iranian retaliation for a potential Israeli strike – a rationale critics have labeled convoluted. Trump also revived unsubstantiated claims linking Iran to the 2000 attack on the USS Cole and asserted Iran was on the verge of developing missiles capable of reaching the U.S. homeland, contradicting a Defense Intelligence Agency assessment from the previous year that estimated Iran was a decade away from such capability.

As the conflict has escalated, the administration has offered increasingly ambitious justifications for military action. U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff claimed Iran was “a week away from having industrial grade bomb-making material,” while Rubio warned of Iran achieving a ballistic missile force that would render it immune to attack. White House Spokesperson Anna Kelly alleged Iran was stockpiling near-weapons grade enriched uranium. Trump himself stated that without intervention, Iran would “have a nuclear weapon” within two weeks and would “take over the entire Middle East.”

These claims lack supporting evidence and contrast with earlier statements suggesting previous strikes had already dismantled Iran’s nuclear program. Experts note that after multiple conflicts with Israel and the United States since 2024, the threat from Iran was likely diminished.

The administration has also touted the potential benefits of the war, promising to liberate the Iranian people, eliminate Iran’s regional influence, end support for terrorism, and lower global oil prices. Trump declared “the hour of your freedom is at hand” to the Iranian people, and claimed the conflict would rid the world of a “major, major cancer.”

However, the war’s early stages have been marked by unintended consequences. Unlike previous engagements, Iran has retaliated by striking regional neighbors, targeting airports, hotels, oil refineries, and shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. This has led to rising oil prices, a shortage of missile defense interceptors, and the stranding of American citizens in the region. Potential long-term consequences include terrorist attacks, economic benefits for Russia, instability in Iraq, and a shift in geopolitical dynamics as China potentially capitalizes on the U.S. military’s redeployment.

Despite these challenges, Trump has suggested the war is nearing completion, claiming “just about everything’s been knocked out.” However, his openness to targeting Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, indicates that regime change remains a possibility.

The pattern of escalating justifications, optimistic predictions, and unforeseen repercussions echoes past U.S. interventions in the Middle East, raising concerns that the Trump administration may be repeating the mistakes of its predecessors. As the conflict continues, the potential for further unintended consequences and a costly strategic disaster remains significant.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Guerre au Moyen-Orient : impact sur l’islamisme et la région

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

Middle East Faces Seismic Shift as US Campaign Against Iran Enters its Second Week

By [Your Name], International Editor, nouvelles-du-monde.com

WASHINGTON – As the United States’ military campaign against Iran enters its sixth day, the conflict is already reshaping the political landscape of the Middle East in ways that extend far beyond the stated goal of countering Iranian influence. While President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have framed the operation as focused solely on Iran, analysts warn of profound and lasting consequences for Islamism, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the delicate balance of power in the region.

The current escalation builds on decades of complex interplay between regional powers and ideologies. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, which brought Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to power, served as a powerful catalyst for Islamist movements across the Middle East, offering a model of resistance against both Western influence and secular Arab nationalism. Groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, though differing in their approach to governance, found inspiration in Iran’s success, filling an ideological void in many countries.

For years, regional leaders like those in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan have employed a strategy of “accommodation and confrontation” towards Islamist groups, simultaneously co-opting them through cultural and educational concessions while suppressing their power when it grew too strong. This delicate balance has been further disrupted by the Arab uprisings and subsequent political transitions. In recent years, Islamist movements had been losing ground, facing repression in Egypt, setbacks in Morocco, and a curtailing of religious influence in Saudi Arabia. Even jihadi groups like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham had softened their public stance.

However, Hamas’s October 7th attack on Israel injected new life into Islamist narratives, resonating across the region amidst the devastation in Gaza. Now, with the United States and Israel inflicting significant damage on Iran and its proxies, the Islamist project faces a renewed crisis.

“Even if the Iranian regime does not fall, its claims to represent resistance will likely be compromised,” one analyst noted, pointing to growing internal dissent within Iran itself, exemplified by the protests sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022. Images of Iranian women burning their hijabs in defiance of religious strictures have become symbols of this internal struggle.

The weakening of Iran will likely have a particularly acute impact on Palestinian resistance movements. Islamic Jihad, long supported by Iran, and Hamas, created by the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, will likely see their resources dwindle. Within Hamas, the faction aligned with Iran may lose influence to those with ties to Qatar and Turkey.

This shift could embolden Israel’s right-wing government to accelerate its annexation of the West Bank, with the Palestinian Authority too weak to offer effective opposition. While Trump may attempt to leverage the current situation to temporarily halt annexation, the long-term trend appears to favor further Israeli expansion.

The changing dynamics also have implications for Saudi Arabia’s potential normalization of relations with Israel. A weakened Iran diminishes the strategic value of an Israeli alliance for Riyadh, particularly in terms of defense. Furthermore, as the United States and Israel degrade Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Saudi Arabia may face increased pressure to forgo its own pursuit of nuclear technology, potentially leading it to seek assistance from China or Russia.

The long-term consequences of the US campaign remain uncertain. Whether Trump and his administration have fully considered these potential ripple effects is questionable, with objectives appearing to shift between neutralizing the Iranian military threat and pursuing regime change. As one source noted, “Wherever the United States ends up in Iran, the president will declare that was his objective all along.”

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
International

Guerre Iran-États-Unis : Premières victimes américaines

by Omar Benali International
written by Omar Benali International

U.S. Confirms First Casualties in Escalating Conflict with Iran

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The United States has suffered its first casualties in the intensifying conflict with Iran, marking a significant escalation in hostilities that entered its second day Sunday. U.S. Central Command announced that three service members were killed in action and five were seriously wounded as part of “Operation Epic Fury,” with others sustaining minor injuries.

“Several others sustained minor shrapnel injuries and concussions — and are in the process of being returned to duty. Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing,” Centcom said in a statement posted on X. The command indicated it would withhold further details, including the identities of the fallen, pending notification of families.

The strikes, conducted in concert with Israel, have targeted Iranian leadership, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who died Friday, along with key military figures such as Ali Shamkhani, Mohammed Pakpour, Amir Nasirzadeh, and Abdolrahim Mousavi. Israel claims to have eliminated a “majority of the highest-ranking senior military officials of the Iranian security leadership.”

The operation follows stalled nuclear negotiations and represents a shift toward promoting regime change, according to analysts.

The casualties come as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian vowed retaliation, declaring revenge a “legitimate right and duty.” Iran has already launched attacks targeting Israel, U.S. bases in the Middle East, and civilian areas in Gulf countries, including Doha, Qatar, and Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates. Reports of strikes, or explosions, have also surfaced in Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Syria.

Iranian attacks have resulted in deaths and injuries across the region, including at least nine fatalities in a missile strike on the Israeli city of Beit Shemesh. A strike on a girls’ school in southern Iran reportedly killed more than 150 people, including children, though the U.S. military is investigating the incident and Israel says it was unaware of any operations in that area.

U.S. President Donald Trump initially downplayed the casualties, stating, “We expect casualties with something like this… We have three, but we expect casualties, but in the end it’s going to be a great deal for the world.”

However, a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted Sunday revealed limited public support for the strikes, with only one in four Americans approving of the action and 43 percent disapproving. Trump’s overall approval rating has also dipped, with 60 percent of Americans expressing disapproval of his presidency, according to a recent Washington Post poll.

The operation was reportedly launched despite warnings from Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, about the potential for U.S. troop deaths. Several former U.S. military leaders also voiced concerns prior to the operation.

Despite the escalating conflict, Trump indicated a willingness to negotiate with Iran, stating, “They want to talk, and I have agreed to talk… They should have done it sooner.” He suggested the operation could continue for the next four weeks.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts