Uncategorized
Letty Cottin Pogrebin wants Jews to own up to the corrosive power of shame
(JTA) — When a lawyer for Donald Trump asked E. Jean Carroll why she didn’t scream while allegedly being raped by Donald Trump, I thought of Letty Cottin Pogrebin. In her latest book, “Shanda: A Memoir of Shame and Secrecy,” she writes about being assaulted by a famous poet — and how the shadow of shame kept women like her silent about attacks on their own bodies.
That incident in 1962, she writes, was “fifty-eight years before the #MeToo movement provided the sisterhood and solidarity that made survivors of abuse and rape feel safe enough to tell their stories.”
Now 83, Pogrebin could have coasted with a memoir celebrating her six decades as a leading feminist: She co-founded Ms. magazine, its Foundation for Women and the National Women’s Political Caucus. She served as president of Americans for Peace Now and in 1982 blew the whistle on antisemitism in the feminist movement.
Instead, “Shanda” is about her immigrant Jewish family and the secrets they carried through their lives. First marriages that were kept hidden. An unacknowledged half-sister. Money problems and domestic abuse. An uncle banished for sharing family dirt in public.
“My mania around secrecy and shame was sparked in 1951 by the discovery that my parents had concealed from me the truth about their personal histories, and every member of my large extended family, on both sides, was in on it,” writes Pogrebin, now 83. “Their need to avoid scandal was so compelling that, once identified, it provided the lens through which I could see my family with fresh eyes, spotlight their fears, and, in so doing, illuminate my own.”
“Shanda” (the Yiddish word describes the kind of behavior that brings shame on an entire family or even a people) is also a portrait of immigrant New York Jews in the 20th century. As her father and mother father move up in the world and leave their Yiddish-speaking, Old World families behind for new lives in the Bronx and Queens, they stand in for a generation of Jews and new Americans “bent on saving face and determined to be, if not exemplary, at least impeccably respectable.”
Pogrebin and I spoke last week ahead of the Eight Over Eighty Gala on May 31, where she will be honored with a group that includes another Jewish feminist icon, the writer Erica Jong, and musician Eve Queler, who founded her own ensemble, the Opera Orchestra of New York, when she wasn’t being given chances to conduct in the male-dominated world of classical music. The gala is a fundraiser for the New Jewish Home, a healthcare nonprofit serving older New Yorkers.
Pogrebin and I spoke about shame and how it plays out in public and private, from rape accusations against a former president to her regrets over how she wrote about her own abortions to how the Bible justifies family trickery.
Our conversation was edited for length and clarity.
I found your book very moving because my parents’ generation, who like your family were middle-class Jews who grew up or lived in the New York metropolitan area, are also all gone now. Your book brought back to me that world of aunts and uncles and cousins, and kids like us who couldn’t imagine what kinds of secrets and traumas our parents and relatives were hiding. But you went back and asked all the questions that many of us are afraid to ask.
I can’t tell you how good writing it has been. I feel as though I have no weight on my back. And people who have read it gained such comfort from the normalization that happens when you read that others have been through what you’ve been through. And my family secrets are so varied — just one right after the other. The chameleon-like behavior of that generation — they became who they wanted to be through pretense or actual accomplishment.
In my mother’s case, pretense led the way. She went and got a studio photo that made it look like she graduated from high school when she didn’t. In the eighth grade, she went up to her uncle’s house in the north Bronx and had her dates pick her up there because of the shanda of where she lived on the Lower East Side with nine people in three rooms. She had to imagine herself the child of her uncle, who didn’t have an accent or had an accent but at least spoke English.
You describe yours as “an immigrant family torn between loyalty to their own kind and longing for American acceptance.”
There was the feeling that, “If only we could measure up, we would be real Americans.” My mother was a sewing machine operator who became a designer and figured out what American women wore when she came from rags and cardboard shoes, in steerage. So I admire them. As much as I was discomforted by the lies, I ended up having compassion for them.
It’s also a story of thwarted women, and all that lost potential of a generation in which few could contemplate a college degree or a career outside the home. Your mother worked for a time as a junior designer for Hattie Carnegie, a sort of Donna Karan of her day, but abandoned that after she met your dad and became, as you write, “Mrs. Jack Cottin.”
The powerlessness of women was complicated in the 1950s by the demands of the masculine Jewish ideal. So having a wife who didn’t work was proof that you were a man who could provide. As a result women sacrificed their own aspirations and passions. She protected her husband’s image by not pursuing her life outside the home. In a way my feminism is a positive, like a photograph, to the negative of my mother’s 1950s womanhood.
“I’m not an optimist. I call myself a ‘cockeyed strategist,” said Pogrebin, who has a home on the Upper West Side. (Mike Lovett)
You write that you “think of shame and secrecy as quintessentially Jewish issues.” What were the Jewish pressures that inspired your parents to tell so many stories that weren’t true?
Think about what we did. We hid behind our names. We changed our names. We sloughed off our accents. My mother learned to make My*T*Fine pudding instead of gefilte fish. Shame and secrecy have always been intrinsically Jewish to me, because of the “sha!” factor: At every supper party, there would be the moment when somebody would say, “Sha! We don’t talk about that!” So even though we talked about what felt like everything, there were things that couldn’t be touched: illness, the C-word [cancer]. If you wanted to make a shidduch [wedding match] with another family in the insular communities in which Jews lived, you couldn’t let it be known that there was cancer in the family, or mental illness.
While I was writing this memoir, I realized that the [Torah portion] I’m listening to one Shabbat morning is all about hiding. It is Jacob finding out that he didn’t marry Rachel, after all, but married somebody he didn’t love. All of the hiding that I took for granted in the Bible stories and I was raised on like mother’s milk was formative. They justified pretense, and they justified trickery. Rebecca lied to her husband and presented her younger son Jacob for the blessing because God told her, because it was for the greater good of the future the Jewish people.
I think Jews felt that same sort of way when it came to surviving. So we can get rid of our names. We wouldn’t have survived, whether we were hiding in a forest or behind a cabinet, a name or a passport, or [pushed into hiding] with [forced] conversions. Hiding was survival.
I was reading your book just as the E. Jean Carroll verdict came down, holding Donald Trump liable for sexually assaulting her during an encounter in the mid-’90s. You write how in 1962, when you were working as a book publicist, the hard-drinking Irish poet Brendan Behan (who died in 1964) tried to rape you in a hotel room and you didn’t report it. Like Carroll, you didn’t think that it was something that could be reported because the cost was too high.
Certainly in that era powerful men could get away with horrible behavior because of shanda reasons.
Carroll said in her court testimony, “It was shameful to go to the police.”
You know that it happened to so many others and nobody paid the price. The man’s reputation was intact and we kept our jobs because we sacrificed our dignity and our truth. I was in a career, and I really was supporting myself. I couldn’t afford to lose my job. I would have been pilloried for having gone to his hotel room, and nobody was there when he picked up an ashtray and threatened to break the window of the Chelsea Hotel unless I went up there with him.The cards were stacked against me.
In “Shanda,” you write about another kind of shame: The shame you now feel decades later about how you described the incident in your first book. You regret “how blithely I transformed an aggravated assault by a powerful man into a ‘sticky sexual encounter.’”
I wrote about the incident in such offhand terms, and wonder why. I wrote, basically, “Okay, girls, you’re gonna have to put up with this, but you’re gonna have to find your own magical sentence like I had with Behan” to get him to stop.
You write that you said, “You can’t do this to me! I’m a nice Jewish girl!” And that got him to back off.
Really painful.
I think that’s a powerful aspect of your book — how you look back at the ways you let down the movement or your family or friends and now regret. In 1991 you wrote a New York Times essay about an illegal abortion you had as a college senior in 1958, but not the second one you had only a few months later. While you were urging women to tell their stories of abortion, you note how a different shame kept you from telling the whole truth.
Jewish girls could be, you know, plain or ordinary, but they had to be smart, and I had been stupid. I could out myself as one of the many millions of women who had an abortion but not as a Jewish girl who made the same mistake [of getting pregnant] twice.
The book was written before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. In the book you write powerfully about the shame, danger and loneliness among women when abortion was illegal, and now, after 50 years, it is happening again. Having been very much part of the generation of activists that saw Roe become the law of the land, how have you processed its demise?
Since the 1970s, we thought everything was happening in this proper linear way. We got legislation passed, we had litigation and we won, and we saw the percentage of women’s participation in the workplace all across professions and trades and everything else rise and rise. And then Ronald Reagan was elected and then there was the Moral Majority and then it was the Hyde Amendment [barring the use of federal funds to pay for abortion]. I was sideswiped because I think I was naive enough to imagine that once we articulated what feminism was driving at and why women’s rights were important, and how the economic reality of families and discrimination against women weren’t just women’s issues, people would internalize it and understand it and justice would be done.
In the case of Roe, we could not imagine that rights could ever be taken away. We didn’t do something that we should have done, which is to have outed ourselves in a big way. It’s not enough that abortion was legal. We allowed it to remain stigmatized. We allowed the right wing to create their own valence around it. That negated solidarity. If we had talked about abortion as healthcare, if we had had our stories published and created organizations around remembering what it was like and people telling their stories about when abortion was illegal and dangerous…. Instead we allowed the religious right to prioritize [fetal] cells over a woman’s life. We just were not truthful with each other, so we didn’t create solidarity.
Are you heartened by the backlash against restrictive new laws in red states or optimistic that the next wave of activism can reclaim the right to abortion?
I’m not an optimist. I call myself a “cockeyed strategist.” If you look at my long resume, it is all about organizing: Ms. magazine, feminist organizations, women’s foundations, Black-Jewish dialogues, Torah study groups and Palestinian-Jewish dialogues.
Number one, we have to own the data and reframe the narrative. We have to open channels for discussion for women who have either had one or know someone who has had one, even in religious Catholic families. The state-by-state strategy was really slow, but Ruth Bader Ginsburg wanted that. She almost didn’t get on the court because she didn’t like the nationwide, right-to-privacy strategy of Roe but instead wanted it won state by state, which would have required campaigns of acceptance and consciousness-raising.
So, the irony is she hasn’t lived to see that we’re going to have to do it her way.
You share a lot of family secrets in this book. Is this a book that you waited to write until, I’ll try to put this gently, most of the people had died?
I started this book when I was 78 years old, and there’s always a connection to my major birthdays. And turning 80 – you experience that number and it is so weird. It doesn’t describe me and it probably won’t describe you. I thought, this could well be my last book, so I needed to be completely transparent, put it all out there.
My mother and father and aunts and uncles were gone, but I have 24 cousins altogether. I went to my cousins, and told them I am going to write about the secret of your parents: It’s my uncle, but it’s your father. It’s your family story even though it’s my family, but it’s yours first. And every cousin, uniformly, said, “Are you kidding? You don’t even know the half of it,” and they’d tell me the whole story. I guess people want the truth out in the end.
Is that an aspect of getting older?
I think it’s a promise of liberation, which is what I have found. It’s this experience of being free from anything that I’ve hid. I don’t have to hide. Years ago, on our 35th wedding anniversary, we took our whole family to the Tenement Museum because we wanted them to see how far we’ve come in two generations.
—
The post Letty Cottin Pogrebin wants Jews to own up to the corrosive power of shame appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Iran Rounds Up Thousands in Mass Arrest Campaign After Crushing Unrest
A billboard with a picture of Iran’s flag, on a building in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 24, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Plainclothes Iranian security forces have rounded up thousands of people in a campaign of mass arrests and intimidation to deter further protests after crushing the bloodiest unrest since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, sources told Reuters.
Modest protests that began last month in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar over economic hardship unleashed long-suppressed wider grievances and swiftly escalated into the gravest existential threat to Iran‘s Shi’ite theocracy in nearly five decades, with protesters commonly calling for ruling clerics to step down.
Authorities cut internet access and stifled the unrest with overwhelming force that killed thousands, according to rights groups. Tehran blames “armed terrorists” linked to Israel and the United States for the violence.
Within days, plainclothes security forces launched a campaign of widespread arrests accompanied by an intensified street presence based around checkpoints, according to five activists who spoke on condition of anonymity from inside Iran.
They said detainees had been placed in secret lockups.
“They are arresting everyone,” one of the activists said. “No one knows where they are being taken or where they are being held. With these arrests and threats, they are trying to inject fear into society.”
Similar accounts were given to Reuters by lawyers, medics, witnesses, and two Iranian officials speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid retribution by security services.
They said the roundups appeared aimed at preventing any serious revival of protests by spreading fear just as the clerical establishment faces rising external pressure.
Uncertainty over the possibility of military action against the Islamic Republic has lingered since US President Donald Trump said last week that an “armada” was heading toward the country but that he hoped he would not have to use it.
On Wednesday, however, he doubled down on his threats by demanding Iran negotiate curbs on its nuclear program, warning that any future US attack would be “far worse” than one day of airstrikes last June on three nuclear sites.
Multiple Western and Middle Eastern sources told Reuters this week that Trump is weighing options against Iran that include targeted strikes on security forces and leaders to inspire protesters, although Israeli and Arab officials said air power alone would not topple the clerical establishment.
ROUNDED UP FOR PROTESTS IN PREVIOUS YEARS
One of the activists said security forces were detaining not only people accused of involvement in the latest unrest but also those arrested during protests in previous years, “even if they had not participated this time, plus members of their families.”
The latest death toll compiled by the US-based HRANA rights group stands at 6,373 – 5,993 protesters, 214 security personnel, 113 under-18s, and 53 bystanders. Arrests stand at 42,486, according to HRANA, which is investigating an additional nearly 20,000 possible deaths.
Several media outlets have reported the death toll could exceed 30,000 citing sources inside Iran.
Judiciary officials have warned that “those committing sabotage, burning public property, and involved in armed clashes with security forces” could face death sentences.
The UN human rights office told Reuters on Thursday it understood that the number of detainees was very high and they were at risk of torture and unfair trials. Mai Soto, the UN Special Rapporteur on Iran, said the thousands of detainees included doctors and health-care workers.
UNOFFICIAL DETENTION CENTERS, THOUSANDS OF ARRESTS
Two Iranian officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed to Reuters that thousands of arrests had been carried out in the past few days.
They said many detainees were being held in unofficial detention sites, “including warehouses and other improvised locations,” and the judiciary was acting quickly to process cases.
Iranian authorities declined to comment publicly on the number of arrests, or say where the detainees were being held. Authorities said on Jan. 21 that 3,117 were killed in the unrest, including 2,427 civilians and security personnel.
Amnesty International reported on Jan. 23 that “sweeping arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, bans on gatherings, and attacks to silence families of victims mark the suffocating militarization imposed in Iran by the Islamic Republic’s authorities in the aftermath of protest massacres.”
Arrests are continuing across the sprawling country, from small towns to the capital, witnesses and activists said.
“They arrested my brother and my cousin a few days ago,” said a resident of northwestern Iran who asked not to be named.
“They stormed our home in plainclothes, searched the entire house, and took all the laptops and mobile phones. They warned us that if we make this public, they will arrest all of us.”
FAMILIES FRANTIC OVER MISSING YOUNG PEOPLE
More than 60% of Iran‘s 92 million people are under the age of 30. Although the latest protests were snuffed out, clerical rulers will eventually risk more demonstrations if the heavy repression persists, according to rights activists.
Three Iranian lawyers told Reuters that dozens of families had approached them in recent days seeking help for relatives who had been detained.
“Many families are coming to us asking for legal assistance for their detained children,” one lawyer said. “Some of those arrested are under 18 – boys and girls.”
Human rights groups have long said Iranian security organs use informal detention sites during periods of serious unrest, holding detainees without access to lawyers or family members for extended periods.
Five doctors told Reuters that protesters wounded during protests had been removed from hospitals by security forces and dozens of doctors had been summoned by authorities or warned against helping injured demonstrators.
Prison authorities denied holding wounded protesters.
Families of five detainees said the lack of information about their whereabouts itself had become a form of punishment.
“We don’t know where they are, whether they are still alive, or when we’ll see them,” said an Iranian man whose daughter was rounded up. “They took my child as if they were arresting a terrorist.”
Uncategorized
Israeli Parliament Gives Initial Approval for 2026 Budget, Averting Snap Election for Now
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in Jerusalem, Jan. 26, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Israel‘s parliament gave initial approval to the 2026 state budget draft on Thursday, handing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a temporary political reprieve by averting the immediate prospect of an early election.
Lawmakers voted 62-55 in favor of the spending plan, which totals 662 billion shekels ($214.43 billion), excluding debt servicing, and sets a budget deficit ceiling of 3.9% of gross domestic product this year.
The budget, as well as an accompanying economic plan, still faces a difficult path to final approval amid deepening polarization within Netanyahu’s governing coalition. Under Israeli law, the budget must be passed by the end of March or parliament would automatically dissolve, triggering a snap election.
Tensions inside the coalition have simmered for more than two years, fueled by disagreements over the war in Gaza, the ceasefire reached in October that halted the fighting, and demands by ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties for legislation exempting religious seminary students from mandatory military service.
Some ultra-Orthodox lawmakers did not vote in favor of the budget since a military conscription bill has not yet been approved.
Netanyahu’s other right-wing coalition partners – as well as opposition parties – argue that ultra-Orthodox men must share the burden of military service, particularly after two years of fighting in Gaza and Lebanon in which nearly 1,000 Israeli soldiers were killed.
($1 = 3.0872 shekels)
Uncategorized
Trump Weighs Iran Strikes to Inspire Renewed Protests, Sources Say
US President Donald Trump delivers a speech on energy and the economy, in Clive, Iowa, US, Jan. 27, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
US President Donald Trump is weighing options against Iran that include targeted strikes on security forces and leaders to inspire protesters, multiple sources said, even as Israeli and Arab officials said air power alone would not topple the clerical rulers.
Two US sources familiar with the discussions said Trump wanted to create conditions for “regime change” after a crackdown crushed a nationwide protest movement earlier this month, killing thousands of people.
To do so, he was looking at options to hit commanders and institutions Washington holds responsible for the violence, to give protesters the confidence that they could overrun government and security buildings, they said. Trump has not yet made a final decision on a course of action including whether to take the military path, one of the sources and a US official said.
The second US source said the options being discussed by Trump‘s aides also included a much larger strike intended to have lasting impact, possibly against the ballistic missiles that can reach US allies in the Middle East or its nuclear enrichment programs. Iran has been unwilling to negotiate restrictions on the missiles, which it sees as its only deterrence against Israel, the first source said.
The arrival of a US aircraft carrier and supporting warships in the Middle East this week has expanded Trump‘s capabilities to potentially take military action, after he repeatedly threatened intervention over Iran‘s crackdown.
The US Navy sent an additional warship to the Middle East, a US official told Reuters on Thursday. The official, who was speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the USS Delbert D. Black had entered the region in the past 48 hours. This brings the number of destroyers in the Middle East to six, along with the aircraft carrier and three other littoral combat ships. The additional warship in the region was first reported by CBS News.
Reuters spoke to more than a dozen people for this account of the high-stakes deliberations over Washington’s next moves regarding Iran. Four Arab officials, three Western diplomats, and a senior Western source whose governments were briefed on the discussions said they were concerned that instead of bringing people onto the streets, US strikes could weaken a movement already in shock after the bloodiest repression by authorities since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Alex Vatanka, director of the Iran Program at the Middle East Institute, said that without large-scale military defections Iran‘s protests remained “heroic but outgunned.”
The sources in this story requested anonymity to talk about sensitive matters. Iran‘s foreign office, the US Department of Defense, and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. The Israeli Prime Minister’s office declined to comment.
Trump urged Iran on Wednesday to come to the table and make a deal on nuclear weapons, warning that any future US attack would be “far worse” than a June bombing campaign against three nuclear sites. He described the ships in the region as an “armada” sailing to Iran.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters that Iran was “preparing itself for a military confrontation, while at the same time making use of diplomatic channels.” However, Washington was not showing openness to diplomacy, the official said. The US official said the current weakness of the regime encouraged Trump to apply pressure and seek a deal on denuclearization.
Iran, which says its nuclear program is civilian, was ready for dialogue “based on mutual respect and interests” but would defend itself “like never before” if pushed, Iran‘s mission to the United Nations said in a post on X on Wednesday.
Trump has not publicly detailed what he is looking for in any deal. His administration’s previous negotiating points have included banning Iran from independently enriching uranium and restrictions on long-range ballistic missiles and on Tehran’s already-weakened network of armed proxies in the Middle East.
LIMITS OF AIR POWER
A senior Israeli official with direct knowledge of planning between Israel and the United States said Israel does not believe airstrikes alone can topple the Islamic Republic, if that is Washington’s goal.
“If you’re going to topple the regime, you have to put boots on the ground,” he told Reuters, noting that even if the United States killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran would “have a new leader that will replace him.”
Only a combination of external pressure and an organized domestic opposition could shift Iran’s political trajectory, the official said.
The Israeli official said Iran’s leadership had been weakened by the unrest but remained firmly in control despite the ongoing deep economic crisis that sparked the protests.
Multiple US intelligence reports reached a similar conclusion, that the conditions that led to the protests were still in place, weakening the government, but without major fractures, two people familiar with the matter said.
The Western source said they believed Trump‘s goal appeared to be to engineer a change in leadership, rather than “topple the regime,” an outcome that would be similar to Venezuela, where US intervention replaced the president without a wholesale change of government. During a US Senate hearing about Venezuela on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said “the hope” was for a similar transition if Khamenei were to fall, although he recognized that the situation in Iran was far more complex. The US official said it was unclear who would take over if Khamenei were out of power.
Israel’s military intelligence chief, General Shlomi Binder, held talks on Iran with senior officials at the Pentagon, the CIA, and the White House on Tuesday and Wednesday, a source familiar with the matter said. Axios reported that he shared intelligence on possible Iranian targets.
Khamenei has publicly acknowledged several thousand deaths during the protests. He blamed the unrest on the United States, Israel and what he called “seditionists.”
U.S.-based rights group HRANA has put the unrest-related death toll at 5,937, including 214 security personnel, while official figures put the death toll at 3,117. Reuters has been unable to independently verify the numbers.
Several media outlets have reported the death toll could exceed 30,000 citing sources inside Iran.
KHAMENEI RETAINS CONTROL BUT LESS VISIBLE
At 86, Khamenei has retreated from daily governance, reduced public appearances, and is believed to be residing in secure locations after Israeli strikes last year decimated many of Iran’s senior military leaders, regional officials said.
Day-to-day management has shifted to figures aligned with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), including senior adviser Ali Larijani, they said. The powerful Guards dominate Iran‘s security network and big parts of the economy.
However, Khamenei retains final authority over war, succession, and nuclear strategy – meaning political change is very difficult until he exits the scene, they said. Iran‘s foreign ministry did not respond to questions about Khamenei.
In Washington and Jerusalem, some officials have argued that a transition in Iran could break the nuclear deadlock and eventually open the door to more cooperative ties with the West, two of the Western diplomats said.
But, they cautioned, there is no clear successor to Khamenei. In that vacuum, the Arab officials and diplomats said they believe the IRGC could take over, entrenching hardline rule, deepening the nuclear standoff and regional tensions.
Any successor seen as emerging under foreign pressure would be rejected and could strengthen, not weaken the IRGC, the official said.
Across the region, from the Gulf to Turkey, officials say they favor containment over collapse – not out of sympathy for Tehran, but out of fear that turmoil inside a nation of 90 million, riven by sectarian and ethnic fault lines, could unleash instability far beyond Iran‘s borders.
A fractured Iran could spiral into civil war as happened after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, two of the Western diplomats warned, unleashing an influx of refugees, fueling Islamist militancy, and disrupting oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a global energy chokepoint.
The gravest risk, analyst Vatanka warned, is fragmentation into “early-stage Syria,” with rival units and provinces fighting for territory and resources.
REGIONAL BLOWBACK
Gulf states – long‑time US allies and hosts to major American bases – fear they would be the first targets for Iranian retaliation that could include Iranian missiles or drone attacks from the Tehran-aligned Houthis in Yemen.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and Egypt have lobbied Washington against a strike on Iran. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has told Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian that Riyadh will not allow its airspace or territory to be used for military actions against Tehran.
“The United States may pull the trigger,” one of the Arab sources said, “but it will not live with the consequences. We will.”
Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman was in Washington this week for meetings with US officials focused on Iran, according to a source familiar with the discussions.
A batch of 1,000 drones was received by the various branches of the Iranian army, semi-official Tasnim news agency reported on Thursday, amid growing tensions.
“In accordance with the threats ahead, the army maintains and enhances its strategic advantages for rapid combat and imposing a crushing response against any aggressor,” the army‘s Commander-in-Chief Amir Hatami said.
Mohannad Hajj-Ali of the Carnegie Middle East Center said the US deployments suggest planning has shifted from a single strike to something more sustained, driven by a belief in Washington and Jerusalem that Iran could rebuild its missile capabilities and eventually weaponize its enriched uranium.
The most likely outcome is a “grinding erosion – elite defections, economic paralysis, contested succession – that frays the system until it snaps,” analyst Vatanka said.