Uncategorized
Amid standoff with US, would Iran really attack Israel?
As President Donald Trump weighs ordering military action against Iran — with officials from both sides scheduled to meet Friday to pursue a diplomatic resolution —Tehran has issued a familiar warning: Attack us, and we will strike Israel.
The threat makes little sense. Israel is responsible neither for Iranians’ miseries, which led to major protests last month, nor for any possible attack by the United States. Yet the cynical logic behind the warning is credible. Turning any confrontation with the U.S. into an Arab-Israeli one might change the dynamics by fracturing any regional coalition backing Washington, shifting the narrative to one of resistance.
Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein attempted exactly this in 1991, during the first Gulf War. Facing a broad U.S.-led coalition that included Arab states, he fired Scud missiles at Israel. If Israel had retaliated, those Arab partners would have been forced to choose between coalition discipline and domestic outrage. The alliance might have collapsed.
Israel, urged by the U.S., showed extraordinary restraint: It absorbed the attacks and did not respond. Saddam’s gambit failed, and he was expelled from Kuwait. That precedent may no longer apply. Israel is angrier now, and its accounts with Iran — even after last summer’s brief war — remain overdue.
Those truths, combined with Trump’s rash approach to conflict, could make for a dangerous combination.
From Tehran’s perspective, it is critical that Trump has no apparent appetite for long wars. He wants moments that can be spun as achievements, not long and costly campaigns. And he is generally impatient. After the 12-day-war in June, the Iranian regime was badly exposed, and serious analysts were calling for real surrender terms: an end to enrichment, abandonment of ballistic missiles, and the dismantling of proxy militias including Hezbollah and the Houthis.
Trump instead rushed to declare that everything had been “obliterated” and mused publicly that a deal might no longer be necessary at all, turning his sights elsewhere.
That short attention span creates room for Iranian calculation — in which Israel is apparently factoring.
It is possible that the Iranians are bluffing about attacking Israel. But they may also be threatening to do so as part of a certain logic, which might look like this: as last summer’s war showed, an American strike targeting the nuclear system — which has clearly become Trump’s focus, despite the fact that his initial threats came in response to Iran’s violent crackdown on protesters — is survivable. As a form of symbolic punishment, it can be absorbed. Limited concessions — caps on enrichment, revived nuclear negotiations, even the quiet removal of expendable officials — might preserve the system itself.
But since Trump is unpredictable, and may get carried away, the threat to strike Israel could serve as a way of cautioning Trump to not take things too far. It could be seen as warning that, should he not stick to the script, Iran has the ability to potentially mire him in a far more drawn-out and costly conflict.
If this is the case, the Iranian regime should tread very carefully indeed. That’s because Israel’s interests in this situation diverge fundamentally from those of the U.S. And actually making good on the threats, and handing Israel an excuse to pursue them, might spectacularly backfire.
Trump may want a quick win for his hubristic claims of unparalleled greatness. But for Israel, regime change in Iran is a very serious, real and rational goal. The Islamic Republic is explicitly committed to Israel’s destruction and has spent decades constructing a “ring of fire” around it — Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, militias in Syria and Iraq, precision-guided munitions aimed at Israeli cities.
The benefit of a post-theocratic Iran — one no longer devoted to Israel’s annihilation — would be transformative, not only for Israel but for the Middle East itself.
Yet despite Trump’s initial passion for protecting the Iranian protesters agitating toward regime change, all signs suggest that he is unlikely to really pursue a democratizing project. To do so would go against his own political philosophy, which is centered on his admiration for authoritarians. His real interest is in being seen to have achieved something — even a item much smaller than regime change — which he might argue his predecessors could not.
That is bad news for those who want to see a democratic Iran, and with it, a more stable Middle East with improved prospects for regional peace. Israel is far from alone in that wish.
Across the Arab world, a quiet realignment is underway. Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and even parts of the broader Sunni establishment increasingly view Iran — not Israel — as the primary source of regional instability. Normalization with Israel is no longer taboo.
So whereas Iran’s playbook assumes Arab outrage will constrain Israeli action, that logic is eroding — giving Israel its own potential ace in the hole.
Moreover, Israelis genuinely yearn for peace with Iran, and they believe that feeling is at least partly reciprocated. Israeli singers performing in Farsi have followings in Iran. The occasional Iranian dissident has visited Israel to much acclaim. The Crown Prince in exile, Reza Pahlavi, has called for a democratic Iran at peace with Israel and the West. There are also more than 200,000 Iranian Jews in Israel, and they remember a different Iran, and consider that its rebirth should be no fantasy.
Israel, in short, is more focused than the U.S., potentially more ruthless where necessary, possibly more patient where required, and far more invested in the outcome with Iran than Trump is ever likely to be. So, counterintuitive as it may seem, provoking the U.S. may be survivable. Provoking Israel would be far more dangerous. Israel’s air force is far larger than the number of attack jets the U.S. has moved into the region. And that air force, backed by stellar intelligence, made mincemeat of Iran’s air defences just last June.
If Tehran is thinking clearly, it may conclude that its safest move is not escalation. Then again, desperate dictators can do very stupid things.
The post Amid standoff with US, would Iran really attack Israel? appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
High-Stakes US Special Forces Mission Rescues Airman From Iran After F-15 Crash
FILE PHOTO: A U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle aircraft takes off for a mission supporting Operation Epic Fury during the Iran war at an undisclosed location, March 9, 2026. U.S. Air Force/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
US forces staged the audacious rescue of an airman behind enemy lines after Iran downed his fighter jet, officials said on Sunday, resolving a crisis for President Donald Trump as he weighs escalating the war, now in its sixth week.
The airman rescued by special operations forces, who Trump said was a colonel, was the weapons-systems officer on the downed F-15, a US official told Reuters.
“Over the past several hours, the United States Military pulled off one of the most daring Search and Rescue Operations in US History,” Trump said in a statement, adding that the airman was injured but “he will be just fine.”
The officer was the second of two crew members on the warplane that Iran said on Friday had been brought down by its air defenses. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said several aircraft were destroyed during the US rescue mission, Tasnim news agency reported.
Reuters reported on Friday that the first crew member had been retrieved, triggering a high-profile search by both Iran and the United States for the remaining airman.
Iranian officials had urged citizens to help find him, hoping to gain leverage against Washington in the war Trump and Israel launched on February 28.
Trump has threatened to escalate the conflict in the coming days with attacks on Iran’s energy infrastructure.
Had Iran captured the airman, the ensuing hostage crisis could have shifted American public perception of a conflict that opinion polls show was already unpopular.
Trump said the airman was rescued “in the treacherous mountains of Iran” in what he said was the first time in military memory that two US pilots had been rescued, separately, deep in enemy territory.
The official told Reuters that as the weapons-systems officer was moved from near a mountain to a transport aircraft parked within Iran, US forces had to destroy at least one of the aircraft because it had malfunctioned.
U.S. AIRCRAFT HIT
The rescue effort, involving dozens of military aircraft, encountered fierce resistance from Iran.
Reuters reported on Friday that two Black Hawk helicopters involved in the search were hit by Iranian fire but escaped from Iranian airspace.
Separately, a pilot ejected from an A-10 Warthog fighter aircraft after it was hit over Kuwait and crashed, the officials said, though the extent of crew injuries was unclear.
Still, Trump was triumphant.
“The fact that we were able to pull off both of these operations, without a SINGLE American killed, or even wounded, just proves once again, that we have achieved overwhelming Air Dominance and Superiority over the Iranian skies,” he said in his statement.
US air crews are trained in what to do if they go down behind enemy lines, measures known as Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape, but few are fluent in Persian and face a challenge in staying undetected while seeking rescue.
The conflict has killed 13 US military service members, with more than 300 wounded, US Central Command says. No US troops have been taken prisoner by Iran.
While Trump has repeatedly sought to portray the Iranian military as being in tatters, they have repeatedly been able to hit US aircraft.
Reuters reported on US intelligence showing that Iran retains large amounts of missile and drone capability. Until just over a week ago, the US could only determine with certainty that it had destroyed about one-third of Iran’s missile arsenal.
The status of about another third was less clear, but bombings probably damaged, destroyed or buried those missiles in underground tunnels and bunkers, Reuters sources said.
The US and Israeli war on Iran has spread across the Middle East, killing thousands and hitting the global economy with soaring energy prices that are fueling fears of inflation.
Uncategorized
On Easter, Pope Leo Urges World Leaders to End Wars, Renounce Conquest
Pope Leo XIV waves from the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica after delivering his “Urbi et Orbi” (To the city and the world) message, on Easter Sunday at the Vatican, April 5, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Remo Casilli
Pope Leo urged global leaders in his Easter message on Sunday to end the conflicts raging across the world and abandon any schemes for power, conquest or domination.
The pope, who has emerged as an outspoken critic of the Iran war, lamented in a special message to the thousands gathered in St. Peter’s Square that people “are growing accustomed to violence, resigning ourselves to it, and becoming indifferent.”
“Let those who have weapons lay them down!” the first US pope exhorted. “Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace!”
Leo did not mention any specific conflicts in the message, known as the “Urbi et Orbi” (to the city and the world) blessing. It was unusually brief and direct.
The pope said that the story of Easter, when the Bible says Jesus rose from the dead three days after not resisting his execution by crucifixion, shows that Christ was “entirely nonviolent.”
“On this day of celebration, let us abandon every desire for conflict, domination, and power, and implore the Lord to grant his peace to a world ravaged by wars,” Leo urged.
Leo, who is known for choosing his words carefully, has been forcefully decrying the world’s violent conflicts in recent weeks and ramping up his criticism of the Iran war.
In a sermon for the Easter vigil on Saturday night, he urged people not to feel numbed by the scope of the conflicts raging across the world but to work for peace.
The pope made a rare direct appeal to US President Donald Trump on Tuesday, urging him to find an “off-ramp” to end the Iran war.
In his address from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica on Sunday to the Square below, decorated with thousands of brightly colored flowers for the holiday, Leo offered brief Easter greetings in ten languages, including Latin, Arabic and Chinese.
The pope also announced he would return to the Basilica on April 11 to host a prayer vigil for peace.
Uncategorized
Temple Mount Set for Limited Reopening to Jews and Muslims
Israeli National Security Minister and head of Jewish Power party Itamar Ben-Gvir gives a statement to members of the press, ahead of a possible ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Jerusalem, Jan. 16, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Oren Ben Hakoon
i24 News – Israeli authorities are preparing to partially reopen the Temple Mount in Jerusalem to both Jewish and Muslim worshipers for the first time since the start of the war with Iran, under a tightly controlled and highly restricted security arrangement, i24NEWS has learned.
According to details obtained by i24NEWS, the Israeli police, backed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, are also expected to permit limited access for Jewish worshipers to the Western Wall as part of the same phased plan.
Under the framework, access to the Temple Mount and surrounding holy sites would be restricted to small groups of up to 150 people at a time. In the event of a missile alert, all visitors would be immediately evacuated in accordance with emergency protocols.
The decision follows a recent Supreme Court ruling allowing demonstrations in a limited format. Police argue that a consistent standard must apply across both civic gatherings and religious sites, with Ben-Gvir insisting that “there cannot be one rule for demonstrations and another for the Temple Mount.”
However, the reopening contradicts recommendations from the Home Front Command, which has advised keeping sensitive sites closed due to the ongoing risk of missile attacks.
Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin has proposed transferring authority over such security-related decisions exclusively to defense officials, an initiative that could reshape the balance between the judiciary and security establishment regarding restrictions on public access.