Connect with us

RSS

Iran’s Dominos Are Falling; Why Are We Pulling Back?

Members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) march during a parade to commemorate the anniversary of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88), in Tehran on Sep. 22, 2010. Photo: Reuters/Morteza Nikoubazl/File photo

Iran’s rapidly weakening deck of cards in Syria and across the region provides an opportunity for the United States to push the momentum against Iran and its proxies. However, at this critical juncture, the United States is drawing down its regional troop presence, limiting its ability to effectively counter Iran’s regional aggression.

The Biden administration announced on September 27 that the current US-led military mission in Iraq will come to an end by September 2025, followed by US troops operating in some fashion in Iraq through 2026. Despite American officials’ claim that this move is not a withdrawal, it certainly bears all the hallmarks of one.

Key US facilities at Al-Asad Air Base and Baghdad International Airport will be shuttered within months. After 2026, few, if any, US troops would remain in the strategically vital country, at a time of growing regional escalation, impeding our ability to impact events on the ground in both Iraq and Syria.

The ramifications of departing Iraq will be significant — in Iraq and beyond.

A minimized US presence in Iraq would increase Iranian influence there, strengthen and embolden Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, and limit the United States’ ability to sustain forces in Syria. This would pave the way for Iran to accelerate its transfer of weapons, cash, and terror operatives to its proxies in Syria and Lebanon via Iraq. Not only might this save Bashar al-Asad in Syria, but it could also pave the way for Hezbollah — currently on its back heels — to be rearmed and revitalized.

In Iraq, the US presence has had a cooling effect on Iran’s ring of fire proxy strategy. By comparison, Iran has provided an abundance of sophisticated ballistic missiles to its Houthi proxies in Yemen, enabling them to wreak havoc on global shipping in the Red Sea. Buffeted by America’s presence in Iraq, though, Iran has provided only short-range rockets and drones to its Iraq-based terror proxies and, fearing reprisals, has privately urged caution to avoid provoking Washington.

Without this security buffer, Iran’s ability to expand its footprint in Iraq will only grow — which is likely why some Iraqi officials reportedly oppose a US withdrawal.

A reduced US force posture in Iraq would also jeopardize America’s presence in Syria — providing a major boon to Tehran. An Iraq draw-down would impede the ability to sustain the nearly 1,000 US service members in the northeast of Syria, since they depend on access via Iraq for basic logistics such as food and fuel. American troops in Iraq also serve to retaliate against attacks on US forces in Syria.

A draw-down in Iraq would, therefore, likely lead to a withdrawal from Syria as well — creating further vacuums for Iran to exploit. At least one US base in eastern Syria is reportedly near a key Iranian-Hezbollah smuggling axis across the Syria-Iraq border. Another US base, Al-Tanf, blocks what would otherwise be the shortest and fastest land smuggling route from Iran to Iraq, then Syria and Lebanon.

With a greater footprint in Iraq and freer access to Syria, Iran could beat back the current threat to Assad’s hold on power, and expand its weapons shipments to Hezbollah, as it has already sought to do in recent days. A Hezbollah rejuvenated by newfound arms pipelines risks scaling back the considerable Israeli successes against the terror group, enabling it to again threaten Israel and other US partners.

Regardless of the merits of a troop scale-down in Iraq, timing matters. The message such a move would send to both friends and allies, amid a staggering 207 Iran-backed attacks on US personnel in the region in the last year alone, would itself be counterproductive to America’s interests. Withdrawing from Iraq at a time of spiraling regional escalation risks sending a message to Iran that imposing sufficient costs on the United States will result in concessions.

This signal would only ring louder in Tehran, given that Iran’s proxy network used Iraq as a staging ground to launch the deadliest attack on American soldiers in the region in years. In January, an Iraq-based Iranian proxy used an Iranian-made drone to kill three US servicemembers and injure more than 30 troops stationed in Jordan along the Iraqi border.

Withdrawal from Iraq at a time of intensifying regional conflict, particularly in neighboring Syria, would also send a disheartening message to our allies and partners. Without American leadership and assets, the nearly 80 countries participating in the US-led counter-ISIL mission in Iraq would be significantly hamstrung, just as ISIL is showing signs of resurgence. In addition, Iranian proxies in Iraq have also directly attacked Israel over 40 times this year — an escalating threat to a key US partner, which demands more, not less, attention and engagement.

Past US withdrawals attest to the problems that come with timeline-based, rather than conditions-based, withdrawals.

As part of the 2008 US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, the United States committed to withdraw its troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. In the following months, insurgent violence escalated across the country, and within three years, the rise of the Islamic State led to US troops returning to Iraq.

In Afghanistan, against the advice of a bipartisan Congressionally-appointed panel and top US military leaders, the administration pursued a timeline-based withdrawal, which led to the Taliban seizing control of the country in short order. As then-head of US Central Command, General Frank McKenzie, USMC (ret.), said in a recent Jewish Institute for National Security of America webinar, the US decision to pursue a timeline-based withdrawal was at the heart of the botched pull-out.

Scaling down America’s presence in Iraq at the current moment will telegraph to Iran and other adversaries worldwide that the United States can be pushed out when attacked, inviting more attempts.

Lieutenant General Richard Mills, USMC (ret.) served as Commander of the First Marine Division, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, and Commander of NATO’s Regional Command Southwest in Afghanistan. He was a participant in the 2019 Generals and Admirals Program with the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.

Yoni Tobin is a policy analyst at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America.

The post Iran’s Dominos Are Falling; Why Are We Pulling Back? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

‘US/Zionist Attack’: Pro-Hamas Campus Groups Condemn Israeli Strikes on Iran

Rescuers work at the scene of a damaged building in the aftermath of Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 13, 2025. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters Connect.

Pro-Hamas campus groups denounced Israel’s military strikes on Iran on Friday while declaring solidarity with the Islamic Republic in a series of social media posts which called on far-left extremists to flood the streets with riotous demonstrations, reprising a role they played following Hamas’s Iran-backed massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

The Israel Defense Forces carried out preemptive strikes on Iran’s military installations and nuclear facilities to neutralize top military leaders and quell the country’s efforts to enrich weapons-grade uranium, the key ingredient of their nuclear program. The move appears to have been a success, as Iranian state-controlled media confirmed that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Hossein Salami — as well as several other senior military leaders — and nuclear scientists Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, are dead.

While many observers have cheered the strikes as a necessary act of deterrence which bolsters the credibility of the Western powers’ insisting that no measure will be spared to prevent Iran’s procuring nuclear weapons, pro-Hamas groups on US campuses accused both Israel and the US of inciting an unjust war.

“We reject the US/Zionist attack on Iran, and affirm Iran’s right to self-defense, sovereignty, and self-determination,” Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), one of higher education’s most notorious campus pro-Hamas student organizations, said on X following the strikes. “No to the imperialist was of encroachment — from Syria to Lebanon to Iran — and YES [sic] to the people’s struggle for Palestinian liberation.”

At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) implored its followers to express their disapproval of the strikes by amassing at the John F. Kennedy Building in the Government Center section of Boston.

“No war with Iran, emergency rally,” the group said.

Meanwhile, at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), SJP shared on Instagram a post by the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), which, in addition to holding documented ties to the US-designated terrorist organization the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), is a key organizer of anti-Israel campus activities.

“Reject the US-Israel war of aggression on Iran,” PYM wrote. “The Zionist occupation launches a series of air strikes across the Tehran [sic], an act of war that seeks to dramatically escalate Zionist and US aggression across the region.”

Off-campus groups embedded in the global network of pro-Hamas groups weighed in as well. In the United Kingdom, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) demanded that Parliament proscribe weapons transfers to Israel.

“As Israel carpet bombs and starves Gaza, intensifies its land grabs and attacks in the West Bank, and now launches major attacks in Iran, the responsibilities on the British government could not be clearer,” PSC said. “It must impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel.”

The statements are reminiscent of the hours following the Oct. 7 attack, in which pro-Hamas groups cheered the Palestinian terrorists and rooted for Israel to fail and be overrun by its enemies.

As scenes of Hamas terrorists abducting children and desecrating dead bodies circulated worldwide and invoked global outrage, dozens of SJP chapters at institutions such as Brown University, the University of Maryland, Tufts University, and UCLA described the attacks as a form of “resistance,” demanding acceptance what they said is “our right to liberate our homeland by any means necessary.”

Additionally, 31 student groups at Harvard University issued a statement blaming Israel for the attack and accusing the Jewish state of operating an “open-air prison” in Gaza, despite that the Israeli military withdrew from the territory in 2005.

“We, the undersigned student organizations, hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence,” said the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee. “In the coming days, Palestinians will be forced to bear the full brunt of Israel’s violence.”

These activities are facilitated by an array of methods the campus groups use for spreading their extremist worldview, according to a new report published by the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism at Indiana University, Bloomington.

The report — titled “Anti-Israel Campus Groups: Online Networks and Narratives” — explored the ways in which pro-Hamas student groups draw in the world beyond the campus to create an illusion of inexorable support for anti-Zionism. Key to this effort, the report explained, is a vast and ambitious network of non-campus anti-Israel organizations which ply them with logistical and financial resources that significantly boost their capabilities beyond those of normal student clubs.

“Social media platforms, particularly Instagram, play a critical role in mobilizing these groups, spreading radical narratives, and coordinating actions at both local and national levels,” report authors Gunther Jikeli and Daniel Miehling wrote. “Social media shapes perceptions of the Israel-Hamas conflict in significant ways, often through highly emotive and polarizing content that fuels activism and, at times, incitement.”

Social media, which has modernized the manufacturing and distribution of political propaganda by reducing complex subjects to “memes” — some involving humor or contemporary cultural references which appeal to the sensibilities of the youth — are the cheapest and most effective weapons in the arsenal of the pro-Hamas movement, the report went on, noting that this was true before the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel precipitated an explosion of anti-Israel activity online.

From 2013 to 2024, Students for Justice in Palestine, pro-Hamas faculty groups, and others posted over 76,000 posts on social media which were analyzed by the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Antisemitism. Over half, 54.9 percent, included only a single, evocative image.

“In contrast, Reels (5.3 percent) and Videos (4.9 percent) are used far less frequently,” the report continued. “Based on these descriptions, we see a strong preference among campus-based anti-Israel groups for static visual formats, suggesting that this type of bimodal content represents the highest form of shareability within activists networks.”

To boost their audience and reach, pro-Hamas groups also post together in what Jikeli and Miehling described as “co-authored posts,” of which there were over 20,000 between 2013 and 2024. The content they contain elicits strong emotions in the individual users exposed to it, inciting incidents of antisemitic discrimination, harassment, and violence, the report continued. Such outrages increase in proportion to the concentration of anti-Israel groups on a single campus, as the report’s data showed a relationship that is “particularly strong.”

Of all the groups responsible for fostering a hostile campus environment, SJP stands out for being “the most frequent collaborator with other anti-Israel organizations,” the report went on. The group’s closest ally appears to be the Palestinian Youth movement.

“This close collaboration not only broadens SJP;s audience but also suggests that PYM’s radical anti-Zionist rhetoric and visual language may shape elements of SJP’s discourse,” Jikeli and Miehling explained. “PYM’s posts frequently incorporate imagery associated with socialist iconography, national liberation movements, and Islamist martyrdom. Such content often features slogans that reject the legitimacy of the Israeli state, depict convicted Palestinian terrorists imprisoned in Israel as political prisoners, and glorify members of terrorist groups.”

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post ‘US/Zionist Attack’: Pro-Hamas Campus Groups Condemn Israeli Strikes on Iran first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Hezbollah Holds Fire After Israeli Strike on Iran, Signaling Weakened Posture Amid Pressure From Lebanese Gov’t

Lebanon’s Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem delivers a speech from an unknown location, Nov. 20, 2024, in this still image from video. Photo: REUTERS TV/Al Manar TV via REUTERS.

The Iran-backed terrorist organization Hezbollah announced it will not carry out a retaliatory strike against the Jewish state in support of Tehran, following a warning from the Lebanese government not to drag the country into a wider confrontation.

“Hezbollah will not initiate its own attack on Israel in retaliation for Israel’s strikes,” the Lebanon-based Islamist group told Reuters.

Israel launched a broad preemptive attack on Iran overnight on Friday, targeting military installations and nuclear sites across the country in what officials described as an effort to neutralize an imminent nuclear threat as nuclear negotiations between the United States and Tehran appear on the brink of collapse.

In an unexpected turn, the choice of Hezbollah, which for decades has been Iran’s chief proxy force in the Middle East, to hold back from retaliating against Israeli strikes on the Islamic regime reveals just how weakened the group is following last year’s Israeli operations in Lebanon — despite its threat of retaliation once serving as a key deterrent against attacks on Iranian nuclear sites.

Last fall, Israel decimated much of Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, which ended with a ceasefire that concluded a year of fighting between the Jewish state and the terrorist group.

In a statement released on Friday, Hezbollah condemned the Israeli attack on Iran, describing it as a dangerous escalation by “an enemy that understands only the language of killing, fire, and destruction.”

The Lebanese group also accused Washington of directly facilitating the attack and called on regional governments to show solidarity with the Iranian people.

“This aggression would not have taken place without direct US approval, coordination, and cover,” a Hezbollah official said in a statement, claiming the strikes are part of a broader effort to advance US and Israeli “hegemony.”

“Washington is now attempting to distance itself to avoid consequences,” the statement read. “If this aggression is not met with rejection, condemnation, and support for Iran and its people, this criminal entity will grow more aggressive and tyrannical.”

Iranian state television confirmed that the attack killed Hossein Salami, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri, along with several other high-ranking military officials.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) also said that the entire top command of Iran’s air force was killed, as well as the IRGC commander responsible for overseeing last year’s drone and missile attacks against Israeli territory.

In a separate statement, Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem warned that Israel’s massive attack on Iran “will have major repercussions on the region’s stability, seeing as it will not pass without a response and punishment.”

“We in Hezbollah and our Islamic resistance and mujahid people are holding onto our approach and resistance, and we support the Islamic Republic of Iran in its rights and stance, and in any steps and measures it takes to defend itself and choices,” Qassem said.

According to the Saudi news outlet Al-Arabiya, Lebanon’s government informed the Iranian terrorist proxy that it would not tolerate its involvement in Tehran’s response against Israel, warning it would bear responsibility for dragging the country into war.

“The time when the organization bypassed the state in deciding to go to war is over,” the terrorist group was told, according to the report. “The decision of war and peace is exclusively in the hands of the Lebanese state.”

Before Israel’s military operations against Hezbollah last year, the terrorist group enjoyed major political and military influence across Lebanon.

The post Hezbollah Holds Fire After Israeli Strike on Iran, Signaling Weakened Posture Amid Pressure From Lebanese Gov’t first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Trump Commends Israel for Striking Iranian Nuclear Sites, Says He Gave Tehran ‘Chance to Make a Deal’

US President Trump speaks to the media at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll, Washington, DC, April 21, 2025. Photo: Andrew Leyden/ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect

US President Donald Trump commended Israel for its successful strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities and military leaders in social media posts on Truth Social. 

“I gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal. I told them, in the strongest of words, to ‘just do it,’ but no matter how hard they tried, no matter how close they got, they just couldn’t get it done,” Trump wrote Friday morning. 

Trump warned that Iran will face more attacks in the coming days if Tehran does not strike an agreement to suspend all uranium enrichment efforts.

“Certain Iranian hardliner’s spoke bravely, but they didn’t know what was about to happen. They are all DEAD now, and it will only get worse! There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end,” Trump continued. 

In the early hours of Friday morning, Israel launched a large-scale military operation against Iran, named Operation Rising Lion, targeting key nuclear and military sites across the country. The strikes resulted in the deaths of several high-ranking Iranian officials, including Major General Mohammad Bagheri, Major General Hossein Salami, and two prominent nuclear scientists, Fereydoon Abbasi and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi. Explosions were reported in Tehran and other provinces, with significant damage to facilities in Natanz, Isfahan, Khondab, and Khorramabad. 

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) described the operation as a preemptive measure to prevent Iran from advancing its nuclear weapons program. In retaliation, Iran launched over 100 drones at Israel, most of which were intercepted. The United States condemned Iran’s actions and reaffirmed its commitment to Israel’s defense, while distancing itself from the Israeli strikes by saying it was not involved in the operation.

The strikes followed a series of negotiations between the US and Iran since April 2025 aimed at reaching a deal over the latter’s nuclear program, which many Western governments believe is ultimately meant to develop nuclear weapons. Iran claims its nuclear activities are for peaceful, civilina purposes. following a letter from President Donald Trump to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei initiating dialogue.

Despite five rounds of discussions, including meetings in Muscat and Rome, significant differences remained, particularly over Iran’s uranium enrichment levels and the scope of international inspections.

Last month, Trump warned that failure to reach an agreement could lead to severe consequences, emphasizing the urgency of a deal. However, Iran’s leadership expressed skepticism, with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei labeling US demands as “outrageous nonsense” and reiterating his opposition to Israel’s existence.

The failure to reach a nuclear agreement has led to heightened tensions in the Middle East, with both sides accusing each other of undermining the diplomatic process.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed that the United States did not participate in the planning of the Israeli operation. “This evening, Israel acted independently in its strike on Iran. The United States played no role in the attack, and our foremost priority remains the safety of American personnel in the region,” Rubio said in a statement late Thursday.

However, Trump told Axios om Friday that he believes that the strikes might have improved the chances of the US striking a nuclear deal with Tehran.

“Maybe now they will negotiate seriously,” Trump said.

The post Trump Commends Israel for Striking Iranian Nuclear Sites, Says He Gave Tehran ‘Chance to Make a Deal’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News