RSS
Israel and the Middle East: Could There Be a Regional Nuclear War?
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi meets with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi in Tehran, Iran, Nov. 14, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Current synergies between Palestinian statehood and regional nuclear war remain generally ignored. Once formally established, a Palestinian state could significantly impact the Israel-Iran balance of power, and also lead to the acceleration of competitive risk-taking in the region.
Though any impending war between Israel and Iran would be fought without a “Palestine” factor, one predictable outcome of such a conflict would be increased pressure on Israel to accept a dedicated enemy state. To be sure, Iran’s leaders are generally unconcerned about Palestinian well-being per se, but even a faux commitment in Tehran to Palestinian statehood could weaken Israel’s overall safety.
Any formal creation of “Palestine” would be viewed by Iran as favorable to its own regional power position. For Israel, a “Two-State Solution” would enlarge not “only” the jihadi terror threat to Israel (both conventional and unconventional), but also the prospects for a catastrophic regional war. Even if such a war were fought while Iran was still pre-nuclear, Tehran could use radiation dispersal weapons or electromagnetic pulse weapons (EMP) against Israel and/or target Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor with conventional rockets.
In one conspicuously ignored scenario, Iran’s North Korean nuclear ally would engage in direct belligerency against the Jewish State. Should that be allowed (and it would not be without historical precedent), a continuously ambiguous Israeli nuclear posture could fatally undermine Jerusalem’s nuclear deterrent.
In this connection, Israeli-Palestinian negotiations ought never be confined to “general principles.” Instead, specific issues will need to be addressed head-on: borders; Jerusalem; relations between Gaza and the “West Bank;” the Cairo Declaration of June 1974 (an annihilationist “phased plan”); the Arab “right of return” and cancellation of the “Palestine National Charter” (which calls unapologetically for eradication of Israel “in stages”).
Memory will be important. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), “parent” of the extant Palestine Authority (PA), was formed in 1964, three years before there were any “Israel Occupied Territories.” So what, it must be asked, was this terror group seeking to “liberate?”
For Israel, among other things, any justice-based plan for Palestinians would also need to acknowledge the historical and legal rights of the Jewish people in Judea and Samaria. Such an acknowledgment would represent an indispensable corrective to flagrantly lawless Hamas claims of resistance “by any means necessary” and to literally genocidal Palestinian calls for “liberation from the river to the sea.” On its face, the authentic Palestinian expectation is always that Israel become part of “Palestine.”
What about North Korea and future wars in the Middle East? Pyongyang has a documented history of active support for Iran and Syria. On ties with Damascus, it was Kim Jung Un who built the Al Kibar nuclear reactor for the Syrians at Deir al-Zor. This is the same facility that was preemptively destroyed by Israel in its “Operation Orchard” (also known in certain Israeli circles as “Operation Outside the Box”) on September 6, 2007. In the absence of “Orchard,” new post-Assad jihadists in Syria (primarily HTS) would have inherited an already-existing nuclear weapons option.
For Israel, nuclear weapons, doctrine and strategy remain essential to national survival. But the country’s traditional policy of “deliberate nuclear ambiguity” or “bomb in the basement” should immediately be updated.
The key objective of needed changes would be more credible Israeli nuclear deterrence, a goal that would correlate closely with “selective nuclear disclosure.” While counter-intuitive, Iran will need to be convinced that Israel’s nuclear arms are not too destructive for purposeful operational use. In what amounts to an arguably supreme irony, the credibility of Israel’s nuclear deterrent could sometime vary inversely with its presumed destructiveness.
For the moment, Iran should be considered as a rational foe. It remains conceivable, of course, that Iran could still act irrationally, perhaps in alliance with other more-or-less rational states and/or kindred jihadi terror groups, but such prospects ought to be anticipated as exceptional, episodic, or idiosyncratic.
What about non-Arab Pakistan? Unless Jerusalem were to consider Pakistan a genuine enemy, Israel has no present-day nuclear foes. Still, as an unstable Islamic state, Pakistan is continuously subject to coup d’état by jihadi elements and is aligned in various ways with both Saudi Arabia and China. At some point the Sunni Saudi kingdom could decide to “go nuclear” itself, largely because of Iran’s “Shiite” nuclear program.
Would such a consequential decision by Riyadh represent a net gain or net loss for Israel? It’s not too soon to ask this question. Derivatively, Jerusalem should consider potentially correlative decisions by Egypt and Turkey. Facing a nuclearizing Iran, might Israel actually be better off with a simultaneously nuclearizing Egypt and/or Turkey?
On elemental nuclear issues. truth may remain counter-intuitive. For Israeli nuclear deterrence to work longer-term, Iran will need to be told more rather than less about Israel’s nuclear targeting doctrine and the invulnerability of Israel’s nuclear forces/infrastructures.
In concert with such changes, Jerusalem should better clarify its presently too-opaque “Samson Option.” The key objective of such clarifications would not be to suggest Israel’s willingness to die with its belligerent Arab neighbors, but to enhance nuclear deterrence.
For Israel, the risks of Palestinian statehood could prove irreversible, irremediable, and existential. These risks would be enlarged if they were incurred simultaneously with an Israel-Iran war. It follows that Jerusalem’s most basic security obligation should be to keep Iran non–nuclear and to oppose Palestinian statehood in any form. On this obligation, the “whole” would assuredly be greater than the sum of its “parts.”
Long before the current Gaza War, a significant fraction of Palestinians wanted Jews “annihilated.” This unhidden exterminatory sentiment remains rooted in certain canonical hadith, and is specifically quoted in the Hamas Covenant. Regarding the Covenant’s explicit call for genocide of “The Jews”:
… the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to realize the promise of Allah, no matter how long it takes. The Prophet, Allah’s prayer and peace be upon him, says: “The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews, and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: `Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him…” (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985).
There is also an ideological role, as Palestinian and other Islamist terror groups and states use Martyrdom to convince their populations to die in the pursuit of killing Jews. To survive amid multiple synergies, Jerusalem must first learn how to transform an enemy presumption that links “martyrdom” to the conquest of time (and even death).
In Jerusalem and also in Washington, key decision-makers should finally realize that the Jihadist fighter sees himself or herself as a religious sacrifice. Here, each individual foe, whether Sunni or Shiite, aims to escape from profane time. By willfully abandoning the profane clock time that imprison ordinary mortals, the Jihadist slaughters “heathen” and “infidel” in an ecstatically grateful exchange for “immortality.”
In essence, the Jihadist terrorist kills and dies in order to end the sovereignty of unbelievers. When Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists raped, tortured, and murdered Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023, their aim was lascivious and primal; it was not “Palestine.”
The barbarisms of October 7 were not merely sanctioned by several Palestinian authorities. They were undertaken in alleged fulfillment of a divine commandment: “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know.” (Koran 8:60) Also: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war…” (Koran 9:5)
Going forward on all security fronts, Israeli strategists should also draw systematically on modern lessons of asymmetric warfare. In The Quranic Concept of War (1979), Pakistani Brigadier General S. K. Malik observes: “Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved.”
Nonetheless, when understood in terms of the hazards of Palestinian statehood, the most genuinely overriding threat of jihadi terror would stem from force-multiplying interactions with Iranian nuclearization. It follows that Israeli strategic planners should always approach these threats as synergistic.
Prof. Louis René Beres was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971) and is the author of many books and scholarly articles dealing with international law, nuclear strategy, nuclear war, and terrorism. In Israel, Prof. Beres was Chair of Project Daniel (PM Sharon). His 12th and latest book is Surviving Amid Chaos: Israel’s Nuclear Strategy (Rowman & Littlefield, 2016; 2nd ed., 2018).
The post Israel and the Middle East: Could There Be a Regional Nuclear War? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Mike Huckabee Presents Credentials to Israel’s President, Begins Duties as US Ambassador
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee looks on during the day he visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in Jerusalem’s Old City, April 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
US Ambassador Mike Huckabee on Monday presented his credentials to Israeli President Isaac Herzog in Jerusalem, officially beginning his time as the Trump administration’s chief diplomatic representative in Israel.
Huckabee, a Baptist minister and the former governor of Arkansas, described the opportunity to become the official US ambassador to Israel as “an honor and incredible joy.”
“Over 50 years ago I came to Israel for the first time,” he said. “I was amazed to be standing in the land of the Bible. Now I come back as an old man, but with a sense of joy and awe that I am in the land that God said, ‘This is mine and these are my people.’ I came here because I believe that this not just geopolitical, because I also love to see it through the eyes of people who come here for the first time.”
During his remarks at the Israeli presidential residence, Huckabee warned that Iran seeks to destroy not only Israel but also the United States.
“It has always been their desire that Israel would be the opening act and then it would be America’s turn to face destruction,” Huckabee said. “Or, to put it another simple way, Israel is the appetizer, and the United States is the entrée.”
Huckabee’s comments came on the heels of the Trump administration’s second round of discussions with Iran over the weekend regarding the regime’s nuclear program. The Trump administration has stated that it aims to dismantle the Iranian program, sharing the view of other Western states that Iran seeks to build nuclear weapons. Tehran claims its nuclear activities are only for civilian energy use.
Huckabee lauded his new position as “divine” and vowed “to stand with the people of Israel for peace and prosperity.”
Herzog showered praise on Huckabee, calling the American official “a shining reflection of [US President Donald Trump’s] love, friendship, and support for the State of Israel.”
The newly minted ambassador arrived in Israel last week, visiting the Western Wall on Friday. Huckabee placed his hand on the holy Jewish site, lowered his head in prayer, and then inserted a slip of paper containing a prayer into the wall.
Huckabee said the prayer, which was delivered on behalf of Trump, read, “For peace in Israel.”
“What an honor it is for me to come on behalf of the president of the United States, President Donald Trump, and to present a prayer that he handwrote, gave to me last Thursday at the White House, with the instruction that my first act as ambassador would be to take his prayer — praying for the peace of Jerusalem — and to bring it to the wall, and to pray that there would in fact be, peace in the land,” Huckabee said.
The US Senate earlier this month voted to confirm Huckabee as the new ambassador to Israel, placing a strong pro-Israel conservative in the prominent position.
The Senate voted 53 to 46 in favor of Huckabee, with all Democrats except Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman voting against him. Every Republican voted to confirm Huckabee.
Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, has long been a stalwart ally of the Jewish state. He has repudiated the anti-Israel protests that erupted in the wake of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel and criticized former US President Joe Biden for sympathizing with anti-Israel protesters during his speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention (DNC). The incoming ambassador also lambasted the anti-Israel encampments at elite universities, stating that there should be “outrage” over the targeting and mistreatment of Jewish college students.
Huckabee has defended Israel’s right to build settlements in the West Bank, acknowledging the Jewish people’s ties to the land dating back to the ancient world. He has also vowed to refer to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria,” adopting terminology preferred by Israel.
“There is no such thing as the West Bank — it’s Judea and Samaria,” Huckabee has said, referring to the biblical names for the area. “There is no such thing as settlements — they’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There is no such thing as an occupation.”
During Huckabee’s 2008 US presidential campaign, he stated that “there’s really no such thing as a Palestinian,” and that land for a potential Palestinian state should be taken from other Arab states and not Israel.
The post Mike Huckabee Presents Credentials to Israel’s President, Begins Duties as US Ambassador first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Looks to Cut Another $1 Billion in Funding From Harvard University as School Builds War Chest
US President Donald Trump attends the annual White House Easter Egg Roll, on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC, April 21, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Leah Millis
The Trump administration may confiscate another $1 billion in federal funds previously appropriated to Harvard University over its allegedly breaching the confidentiality of negotiations on quelling campus antisemitism and reducing the institution’s left-wing bias, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.
The move would intensify what has become a fight over the future of elite higher education, against which conservatives have lodged a slew of criticisms for decades. Their moment to take action has now arrived with the second term of US President Donald Trump, which coincides with a precipitous drop in public support for academia caused by an explosion of pro-Hamas demonstrations on campuses and the promotion of views which many Americans perceive as anti-meritocratic, anti-Western, and racist.
Earlier this month, the administration impounded $2.26 billion in Harvard’s federal funds over the institution’s refusal to agree to a wishlist of policy reforms that Republican lawmakers have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Contained in a letter the administration sent to Harvard interim president Alan Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — the policies called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
More cuts may be forthcoming, the Journal reported, due to the Trump administration’s fury over Garber’s decision to publicize the letter, which was intended to be a private discussion between it and Harvard. Administration officials were reportedly planning to treat the university “more leniently” than other schools from which it has already confiscated billions before the policy list was released.
Harvard, however, has denied that it ever agreed to keep its correspondence with the multi-agency Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism confidential. Meanwhile, the Trump administration believes “the school aimed to fight the entire time” and that it must now respond with more punitive measures to demonstrate its resolve to see a conflict with Harvard through to the end.
The administration is already taking action against the school in other ways. On Friday, the Department of Education announced that it is investigating Harvard’s foreign contributors, citing as cause the university’s alleged numerous failures to provide annual disclosures of gifts exceeding $250,000 as is required by the Higher Education Act of 1965.
“As a recipient of federal funding, Harvard University must be transparent about its relations with foreign sources and governments. Unfortunately, our review indicated that Harvard has not been fully transparent or complete in its disclosures, which is both unacceptable and unlawful,” US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. “This records request is the Trump administration’s first step to ensure that Harvard is not being manipulated by, or doing the bidding of, foreign entities, which includes actors who are hostile to the interests of the United States and American studies.”
She added, “We hope Harvard will respect its own motto and be truthful in its federal filings and foreign relationships.”
Harvard University has been cheered by progressives and criticized by conservatives over its refusal to enact the reforms proposed by the Trump administration.
Former US President Barack Obama lauded Garber for “rejecting an unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom,” and former Harvard president Larry Summers, speaking to The Harvard Crimson, said that the school should spend down its $53.2 billion endowment fund to offset the federal government’s cuts.
Others, however, such as pro-Israel activist Shabbos Kestenbaum, expressed more opprobrious views of Harvard, accusing it of “fighting Trump harder than it ever fought antisemitism.” Christopher Rufo, a conservative author and resident scholar of the Manhattan Institute, said Trump “has every right to withhold funding” due to the university’s embrace of the DEI movement and holding of segregated graduation ceremonies.
Harvard’s so-called “resistance” is backed by its immense wealth, and the school has been drawing on its vast financial resources to build a war chest for withstanding Trump’s budget cuts since March, when it issued over $450 million in bonds as “part of ongoing contingency planning for a range of financial circumstances.” Another $750 million in bonds was offered to investors in April, according to The Harvard Crimson, a sale that is being managed by Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
A generous subsidy protects Harvard from paying exorbitant interest on the new debt, as investors can sell most bonds issued by educational institutions without being required to pay federal income tax. Other universities have resorted to borrowing as well, issuing what was reportedly a record $12.4 billion municipal bonds, some of which are taxable, during the first quarter of 2025. Among those which chose to take on debt are Northwestern University, which was defunded to the tune of $790 million on April 8. It issued $500 million in bonds in March. Princeton University, recently dispossessed of $210 in federal grants, is preparing an offering of $320 million, according to Forbes.
The strategy cannot be maintained indefinitely, Middle East expert and president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East Asaf Romirowsky told The Algemeiner on Monday, noting that Harvard’s first bond offering fell short of its target by $15 million. He said that it is best, and cheaper, for Harvard, as well as other Ivy League institutions, to address the campus antisemitism crisis and “wokeness” on terms to which they and Trump can agree.
“Harvard and other elite colleges seem to feel that Trump is out to hurt them, but the fact of the matter is that they have refused to be introspective in assessing the quality of the product they produce,” Romirowsky explained. “It behooves everybody to find some kind of middle of the road if we are going to change and reform the institutions and give them time to clean themselves up.”
He continued, “Will Harvard survive? Of course, but it needs to reckon with the quality and caliber of its students and faculty, who are so ideologically disconnected from reality.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Trump Looks to Cut Another $1 Billion in Funding From Harvard University as School Builds War Chest first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran’s Top Diplomat to Visit China as Tehran Seeks to Strengthen Ties Amid US Tensions
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will visit China on Tuesday, ahead of a third round of nuclear talks with the United States in Oman this weekend, as both Tehran and Beijing seek to deepen their bilateral ties.
“It is natural that we will consult and brief China over the latest developments in Iran-US indirect talks,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday, adding that Araghchi’s trip also aims to further the implementation of agreements between Tehran and Beijing as their relations grow stronger.
According to Jack Burnham, a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based think tank, both countries recognize the increasing value of their cooperation on the global stage.
“The growing ties between China and Iran signal a rising ‘Axis of Aggressors’ coordinating their efforts to undermine US and Israeli national security,” Burnham told The Algemeiner.
“Iran remains a key supplier of cheap crude for Chinese refineries, while Chinese firms with close ties to the Chinese military have been accused of offering support to the Houthis [an Iran-backed terrorist group based in Yemen] in their strikes against US and Israeli targets,” he continued.
Iran’s growing ties with China come at a time when both countries are facing escalating sanctions from Washington, particularly targeting Tehran’s oil industry, as part of US President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign aimed at cutting the country’s crude exports to zero and preventing it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
“As the Trump administration seeks to increase pressure on Tehran to gain leverage in ongoing nuclear talks, China’s support for Iran may become a more significant aspect of the regime’s willingness to hold out — a key factor behind the US Treasury Department’s efforts to sanction Chinese refineries as negotiations continue,” Burnham told The Algemeiner.
In an interview with the Russian state news agency RT, Araghchi said that close collaboration with Moscow and Beijing is “a necessity” for Tehran, given the current international climate.
“We have started trilateral talks with Russia and China on the issue of Iran’s nuclear program for some time now,” the Iranian top diplomat said. “We are ready to continue these talks and expand them to other issues.”
“Iran, China, and Russia – in a coordinated move – can take effective steps towards international peace,” he continued.
Tehran became a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a Eurasian security and political group, in 2023 and also joined the BRICS group in 2024 — a bloc of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa that positions itself as an alternative to economic institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
In 2021, Iran and China signed a comprehensive 25-year strategic agreement covering energy, security, infrastructure, and communications, which ceded almost all of Tehran’s natural and mineral resources, infrastructure, and markets to Beijing in exchange for security guarantees against the West.
The latest example of their growing military cooperation was their joint naval drills earlier this year, called the Maritime Security Belt 2025, in Iranian territorial waters in the Gulf of Oman, located in the northern Indian Ocean.
As part of Tuesday’s visit to Beijing, a high-ranking judicial delegation will join Iran’s top diplomat to the Chinese capital.
Iranian Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei will attend the 20th summit of the chairs of supreme courts from the nine member countries of the SCO. The conference will focus on strengthening legal cooperation to combat terrorism, organized crime, trafficking, and cybercrime.
The high-level trip comes ahead of a third round of nuclear talks with Washington in Oman this Saturday, following Tehran’s previous consultations with Russia.
After Saturday’s second round of nuclear negotiations in Rome, Araghchi announced that an expert-level track would begin in the coming days to finalize the details of a potential agreement.
“Relatively positive atmosphere in Rome has enabled progress on principles and objectives of a possible deal,” Araghchi wrote in a post on X.
“We made clear how many in Iran believe that the JCPOA [a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal that imposed limits on the Iranian nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief] is no longer good enough for us. To them, what is left from that deal are ‘lessons learned,’” he continued.
“For now, optimism may be warranted but only with a great deal of caution.”
Iran has previously rejected halting its uranium enrichment program, insisting that the country’s right to enrich uranium is non-negotiable, despite Washington’s threats of military actions, additional sanctions, and tariffs if an agreement is not reached to curb Tehran’s nuclear activities.
Last week, US special envoy Steve Witkoff said that any deal with Iran must require the complete dismantling of its “nuclear enrichment and weaponization program” — reversing his earlier comments, in which he indicated that the White House would allow Tehran to enrich uranium to a 3.67 percent threshold for a “civil nuclear program.”
The post Iran’s Top Diplomat to Visit China as Tehran Seeks to Strengthen Ties Amid US Tensions first appeared on Algemeiner.com.