RSS
WIll Israel-Iran Conflict Spiral Out of Control — or Will Both Sides Play It Safe?
Iranians attend an anti-Israel rally in Tehran, Iran, April 19, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
The geopolitical tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the State of Israel have long been a focal point of Middle Eastern politics, drawing global attention due to their potential implications for regional stability and international security.
This article examines the recent developments in Iran-Israel relations by analyzing Iran’s military capabilities, its nuclear ambitions, the rhetoric of the conflict, and the implications of Iranian terrorism. The discussion navigates through these elements to provide a comprehensive understanding of the strategic postures and potential scenarios that might unfold in the future.
Military Capabilities and Deficiencies
Recent confrontations between Iran and Israel have shed light on critical vulnerabilities within Iran’s military infrastructure, particularly in air defense and deterrence mechanisms. The effectiveness of Iran’s air defenses was questioned critically following Israel’s successful penetration of Iranian airspace, which revealed not only technical deficiencies, but also strategic shortcomings in Iran’s approach to regional security. These incidents have led to an evaluation of Iran’s military posture as potentially more symbolic than pragmatic, challenging the perceived robustness of its defense strategy.
Nuclear Ambitions and International Treaties
One of the most contentious issues in Iran-Israel relations is Iran’s nuclear program. There is growing concern that Iran might withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and openly pursue nuclear weapons. This potential shift is alarming for global security architectures, and reflects Iran’s frustration with international constraints that have not led to economic or political gains promised by global powers at various junctures.
Just this week, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Mariano Grossi said that Iran’s recent nuclear activity “raises eyebrows” — which is an extremely worrying sign.
The possibility of Iran declaring its intention to develop a nuclear bomb — or just to do so without announcing this to the world — would escalate tensions significantly, prompting a reevaluation of security strategies by multiple states, particularly Israel and the United States.
Perception vs. Reality of Military Strength
Despite its assertive rhetoric and occasional show of military force, Iran has often been described as a “paper tiger,” a term that implies its actual capabilities do not match its portrayed strength. This analysis suggests that while Iran has made significant strides in military technology and capabilities since the Cold War, its actual ability to project power and sustain prolonged military engagements is limited, when paired with Israeli and American countermeasures.
But those countermeasures certainly aren’t exhaustive or unlimited, and it’s unknown what power Iran might possess in a full-blown conflict. Still, this discrepancy between perception and reality affects Iran’s strategic calculations and its interactions with neighboring countries and the international community. The international response to Iran’s attack on Israel demonstrates that Iran has a number of countries that are trying to thwart its malicious activities.
Avoidance of Full-Scale Warfare
Given its strategic limitations, Iran is likely to avoid full-scale warfare. For Iran, the cost of such conflict would be catastrophic, particularly considering the potential for international isolation and the probable direct confrontations with technologically superior forces like those of the United States and Israel. Instead, Iran might continue to leverage asymmetric warfare tactics, including proxy wars, terrorism, and using political influence in neighboring regions, as a means to extend its influence without engaging in direct, conventional warfare.
Terrorism and Asymmetric Warfare
The increase in activity of Iran’s terrorist cells in regions like the Northern Hemisphere and the Middle East suggests a strategic pivot towards asymmetric warfare. This form of engagement allows Iran to exert influence and retaliate against adversaries without direct military confrontations, which could lead to rapid escalation and uncontrollable consequences. The intensification of such activities has implications for regional security, necessitating a coordinated response from affected states to address the root causes and manifestations of state-sponsored terrorism.
The Nature of the Iran-Israel Conflict
Despite the severe rhetoric and military posturing, the Iran-Israel conflict exhibits a pattern of controlled escalation. Both nations are aware of the potential for a full-scale conflict to spiral out of control, suggesting a mutual, albeit unspoken, understanding that limits the scope of their engagements. This tacit acknowledgment dictates much of the strategic interaction between the two, with both sides aiming to manage the conflict within certain boundaries, avoiding actions that could trigger an all-out war.
The Iran-Israel dynamic is a complex interplay of military strategy, political survival, and regional influence. While Iran’s military capabilities and nuclear ambitions pose significant challenges, its strategic behavior suggests a preference for indirect engagement over direct conflict. The state’s use of terrorism as a tool of foreign policy is particularly concerning and highlights the broader implications of Iran’s regional strategy. Understanding these elements is crucial for policymakers and analysts working to mitigate risks and foster stability in one of the world’s most volatile regions.
Erfan Fard is a counterterrorism analyst and Middle East Studies researcher based in Washington, DC. Twitter@EQFARD
The post WIll Israel-Iran Conflict Spiral Out of Control — or Will Both Sides Play It Safe? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US State Department Revokes Visas of UK Punk Rap Act Bob Vylan Amid Outrage Over Duo’s Chants of ‘Death to the IDF’
Bob Vylan music duo performance at Glastonbury Festival (Source: FLIKR)
The US State Department has revoked the visas for the English punk rap duo Bob Vylan amid ongoing outrage over their weekend performance at the Glastonbury Festival, in which the pair chanted “Death to the IDF.”
The State Department’s decision to cancel their visas would preclude a planned fall concert tour of the US by the British rappers.
“The [US State Department] has revoked the US visas for the members of the Bob Vylan band in light of their hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants. Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote on X/Twitter on Monday.
During a June 28 set at Glastonbury Festival, Bob Vylan’s Pascal Robinson-Foster ignited a firestorm by leading the crowd in chants of “Death, death, to the IDF,” referring to the Israel Defense Forces. He also complained about working for a “f—ing Zionist” during the set.
The video of the performance went viral, sparking outrage across the globe.
The BBC, which streamed the performance live, issued an on‑screen warning but continued its broadcast, prompting criticism by government officials for failing to cut the feed.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer and festival organizers condemned the IDF chant as hate speech and incitement to violence. The Israeli Embassy in London denounced the language as “inflammatory and hateful.”
“Millions of people tuned in to enjoy Glastonbury this weekend across the BBC’s output but one performance within our livestreams included comments that were deeply offensive,” the BBC said in a statement following the event.
“These abhorrent chants, which included calls for the death of members of the Israeli Defense Forces … have no place in any civil society,” Leo Terrell, Chair of the US Department of Justice Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, declared Sunday in a statement posted on X.
Citing the act’s US tour plans, Terrell said his task force would be “reaching out to the U.S. Department of State on Monday to determine what measures are available to address the situation and to prevent the promotion of violent antisemitic rhetoric in the United States.”
British authorities, meanwhile, have launched a formal investigation into Bob Vylan’s controversial appearance at Glastonbury. Avon and Somerset Police confirmed they are reviewing footage and working with the Crown Prosecution Service to determine whether the performance constitutes a hate crime or incitement to violence.
United Talent Agency (UTA), one of the premier entertainment talent agencies, dropped the duo, claming “antisemitic sentiments expressed by the group were utterly unacceptable.”
The band defended their performance on social media as necessary protest, stating that “teaching our children to speak up for the change they want and need is the only way that we make this world a better place.”
The post US State Department Revokes Visas of UK Punk Rap Act Bob Vylan Amid Outrage Over Duo’s Chants of ‘Death to the IDF’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Dem House Leader Hakeem Jeffries Urges Mamdani to ‘Aggressively Address’ Antisemitism in NYC if Elected Mayor
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
US House Democratic leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (NY) urged Democratic nominee for mayor of New York Zohran Mamdani to “aggressively address the rise in antisemitism” if he wins the general election in November.
“‘Globalizing the intifada’ by way of example is not an acceptable phrasing,” Jeffries said Sunday on ABC’s This Week. “He’s going to have to clarify his position on that as he moves forward.”
“With respect to the Jewish communities that I represent, I think our nominee is going to have to convince folks that he is prepared to aggressively address the rise in antisemitism in the city of New York, which has been an unacceptable development,” he added.
Jeffries’s comments come as Mamdani has been receiving an onslaught of criticism for defending the controversial phrase “globalize the intifada.”
Mamdani first defended the phrase during an appearance on the popular Bulwark Podcast. The progressive firebrand stated that he feels “less comfortable with the banning of certain words.” He invoked the US Holocaust Museum in his defense, saying that the museum used the word intifada “when translating the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising into Arabic, because it’s a word that means ‘struggle.’”
The Holocaust Museum repudiated Mamdani in a statement, calling his comments “offensive.”
Mamdani has continued to defend the slogan despite ongoing criticism, arguing that pro-Palestine advocates perceive it as a call for “universal human rights.”
Mamdani, the 33‑year‑old state assembly member and proud democratic socialist, defeated former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other candidates in a lopsided first‑round win in the city’s Democratic primary for mayor, notching approximately 43.5 percent of first‑choice votes compared to Cuomo’s 36.4 percent.
The election results have alarmed members of the local Jewish community, who expressed deep concern over his past criticism of Israel and defense of antisemitic rhetoric.
“Mamdani’s election is the greatest existential threat to a metropolitan Jewish population since the election of the notorious antisemite Karl Lueger in Vienna,” Rabbi Marc Schneier, one of the most prominent Jewish leaders in New York City, said in a statement. “Jewish leaders must come together as a united force to prevent a mass Jewish Exodus from New York City.”
Some key Democratic leaders in New York, such as US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Gov. Kathy Hochul, have congratulated and complimented Mamdani, but have not yet issued an explicit endorsement. Each official has signaled interest in meeting with Mamdani prior to making a decision on a formal endorsement.
The post Dem House Leader Hakeem Jeffries Urges Mamdani to ‘Aggressively Address’ Antisemitism in NYC if Elected Mayor first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Eyes Ties With Syria and Lebanon After Iran War
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar attends a press conference with German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul (not pictured) in Berlin, Germany, June 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Christian Mang
Israel is interested in establishing formal diplomatic relations with long-standing adversaries Syria and Lebanon, but the status of the Golan Heights is non-negotiable, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on Monday.
Israeli leaders argue that with its rival Iran weakened by this month’s 12-day war, other countries in the region have an opportunity to forge ties with Israel.
The Middle East has been upended by nearly two years of war in Gaza, during which Israel also carried out airstrikes and ground operations in Lebanon targeting Iran-backed Hezbollah, and by the overthrow of former Syrian leader and Iran ally Bashar al-Assad.
In 2020, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco became the first Arab states to establish ties with Israel since Jordan in 1994 and Egypt in 1979. The normalization agreements with Israel were deeply unpopular in the Arab world.
“We have an interest in adding countries such as Syria and Lebanon, our neighbors, to the circle of peace and normalization, while safeguarding Israel‘s essential and security interests,” Saar said at a press conference in Jerusalem.
“The Golan will remain part of the State of Israel,” he said.
Israel annexed the Golan Heights in 1981 after capturing the territory from Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War. While much of the international community regards the Golan as occupied Syrian land, US President Donald Trump recognized Israeli sovereignty over it during his first term in office.
Following Assad’s ousting, Israeli forces moved further into Syrian territory.
A senior Syrian official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Syria would never give up the Golan Heights, describing it as an integral part of Syrian territory.
The official also said that normalization efforts with Israel must be part of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and not carried out through a separate track.
A spokesperson for Syria‘s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.
The 2002 initiative proposed Arab normalization with Israel in exchange for its withdrawal from territories including the Golan Heights, the West Bank, and Gaza. It also called for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
Throughout the war in Gaza, regional power Saudi Arabia has repeatedly said that establishing ties with Israel was conditional on the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
Israel‘s Saar said it was “not constructive” for other states to condition normalization on Palestinian statehood.
“Our view is that a Palestinian state will threaten the security of the State of Israel,” he said.
In May, Reuters reported that Israel and Syria‘s new Islamist rulers had established direct contact and held face-to-face meetings aimed at de-escalating tensions and preventing renewed conflict along their shared border.
The same month, US President Donald Trump announced the US would lift sanctions on Syria and met Syria‘s new president, urging him to normalize ties with Israel.
The post Israel Eyes Ties With Syria and Lebanon After Iran War first appeared on Algemeiner.com.