Uncategorized
Israel and US go for regime change in Iran, with leaders few trust
TEL AVIV, Israel — We were woken just after 8 a.m. by a siren, followed within minutes by the notification that there were in fact no incoming missiles. It appeared the government had decided to use the alert system as a kind of national alarm clock, to let the country know that the war had begun. For the second time in nine months, Israel had attacked Iran. This time it was in coordination with the United States.
Within the hour we had already been sent to the shelter by an actual missile alert. By midday, we would make that trip five times. The country, as far as one can tell from the stairwells and the WhatsApp groups, is stoic. Irritated, tired, but stoic. This is absurd, people say, but they lace up their shoes and head downstairs anyway. Or to the reinforced safe rooms that the lucky few have.
The arguments for this round of conflict are not, on the surface, overwhelming. After the 12-day war in June, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs had been set back for many years, that the major threat to Israel’s existence had been removed. President Donald Trump, after American B-2 bombers joined on the final day, spoke repeatedly of the nuclear threat being “obliterated” at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. He bristled at intelligence assessments suggesting otherwise.
There has been little public evidence that Iran rebuilt that threat in the interim. Netanyahu said around midday Saturday in a recorded radio address that Iran’s new capabilities were being placed underground. Trump, meanwhile, demanded that Iran forswear nuclear weapons; but Tehran has long said it does not seek them, even as it enriched uranium to levels with no civilian justification. No one believes them. But they have been saying it.
In the shelter, I had time to contemplate all this with the same cast of neighbors I got to know rather well in June.
The divorced lawyer and her boyfriend. The mathematics divorcee with her enormous dog, which takes up the space of two folding chairs. The sweet elderly couple who sit holding hands, as if the room were a train platform and they might be separated. The religious French family from upstairs preparing to celebrate a son’s 18th birthday; the mother, improbably, in her finest dress at 9 in the morning. Everyone bleary-eyed. Everyone attempting humor. Some trepidation, but not much.
At one point a commotion erupted. Someone had noticed that a shop in the building had installed an air-conditioning unit in such a way that it partially blocked the emergency exit from the underground shelter. The prospect of being herded underground because of missiles while potentially trapped was not exactly welcome. My wife calmly announced she would deal with the management company first thing Sunday morning. I know her. She will.
It is in rooms like that that the big questions feel both distant and unavoidable. Why now? If the programs were truly crippled in June, what has changed? One possible answer lies not in centrifuges but in politics.
Trump had boxed himself in last month when he told Iranian protesters that “help is on its way.” Thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, took him at his word and were killed by the regime’s goons. Trump took heat for having encouraged them and then done nothing. He looked ridiculous, and — to paraphrase The Godfather — a man in his position cannot afford to look ridiculous.
In the interim, the U.S. steadily built up an armada in the region. Ships and planes accumulated in a way that was slow, but deliberate and ultimately overwhelming. It began to look like the kind of force that was not likely to go unused.
The more reasonable argument for assuming the risks of war — casualties, disruption in the oil markets, escalation and so on — is regime change. That idea has a grim history. It rarely works as intended. It is unpredictable, destabilizing, morally fraught. The record in the Middle East is not encouraging. The legal right to do it is debatable at best.
But there are exceptions, and the Islamic Republic, in its 47 years, has made a compelling case for being one.
Its internal repression is ferocious. Protesters are shot or imprisoned in numbers that make gradual reform a fantasy. Short of a palace coup, the Iranian people have little chance of dislodging their rulers on their own.
Moreover, Iran has destabilized the region for decades through proxy militias trying to spread jihadism: Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Hezbollah helped prop up Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack ignited a war that left tens of thousands dead in Gaza and over a thousand murdered in Israel. Not every evil in the region can be laid at Iran’s door, but a significant share can, and much of it has victimized fellow Muslims.
There is a wide consensus in Israel that the Iranian regime is a menace. Many Israelis believe that if it fell, it would be good for Israel and good for the Iranian people. They harbor a romantic notion that a democratic Iran would become a partner, even an ally, and that ordinary Iranians would thank Israel for helping to bring about that outcome. Whether that is naive is another matter, but the distinction between regime and people is real in the Israeli mind.
And in what was perhaps the only surprise of the day — for the attack itself was widely telegraphed — Trump set regime change as the true aim of the operation in his comments announcing the strikes. In his characteristic rambling, self-congratulatory style, he urged Iranians to take over their government — and catalogued the crimes of the regime, going all the way back to the 1979-80 hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy in Tehran.
This from a man whose National Security Strategy, released in December, downplayed democracy promotion, and who has shown little affection for liberal norms at home or abroad. Many assumed he wanted only some agreement he could spin as a win — yet he instead seems intent on transforming Iran.
Might regime change actually work? Without a ground invasion — which is neither contemplated nor remotely plausible — the odds seem low. Authoritarian systems are designed precisely to absorb shocks. Enough of the regime would have to be symbolically and practically shattered — key figures eliminated, command centers wrecked, the aura of invulnerability broken — that mass protests resume at a scale the authorities cannot contain.
The calculation appears to be that sustained external pressure, combined with visible regime weakness, could tip internal dynamics. A military already stretched by external attack might find itself unable, or unwilling, to suppress millions in the streets. What follows would not be a popular revolution in the romantic sense but something closer to a palace coup: factions within the system deciding survival requires abandoning the clerical leadership.
Trump’s rhetoric suggested precisely this. His call for the Revolutionary Guard to stand down, coupled with promises of amnesty, is an attempt to split the regime from within, to persuade those with guns that their future lies in defecting rather than fighting. It could work — because that is how hated the regime actually is.
It would have been better for any such action to have gotten the green light from the United Nations Security Council. But — even beyond Trump’s disrespect for the organization — that body is paralyzed by the veto power of Russia, Iran’s sometimes ally.
Moreover, all of this would be easier to deal with if the leaderships in Israel and the U.S. were trusted at anywhere near a normal level. But we are dealing with Trump and Netanyahu.
Trump, it need hardly even be said, has made dishonesty a kind of performance art. He is the most determined dissembler to ever hold the American presidency, as far as I can tell. It has become something of a joke, in America and across the world. In a moment like this, it is not a joke. So in a crisis that could reshape the region, there is no reliable way to know if his claims are true.
Something even worse can be said of Netanyahu, who is on trial for bribery and trailing badly in the polls ahead of elections that must be held by October and could come sooner. It is axiomatic for many Israelis that he would do anything to cling to power, including starting another war.
So these two men, each viewed by large portions of their publics as self-interested and manipulative, now preside over a conflict that could be ruinous.
And yet there is another astonishing layer. Trump, who has damaged the standing of the U.S., abandoned Ukraine, expressed admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin and rattled NATO with talk of seizing Greenland from Denmark, may be on the verge of a historic achievement. If the Iranian regime were to fall with American assistance, it would rank among the most consequential geopolitical events of the past half-century, perhaps second only to the collapse of Soviet communism. Oddly, I am old enough to have witnessed that as well, as a correspondent for the Associated Press.
Back in the shelter, there is a massive improvement relative to June: Wi-Fi has been installed, thanks to my tireless wife. The dog is still panting, the elderly couple still holds hands, the air-conditioning unit still blocks the exit, the French mother is now checking her phone between sirens.
It is possible to feel two contradictory things at once. This might be a reckless, perhaps even insane action launched by unworthy leaders. And it might, just possibly, change everything for the better.
The post Israel and US go for regime change in Iran, with leaders few trust appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
UK Approves US Use of British Bases to Strike Iran Missile Sites Targeting Ships
People use their cameras as a USAF B-1 bomber approaches to land at RAF Fairford airbase, used by United States Air Force (USAF) personnel, amid the US–Israeli conflict with Iran, in Fairford, Gloucestershire, Britain, March 17, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Toby Melville
The British government gave authorization on Friday for the US to use military bases in Britain to carry out strikes on Iranian missile sites that are attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
British ministers met on Friday to discuss the war with Iran and Iran‘s blocking of the Strait of Hormuz, according to a Downing Street statement.
“They confirmed that the agreement for the US to use UK bases in the collective self-defence of the region includes US defensive operations to degrade the missile sites and capabilities being used to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in a post on X that Starmer was “putting British lives in danger by allowing UK bases to be used for aggression against Iran,” adding “Iran will exercise its right to self-defense.”
Starmer said this week Britain would not be drawn into a war over Iran. He initially rejected a US request to use British bases for the strikes on Iran, saying he needed to be satisfied that any military action was legal.
But the prime minister modified his stance after Iran conducted strikes on British allies across the Middle East, saying that the United States could use RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia, a joint US-UK base in the Indian Ocean.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly attacked Starmer since the conflict started, complaining he was not doing enough to help him.
On Monday, Trump said there were “some countries that greatly disappointed me” before he singled out Britain, which he said had once been considered “the Rolls-Royce of allies.”
The Downing Street statement on Friday called for “urgent de-escalation and a swift resolution to the war.”
Opinion polls in Britain suggest widespread skepticism about the war, with 59% of those surveyed by YouGov saying that they were opposed to the US-Israeli attacks.
Uncategorized
French Appeals Court Rules Vandalism of Memorial for Murdered Jew Not Antisemitic
A crowd gathers at the Jardin Ilan Halimi in Paris on Feb. 14, 2021, to commemorate the 15th anniversary of Halimi’s kidnapping and murder. Photo: Reuters/Xose Bouzas/Hans Lucas
A French appeals court has acquitted Tunisian twin brothers of antisemitism charges after they cut down an olive tree planted to honor Ilan Halimi, a young French Jewish man tortured to death two decades ago, in what appears to be yet another instance of France’s legal system brushing aside antisemitism as a potential motive for crime.
On Wednesday, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld the decision from the initial trial in October to dismiss the charge that the crime was motivated by antisemitism, which would have increased the punishments for the two brothers. The judges found no evidence that the assailants knew of Halimi’s identity or history or acted with the intent to target his memory because of his religious affiliation.
The court’s ruling this week upheld the original convictions, sentencing both men to eight months in prison — one with a suspended sentence, meaning he will only serve time if he reoffends or violates certain conditions, and who has since been deported to Tunisia. Both men are also barred from entering France for five years.
The two 19-year-old undocumented men with prior convictions for theft and violence were arrested in August for vandalizing Halimi’s memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine.
During the initial trial in Bobigny, in northeastern France, the brothers faced charges of “aggravated destruction of property” and “desecration of a monument dedicated to the memory of the dead on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion,” offenses carrying sentences of up to two years in prison.
The court acquitted them of committing an antisemitic hate crime, ruling that they were unaware they had desecrated Halimi’s memorial.
Even though they admitted to being in the garden on the night of the incident, the brothers denied cutting down the tree and claimed they were unaware of Halimi’s story, leading the court to rule that the act was not antisemitic in nature.
Halimi was abducted, held captive, and tortured in January 2006 by a gang of about 20 people in a low-income housing estate in the Paris suburb of Bagneux.
Three weeks later, Halimi was found in Essonne, south of Paris, naked, gagged, and handcuffed, with clear signs of torture and burns. The 23-year-old died on the way to the hospital.
In 2011, an olive tree was planted in Halimi’s memory. Last year, in one of the latest attacks on his memory, the memorial in the northern Paris suburb of Épinay-sur-Seine was found felled — probably with a chainsaw.
Since the attack, French authorities have been working to replant olive trees to honor Halimi’s memory.
This latest case is by no means the first in France to raise alarm bells among the Jewish community, as courts have repeatedly overturned or reduced sentences for individuals accused of antisemitic crimes, fueling public outrage over what many see as excessive leniency.
In February, a French court tossed out antisemitic-motivated charges against a 55-year-old man convicted of murdering his 89-year-old Jewish neighbor in 2022.
According to French media, the magistrate of the public prosecutor’s office refused to consider the defendant’s prior antisemitic behavior, including online posts spreading hateful content and promoting conspiracy theories about Jews and Israelis, arguing that it was not directly related to the incident itself.
In May 2022, Rachid Kheniche threw his neighbor, René Hadjadj, from the 17th floor of his building, an act to which he later admitted.
At the time, Kheniche told investigators that while having a discussion, he tried to strangle Hadjadj without realizing what he was doing, as he was experiencing a paranoid episode caused by prior drug use.
After several psychiatric evaluations, the court concluded that the defendant was mentally impaired at the time of the crime, reducing his criminal responsibility and lowering the maximum sentence for murder to 20 years.
Kheniche was ultimately sentenced to 18 years in prison and six years of “socio-judicial monitoring.”
Last year, the public prosecutor’s office in Nanterre, just west of Paris, appealed a criminal court ruling that cleared a nanny of antisemitism-aggravated charges after she poisoned the food and drinks of the Jewish family she worked for.
Residing illegally in France, the nanny had worked as a live-in caregiver for the family and their three children — aged two, five, and seven — since November 2023.
The 42-year-old Algerian woman was sentenced to two and a half years in prison for “administering a harmful substance that caused incapacitation for more than eight days.”
Even though the nanny initially denied the charges against her, she later confessed to police that she had poured a soapy lotion into the family’’ food as a warning because “they were disrespecting her.”
“They have money and power, so I should never have worked for a Jewish woman — it only brought me trouble,” the nanny told the police. “I knew I could hurt them, but not enough to kill them.”
The French court declined to uphold any antisemitism charges against the defendant, noting that her incriminating statements were made several weeks after the incident and recorded by a police officer without a lawyer present
In another shocking case last year, a local court in France dramatically reduced the sentence of one of the two teenagers convicted of the brutal gang rape of a 12-year-old Jewish girl, citing his “need to prepare for future reintegration.”
More than a year after the attack, the Versailles Court of Appeal retried one of the convicted boys — the only one to challenge his sentence — behind closed doors, ultimately reducing his term from nine to seven years and imposing an educational measure.
Uncategorized
US Sending Marines and Amphibious Assault Ship to Middle East, Officials Say
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth holds a briefing with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine, amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, US, March 19, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Evan Vucci
The US military is deploying thousands more Marines to the Middle East, officials told Reuters on Friday, as President Donald Trump accused NATO allies of cowardice over their reluctance to send forces to help open the Strait of Hormuz.
The narrow waterway, conduit for around a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies, has been effectively closed to most shipping since the United States and Israel launched the war against Iran almost three weeks ago.
Vital energy infrastructure in both Iran and neighboring Gulf states has also been attacked, and oil prices have jumped about 50% since the start of the war on Feb. 28, threatening a global economic shock.
More than 2,000 people have been killed, mostly in Iran and Lebanon, while Americans, facing sharply higher prices, appear increasingly concerned at signs the war could expand further.
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll showed almost two-thirds of Americans believe Trump will order troops into a large-scale ground war, with only 7% supporting such a move.
On Friday, Israel’s military said it carried out two large waves of air strikes on Tehran and central Iran, targeting weapons production facilities and sites storing ballistic missile launchers and components. Israel faced multiple waves of missile attacks from Iran, according to the Israeli military, triggering air raid sirens in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, where explosions from interceptions were heard.
Fragments from an Iranian missile struck Jerusalem on Friday, landing just outside the Old City, which is sacred to Christians, Jews, and Muslims, according to a photograph released by the police. There were no reports of injuries or casualties.
Kuwait’s state oil firm said its Mina Al-Ahmadi refinery had suffered multiple drone attacks that set some units alight, the latest energy facility hit by Iran in recent days.
TROOPS DEPLOY
Three US officials told Reuters that 2,500 Marines, along with the USS Boxer, an amphibious assault ship, and accompanying warships would deploy to the region, although they did not say what their role would be.
Two officials said there had been no decision on whether to send troops into Iran itself. Sources have earlier told Reuters that possible targets could include Iran‘s coast or Kharg Island oil export hub.
Trump said the United States was close to reaching its goals in the war, which include degrading Iran‘s military and preventing it from developing a nuclear weapon, and may wind down its military effort.
Trump also called US allies “cowards” for declining to help open the Strait of Hormuz while fighting continued in a conflict they were not consulted about beforehand.
Several allies have pledged to join “appropriate efforts” to ensure safe passage through the strait, but Germany and France have both said fighting must stop first. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he would speak to Trump this weekend.
The UK government authorized the US to use its bases in Britain to strike Iranian missile sites that are targeting ships in the strait.
END OF RAMADAN AND PERSIAN NEW YEAR
As Muslims around the region tried to celebrate Eid al-Fitr, which ends the fasting month of Ramadan, and Iranians marked Nowruz, the Persian New Year, new Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued a message of defiance.
Khamenei, who has not been seen in public since the Israeli attack that killed his father and predecessor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on the war’s first day, said Iranians had responded with unity and resistance and “dealt a disorienting blow to the enemy.”
US and Israeli officials say Iran can still hit back, even though weeks of bombing have severely weakened the government and depleted its stock of missiles and drones.
Iran‘s Revolutionary Guards said they had attacked Haifa and Tel Aviv with multi-warhead missiles and used drones to attack weapons stocks at US bases, including Sheikh Isa air base in Bahrain. No comment was immediately available from US forces.
The semi-official Iranian news agency Tasnim said intelligence minister Esmail Ahmadi was killed, the latest of dozens of leading figures assassinated by Israel.
“We have nobody to talk to,” Trump said. “And you know what? We like it that way.”
FUEL PRICES CLIMB AHEAD OF US ELECTIONS
Soaring US diesel and gasoline prices may hurt Trump’s core political support as his Republicans prepare to defend slim majorities in November’s congressional elections.
On Friday, the benchmark price of Brent crude oil was up slightly, near $110, after surging the day before on growing fears that the largest ever disruption to world energy supplies would trigger a global economic shock.
Flows of crude and petroleum have dropped by about 12 million barrels per day – roughly 12% of global demand – due to output cuts and export halts by Gulf producers.
Those barrels cannot easily be replaced by the industries that rely on them, and will be felt for months or even years.
A major Qatari gas field was disrupted by an Iranian strike, and Iraq on Friday declared force majeure on all oilfields developed by foreign oil companies.