|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Welcome to The Geopolity’s What We’re Watching (3W), our daily look at the interconnected worlds of Geopolitics, Economics and Energy. Curated from the world’s leading sources of information, our analysis and commentary is designed to help you make sense of the events driving the major developments in the world.
One of the key geopolitical insights that we at 3W have been stressing is that the US – Israel Alliance lacks any kind of sincerity in the negotiations it enters. All the Alliance’s negotiations are part of a plan to achieve its ambition of domination in the Middle East. And this is proven every time it says it reached an agreement, because it will violate the agreement’s conditions within days, if not hours or minutes. In other words, the Alliance only enters negotiations in order to trap those who resist its ambitions.
On Sunday, Israel again confirmed this 3W analysis by attacking Beirut, the capital of Lebanon – just three days after signing a ceasefire agreement with the Lebanese government. Two air strikes on two apartment buildings killed two people and injured at least 20, including women and children, writes the BBC. Those who read our original 3W analysis of this agreement will not have been surprised.
One of the key geopolitical insights that we at 3W have been stressing is that the US – Israel Alliance lacks any kind of sincerity in the negotiations it enters
At 3W we also note that the Israeli strike on Beirut effectively confirmed our analysis of the supposed “spat” between Trump and Netanyahu last week. The official narrative was that Trump got angry at Netanyahu over Israel’s continued war on Lebanon, as this threatens to derail the US negotiations with Iran. It was said that Trump had forced Netanyahu to “stand down” on Lebanon for that reason. We said at the time that even if we believe Trump hates Netanyahu, this does not change the fact that in terms of actual policy they are aligned – because Israel forces the US to align. For that reason we said the official narrative was most likely propaganda, designed to strengthen the US position in the negotiations with Iran, providing it with “plausible deniability”. Israel’s killing of Lebanese soldiers on Saturday, and army general no less, and its attack on Beirut on Sunday, make clear we were correct. The reality remains that the US – Israel Alliance remains fully committed to the (Israeli) plan to change Israel’s borders south, east and north, through military occupation first, depopulation second, then colonization, followed by annexation. Iran is a target for the Alliance because it has not submitted to the Alliance and does not blindly agree and support the Alliance’s plan.
However, on Sunday, Iran struck Israel in retaliation for its attacks on Beirut. The Guardian writes that after the strike, US president Donald Trump called Israeli prime minister Bejamin Netanyahu urging him “not to strike back”, adding he was “not happy about it” and that it would “not help” negotiations with Tehran. But Israel did strike Iran, and the “strikes and counter-strikes” continued into Monday. The analysis by The Associated Press is that this confirms the official narrative that Trump and Netanyahu are at odds. But in our 3W view, this development either confirms, again, our assessment that any talk about distance between Trump and Netanyahu is part of a political ploy to trap Iran into a deal with the US, or it confirms our assessment that Israel is the dominant party in the US – Israel Alliance. Or both.
Later on Monday both Israel and Iran then announced they would refrain from striking eachother, writes the BBC.
To understand this development, in the 3W view it needs to be looked at from two angles: the US – Israel Alliance angle and the Iranian angle.
US intelligence agencies have warned that Israeli espionage efforts inside the US are getting out of hand and need to reigned in
First the US – Israel Alliance angle. We have noted before that US president is much more concerned about the global economic fallout of the Alliance War on Iran than is Israeli prime minister Netanyahu. At the end of April, for example, we wrote, “Israel Pushes the US to Burn the Global Economy Down”. Ever since, whenever the US announces progress in its negotiations with Iran, Israel escalates its war on Lebanon, in the knowledge that this infuriates Iran and therefore disrupts momentum in the negotiations. It appears that this is also behind Israel’s decision to attack Beirut on Sunday, as US president Trump said to the BBC on Monday that he had called Netanyahu to ask him to stop the Israeli attacks on Iran, because “We’re very close to signing a very powerful deal, a very good deal.” With Iran that is. This is nothing short of a repeat of what Israel did after Trump announced, late May, that the US and Iran were “very close” to a deal. A day later 3W noted that Israel then stepped up its offensive in Lebanon. We repeat, therefore, that everything the US does diplomatically is either part of a political ploy agreed with Israel to trap Iran into a deal with the US, or it will be blocked by Israel if it is not aligned with its plans for the Middle East.
We repeat, therefore, that everything the US does diplomatically is either part of a political ploy agreed with Israel to trap Iran into a deal with the US, or it will be blocked by Israel if it is not aligned with its plans for the Middle East
Then second, the Iranian angle. In this regard, a recent analysis of Iran’s new grand strategy by Narges Bajoghli and Vali Nasr is highly insightful. Writing in Foreign Affairs, they say that the war has given rise to a new Iran. The country has retained its military and industrial capacity, significantly improved management of society, increased support for the ruling elites, and enhanced its messaging to international audiences. These successes have given Iran the confidence to adopt a new Grand Strategy, Bajoghli and Nasr say. Under this strategy, Iran has given up on trying to appease the US through compromising on its interests and rights. Instead, Iran will now proactively protect its interests. The establishment of control over the Strait of Hormuz, and the insistence that it will maintain this control, is an example of this. Through this control, namely, Iran can ensure a steady inflow of foreign currency, but it also gives the country leverage with other countries in negotiations, which it can use to secure its interests more broadly. The proactive nature of Iran’s new Grand Strategy is also reflected in how it views its strategic allies across the Middle East region. Based on the belief that during the recent war Hezbollah proved its value to Iran’s interests, Iran is now determined to use its allies more pro-actively, and to protect them more proactively. In its external messaging Iran now focuses less on the Islamic revolution, and more on standing up against colonialism and injustice, messages that resonate more with a wider audience. This Grand Strategy is behind Iran’s response to Israel’s attacks on Beirut on Sunday. While previously Iran might have “let it go” without responding, such as happened during the 12-day war in 2025, Iran now has drawn a clear red line regarding its regional allies that it will not allow anyone to cross without retaliating.
3W notes that this confident, pro-active strategy means that the US will not be able to achieve a negotiated deal with Iran on US terms. The US will have to compromise significantly. Therefore, every time Trump says Iran will give up its nuclear program comprehensively, without the US having to make a major concession, in the 3W view this means he is lying.
This leaves the US – Israel Alliance War on Iran completely stuck, as Israel does not want any deal, the US does not want to make compromises, and Iran does not want to surrender. A continuation of the current, low intensity military conflict is therefore the most likely pathway forward – which of course with disastrous consequences for the global economy, as 3W has mentioned many times before.
A continuation of the current, low intensity military conflict is therefore the most likely pathway forward – which of course with disastrous consequences for the global economy
The only “off ramp” we at 3W see at this moment is a conflict within the US – Israel Alliance, a possibility we first discussed some two weeks ago in “Iran is Turning into the End for the US–Israel ‘Special Relationship’ “. In this regard, the US Congress is pushing legislation that would formally tie the US and Israeli militaries together, in a manner that could not be opposed by any US president, writes The Guardian. The proposed rules would commit the US to bilateral research and development, co-production of weapons, joint ventures, licensing agreements and integration of the US and Israeli weapons industries. Essentially, it would make Israel part of the US military and military-industrial complex. Analysts note that making the United States increasingly dependent on Israeli technology – in AI, quantum computing, high-powered lasers, cyberwarfare, anti-drone systems, and other advanced fields – while also transferring America’s most sophisticated technologies to Israeli governments, Israel is designing a structure that would harness American power for the aims of its Zionist project. In the 3W view, formalizing what has already happened on the ground over the past two and a half years.
But, at 3W we also note that the more Israel pushes in this direction, the stronger the countercurrent will be from people among the US elites whose worldview is not defined by Zionism. The New York Times writes that US intelligence agencies have warned that Israeli espionage efforts inside the US are getting out of hand and need to reigned in. A variety of US intelligence agencies have recently released reports that state Israel is actively spying on US officials. The fact that this information was leaked to the press, while it was denied by Trump administration officials and the Israeli embassy in the US, in our 3W view indicate that elements of US elite circles are trying to create a US public opinion against Israel, in order to break the current special relation and return to a more “normal” relation between the two country, in which Israel is subordinate to the much more powerful US.