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.
In our previous 3W analysis, we stated that Israel has been maneuvering to ensure the US continues the War on Iran, while the US has been maneuvering to bring Saudi Arabia actively into this war.
We also said the meeting between Trump and Netanyahu on Tuesday would be used by Israel to ensure the key US policy makers continue to follow the Israeli plans when it comes to Iran, and that these key US policy makers will probably fall into this trap.
We say “trap” on purpose, because as 3W previously explained, the stated aims of the US – Israel Alliance War on Iran either do not further US geopolitical interests, or could much more easily be achieved via other means. For Israel, however, “hot war” on Iran is a stated strategic interest. The current Israeli strategy aims to occupy and annex the territories immediately surrounding it (Gaza, West Bank, Southern Lebanon, Golan Heights), formally subject the Arab states to Israel regional hegemony via the Abraham Accords, and weaken through war its “second ring” neighbours Iran and Turkey to prevent them from ever threatening Israel’s regional hegemonic ambitions.
As to what has happened since.
Shortly before the meeting with Israeli prime minister Netanyahu, US president Trump made clear that he was aware that Netanyahu would be pushing him to keep the War on Iran going. In an interview on Tuesday morning Trump downplayed reports that Netanyahu would present new information about an uptick in activity at Pickaxe Mountain, a suspected Iranian nuclear site, writes The New York Times. “I don’t need Bibi to tell me that,” Trump said. “Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved.” However, Trump essentially made clear he was already on board with the Israeli proposal. “We took out their nuclear sites, and we’ll have to take out Pickaxe if we don’t make a deal.”
Then, during his meeting with Trump, Netanyahu expressed skepticism about the chance of a deal with Iran and discussed increasing economic pressure on Iran “through kinetic and non-kinetic means”, writes Axios. Israel is pushing the narrative that the Iranian economy is close to collapse, and for that reason the US should stay the current course of blockading and striking Iran, as it is winning. (Axios adds that Netanyahu also discussed Syria with Trump, using maps that on the Israel view make clear that turkey occupies much more Syrian territory than Israel does, in an attempt to make Trump accept a continued Israel presence in Syria. Anadolu Ajensi adds that Israeli forces shelled the southern countryside of Syria’s Quneitra province on Thursday, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency).
Several hours after the sitdown, Iran launched a missile attack on an American base in Jordan, for the first time since Trump paused US strikes in Iran last Friday. In response, US president Trump told Fox News on Wednesday morning that the US will now “beat the f—ing s— out of them”, writes The Hill.
3W notes this event requires a pause for reflection. If Iran knew, as everyone else does, that Israel is pushing for a restart of war, why did it give the US an excuse to do so by attacking Jordan? In the 3W view, this is because Iran has realized – correctly in our view – that this war will not be settled by honest negotiations. The US clearly used the MOU to rearm and regroup and never had an intention of living up to its commitments as part of the signed deal. The US, based on Israeli urgings, continues to operate from the standpoint that it can inflict a defeat upon Iran, and in that way will achieve all its aims without having to make any concessions or agree any compromises. In this case, if Iran only responds to US attacks on its soil, Iran will effectively hand part of “escalation dominance” to the US. The US can then escalate when and where it wants, without worrying too much about consequences, because it knows it can de-escalate just by halting its attacks. It therefore makes sense for Iran to move to a strategy where it attacks its targets whenever it feels the time is right to do so, such that the US loses the ability to determine when the war will end. Or in other words, to ensure the US has to think twice before it attacks, because it can no longer be certain that its halting of attacks will indeed end the fighting. At 3W we believe this strategic reasoning is probably behind Iran’s attacks on Jordan on Tuesday evening. Iran has chosen to continue its strategy of systematically destroying the US military resources in the Middle East, in an attempt to physically move the US further away from its borders, whereby the ability of the US to threaten Iran is reduced.
Most likely Iran also understood that attacking Jordan on Tuesday would trigger a US response, on Wednesday itself the US did indeed respond. American forces launched a two-hour “heavy” round of strikes on Wednesday night, their first direct attack on the Islamic republic in almost a week, writes The Financial Times.
Also on Wednesday, Saudi Arabia joined the US in striking multiple logistics and weapons sites used by Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, writes The Associated Press. Saudi Arabia justified its entry into the war by pointing to the attacks on its energy infrastructure from the direction of Iraq, earlier in the week. The Saudi defense minister Khalid bin Salman also met with US president Trump and vice president JD Vance on Wednesday, in what appeared to be an effort to align with the US on fighting against the Iran-aligned Houthi’s in Yemen and militias in Iraq.
Saudi government statements appeared keen to portray the strikes as a limited reaction to specific attacks, rather than an entry into the wider US and Israeli war with Iran, writes The New York Times. “The kingdom confirms that it is not seeking escalation but that it will respond to any aggression,” said a Saudi defense ministry spokesman.
As if this was not enough escalation already, also on Wednesday drones attacked two gas vessels at Egypt’s Mediterranean port of Damietta, writes Reuters. Though no entity took responsibility for the attack, the vessels are US-owned gas storage tankers, which led to speculation it could indicate a further horizontal escalation of the US – Israel Alliance War on Iran.
3W notes that the attack on Egypt can be said to be aligned with the Iranian strategy to push the US out of the region. But, it can also be said it is aligned with the Israeli strategy to use war to cement an Israeli hegemonic position across the Middle East. This latter insight leads to thought that perhaps the attack on Saudi Arabia from the territory of Iraq, may not have been inspired by Iran at all, but rather a trick by the US – Israel Alliance to bring Saudi Arabia into the war. After all, it is well known that Israel operates secret bases on Iraqi territory. And indeed, the government of Iraq denies that the attacks on Saudi Arabia originated from its territory, writes Anadolu Ajensi.
This, in turn, brings back into focus 3W’s earlier speculation, which was that the US – Israel Alliance could be aiming for Arab soldiers to launch a ground operation against Iran. For this, Saudi Arabia in particular needs to be given the idea that it cannot avoid getting attacked, and that therefore its best course of action is to join the fight with the US – on the direction of Israel…
In conclusion, at 3W we would caution against rushing into conclusions regarding the Egypt event at this stage, but we would also not rule out that a major escalation is being prepared by the US – Israel Alliance. Since it chooses war over diplomacy, then this really is its only option left.