The Laurel and Hardy negotiating team of Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, coupled with Trump’s appalling ignorance of world affairs and megalomania, seem set to push the U.S. into yet another debacle in the Middle East, one the Congress has not approved, and the public does not want.
The demands imposed on Iran by the Trump White House are no more acceptable to the regime in Tehran than those imposed on Hamas in Gaza under Trump’s sham peace plan.
Trump’s demand that Iran shut down its nuclear program and give up its missile capabilities in return for no new sanctions is as tone deaf as calling on Hamas to disarm in Gaza.
But since we have long dispensed with diplomats, who are linguistically, politically and culturally literate, who can step into the shoes of their adversaries, we are being led to another war in the Middle East by our newest coterie of buffoons.
The U.S. and Israel foolishly believe they can bomb their way to decapitating the Iranian government and installing a client regime. That this non-reality-based belief system failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya eludes them.
The promise of no new sanctions will not incentivize Iran to broker an agreement. Iran is already crippled by onerous sanctions that have gutted its economy.
This will do nothing to break the economic stranglehold.
Iran will not give up its nuclear program, which has the potential to be weaponized, or its ballistic missile program, which Israel said it would target in an air attack.
Israel’s reputed nuclear arsenal of some 300 warheads is a powerful incentive for Iran to retain the capacity to build a nuclear arsenal of its own. Iran, like Hamas, is never going to render itself defenseless against those seeking its annihilation.
An aerial attack on Iran will not be like the 12-day assault last June against Iran’s nuclear facilities and state and security facilities.
Then Iran calibrated its response with symbolic strikes on Al Udeid air base in Qatar in the hopes that it would not lead to a wider, protracted conflict.
If an aerial assault is launched, Iran will have nothing to lose. It will understand that appeasing its adversaries is impossible.
Iran is not Iraq. Iran is not Afghanistan. Iran is not Lebanon. Iran is not Libya. Iran is not Syria. Iran is not Yemen.
Iran is the seventeenth largest country in the world, with a land mass equivalent to the size of Western Europe. It has a population of almost 90 million — 10 times greater than Israel — and its military resources, as well as alliances with China and Russia, make it a formidable opponent.
The Strait of Hormuz and the Musandam Peninsula on Dec. 6, 2018. (MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA GSFC / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)
Despite Iran’s relative military weakness, when set against the combined forces of the U.S. and Israel, it can inflict a lot of damage. It will do this as swiftly as possible.
Hundreds of American troops will likely be killed. Iran will certainly shut down the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil chokepoint that facilitates the passage of 20 percent of the world’s oil supply.
This will double or triple the price of oil and devastate the global economy. It will target oil installations along with U.S. ships and military bases in the region.
Mounting losses and a huge spike in oil prices will provide the fodder for Trump, and his vile counterpart in Israel, to ignite a sustained regional war.
This is the cost of being governed by imbeciles. God help us.
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He is the host of show “The Chris Hedges Report.”
Dr. Muhammad Al-Hindi, Deputy Secretary-General of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, told Al Jazeera Mubasher that with “every door closed,” Palestinians have only steadfastness and resistance left, dismissing Trump’s ceasefire framework and the so-called Board of Peace as political theater that grants “sovereignty for President Trump, security for Israel,” while sidelining Palestinian representation. He accused Israel and the U.S. of blocking the reconstruction of Gaza as a form of “extortion,” and rejected calls for disarmament as an “attempt at deception” that would only invite further displacement—citing the occupied West Bank as an example. Al-Hindi added that the resistance does not trust Washington and entered negotiations only to stop bloodshed. He warned that Israel is pushing for wider regional war, including with Iran, to entrench its dominance, adding that Palestinians have been, “resisting for a century, before Iran, before any “axis”—and they will continue.”
Modi’s Israel visit strengthens military and tech ties, offering Netanyahu political cover amid Gaza genocide and regional tensions.
Key Takeaways
Modi’s two-day visit to Israel centers on defense, technology, and economic cooperation while Gaza remains under devastating assault.
The Knesset address functioned as a high-visibility endorsement of Israel during mounting genocide allegations.
India is one of Israel’s most important defense and trade partners, with bilateral trade reaching $3.62 billion in 2025.
Palestinian solidarity voices and Indian opposition figures condemned the visit as legitimizing Netanyahu’s wartime policies.
The trip carries broader geopolitical implications, intersecting with US-Iran tensions and emerging regional corridors.
The Optics
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in Israel to a warm public embrace from Benjamin Netanyahu, a carefully choreographed display underscoring the deepening alignment between New Delhi and Tel Aviv.
According to the Associated Press, the two-day visit is focused on strengthening “security, economic and technological cooperation,” including meetings with Netanyahu and President Isaac Herzog, an address to the Knesset, and the signing of multiple agreements.
India–Israel trade reached $3.62 billion in the 2025 fiscal year, reflecting the economic dimension of the partnership.
But the optics matter as much as the agreements. Modi’s speech to Israel’s parliament comes as Israel continues its genocidal war on Gaza — a campaign that has killed and wounded hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and devastated the besieged territory’s civilian infrastructure. In this context, a standing ovation in the Knesset is not merely a diplomatic ceremony; it is political messaging.
Israel’s government, facing growing international scrutiny over war crimes allegations, benefits enormously from high-profile visits by major powers. Modi’s appearance signals that Israel remains far from isolated, even as global outrage over Gaza intensifies. The Speech
In his Knesset address, Modi emphasized that India and Israel are “trusted partners” whose relationship is “vital” for trade and security. He condemned the October 7, 2023 attacks and declared that “nothing can justify terrorism,” aligning himself closely with Israeli framing of the conflict.
Reuters reported that Modi reaffirmed India’s solidarity with Israel and its “firm stance against terrorism,” while Netanyahu highlighted what he called a “tremendous alliance” between the two countries. The Israeli prime minister praised India for “standing by” Israel.
Modi referenced support for a UN-backed Gaza peace initiative and spoke of dialogue and stability. Yet notably absent was any strong public criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
The speech’s structure reflects a broader shift in Indian foreign policy. Historically, India was among the strongest supporters of Palestinian self-determination in the Global South. Diplomatic relations with Israel were only formalized in 1992. Since Modi’s rise to power in 2014, however, relations with Israel have moved from cautious pragmatism to overt strategic alignment.
The ‘Partnership’
Behind the rhetoric lies the substance: arms and technology.
India has become one of Israel’s largest defense customers. Cooperation spans missile systems, surveillance technologies, air defense, drones, and cybersecurity platforms. Analysts widely recognize that Israeli defense exports to India have surged over the past decade, embedding the relationship in concrete military infrastructure.
The current visit is expected to further expand collaboration in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, cybersecurity, and joint defense production. Netanyahu has openly described the relationship as part of a broader axis of innovation and security.
For Palestinians, this is not abstract cooperation. Israel’s military technologies are developed, refined, and field-tested in the context of occupation and repeated wars on Gaza. Surveillance systems, drone capabilities, and precision-guided weaponry are inseparable from the architecture of control imposed on Palestinians.
Domestic Criticism
Modi’s visit has drawn criticism both within India and internationally. The Communist Party of India described the trip as legitimizing Netanyahu during a genocidal assault on Gaza, framing it as a betrayal of India’s anti-colonial legacy.
The critique extends beyond partisan politics. For many observers, the visit symbolizes a shift from India’s historic support for decolonization movements toward a pragmatic alignment with militarized nationalism.
Regionally, the trip unfolds amid rising US-Iran tensions and discussions around new economic corridors linking India to Europe via the Middle East. Israel’s leadership sees India as a crucial node in this emerging architecture.
But this architecture often sidelines Palestine. Trade corridors, AI partnerships, and defense agreements are negotiated at high levels, while Palestinian self-determination is treated as a peripheral issue.
Our Strategic Assessment
Modi’s visit must be understood not as a standalone diplomatic event but as part of a broader geopolitical recalibration.
First, it provides Israel with visible diplomatic reinforcement at a moment when accusations of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and systematic targeting of civilians dominate international discourse. Each high-level visit chips away at narratives of isolation.
Second, it reflects India’s long-term strategic priorities: diversification of defense partnerships, technological advancement, and regional positioning in a multipolar world. Israel offers advanced military technology and intelligence cooperation that New Delhi values deeply.
Third, the visit exposes the fragility of “balanced” diplomacy. While India continues to voice theoretical support for a two-state solution, its material alignment tells another story. Arms transfers, joint ventures, and high-profile endorsements during wartime weigh more heavily than carefully crafted statements at the United Nations.
For Palestinians, the message is sobering. Major powers may condemn settlement expansion in principle, but the structural partnerships that empower Israel’s military and technological dominance remain intact.
Finally, the regional context cannot be ignored. With US-Iran tensions mounting, Israel is eager to solidify alliances beyond Washington. India’s embrace signals that Tel Aviv retains powerful friends in Asia, even as European public opinion shifts.
In this environment, Palestinian rights risk becoming bargaining chips in larger geopolitical calculations.
By Linus Höller, Defense News, Feb 23, 2026, 11:54 AM
Four U.S. Air Force Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker air refueling aircraft are parked at Sofia’s Vasil Levski Airport on Feb. 19, 2026. (Nikolay Doychinov/AFP via Getty Images)
BERLIN — Bulgaria’s Sofia International Airport briefly suspended civilian air operations twice over the weekend while a fleet of American military aircraft staged at the facility, fueling speculation that Washington is positioning forces ahead of a potential strike on Iran.
A Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), verified by the Bulgarian investigative outlet Obektivno.BG, showed the airport restricted non-military operations on Feb. 23 from 01:15 to 02:50 local time and again on Feb. 24 from 01:05 to 03:35. Commercial flights are not ordinarily scheduled during this time frame.
Airport authorities attributed the brief closures to routine runway repairs and explicitly denied any link to the American military presence.
Photographs circulating on social media showed at least six KC-135 Stratotanker refueling aircraft from the 6th Air Refueling Wing at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, along with C-17 and C-130 cargo planes and Boeing 747s typically used for troop transport, parked at the airport’s Terminal 1, according to Obektivno.BG.
Bulgaria’s Ministry of Defense confirmed the U.S. Air Force presence, describing the deployment as support for “training related to NATO’s enhanced vigilance activities,” with American personnel engaged solely in aircraft maintenance. Caretaker Foreign Minister Nadezhda Neynsky acknowledged her ministry had limited information and had ordered officials to collect additional details.
The Sofia staging is a small part of a much larger American military mobilization. The Bulgarian investigative journalists have tracked more than 120 U.S. Air Force aircraft that crossed the Atlantic within days, including four dozen F-16s, three squadrons of F-35A stealth fighters, and 12 F-22 Raptors.
Similar deployments, including F-22s staged at RAF Lakenheath, preceded last June’s Operation Midnight Hammer strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. The USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group is also en route to join the USS Abraham Lincoln, which is already positioned in the Arabian Sea.
U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has refused to grant Washington permission to use two critical British-controlled installations − RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, the European forward base for U.S. heavy bombers including the B-2 and B-52, and the joint US-UK facility at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean − for any potential strike on Iran, The Times of London reported.
The buildup coincides with high-stakes nuclear diplomacy. American President Donald Trump, speaking at the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace on Feb. 19, said he had given Tehran roughly ten days to reach a nuclear agreement, warning that “bad things will happen” if talks collapse. U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met an Iranian delegation in Geneva last week, with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi describing agreement on a set of “guiding principles,” though significant gaps remain between the two sides.
Bulgaria, a NATO member since 2004, maintains a Defense Cooperation Agreement with Washington signed in 2006 that permits U.S. forces to use Bulgarian military facilities.
Linus Höller is Defense News’ Europe correspondent and OSINT investigator. He reports on the arms deals, sanctions, and geopolitics shaping Europe and the world. He holds a master’s degrees in WMD nonproliferation, terrorism studies, and international relations, and works in four languages: English, German, Russian, and Spanish.
The tightening strategic embrace between New Delhi and Tel Aviv could test Pakistan’s security and diplomacy, say analysts.
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attend a welcome ceremony upon Modi’s arrival at Ben Gurion International Airport in Lod, near Tel Aviv, Israel, on February 25, 2026 [Shir Torem/Reuters]
Islamabad, Pakistan – When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stepped off the plane in Tel Aviv on Wednesday for his second visit to Israel, and the first by any Indian premier since his own landmark trip in 2017, the symbolism was unmistakable.
He was given a red-carpet welcome by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a head of government who is facing an International Criminal Court arrest warrant and prosecuting a war in Gaza that much of the world has condemned as genocide.
Yet Modi’s visit signalled not hesitation, but a wholehearted endorsement to expand India’s strategic embrace of Israel.
Days before his arrival, Netanyahu announced at a cabinet meeting what he described as a “hexagon of alliances”, a proposed regional framework placing India at its centre alongside Greece, Cyprus and unnamed Arab, African and Asian states.
Its declared purpose was to counter what he called “radical axes, both the radical Shia axis, which we have struck very hard, and the emerging radical Sunni axis”.
In a region where Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been among Israel’s most outspoken critics, and where Saudi Arabia and Pakistan formalised a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement in September 2025 – all three Sunni-majority nations – the outline of what Tel Aviv may view as this “axis” is not difficult to discern.
Against that backdrop, India’s deepening alignment with Israel directly impacts – and could reshape – Islamabad’s strategic calculus in an already volatile region, say analysts.
Expanding defence and technology ties
The India-Israel relationship has accelerated sharply since Modi’s 2017 visit. India is now Israel’s largest arms customer, and the agenda this week spans defence, artificial intelligence, quantum computing and cybersecurity.
A new classified framework is expected to open exports from Israel of previously restricted military hardware to India. Among the systems reportedly under discussion is Israel’s Iron Beam, a 100kW-class high-energy laser weapon inducted into the Israeli army in December 2025. Cooperation on Iron Dome missile defence technology transfer for local manufacturing is also under consideration.
For Masood Khan, Pakistan’s former ambassador to both the United States and the United Nations, the visit marks a decisive moment.
“News coming out suggests they are going to sign a special strategic agreement, one that could be seen as a counterpart to the agreement signed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia last year,” he said. “Israel already has such special agreements with countries like the US and Germany.”
Masood Khalid, a former Pakistani ambassador to China, pointed to this military dimension.
“We saw how Israeli drones worked in the India-Pakistan conflict against us last year,” he said, referring to India’s use of Israeli-origin platforms during the May 2025 strikes against Pakistan, when the South Asian neighbours waged an intense four-day aerial war. “Public statements from both sides speak of strengthening strategic cooperation – particularly in defence, counterterrorism, cybersecurity and AI.”
India’s defence ties with Israel are no one-way street any more. During Israel’s war on Gaza in 2024, Indian arms firms supplied rockets and explosives to Tel Aviv, an Al Jazeera investigation confirmed.
Umer Karim, an associate fellow at the Riyadh-based King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, sees the partnership as part of a wider recalibration.
“It is clear that India has entered into a strategic partnership with Israel, and at a time when both governments have been criticised for their actions, this bilateral relationship has become increasingly important for both,” he told Al Jazeera.
Netanyahu’s ‘hexagon’ and Pakistan
Netanyahu’s hexagon proposal remains undefined. He has promised an “organised presentation” at a later date.
While Israel believes it has weakened what the Israeli PM described as the “Shia axis” through its 2024-2025 campaign against Iran-aligned groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas, the “emerging radical Sunni axis” is less clearly articulated.
Analysts suggest it could refer to states and movements aligned with strands of political Islam and sharply critical of Israeli policy, including Turkiye and countries that have strengthened security ties with Riyadh and Ankara, as Pakistan has. Pakistan is also the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons – something that has long worried Israel: In the 1980s, Israel tried to recruit India for a joint military operation against a nuclear facility in Pakistan, but backed off the plan after New Delhi abstained.
Karim was convinced about Pakistan’s place in Netanyahu’s crosshairs.
“Absolutely, Pakistan is part of this so-called radical Sunni axis,” he said, arguing that Pakistan’s strategic agreement with Riyadh and its close ties with Turkiye directly affect Israel’s calculations. “In order to counter this, Israel will increase its defence cooperation and intel sharing with Delhi.”
Khalid pointed to longstanding intelligence links.
“Intelligence sharing between Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad dates back to the sixties. So their strengthened interaction in this domain should be of serious concern for us,” he said, referring to the external intelligence agencies of India and Israel.
Others urge caution. Gokhan Ereli, an Ankara-based independent Gulf researcher, argued that Pakistan is unlikely to be an explicit target within Israel’s framing.
“In this context, Pakistan is more plausibly affected indirectly, through the alignment of Israeli, Indian and Western threat narratives, than being singled out as a destabilising actor in its own right,” he told Al Jazeera.
Khan, the former ambassador, agreed.
“I don’t perceive a direct threat, but the latent animosity is there. And when Modi is in Tel Aviv, he will try to poison Netanyahu and other leaders there to think about Pakistan in a hostile way,” he said.
Muhammad Shoaib, assistant professor of international relations at Quaid-i-Azam University, echoed that assessment.
“India’s close relations with Israel are likely to negatively impact Tel Aviv’s perception and statements on Pakistan,” he said.
The Gulf balancing act
Perhaps the most complex arena for Pakistan is the Gulf. For decades, it has relied on Gulf partners for financial support, including rolled-over loans and remittances that form a crucial pillar of its economy.
Pakistan signed a mutual defence agreement with Saudi Arabia in September last year [File: Press Information Department via AP Photo]
After signing the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement with Saudi Arabia last September, discussions have intensified about Turkiye joining a similar framework. Yet the United Arab Emirates, one of Pakistan’s closest Gulf partners, signed a strategic agreement with India in January 2026.
Khalid called for deeper economic integration to underpin these ties.
“Pakistan is doing well to strengthen its bilateral ties with key Middle East countries, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Kuwait,” he said, “but apart from GCC, Pakistan also needs to promote regional cooperation, particularly with countries of Central Asia, Turkiye, Iran and Russia. Geoeconomics through greater trade and connectivity should be the basis of this regional cooperation.” The Gulf Cooperation Council consists of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Complicating matters further is Iran’s central role in current regional tensions. With Washington threatening potential military action against Iran, and Israel pressing for regime change in Tehran, Pakistan has quietly sought to ease tensions by arguing for diplomacy.
“But there are two main parties – Iran and the US – and then, most importantly, Israel, which doesn’t just limit its demands to a nuclear deal,” Khan, the former diplomat said. “It wants to expand to Iran’s missile defence capabilities and regional alliances, and that may well be a sticking point. Pakistan’s aspiration is to contribute to efforts to find a diplomatic solution.”
Strategic contest
Ultimately, Pakistan’s policymakers must assess whether ties with Saudi Arabia and Turkiye are strong enough to offset the expanding India-Israel partnership.
Modi and Netanyahu frame their security doctrines around countering what they describe as “Islamic radicalism”. New Delhi has repeatedly accused Pakistan of fomenting violence against India.
Yet Khan argued that Islamabad is not without leverage.
“We have built a firewall around us by pushing back Indian aggression in May 2025, and by strengthening our ties with the US over the last year,” he said.
According to The Washington Post, the US has shifted at least 150 military aircraft to Europe and the Mideast over the past week as it prepares for a potential attack on Iran
Twelve US F-22 Raptor fighter jets that departed the UK on Tuesday have arrived at an Israeli Air Force base in southern Israel, Ynet has reported, as the US continues its massive military buildup in the Middle East to prepare for a potential attack on Iran.
The F-22s arrived in the UK last week, part of the more than 150 US military aircraft that have shifted to Europe and the Middle East since February 17, as tracked by The Washington Post.
An Israeli official speaking to China’s Xinhua news agency about the US F-22 deployment said that the Israeli military is preparing for all possible scenarios, including an “Iranian attack or retaliatory strike.” The US defended Israel from Iranian retaliatory strikes during the 12-Day War in June 2025, though many missiles got through US air defenses.
A US F-22 Raptor fighter jet takes off from the Savannah Air National Guard Base in Georgia on January 23, 2026 (US Air National Guard photo)
The Ynet report said that the aircraft carrier USS Gerald Ford is still heading east in the Mediterranean Sea and has passed Crete. Once it arrives near Israel’s coast, it will be the second US aircraft carrier positioned in the region to prepare for an attack on Iran, joining the USS Abraham Lincoln, which has been operating in the Arabian Sea.
US officials previously told The New York Times that Ford and its three destroyer escorts are likely to be initially deployed near the coast of Israel to defend Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities and towns. The US defended Israel from Iranian counterattacks during the 12-Day War, though many Iranian missiles got through US air defenses, which included US Navy destroyers firing SM-3 missiles.
The Ford was deployed to the Mediterranean after spending several months in the Caribbean, where it supported “Operation Southern Spear,” the US military mission that involved bombing small boats and the attack on Venezuela to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. The crew of the Ford has been on an extended deployment and will break the post-Vietnam War US carrier deployment record if it remains at sea through mid-April.
Israel lobby groups have spread doctored quotes by UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights Francesca Albanese to defame her. Their desperate campaign is a testament to her work and the threat she poses by holding Israel accountable for genocide.
Francesca Albanese in Bogotá, Colombia, July 2025 (Photo: Andrea Puentes – Joel González/ Presidencia de la República de Columbia)
Mark Twain and Winston Churchill are both purported to have once said that a lie can travel half-way around the world before truth has had a chance to put its pants on.
On February 7, Francesca Albanese, the current UN Special Rapporteur for human rights in Palestine, gave a short presentation by video conference to a media forum in Doha, Qatar, organized by the Al Jazeera network. She was part of a panel, which included Fatou Bensouda, the former Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, speaking about the role of international law in addressing serious human rights violations.
In her remarks, Albanese spoke sharply about the Israeli genocide in Gaza since October 2023. In particular, she pointed out that many Western states and corporations had not only armed Israel, but had provided it with economic and diplomatic support throughout the genocide. She also criticized much of the Western media for amplifying the rhetoric of Israel’s pro-apartheid and genocidal narrative. In her presentation, Albanese went on to say that:
“…if international law has been stabbed in the heart, it is also true that never before has the global community seen the challenges that we all face. We, who do not control large amounts of financial capital, algorithms, and weapons, we now see that we, as a humanity, have a common enemy. And freedoms, the respect for fundamental freedoms, is the last peaceful avenue, the last peaceful toolbox that we have to regain our freedom.”
What happened next created a firestorm, based entirely on slander and deception for something she never said.
Albanese’s warning that humanity is facing a common enemy was clearly directed at the international system of finance capital, large tech corporations, and weapons manufacturers that had enabled the genocide in Gaza. She contrasted that system with the rights-based principles of international law, which are designed to protect and enhance our personal and collective freedoms.
The following day, a doctored version of Albanese’s presentation was posted on the YouTube site of UN Watch, a notorious private organization headquartered in Geneva whose raison d’être is to attack the United Nations’ scrutiny of the many human rights violations committed through Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory. The truncated version by UN Watch had Albanese saying: “Instead of stopping Israel, most of the world has armed, given it political excuses, political sheltering, economic and financial support.” And then the video cuts to: “we now see that we as a humanity have a common enemy.” The clear implication in the edited video was that Albanese had called Israel “the common enemy of humanity”.
This doctored UN Watch video spread like wildfire through the official politico-system of the Global North. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot called for Albanese’s immediate resignation for her “outrageous and reprehensible remarks which target not the Israeli government, whose policies can be criticized, but Israel as a people and as a nation, which is absolutely unacceptable.”
The German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul piled on, stating that: “Ms. Albanese has already made numerous missteps in the past. I condemn her recent statements on Israel. She cannot hold her position.” Antonio Tajani, the Italian Foreign Minister, said that her “behavior, statements and initiatives aren’t appropriate for the position she holds.” Similar calls were issued by the foreign ministers of Czechia and Austria.
Antonio Guterres, the United Nations Secretary General, offered no defence for Albanese, even after the revelation that her alleged comments on Israel had been doctored. During a press conference at the UN headquarters in New York on February 12, Stéphane Dujarric, the official spokesperson for the Secretary General, was asked about the call by the French Foreign Minister for Albanese’s resignation. Dujarric replied laconically that: “We don’t agree with much of what she says.”
After this initial wave of denunciations, international civil society began to fight back. Albanese, who had been voted by PassBlue as one of the United Nations’ Persons of the Year for 2024, referred to the full transcript of her presentation, and remarked: “I have never, ever, ever said ‘Israel is the common enemy of humanity.’” She pointed to the ongoing campaign of attacks on her by pro-Israeli organizations following the release of her comprehensive recent report to the United Nations on the genocide in Gaza and, in a separate report, the naming of large corporations (including Microsoft and Amazon) as potentially complicit in aiding Israel’s atrocities.
On February 13, Agnes Callamard, the Secretary General of Amnesty International, issued a public statement condemning the five European foreign ministers who had called for Albanese’s head based on “a deliberately truncated video to misrepresent and gravely misconstrue her messages.” Callamard then contrasted the vehemence of these ministers’ attacks on Albanese with their sotto voce approach to the Israeli genocide in Gaza:
“If only these minsters had been as loud and forceful in confronting a state committing genocide, unlawful occupation and apartheid as they have in attacking a UN expert. Their cowardice and refusal to hold Israel accountable stand in stark contrast to the Special Rapporteur’s unwavering commitment to speaking truth to power.”
Strong statements of support for Albanese have also been issued by Artists for Palestine (whose 100+ signatories included the actors Mark Ruffalo and Javier Bardem, the filmmaker Spike Lee, the British pop singer Annie Lennox, the Nobel Prize Laurate for Literature Annie Ernaux and the critic Judith Butler) and through an open letter signed by 150 former European ambassadors and diplomats and former United Nations officials. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights also defended Albanese, stating that it was very worried about the rise in personal attacks, threats, and misinformation directed towards UN officials and independent human rights experts.
United Nations special rapporteurs are unpaid human rights experts appointed by the Human Rights Council for six-year mandates to publicly report on human rights violations and trends worldwide. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan called this system of human rights experts, known as special procedures, the “crown jewel” of the UN human rights system. The Special Rapporteur position for human rights in occupied Palestinian territory is, arguably, the most challenging of the approximately 60 UN human rights expert mandates, given the intense attacks that the rapporteurs have recently faced from Israel, the United States, and a suite of pro-Israel organizations such as UN Watch and NGO Monitor.
UN Watch, in particular, acts as a ventriloquist for Israel’s justification of its illegal occupation and its genocide in Gaza. While presenting itself as a non-governmental human rights organization with official status at the UN, UN Watch’s primary task is to ardently defend Israel, invariably in incendiary language, through a neo-conservative and Likudnik perspective. It has consistently refused to reveal who its funders are, although independent reporting has named the American Jewish Committee and the Newton and Rochelle Becker Foundation as major sources. UN Watch’s many targets — including the most recent UN special rapporteurs on Palestine, the UN Independent Commission of Inquiry on Palestine and Israel, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, UNRWA, and countries that are critical of Israel — are frequently labelled as antisemitic individuals and organizations or, slightly more kindly, as being ferociously biased against Israel.
Albanese has also been fiercely attacked by Israel. In 2024, it declared her to be persona non grata, banning her from visiting the occupied Palestinian territory, in part because of her UN reports concluding that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. In 2025, Israel released a report — drawn largely from UN Watch — where it claimed that she was linked to terrorism (because she spoke at events organized by the Palestinian human rights organizations Al-Haq) and because she supposedly spread “antisemitic rhetoric. And last week, Israel issued an extraordinary tweet on X, claiming that she is a “mouthpiece for Hamas”. This latest smear was issued despite the many times that Albanese has condemned the Hamas’ attacks on October 7 2023 as serious violations of international law because Israel civilians were killed or taken hostage.
For Albanese’s courage in previously naming the Israeli genocide and warning American corporations that their weapons and hi-tech sales to Israel might expose them to criminal liability at the International Criminal Court, American Secretary of State Marco Rubio formally sanctioned her in July 2025. He claimed that: “We will not tolerate these campaigns of political and economic warfare, which threaten our national interests and sovereignty.”
The American sanctions against a UN human rights expert are unprecedented. They essentially freeze Albanese out of the international banking system. The sanctions have also impounded the condo that she and her husband own in Washington, prevented her from receiving reimbursement for her medical expenses from American insurance companies, and prohibited her from traveling to the United Nations headquarters in New York to deliver her annual reports. Many of her fellow UN human rights experts have publicly condemned the sanctions, pointing out that they violate international law, including the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. The human rights experts added that:
“The targeting of the Special Rapporteur cannot be separated from the egregious international crimes and human rights abuses being perpetrated against Palestinians and the longstanding efforts to delegitimise those who defend their rights.”
An Air Force E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system aircraft conducts aerial operations. [Photo: Air Force Master Sgt. Matthew Plew ]
The Trump administration is assembling the largest concentration of American military force in the Middle East since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, placing the United States on the brink of a massive illegal war against Iran that could last weeks or months and engulf the entire region.
Robert Pape, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago and one of the foremost analysts of American air power, wrote on X Saturday: “This represents 40-50% of the deployable US air power in the world. Think air power on the order of the 1991 and 2003 Iraq war. And growing. Never has the US deployed this much force against a potential enemy and not launched strikes.”
The Jerusalem Post and the Media Line, in an article published Saturday, reported that there are “now four American carrier strike groups either in the wider Middle East or moving toward it. That alone changes the equation. In the surrounding waters, roughly a dozen guided-missile destroyers are spread out, some near the Strait of Hormuz, others operating closer to the Red Sea.” These publications are the only outlets to report that four carrier strike groups are involved in the buildup.
Col. Richard Kemp, a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, told the Media Line: “As I understand it, this is the biggest military buildup in the Middle East since 2003.” He described the current scale as greater than the 12-day war in June 2025. “It could run into weeks,” he said. “It could well be a fairly long, sustained bombing campaign against Iran.” Of the force now assembled, he said: “It’s needed in order to sufficiently damage the regime. Not a token strike.”
Brig. Gen. Amir Avivi, founder of the Israel Defense and Security Forum, said the strategic objective had shifted beyond Iran’s nuclear facilities. “Now we are talking about taking down the regime. It is something completely different,” he told the Media Line. “I think in two weeks it could be done.”
The New York Times reported Sunday that the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest warship, was “steaming south of Italy in the Mediterranean Sea” and would soon be off the coast of Israel. The USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group is already operating in the Arabian Sea. The Times reported that US President Donald Trump discussed plans for strikes in a White House Situation Room meeting on Wednesday attended by Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.
According to the Times, Trump has told advisers that if diplomacy or an initial targeted attack does not force Iran to capitulate, “he will consider a much bigger attack in coming months intended to drive that country’s leaders from power.”
Targets under consideration include the headquarters of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, nuclear sites and the ballistic missile program. Gen. Caine, who told Trump there was “a high likelihood of success” before the Venezuela operation, has not been able to deliver the same reassurances about Iran, “in large measure because it is a far more difficult target.”
Politico reported Thursday that the buildup had already cost an estimated $350 million to $370 million and that costs are mounting rapidly. It noted that 17 US warships now sit in the region, a significant portion of the roughly 68 warships deployed around the globe. The Wall Street Journal reported that sailors aboard the Ford have been at sea for eight months, with morale deteriorating and crew members considering leaving the Navy.
The military escalation takes place amid a deepening political crisis within the United States. On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize presidential tariffs, striking down the central pillar of Trump’s trade war. Trump responded by calling the justices a “disgrace to our nation” and immediately imposing new tariffs under a different statute. It was the most significant judicial rebuke of presidential power in decades.
Edward Luce of the Financial Times commented: “Past performance suggests he could lash out in other ways. Given his instinct for unfiltered discretion, the Supreme Court’s ruling could lead to overcompensation in other spheres. US military action is the one area where the executive branch can almost always count on judicial forbearance.”
A war against Iran, a country of 90 million people that has not attacked the United States, would constitute a war of aggression, the “supreme international crime” as defined at the Nuremberg trials.
This silence is the continuation of a pattern documented throughout the buildup. Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia endorsed the military threat, saying he thought it was “appropriate the president has all the options on the table.” Democratic Representative Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey explicitly opposed a bipartisan resolution by Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna that would have prohibited the use of military force against Iran without congressional authorization, declaring that “Congress must not limit our ability to protect Americans and our allies.”
Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania went on Newsmax to pledge his support for bombing Iran, saying of last year’s strikes: “I absolutely was fully supportive and was cheering for that Midnight Hammer.”
Neither House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, nor Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made any statements over the weekend on the US threats against Iran. The Democrats funded every weapon now being assembled for the attack.
The $901 billion National Defense Authorization Act passed the House in December, with 115 Democrats voting yes. In the Senate, the vast majority of Democrats voted in favor. In January, 149 House Democrats voted for $839 billion in defense appropriations.
The war drive against Iran is the latest expression of the global eruption of US imperialism. Having seized the president of Venezuela and installed a puppet regime, having threatened to seize Greenland and the Panama Canal, the Trump administration is now preparing to wage aggressive war against a nation of 90 million people to impose regime change and seize control of the Middle East’s resources and strategic chokepoints.
The Democratic Party’s complicity in these preparations exposes once again that both parties represent the interests of the same ruling class, and that no faction of the political establishment opposes the escalating global war.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has entrusted Iran‘s top national security official with the survival of the country in the case of attacks or assassination, a report by The New York Times said.
According to the report published on Sunday, several senior officials and members of the Revolutionary Guard Corps told the daily that Khamenei has issued a series of directives aimed at securing Tehran’s governance.
This includes four layers of succession for military and government posts he appointed, alongside instructions given to senior officials to name up to four replacements.
In the case that communication with him is obstructed or he is killed, Khamenei has also delegated responsibilities to a close-knit group of confidants, based on information shared with the Times by senior officials, diplomats and military commanders.
Ali Larijani is named in the article among the handful of close political and military associates who will ensure the survival of Iran in the event of US-Israel attacks or the assassination of Tehran’s top leadership.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The security chief was appointed in August as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, the body that holds ultimate authority over the country’s security and foreign policy decisions.
During the 12-day war with Israel in June, Khamenei named three candidates who would potentially succeed him.
While Larijani is almost certainly not among the contenders for the title of Supreme Leader, as he is not a senior Shia cleric which is necessary for the role, he is among the top candidates for managing the country if Iran’s upper echelon is wiped out, the report said.
Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, the parliament speaker, and former president Hassan Rouhani are also among those listed by sources as possible leaders.
What Larijani’s return as security tsar reveals about Iran
The report also makes mention of contact between Washington and Tehran amid the unrest in Iran.
According to the Times, American envoy to the region Steve Witkoff sought to reach the country’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, following US President Donald Trump’s threats to strike Iran if it killed protesters.
Araghchi then asked President Masoud Pezeshkian for authorisation to communicate back to Witkoff, but was directed by Pezeshkian to get approval from Larijani instead, underscoring his role.
The report indicates that the president appears resigned to deferring authority to Larijani.
Against this backdrop of US-Iran tensions, speculation on Khamenei’s next moves comes amid growing tensions despite diplomatic talks this week between the two countries.
The talks were a last-ditch attempt to avert threatened military action by the US, with Khamenei warning Trump on Tuesday he would not be able to “destroy” the Islamic Republic.
According to AFP, talks were being held discreetly, with diplomatic police blocking the private access road to Oman’s residence in the municipality of Cologny.
USS Gerald R. Ford [Photo: US Navy/Seaman Alyssa Joy]
The aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, the largest warship ever built, transited the Strait of Gibraltar on Friday and entered the Mediterranean, placing the United States within days of having the military force in position for a massive illegal assault on Iran.
Two US officials told Reuters on Friday that military planning had reached “an advanced stage,” with options including “targeting individuals” and “pursuing leadership change in Tehran.” Asked whether he was considering a limited strike, US President Donald Trump told reporters: “I guess I can say I am considering that.”
The New York Times reported Tuesday that the buildup had “progressed to the point” that Trump could take military action “as soon as this weekend.” More than 50 fighter jets, two carrier strike groups and dozens of refueling tankers have been deployed. B-2 bombers have been placed on higher alert.
The Wall Street Journal detailed the hardware pouring into the region: F-35 and F-22 stealth fighters, F-15Es, F-16s, EA-18G electronic warfare jets, nine destroyers armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, and the submarine USS Georgia. The Associated Press called it “the largest force of American warships and aircraft to the Middle East in decades.”
An attack on Iran would constitute a war of aggression—the “supreme international crime”—as defined at the Nuremberg trials. Iran has not attacked the United States. There is no UN Security Council authorization. There is no congressional authorization. Trump has made clear he regards none of this as a constraint. “I don’t need international law,” he told the New York Times in January.
The threat of attack comes as Iran’s government has been desperately appealing to the Trump administration to negotiate. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Friday that a draft counterproposal would be ready “in the next two, three days” following indirect talks in Geneva this week and that a deal could be achieved “in a very short period of time.”
Iran’s diplomatic efforts will count for nothing, because for the Trump administration “diplomacy” is merely a pretext and cover for murder and extortion. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro sought to negotiate with the Trump administration in the months before the January raid that seized him and his wife, offering as late as the day before to discuss a deal.
The same fraud was carried out against Iran last year. The White House gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum. Five rounds of talks were held. On June 8, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff sat in a war-planning session at Camp David alongside the CIA director and defense secretary. Five days later, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, bombing more than 100 targets and assassinating senior commanders and nuclear scientists. On June 22, seven B-2 bombers launched Operation Midnight Hammer, striking Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Iran’s foreign minister told the UN: “We were attacked in the midst of an ongoing diplomatic process.”
The White House demands total capitulation—no uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, dismantling of the ballistic missile program and abandonment of regional allies. US officials say privately they see no prospect of Iran meeting these terms. The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that if Iran refuses to comply after an “initial limited military strike,” “the US would respond with a broad campaign against regime facilities—potentially aimed at toppling the Tehran regime.”
The war against Iran is a component of the eruption of American militarism all over the world. The carrier now entering the Mediterranean to attack Iran was redeployed from the Caribbean, where it took part in the seizure of Venezuelan President Maduro. The attack on Venezuela, the threatened seizure of Greenland and the Panama Canal, and the war against Iran are components of a single strategy: the use of military power to control the world’s critical resources and chokepoints in preparation for conflict with Russia and China.
There is overwhelming opposition to war with Iran. A Quinnipiac poll in January found 70 percent of voters oppose military action. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found 69 percent say the US should not get involved in Middle East military action unless directly threatened.
Despite this public opposition, the Democratic Party has systematically enabled Trump’s war preparations, because it speaks for the same constituency in the capitalist ruling class, which sees the colonial subjugation of the whole world as a means to prop up US global hegemony.
Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia told MS NOW on February 14: “I think it’s appropriate the president has all the options on the table.”
On Friday, Democratic Representative Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey issued a bipartisan statement with Republican Representative Mike Lawler of New York explicitly opposing a resolution by Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna that would prohibit the use of military force against Iran without congressional authorization. “This resolution would restrict the flexibility needed to respond to real and evolving threats and risks signaling weakness at a dangerous moment,” they wrote. “Congress must not limit our ability to protect Americans and our allies.”
Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania declared on Newsmax on February 11 his support for bombing Iran, pledging to vote against any war powers resolution. “I absolutely was fully supportive and was cheering for that Midnight Hammer,” he said. “And, now, if that’s required for a second round, I’ll be the one Democrat to absolutely say that’s entirely appropriate.”
On Friday, as the Ford entered the Mediterranean and the administration announced plans for “leadership change” and “targeting individuals,” neither House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, nor Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, nor the leaders of the “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party—Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who last weekend at the Munich Security Conference repeated the administration’s regime change talking points about Iran—issued any statement.
The Democrats have voted to fund every weapon now being assembled for this attack. The $901 billion National Defense Authorization Act passed the House 312-112 in December, with 115 Democrats voting yes. In the Senate, it passed 77-20 with the vast majority of Democrats in favor. In January, 149 House Democrats voted for $839 billion in defense appropriations.
Francesca Albanese in Bogotá, Colombia, July 2025 (Photo: Andrea Puentes – Joel González/ Presidencia de la República de Columbia)
Peace and Justice Post 
You must be logged in to post a comment.