Iran war roundup
(1) Trump’s red line with Iran was apparently enforced. He told the Iranians they had sixty days to negotiate and reach an agreement, and he warned them that the consequences of not doing so would be dire. It was on day sixty-one that Israel attacked. This business of keeping one’s word has the added advantage of not just being effective with Iran; it also gives notice to other nations who might be paying attention that Trump means what he says. It lends strength to future negotiations with other countries and other parties.
(2) Here’s a report that some Iranians are calling for the return of the Crown Prince, son of the late Shah. I don’t doubt there are some, but my hunch (and it’s only a hunch) is that even if the current regime falls, Reza Pahlavi isn’t coming back as an actual ruler with significant power. Maybe as a figurehead, something like the British monarchy.
(3) The idea that Mossadegh, who was the prime minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953, was deposed in a coup engineered by the CIA is stated time and again by online pundits as though it’s a truism that needs no explanation or proof, so widely accepted is the idea. But yesterday commenter “Gringo” has reminded us that the truth is quite different, as explained in this article that Gringo linked. An excerpt:
First, the CIA did not mount or execute a coup. Second, Mossadegh was not democratically elected. …
Between 1953 and 1979, the shah would appoint and dismiss 10 more prime ministers, including Mossadegh twice. Not even the most overheated Iran historian, in Islamic Iran or American academia, describes these changes as coups. The difference is that when Mossadegh’s second government went down in flames in August 1953, there were some American would-be arsonists in the wings who may or may not have shared responsibility, but who insisted on claiming the lion’s share of the credit, however implausibly or unwisely.
Constitutionally, appointing prime ministers in imperial Iran was the sole prerogative of the shah. As Gholam Reza Afkhami wrote, “The Constitution … gave the Crown and only the Crown the power to appoint or dismiss the ministers …
(4) An Iranian missile has hit a hospital in Israel and done significant damage:
The hospital’s director general Prof. Shlomi Kodesh told the media, “A missile hit the old surgical ward building at Soroka. It’s a relatively old building that had been evacuated in recent days.” …
He added, “There is widespread damage to other buildings at the hospital. All patients and all staff were in shelters. The several injured we have are lightly hurt, mostly from the blast shockwave.”
It’s very fortunate that the building had been evacuated. I’m trying to imagine what it’s like to get all the patients into shelters.
Iran says it didn’t target the hospital, but their explanation doesn’t hold water:
Iran claimed that the ballistic missile that hit Beersheba’s Soroka Hospital was aimed at an adjacent military intelligence facility.
There are no Israeli military facilities in the vicinity of Soroka Hospital. The IDF’s Southern Command base is located over two kilometers away, and there is an under-construction army base just over a kilometer away.
(5) This article purports to tell us how Israel corralled Iran’s IRGC generals into a bunker on a ruse, in order to kill them. But the article promises more than it delivers; it doesn’t really describe much more than we already knew. The Mossad guards its secrets pretty well, I think.
I think I might have been the one who noted that tablet piece most recently, the largest point of scholars, on the region have accepted that trope except for Amir Taheri* who I referred to earlier, who was an editor for Keyhan, and has written a number of books about the regime, the likes of Copeland and Roosevelt didn’t make things better, those who have been victims of ‘betrayed revolutions’ like my family, although one wonders how necessary this revolution was, we can go back to the French Revolution, yes Louis’s mismanagement was bad, but that doesn’t mean the people had to devour themselves, see the Russian Revolution as another example,
Similarly, not a few Russians came to associate democracy with chaos and economic instability, that notion is at the back of the mind of many average Russians (perhaps a plurality not a majority) so when we speak of ‘regime change’ we should know how it sounds,
the Iranian regime, targets civilians as we see with the Soroka hospital, versus military targets with the Israelis, they are very bad liars,
*Taheri has the insight that the Shah managed to anger the same two groups, the mullahs and the merchants that led to Mossadeghs downfall
The regime is probably falling apart. With so many senior people removed, some subordinates are probably making their own choices. Hitting the hospital might not have been ordered by central authority.
Battle of Manila
“ In spite of these orders, Rear Admiral Sanji Iwabuchi, commander of the Imperial Japanese Navy’s 31st Naval Special Base Force, was determined to fight a last-ditch battle in Manila. Though nominally part of the Shimbu Group, Iwabuchi repeatedly ignored orders to withdraw from the city.”
He told the Iranians they had sixty days to negotiate… It was on day sixty-one that Israel attacked. This business of keeping one’s word…
There are pros and cons to this interpretation of events becoming conventional wisdom. It would be taken in many quarters as an acknowledgement that Israel is a puppet of Trump (or vice versa). Those kinds of misunderstandings are a good way for small wars to turn into big ones.
Israel quite properly needs to do what it has to for its security. I think it was wrong for American governments to continually prevent Israel from accomplishing anything meaningful. I also think it would be wrong for American governments to treat Israel like a bulldog they can sic on people, and to have the rest of the world thinking that could have some unintended and unfortunate consequences.
I grant that a lot of people already think that Israel is a puppet of the US (or vice versa), but to date they have been thinking so falsely, and I don’t think Americans would be better off if it become true. Neither do I think Israelis would be better off, but I’m not Israeli and they need to think that through themselves.
its much easier said than done, I referred to this
https://www.amazon.com/Harpoon-Inside-Against-Terrorisms-Masters/dp/0316399051
which has a bit of a hagiography of the late Meir Dagan, who was at odds with Netanyahu on what he ultimately had to do,but he was better at unraveling the financial threads that supported first Fatah then Hamas and Hezbollah, he was at loggerheads with the US, because of the Oslo delusion, the thing that bedeviled
Norman Podhoretz, years before it ever happened, that any of these players are honest brokers, honorable men, etc etc, some portion of the electorate does feel deceived because all of the blood, that has been spilled in that part of the world in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also Somalia and Yemen,
why our policymakers retreated from Iraq and let Islamic State fill the vaccuum and more recently the Taliban in Afghanistan, it wasn’t quite a forever war, but close enough to the experience of many Americans,
@miguel cervantes: that has been spilled in that part of the world in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also Somalia and Yemen
Not to mention Syria. In reading about the events leading up to the fall of Assad I was surprised by how much direct US involvement was going on there since 2014. I remember it occasionally being mentioned on blogs over the years, often accompanied by “since when do we have troops in Syria”. And we still do as far as I can find out. There have been quite a few countries involved in the fighting in Syria, including Iran, of course.
I agree with Trump’s approach on Iran so far. It looks to me as though his goals are (i) Iran shouldn’t have nukes; and (ii) no more regime change wars in the ME. That sounds right to me.
It’s tough to square that circle, though. I also suspect that there are other factors at play that aren’t as widely known vis-a-vis China and maybe Russia. Moving cautiously, as Trump appears to be doing, is fine. When you have no good choices, and things aren’t likely to get worse in the short term, letting the board play out for a bit is a wise strategy.
The best solution would certainly be if Israel has the capability of taking out the deeply-entrenched facilities without US involvement.
(Also, where is the “strange new respect” among the MAGA crowd for George HW Bush? Trump’s strategy of strength plus caution actually looks a lot like HW. Recall that HW took significant flak from both the neo-con right and opportunistic Democrats for failing to support the post-Gulf War uprisings against Saddam Hussein.)
An intereting tidbit I heard Mike Doran mention last night that doesn’t happen to get much attention in public, partly, I guess, because it’s actually kind of frightening: says Mike “. . . there is a realistic possibility that the Iranians have something in escrow in North Korea . . . that the Iranians, what if the Iranians have purchased something from the North Koreans and the North Koreans are holding it? That’s not an unrealistic possibility.”
Not sure the Iranians need anything “in escrow” from N. Korea in order for the Norks to “lend them” a nuclear hand, should the need arise.
(Perhaps a “warning” from DJT might clarify things a bit.)
And in other not entirely unexpected news…
Tiptoeing through the two-lips:
“Trump: Tucker Called to Apologize”—
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/donald-trump-tucker-carlson-iran/2025/06/19/id/1215602/
FWIW…
thats entirely possible AQ Khan seemed to do deliveries between Iran and North Korea, and probably continued the business even after the ring,
no W doesn’t look better, why didn’t he bomb the reactors instead of sending 150,000 troops, was it really imperative to invade on that timetable, if the afghan side of the mission was not finished, also he was painfully naive about what democracy would entail in that part of the world, it was a new thing, Iraq hadn’t had anything close to that since Nuri Al Said, and that experiment didn’t last long,
of course the enemy has a vote, and the Baathists employed an assymettrical scheme to minimize the advantages of our technology with the car bomb and the cell phone, a technique sadly had been employed by the National Accord, we were out of our depth, the car bomb was first employed by the Wrath of God team, which is why the whole beeper phone tag, makes me a little nervous as much as it was a proud accomplishment, every technology can be boomeranged against us,
the circumstances were different but Reagan was much less enthusiastic about large scale deployment, the Pershings in Western Europe, were the most provocative, in fact the Soviets took them to be a precursor to World War 3, Grenada, was almost happenstance, and we tripped into Beirut,
miguel, Bauxite was talking about HW not W. Not a trivial distinction here since HW didn’t “regime change” or “nation build”.
A bit of a surprise here: who knew that Putin had even a shred of a sense of humor??
“Kremlin Warns Against US Intervention In Iran, Tells Israeli Leaders ‘Come To Your Senses’”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/kremlin-warns-against-us-intervention-iran-tells-israeli-leaders-come-your-senses
I soured on the Gulf war, in part of what came after, of course, much of Western Europe indulged the bribe to the Iranian regime as they did with Hamas through the Foreign Office and UNWRA, if nothing had changed in the subsequent decade, maybe I would regard it well, part of the Oslo delusion, the fact this bribe didn’t work with North Korea, never seems to fase them
of course Wendy Sherman, seemed to think well we haven’t put enough money into the bribe,
Cheney opposed invading Iraq proper in 1991, because he considered the prospects of a long standing rebellion in the country, also who would take advantage of said chaos, we did have a few brushfires in 1994 and 1998,
the last was presumably when most of the weapons stockpiles were taken out
but it wasn’t a crazy notion to think Saddam retained some portion of those, in a ddition to the contacts his security services retained with Islamists, after September 11th we couldn’t really take that chance, but some of the claims
like Atta in Prague were in retrospect foolish, others like the yellowcake i’m not ruling out because of the likes of Joe Wilson,
US President Donald Trump will decide whether or not to directly join the war against Iran alongside Israel within the next two weeks, the White House announces….
“Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future — I will make my decision on whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” according to the Trump statement read aloud by Leavitt.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-june-19-2025/#liveblog-entry-3578819
________________________________
Not sure whether that’s not a head fake for a more immediate attack.
At the very least I take it as an ultimatum to Iran for negotiations in which they must surrender their nuclear programs.
But on Day 15 Iran had better assume that Trump will bunker bust Fordow.
From Barry’s ZH link:
“We hope that all parties recognize that there is no viable alternative to seeking mutually acceptable negotiated solutions to the problems at hand. Our support for a resolution concerning the Iranian nuclear program will always be grounded in international law, the principle of equal and indivisible security, and a balanced consideration of mutual interests.”
You’re right, he’s a regular Shecky Greene.
The son of the Shah as a temporary figure seems likely to minimize opposition to him taking over after
Unconditional Surrender.
If it comes, which I doubt will be that soon. Tho it might.
Occupation seems really unlikely, so a military coup/ assumption of power different than the mullahs seems more likely. Supported by those who are now rich in Iran and don’t want to destroyed. None of whose names I know.
It was smart of Trump to have the 60 day limit, and unleash the Israeli Doberman that has long been leashed and restrained by the US. It’s mostly good, but there will be some negatives.
Here’s KT McFarland, former Trump Deputy National Security Adviser, who speculates on Trump’s Iran decision:
__________________________
Trump is weighing 2 critical factors before making Iran attack decision, expert says
I think he’s waiting for two things.
First, how much further is Israel going to degrade Iran’s capabilities to retaliate —
whether through targeting leadership or additional missile strikes — so that they really have no ability to retaliate no matter what.
And second, I think he’s waiting to see: Is the phone call coming from Iran?
Not from the Ayatollah, but is there somebody else who’s thinking, maybe this is the time to negotiate?
–KT McFarland, “Trump is weighing 2 critical factors before making Iran attack decision”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj__vtI8H44
__________________________
We can be sure Khamenei, 86 years-old and a fantatic, is not going to roll over for Trump, but perhaps there are regime insiders who see the writing on the wall and don’t want to die in a bunker.
I suspect there is plenty of room for surprises in the next couple weeks.
A surrender without occupation will certainly be full of surprises. Not suggesting occupation, but preparation for dealing with surprises we don’t like would be a good idea.
To huxley’s points there, we’re going to see lots of attempts to drive wedges between Israel’s interests in continuing their bombing campaign and the US’s calls for negotiated surrender, this by means of Iran proponents calling for ceasefire prior to surrender negotiation beginning. Israel no way wants a ceasefire.
The only involvement the US should have in regime change is in assisting Israel in the removal of Iran’s current leadership. Let the Iranian people decide what form of governance follows. If they then choose… poorly… let them quickly experience the consequences of their choice.
Saw a CBS News clip where a reporter stood near the end of the runway at Whiteman AFB in Arkansas and intoned how B-2 bombers would takeoff “from here” to bomb Iran. Somebody should tell CBS about Diego Garcia, and the six bombers that have been there for a week.
The rest of the piece dealt with basics about bunker busters and Iranian nuke sites that anyone would have heard multiple times in the past month, but it was delivered as if it was cutting edge hot news. Makes you wonder who their audience is, if any.