Great summary. I'd add that this time has also been good cover/all eyes busy time for the murderous thugs to keep up the wars in Sudan, Ethiopia/Eritrea, which are also part of this effort to do in Iran and eventually China. Further afield the empire presses on Nigeria and the West Coast of Africa to create more suck-holes.
Apparently prior to the U.S. Israeli action the IRGC and hardliners had unpopularity and allegations of graft. I have a feeling due to hubris both the U.S. and Israel will get the exact opposite outcome that they calculated and completely destabilize the Sykes-Picot framework they inherited. Watching Ted Cruz talk to Tucker Carlson none of these idiots realize they are squandering their imperialist inheritance. However who knows.
One of the additional questions that arises is the following: How much can Pakistan, Russia and China "afford" the fall of Iran. Which, in turn, can be further abstracted down to the question of the "defense in depth" / solidarity ratio. The closer this ratio is to the number 1, the closer the chances of regime change are to the number 0 in each of the possible equations.
From what I can hear, China is taking point on assisting Iran, but without intervening directly, including providing materiel, intelligence etc and probably working with Pakistan.
Russia has its hands full with Ukraine, but also there are rumours of some distrust between Iran and Russia, from their time in Syria advising Assad, and Russia's historical record of ignoring Israeli aggression in Syria. Russia has an Israeli lobby, maybe not as powerful as that in the US/UK/EU but still powerful enough to become a 5th column internally within Russia's elites.
There are more than a million recent Russian emigres now living in Israel who are still considered Russian (at least partly) by the Kremlin. Russian elites are very touchy about ethnicity and demographics. Not sure we need to invoke a lobby.
In Justin's list of historically pacified countries, it is astounding how much of the "successes" were initiated by military victory, primarily in 1967. Though of course economic and political factors are arguably what's behind the enticements of local elites to join with the West, in addition to the West's "Cultural capital".
[Interestingly, in the 20th century, the side who primarily engaged in economic warfare were the Arab oil states - remember when they did stuff like that? - though with hindsight their economic blockade arguably backfired (both regionally and globally.]
Lebanon is conspicuously absent from Justin's list of "successes" and "failures" of Western imperial projects. Presumably because it itself is a complicated amalgam of "successes" - which only bred "failures" such as the creation of Hezbollah itself (quite analogous to the Islamic revolution in Iran).
However, Lebanon itself seems to be the closest to a "model", if any exist, to this current escalation. After all, Israel waged an air war against Hezbollah (including war crimes against the civilian apartment blocks where commanders were living) and it miraculously "folded".
I have been exasperated with the media mantra that Hezbollah has been (militarily) defeated - they often even imply that it was "through the pager attack". While there has been a (partial) defeat, it was never militarily, but a mixture of economic and primarily political pressure, with Hezbollah wanting to avoid civil war at all costs.
Militarily, Hezbollah pioneered modern tunnel warfare - a model no (Western) army has an answer to. Interestingly, Hezbollah initially had North Korean advisors, who had to master tunnel warfare when the US famously dropped more ordinance on them than in all of WWII. Note that Yemen's missile and anti-aircraft capacity could not be destroyed from bombing runs alone even with the US active involvement.
In Gaza, the IDF isn't even trying to engage the resistance below ground, preferring to "win" the war against civilians above ground using aircraft bombing (expensive), artillery (cheaper), and tank shelling, bulldozers, and manually placed explosives (cheapest, but not in lives).
Militarily, attacking Iran from the air is yet more expensive, since they are (1) far away, (2) actually have air defenses which limits attacks to the newest and most expensive hardware, (3) actually fight back which requires (again expensive) interceptor missiles (and creates unwelcome TV coverage). Again, attacking from the air actually has limited returns as most of the military sites (and if necessary, even some of the military-industrial complex) can be moved underground, like their nuclear and missile sites.
Economically, as Justin laid out, Iran has already been sanctioned for decades; but now they have BRICS trading partners who will also be willing to extend lines of credit (if not intervene militarily). It is the West which will lose a lot more should Iran merely announce that the Street of Hormuz is closed for business.
Politically, Iran is not anywhere near as fractured as Lebanon, and their society has a track record of unifying behind their government under external attack (last time from Iraq). Also there is no clear analogy to a victory condition: i.e. a political or business elite pressuring the military to stand down; unlike Hezbollah, Iran already was standing down, i.e. never initiated military attacks.
Perhaps we can still avoid WWIII as Trump likes to win and hates to lose. His base have retained some sound anti-war instincts, and the (non-Millenarian) military does know that ships, including aircraft carriers, are but floating coffins in 2025 (see Russia's Black Sea Fleet).
Stuff like “the Street of Hormuz” made me turn off auto-correct long ago, and do you know? I think my writing improved. Of course it had a LOT of room, lol.
How about "Hezbollah pioneered *urban* modern tunnel warfare"?
Having seen and crawled through the tunnels in Vietnam, post war, and from the field reports ex-West Asia, I'd add the scale and functionality is entirely different. Perhaps North Korea has done much more, earlier; but their modern tunneling systems not been tested in a mock up of full modern combat.
That. Also adding mobile missile launchers to the mix - so the invader has to "clear" an otherwise strategically unimportant area or be subject to missile barrages in addition to commando raids.
The mock-up training etc. was my point. They had decades to counter tunnel warfare since Korea/Vietnam, and have basically failed to do so at scale.
Robotics won't change this anytime soon, either. Those drones and dogs may be scary out in the open and in flat terrain, but it's a struggle to get them to work at all in cramped environments with occlusions and bad reception.
Fascinating to hear about the tunnels in Vietnam first-hand. I hope we can visit the ones in Gaza at some point in the future as obsolete tourist attractions, as well.
I would add that side by side with Russian leadership’s awareness of ethnic Russians in Israel lies their awareness of Israel’s contribution to killing ethnic Russians in the Ukraine.
Thanks Justin, love the pictures too, very apt. One thing, I heard earlier (Dima, Military Summary Channel) that 2 Chinese naval intelligence/EW ships flying under flag of declared neutrality, are now stationed off Iran's coast in the Gulf with long range surveillance capability known to be able to block EW & pinpoint "stealth" hostiles. In addition to 4 Chinese cargo planes making deliveries. This leaves only a narrow path for US bombers, parallel to Pakistan, also with buildup on their southern borders being noted.
Dima also reported that China has called Oman, requesting it close its airspace.
Lastly, from another source, (who I've forgotten, sorry), a snippet is that Trump wants the 2 weeks because he wants his Big Beautiful Bill to go through the Senate on 4 July. Going in earlier might lose him a couple of crucial Senator votes.
I have thought of the two week delay as also giving time for Trump's grifting. He has no ideology, so would be cynically wringing Zionist donors dry as they panic over potential drawdown of interceptor stocks.
I didn’t of that but I bet you are right! Ugh. I was hoping he was waiting on congress to get their duty returned to them. Just not sure of enough votes for no war with Iran!
imo a US-Iran showdown has been inevitable, made more imminent by the transport corridors China and Russia are using in Iran and the growth of BRICS. After the initial shock - who goes for a mass surprise attack on civilian targets during negotiations? - it does look as if this went about as well as possible for Iran global perception-wise and especially with respect to US domestic opinion. I don't see how USreal can win against Iran when they couldn't defeat Yemen and known Iranian nuclear sites are now essentially going to be decoys. US shock and awe and Mossad technowizardry can gain USrael a few weeks of pyrrhic tactical victory but they don't have the stomach nor the numbers to deploy the boots on the ground to make serious inroads in Iran. However long it takes, and however much pain they might inflict, they are now firmly clenched in the jaws of strategic defeat.
Haha. The US probably blew up some concrete. Iranians have been digging tunnels for their qanat irrigation systems for thousands of years. Nothing of value would have been anywhere close to the surface.
Meanwhile there were rumours that Iran conducted an underground nuclear test, resulting in a 5.2 earthquake west of Tehran. Propaganda will be thickening the fog of war for a while.
On a side note, I had assumed attacking nuclear sites was prohibited, but apparently only attacks against nuclear power plants are explicitly prohibited (Article 56 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and Article 15 of Additional Protocol II). Natanz and Fordo are nuclear enrichment sites I think.
I hear democrats can stall that bbb mess. Will they? Then there is tim Kaine’s resolution to take back their constitutional power: constitutionally congress is supposed to decide war even in emergency situations. Will it succeed? If not vote em out!
Justin, thanks for this very useful summary and analysis. I just have one small point that you might want to amend. Saudi’s main Arab partners in its war on Yemen were UAE and Bahrain, I think. Qatar was a partner initially, but relations with the Saudis, et al., broke down and Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain and Egypt initiated a blockade on Qatar in June 2017.
Great summary. I'd add that this time has also been good cover/all eyes busy time for the murderous thugs to keep up the wars in Sudan, Ethiopia/Eritrea, which are also part of this effort to do in Iran and eventually China. Further afield the empire presses on Nigeria and the West Coast of Africa to create more suck-holes.
Apparently prior to the U.S. Israeli action the IRGC and hardliners had unpopularity and allegations of graft. I have a feeling due to hubris both the U.S. and Israel will get the exact opposite outcome that they calculated and completely destabilize the Sykes-Picot framework they inherited. Watching Ted Cruz talk to Tucker Carlson none of these idiots realize they are squandering their imperialist inheritance. However who knows.
One of the additional questions that arises is the following: How much can Pakistan, Russia and China "afford" the fall of Iran. Which, in turn, can be further abstracted down to the question of the "defense in depth" / solidarity ratio. The closer this ratio is to the number 1, the closer the chances of regime change are to the number 0 in each of the possible equations.
From what I can hear, China is taking point on assisting Iran, but without intervening directly, including providing materiel, intelligence etc and probably working with Pakistan.
Russia has its hands full with Ukraine, but also there are rumours of some distrust between Iran and Russia, from their time in Syria advising Assad, and Russia's historical record of ignoring Israeli aggression in Syria. Russia has an Israeli lobby, maybe not as powerful as that in the US/UK/EU but still powerful enough to become a 5th column internally within Russia's elites.
There are more than a million recent Russian emigres now living in Israel who are still considered Russian (at least partly) by the Kremlin. Russian elites are very touchy about ethnicity and demographics. Not sure we need to invoke a lobby.
Thanks for this. :/
In Justin's list of historically pacified countries, it is astounding how much of the "successes" were initiated by military victory, primarily in 1967. Though of course economic and political factors are arguably what's behind the enticements of local elites to join with the West, in addition to the West's "Cultural capital".
[Interestingly, in the 20th century, the side who primarily engaged in economic warfare were the Arab oil states - remember when they did stuff like that? - though with hindsight their economic blockade arguably backfired (both regionally and globally.]
Lebanon is conspicuously absent from Justin's list of "successes" and "failures" of Western imperial projects. Presumably because it itself is a complicated amalgam of "successes" - which only bred "failures" such as the creation of Hezbollah itself (quite analogous to the Islamic revolution in Iran).
However, Lebanon itself seems to be the closest to a "model", if any exist, to this current escalation. After all, Israel waged an air war against Hezbollah (including war crimes against the civilian apartment blocks where commanders were living) and it miraculously "folded".
I have been exasperated with the media mantra that Hezbollah has been (militarily) defeated - they often even imply that it was "through the pager attack". While there has been a (partial) defeat, it was never militarily, but a mixture of economic and primarily political pressure, with Hezbollah wanting to avoid civil war at all costs.
Militarily, Hezbollah pioneered modern tunnel warfare - a model no (Western) army has an answer to. Interestingly, Hezbollah initially had North Korean advisors, who had to master tunnel warfare when the US famously dropped more ordinance on them than in all of WWII. Note that Yemen's missile and anti-aircraft capacity could not be destroyed from bombing runs alone even with the US active involvement.
In Gaza, the IDF isn't even trying to engage the resistance below ground, preferring to "win" the war against civilians above ground using aircraft bombing (expensive), artillery (cheaper), and tank shelling, bulldozers, and manually placed explosives (cheapest, but not in lives).
Militarily, attacking Iran from the air is yet more expensive, since they are (1) far away, (2) actually have air defenses which limits attacks to the newest and most expensive hardware, (3) actually fight back which requires (again expensive) interceptor missiles (and creates unwelcome TV coverage). Again, attacking from the air actually has limited returns as most of the military sites (and if necessary, even some of the military-industrial complex) can be moved underground, like their nuclear and missile sites.
Economically, as Justin laid out, Iran has already been sanctioned for decades; but now they have BRICS trading partners who will also be willing to extend lines of credit (if not intervene militarily). It is the West which will lose a lot more should Iran merely announce that the Street of Hormuz is closed for business.
Politically, Iran is not anywhere near as fractured as Lebanon, and their society has a track record of unifying behind their government under external attack (last time from Iraq). Also there is no clear analogy to a victory condition: i.e. a political or business elite pressuring the military to stand down; unlike Hezbollah, Iran already was standing down, i.e. never initiated military attacks.
Perhaps we can still avoid WWIII as Trump likes to win and hates to lose. His base have retained some sound anti-war instincts, and the (non-Millenarian) military does know that ships, including aircraft carriers, are but floating coffins in 2025 (see Russia's Black Sea Fleet).
Stuff like “the Street of Hormuz” made me turn off auto-correct long ago, and do you know? I think my writing improved. Of course it had a LOT of room, lol.
Great comment.
yes, let's blame auto-correct for the dire straits my writing is in ;-)
"Hezbollah pioneered modern tunnel warfare". Vietnam no longer counts as 'modern'? :-)
How about "Hezbollah pioneered *urban* modern tunnel warfare"?
Having seen and crawled through the tunnels in Vietnam, post war, and from the field reports ex-West Asia, I'd add the scale and functionality is entirely different. Perhaps North Korea has done much more, earlier; but their modern tunneling systems not been tested in a mock up of full modern combat.
That. Also adding mobile missile launchers to the mix - so the invader has to "clear" an otherwise strategically unimportant area or be subject to missile barrages in addition to commando raids.
The mock-up training etc. was my point. They had decades to counter tunnel warfare since Korea/Vietnam, and have basically failed to do so at scale.
Robotics won't change this anytime soon, either. Those drones and dogs may be scary out in the open and in flat terrain, but it's a struggle to get them to work at all in cramped environments with occlusions and bad reception.
Fascinating to hear about the tunnels in Vietnam first-hand. I hope we can visit the ones in Gaza at some point in the future as obsolete tourist attractions, as well.
First thing that came to my mind too.
the hubris of empire shall be its downfall
I would add that side by side with Russian leadership’s awareness of ethnic Russians in Israel lies their awareness of Israel’s contribution to killing ethnic Russians in the Ukraine.
Thanks Justin, love the pictures too, very apt. One thing, I heard earlier (Dima, Military Summary Channel) that 2 Chinese naval intelligence/EW ships flying under flag of declared neutrality, are now stationed off Iran's coast in the Gulf with long range surveillance capability known to be able to block EW & pinpoint "stealth" hostiles. In addition to 4 Chinese cargo planes making deliveries. This leaves only a narrow path for US bombers, parallel to Pakistan, also with buildup on their southern borders being noted.
Dima also reported that China has called Oman, requesting it close its airspace.
Lastly, from another source, (who I've forgotten, sorry), a snippet is that Trump wants the 2 weeks because he wants his Big Beautiful Bill to go through the Senate on 4 July. Going in earlier might lose him a couple of crucial Senator votes.
I have thought of the two week delay as also giving time for Trump's grifting. He has no ideology, so would be cynically wringing Zionist donors dry as they panic over potential drawdown of interceptor stocks.
I didn’t of that but I bet you are right! Ugh. I was hoping he was waiting on congress to get their duty returned to them. Just not sure of enough votes for no war with Iran!
imo a US-Iran showdown has been inevitable, made more imminent by the transport corridors China and Russia are using in Iran and the growth of BRICS. After the initial shock - who goes for a mass surprise attack on civilian targets during negotiations? - it does look as if this went about as well as possible for Iran global perception-wise and especially with respect to US domestic opinion. I don't see how USreal can win against Iran when they couldn't defeat Yemen and known Iranian nuclear sites are now essentially going to be decoys. US shock and awe and Mossad technowizardry can gain USrael a few weeks of pyrrhic tactical victory but they don't have the stomach nor the numbers to deploy the boots on the ground to make serious inroads in Iran. However long it takes, and however much pain they might inflict, they are now firmly clenched in the jaws of strategic defeat.
Trump just tweeted on is social media that 3 nuclear sites were hit by U.S. bombers. Bragging the sites are destroyed! Grrrrr
Haha. The US probably blew up some concrete. Iranians have been digging tunnels for their qanat irrigation systems for thousands of years. Nothing of value would have been anywhere close to the surface.
Meanwhile there were rumours that Iran conducted an underground nuclear test, resulting in a 5.2 earthquake west of Tehran. Propaganda will be thickening the fog of war for a while.
On a side note, I had assumed attacking nuclear sites was prohibited, but apparently only attacks against nuclear power plants are explicitly prohibited (Article 56 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and Article 15 of Additional Protocol II). Natanz and Fordo are nuclear enrichment sites I think.
I hear democrats can stall that bbb mess. Will they? Then there is tim Kaine’s resolution to take back their constitutional power: constitutionally congress is supposed to decide war even in emergency situations. Will it succeed? If not vote em out!
Justin, thanks for this very useful summary and analysis. I just have one small point that you might want to amend. Saudi’s main Arab partners in its war on Yemen were UAE and Bahrain, I think. Qatar was a partner initially, but relations with the Saudis, et al., broke down and Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain and Egypt initiated a blockade on Qatar in June 2017.