The age of war? Israel-Iran conflict further undemines global security
42:04
Issued on:
From the show
Donald Trump sold us a different kind of Pax Americana. The U-S-led global rules-based order was always about soft power backed by bulk military might.Trump's rules on Inauguration Day veered instead to the utilitarian: yes to the world's top superpower staking imperial claims to parts of the planet deemed vital to national interests. Yes to coveting Greenland's strategic minerals and Panama's essential waterway. No to forever wars in places like Ukraine where the US pays while Europe reaps the benefits of curbing Vladimir Putin's westward march.
So why now the sudden pull of the Middle East? As the US president weighs whether to go all-in with Israel's pre-emptive war against Iran? one whose stated aims oscillate between nuclear deterrence and regime change. Why Iran and not Ukraine and what conclusions Europe draws from the evolution of warfare in 2025? Both Ukraine and Israel inflicting damage with spectacular operations that combine special ops in the field, drones and artificial intelligence. Sales reps are all smiles at the big Paris Air Show but how should cash-strapped states be buying for their militaries? Can an unmanned gizmo really inflict as much damage as a state-of-the-art fighter jet? If so, just how volatile a world we live in?
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
2 hours ago
- France 24
Muslim countries urge end to Israel's 'aggression' against Iran
Arch-rivals Israel and Iran have been at war since June 13 when Israel, claiming Tehran was on the verge of acquiring a nuclear bomb, launched a wave of devastating air strikes, killing top army commanders and scientists. Iran immediately retaliated, and the two sides have been trading barrages since. The ministers "condemn firmly the aggression of Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran, stress the urgent need to stop Israeli attacks and their great concern regarding this dangerous escalation", said an OIC statement It was published at the end of a OIC meeting in Istanbul this weekend. It made no direct reference to the US bombardment of Iran's key nuclear facilities early Sunday, after President Donald Trump decided to join Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear programme. But the OIC did denounce the "destabilization policies of Israel in the region and its recent attacks on Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, constituting flagrant (a) violation of sovereignty and security of these countries and international law". Attending the OIC meeting, Iran's top diplomat Abbas Araghchi said Sunday morning that the United States and Israel had "breached a major red line". Founded in 1969, the 57-member OIC sees its role as protecting the interests of the Muslim world and increasing Muslim solidarity.
France 24
4 hours ago
- France 24
US strikes on Iran: what we know
President Donald Trump had spent weeks pursuing a diplomatic path to replace the nuclear deal with Tehran that he tore up during his first term in 2018. But he ultimately decided to take military action against Iran's nuclear program, which had already been bombarded in a more than week-long Israeli campaign that has also targeted Tehran's top military brass. Below, AFP examines what we know about the US strikes on Iran -- an operation dubbed "Midnight Hammer." Major operation Caine told journalists the strikes involved more than 125 US aircraft including B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, fighters, aerial refueling tankers, a guided missile submarine and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft. "This mission demonstrates the unmatched reach, coordination and capability of the United States military," the general said. "No other military in the world could have done this." Caine said it was "too early" to comment on what remains of Iran's nuclear program, but that "initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction." B-2 bombers The US employed seven B-2s in the strikes -- aircraft that can fly 6,000 nautical miles (9,600 kilometers) without refueling and which are designed to "penetrate an enemy's most sophisticated defenses and threaten its most valued, and heavily defended, targets," according to the US military. "This was the largest B-2 operational strike in US history and the second-longest B-2 mission ever flown," according to Caine. Several B-2s proceeded west over the Pacific as a decoy while the bombers that would take part in the strikes headed east -- a "deception effort known only to an extremely small number of planners and key leaders," the general said. "Iran's fighters did not fly, and it appears that Iran's surface-to-air missile systems did not see us. Throughout the mission, we retained the element of surprise," Caine said. The United States used the B-2 in operations against Serbian forces in the 1990s, flying non-stop from Missouri to Kosovo and back, and the bombers were subsequently employed in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars in the 2000s. Massive Ordnance Penetrator Caine said the B-2s dropped 14 bombs known as the GBU-57 or Massive Ordnance Penetrator -- a powerful 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) bunker-busting weapon that made its combat debut in the Iran operation. The bombs -- which are designed to penetrate up to 200 feet (60 meters) underground before exploding -- were needed to hit deeply buried Iranian nuclear facilities. Testing of the weapons began in 2004 and Boeing was in 2009 awarded a contract to complete the integration of GBU-57 with aircraft. Tomahawk cruise missiles In addition to the bombers, a US guided missile submarine in the Middle East launched more than two dozen missiles at unspecified "surface infrastructure targets" at Isfahan, one of three nuclear sites struck in the operation, Caine said. The missiles are "designed to fly at extremely low altitudes at high subsonic speeds, and are piloted over an evasive route by several mission tailored guidance systems" and were first used in 1991 against Iraqi forces during Operation Desert Storm, according to the US military. Aim of the strikes US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told journalists the strikes were launched to "neutralize the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear program and the collective self-defense of our troops and our allies." "This mission was not, has not been, about regime change," Hegseth told journalists. A number of key figures in Trump's "Make America Great Again" movement have vocally opposed US strikes on Iran, and his promise to extract the United States from its "forever wars" in the Middle East played a role in his 2016 and 2024 election wins. What comes next? Trump has called on Iran to "agree to end this war," saying that "now is the time for peace." But it remains to be seen whether the strikes will push Tehran to deescalate the conflict, or to widen it further. If Iran chooses the latter option, it could do so by targeting American military personnel who are stationed around the Middle East, or seek to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, which carries one-fifth of global oil output.
Euronews
6 hours ago
- Euronews
Will Russia stand up for its ally Iran and how can Moscow benefit?
Russia's foreign ministry slammed on Sunday the overnight US air strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, calling it 'an irresponsible decision to subject the territory of a sovereign state to missile and bomb strikes, no matter what arguments it is presented with' — all the while Moscow itself is intensifying its attacks on Ukraine. The Kremlin says the US attack 'blatantly violates international law, the UN Charter, and the resolutions of the UN Security Council, which has previously unambiguously qualified such actions as inadmissible' adding that 'It is particularly alarming that the strikes were carried out by a country that is a permanent member of the UN Security Council'. Russia, the permanent member of the UN Security Council itself, has been waging its unprovoked all-out war against Ukraine since February 2022, bombing Ukrainian cities and attacking Ukraine on the ground. 'We urge to stop the aggression, to step up efforts to create conditions for returning the situation to the political and diplomatic track,' the Moscow statement said, referring to the US strikes. At the St Petersburg forum before Washington's strike, Vladimir Putin said that Iran had not asked for help since the beginning of Israel's air campaign. The Russian president added that the comprehensive partnership treaty between Moscow and Tehran has no articles related to the military sphere, which is ironic, given Russian production of Iranian developed Shahed-136 drones (aka the Geranium-2). Euronews spoke with Nikita Smagin, an orientalist and author of the book "All Iran. The paradoxes of life in an autocracy under sanctions" about what is at stake for the Kremlin. Smagin says the Russian side has previously emphasised that its alliance with Iran is not a 'military one' and Moscow is therefore not obliged to provide it with military assistance. "It is logical to expect that Russia will not interfere in what is happening, because it does not want to risk for the sake of Iran the aggravation of the situation with Israel and the United States," the expert says. Smagin notes that Tehran's decision not to request military intervention from Moscow before the US strikes is not surprising. "The Islamic Republic was built from the very beginning on the ideas of sovereignty," he says, adding that one of the driving ideas behind the restructuring of the Iranian state was to put an end to the interference of foreign players, primarily the US and the UK, in Iran's internal affairs. "In this sense, Iran has never turned to Russia for help and is not turning to Russia now because it is afraid of losing some sovereignty, of giving up some of its sovereignty to Russia, as was the case with Bashar al-Assad," Smagin says. But the situation could change. "If only because Putin drew attention to the fact that he does not even want to think about the assassination, the destruction of Khamenei, it is obvious that these issues are somewhat disturbing to him," the expert explains. 'The fate of authoritarian leaders hurts Russia' According to US President Donald Trump, Washington knows "exactly" where Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is "hiding". Trump also said that the Iranian leader is "an easy target, but they will not kill him, at least not yet". If the Islamic Republic's regime falls or if it comes to physically destroying the Ayatollah, how will the Kremlin react to this? What would it mean for the Russian authorities? "In general, we see that the deaths in revolutionary processes, the destruction of heads of authoritarian states in general hurts the Russian side. We remember how Putin reacted to the assassination of Gaddafi," notes Nikita Smagin. The rebels were primarily operating there, but not without the assistance of foreign forces, including British intelligence and the Emirates. But nevertheless, all this looked like a serious "wake-up call" for Putin. And, apparently, this was one of the reasons why he began to change his positioning in the international arena. According to the analyst, if the Islamic Republic collapses, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei may well be granted asylum in Russia. "This is already an established practice. I think it is not that it is excluded. But if Khamenei is eliminated, it will not cause any joy in the Kremlin. They believe that killing leaders is a red line, beyond which in fact Israel has already crossed. It has already eliminated Hezbollah leaders, for example," he says. 'It will be easier to draw up the budget' The new crisis in the Middle East may hit Russia's influence in the region, but the sudden escalation has brought the Kremlin some good news. At the G7 summit in Canada, for example, it was decided not to lower the price threshold for Russian oil so as not to further destabilise the market. Since the end of 2022, one of the key aspects of leverage on Moscow has been the establishment of price ceilings for Russian oil at $60 per barrel. Three and a half years into Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU has proposed lowering the price ceiling to $45 per barrel, but it will have to wait for now. "If we take disintegration in Iran as a whole, or rather regime change, because disintegration (of the country) is already a concomitant, then, of course, it threatens Russia's interests in the long term," says Nikita Smagin. "The Kremlin, of course, expects to benefit from this in the short term: oil prices will go up very seriously. The worse the situation gets, the higher the prices will be and the easier it will be for the [Russian] budget to be drawn up - this year, by the looks of it, there could be problems with it," the analyst explains. According to Smagin, Russia will benefit in the current moment, but in the longer term, regime change and "turning Iran into some permanent point of instability threatens, of course, Russia's strategy in the Middle East, because a lot of effort has been invested in Iran." "Iran has been a reliable partner of the Kremlin on many fronts, " he says. "A lot of projects, and strategically important ones at that, were planned to be conducted through Iran, for example, the [transport corridor] North-South project, a possible gas hub. This, of course, is all for the future, but nevertheless, in the event [of the regime's collapse] there will be no possibility of realising it. In the long term, it will be a loss and a setback for the Russian side." 'The peak of Russia's military cooperation with Iran has long passed' In more than three years of full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has succeeded in "localising" the production of Iranian-designed drones. According to Nikita Smagin, Iran's importance as a supplier of Shahed-136 drones is in the past. The peak of military co-operation between the two countries came in 2022. As the expert notes, at the beginning of last year, up to 90% of components were not Iranian. "Only the engines were supplied from Iran. Everything else was made by Russia," he adds. "Even if localisation is not 100 percent now, it is very close to that. I think Russia will find ways to replace that, not to mention that the Shaheds don't play as big a role as they used to." "Still, there is a huge amount of in-house development. Russia has been investing in drones during this time," Smagin explains. "Moreover: even if we're talking about the Shahed specifically, it's not even strongly Iranian anymore. The Geran-1 and Geran-2 drones are very much redesigned, because the Iranian version was not as effective as many expected," he notes. In an interview with Kommersant, Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, describes the Shaheds' flight characteristics as "primitive" and "allowing them to be shot down en masse even with 7.62 mm anti-aircraft machine guns." He also writes of the "moped" engine sound, "alerting the entire neighbourhood to the drone's arrival." 'In Israel, Russia's role as a mediator is looked upon with no apparent antipathy' As Hannah Notte, a political scientist and expert at the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies, writes, Russia has always had limitations on how far it can go in supporting Iran. "The Kremlin's obsessive anti-Western agenda has raised the Islamic republic's profile as a partner, but Putin has other interests in the region - such as a long-standing, albeit complicated, relationship with Israel and the need to coordinate oil prices with OPEC - so he has been mindful of Israel's and the Gulf states' red lines when it comes to defence cooperation with Tehran," Notte wrote in a column for US outlet The Atlantic. Nikita Smagin believes that in the current conflict between Iran and Israel, Russia is no longer an "indispensable" mediator. "When the nuclear negotiations were going on, when Trump was trying to sign a nuclear deal with Iran, here Russia could act as an indispensable mediator," he says. "It was actually the only party that had the technical capability and was ready to export surplus uranium from Iran, pre-weapons grade or enriched beyond the required minimum per cent. Now, apparently, this issue is off the agenda". At the same time, despite the fact that relations between Israel and Russia, which became the first country in the world to receive a Hamas delegation after the 7 October attacks officially, have deteriorated, according to Smagin, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem look at Russia's role as a mediator "without any obvious antipathy". As Smagin notes, even after Moscow's invasion of 2022 and the subsequent wave of immigration in an attempt to avoid mobilisation, "a large number of agents of anti-Russian influence have appeared in the Jewish state, people who moved from Russia and have a very negative attitude to the Russian authorities and are obviously the backbone of anti-Russian sentiments in Israel."
