Israeli military says it killed two IRGC commanders
Israel's Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Saturday that the military had killed a commander in the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' overseas arm in a strike on an apartment block in the Iranian city of Qom.
The commander, Saeed Izadi, led the Palestine corps of the overseas arm, or Quds Force, Mr Katz said in a statement.
The Israeli military later said that it killed a second commander of the IRGC's overseas arm, who it said was Benham Shariyari, during an attack on his vehicle overnight in western Tehran.
It said the commander 'was responsible for all weapons transfers from the Iranian regime to its proxies across the Middle East'.
There was no confirmation from the IRGC on the killing of the two commanders.
The Quds Force built up a network of Arab allies known as the Axis of Resistance, establishing Hezbollah in Lebanon in 1982 and supporting the Palestinian militant Islamist group Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
But Iran-aligned network has suffered major blows over the last two years, as Israeli offensives since Hamas' October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel have weakened both the Palestinian group and Hezbollah.
Mr Katz said that Mr Izadi financed and armed Hamas during the initial attacks, describing the commander's killing as a 'major achievement for Israeli intelligence and the air force'.
Israel Defence Forces said in a statement that Mr Izadi was 'one of the main orchestrators' of the October 7 Hamas attacks. 'He was responsible for military co-ordination between the senior commanders of the IRGC and the Iranian regime with key figures in Hamas,' the statement read.
Mr Izadi was under US and UK sanctions over what they said were his ties to Hamas and Palestinian militant faction Islamic Jihad, which also took part in the October 7 attacks.
Last Friday, Israel launched a large‑scale air and covert strike campaign – including Mossad-backed drone operations – against military and nuclear sites in Iran.
The attacks killed senior commanders in IRGC and nuclear scientists, and damaged nuclear sites such as Natanz and Isfahan. Israel said its sweeping assault was necessary to prevent Tehran from moving closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon.
At least 657 people, including 263 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,000 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group.
Iran has retaliated by firing 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. Most have been shot down by Israel's air defences, but at least 24 people in Israel have been killed and hundreds wounded.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
39 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Israeli strike in Iran kills ex-bodyguard of Hezbollah leader Nasrallah
An Israeli air raid in Iran has killed Hussein Khalil, a former bodyguard of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, a senior official from the Iran-backed group confirmed on Saturday. Khalil, widely known as Abu Ali and nicknamed Nasrallah's 'shield,' was reportedly killed near the Iranian-Iraqi border after crossing into Iran, according to the official, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity. An Iraqi armed group also stated that one of its commanders had died in the same strike, and confirmed the deaths of both Khalil and his son.
Al Etihad
2 hours ago
- Al Etihad
Egyptian FM, Witkoff discuss Iran-Israel escalation
21 June 2025 23:26 CAIRO (WAM)Minister of Foreign Affairs, Emigration, and Egyptian Expatriates Badr Abdelatty made a phone call on Saturday with Steve Witkoff, the US President's Special Envoy for the Middle East, as part of ongoing coordination and consultation between Egypt and the United States regarding the dangerous and rapidly evolving developments in the region, MENA call addressed the growing regional tensions, particularly the military escalation between Israel and Iran, and the serious threat it poses to regional security and stressed the importance of de-escalation, a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, and the resumption of negotiations on the Iranian nuclear affirmed that military solutions are not viable for regional conflicts and that peaceful settlement and political dialogue remain the only path to ensuring lasting stability and peace in the Middle East. For his part, Witkoff shared the US perspective on the evolving situation and the ongoing efforts to give diplomacy a chance to contain the crisis. Israel-Iran Conflict Continue full coverage
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Iran has backed itself into a corner in the conflict with Israel and the US
The continuing standoff between Iran on one side and a US-backed Israel on the other is happening not just in military terms but also in the realm of representation. The warring parties are performing in the battlefield and in the public domain. The latter acts as a window that reveals both political and military strengths and weaknesses, giving a glimpse of the course this war is likely to take. Military developments as well as public messaging strongly indicate that Iran is fighting a losing battle. Israel is framing its attacks on Iran as being about self-defence; presenting the Iranian population with an opportunity for freedom; and saving the world from the threat posed by Tehran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly urged the Iranian people to rise up against the establishment, casting Israel as their external liberator. But his framing of Iran as a threat to the world transforms the war from a bilateral issue into a global matter. This framing was echoed by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who described Israel's attacks as 'dirty work Israel is doing for all of us', with 'us' here referring to Israel's allies but also the world at large. Such a characterisation of the attacks on Iran is meant to serve as an endorsement of their legitimacy and necessity, standing in stark contrast to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, which many countries in and outside the West publicly condemned as illegal. Though Israel's attacks are presented as being for the sake of global security, it is the US that has taken ownership of the overall narrative of the war. Even if Washington does not directly intervene in the war militarily, President Donald Trump has presented the US as its agenda setter. He has called on Iran to surrender, insinuated that the life of its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is in the US's hands, and said that 'we have complete and total control of the skies over Iran'. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons During the Israel-Hezbollah war, the Israeli army's Arabic-language spokesperson, Avichay Adraee, gained prominence for issuing orders to Lebanese residents to "evacuate" their homes ahead of Israeli strikes, leading many commentators to say that Mr Adraee had become the de facto leader in those areas. Mr Trump is playing a similar role in his call for the residents of Tehran to 'evacuate'. The statements by Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu are not incidental. They are crafted to send a message to Tehran's ruling class that it is the US and Israel that are in charge in Iran. This is an example of psychological warfare amplified by the tools of the digital age, where such statements are not only repeated in the media but also go viral. Mr Trump has also played on the blindness of the Iranian regime regarding the position of the US towards Iran. Tehran appeared to regard the chances of US intervention against Iran's nuclear facilities to be unlikely despite Mr Trump's repeated affirmations that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. Mr Trump's 'I may do it; I may not do it' statement about direct US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites serves as a tool to undermine the Iranian establishment's self-belief. The messages from the US and Israel have also caused a notable shift in Hezbollah's public discourse. Following the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, Hezbollah swiftly declared that it would join Hamas in what the Lebanese group called 'the war of assistance'. For several months, Hezbollah kept issuing messages of defiance through its various communication channels and the speeches of its then-leader Hassan Nasrallah. The present situation is rather different. When Israel began attacking Iran earlier this month, Hezbollah was quick to issue a statement saying the group would not initiate an attack on Israel in the course of the war. The choice of language was for the group to try to save face in justifying its inability to support Iran militarily against Israel. Iran is left alone in trying to save itself and its reputation. While the Islamic Republic's rise is commonly associated with the notion of revolution, Tehran has, from the beginning, also adopted a framework of victimisation as a core part of its identity. As early as 1979, Iran's rulers presented the country as a victim of US imperialism, saying that resistance against this American project was a key mission for the republic. Such framing has not gone away. Iran continues to call the US 'the Great Satan' and justifies much of its foreign interventions in terms of countering what it regards as American evil. Having adopted this rigid framing of the US for almost five decades, Tehran has backed itself into a corner. Being seen to compromise in the face of American pressure means losing the credibility that the Iranian establishment has cultivated in the eyes of its supporters both domestically and regionally. This is why Mr Khamenei's response to Mr Trump's call for Iran to surrender has been to recycle the same tired trope of 'this nation is not one to surrender'. Some observers are making comparisons between the current war Iran is fighting and the Iran-Iraq War, which ended in 1988 when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini reluctantly accepted that Tehran had no choice but to 'drink the poisoned chalice'. There is speculation whether Iran will eventually follow a similar scenario regarding Israel. But for Iran, Israel is the US-backed 'Little Satan'. There can be no compromise as far as Iran's ruling class is concerned because this would mean losing its raison d'etre. If the end game is defeat either way, the regime would rather face it as a victim than as a quitter.
