Latest news with #Gaddafi
Time of India
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Iran-Israel conflict: Donald Trump's caution on joining Israel airstrikes rooted in fears of creating 'another Libya'
President Donald Trump's recent hesitation to authorise military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities is rooted in a deep-seated concern: the risk of plunging Iran into chaos reminiscent of Libya's collapse after the 2011 NATO intervention. As per a New York Post report citing multiple administration insiders, Trump has repeatedly cited the North African nation's descent into anarchy as a cautionary tale, shaping his approach to the escalating crisis with Iran. The Libya precedent: A decade of anarchy Libya's trajectory after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi stands as a stark warning in Trump's mind, as per the report. In 2011, following a NATO-led bombing campaign—supported by the United States—the long-standing dictator was overthrown. Rather than ushering in stability, Gaddafi's ouster triggered a prolonged period of civil war, political fragmentation, and violence. The country has since splintered into rival governments and militias, with no unified authority and ongoing conflict between factions based in Tripoli and the east. Trump's frequent references to Libya are twofold, sources said: first, the chaos that ensued after Gaddafi's removal; second, the way the intervention complicated future negotiations with other adversarial states, such as North Korea and Iran. "He doesn't want it to turn into Libya," one insider said, underscoring Trump's reluctance to repeat what he sees as a costly and destabilising precedent. A two-week breather In the wake of Israel's recent preemptive airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Trump has opted to delay any US involvement for up to two weeks. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the president's wait-and-see approach, citing the "substantial chance of negotiations" with Iran that may or may not materialize in the near future. Iran's foreign minister is expected to meet with European counterparts in Geneva, while Trump's special envoy continues backchannel communications. The administration's posture is one of cautious patience, with Trump reportedly weighing input from advisors, international leaders, and the American public. Limited strikes, not regime change As per the New York Post report, sources close to the administration indicate that Trump's preferred military option, if any, would be tightly focused: limited airstrikes targeting Iran's nuclear facilities at Fordow and Natanz using 30,000-pound "bunker buster" bombs —munitions that Israel's air force cannot deliver. The goal would be to neutralise Iran's nuclear capabilities without toppling Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei or triggering a broader conflict. 'Libya was a much more extended kind of bombing commitment, and it ended up being regime change,' one source noted, contrasting it with Trump's current thinking. 'If the regime falls [in Iran], then it's not on Trump, because that's not the goal of his very limited strike'. The president's reluctance to pursue regime change is also informed by the fear that a successor to Khamenei could be even more dangerous, and by a desire not to get entangled in the question of who governs Iran—a stance that resonates with his political base. Trump's caution is further shaped by the broader regional context. The Middle East is littered with examples—Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen—where US interventions have led to protracted instability and civil war.
Daily Mail
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Trump's indecision on Iran due to primal fear about 'another Libya'
President Trump gave Iran a two-week grace period to negotiate a nuclear pact over fears of repeating the chaos that took place in Libya and the devastating aftermath of Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump is confident he can still secure a diplomatic outcome amid the escalating war between Israel and Iran, despite threats this week that he would drag the US into the another crisis in the Middle East. 'He'd rather have a deal,' an insider told The New York Post about Trump's thinking. Trump fears causing 'another Libya,' referring to the North African nation's descent into anarchy and chaos after longtime dictator Gaddafi was toppled in 2011 during the Obama administration. At the time, the West hoped Gaddafi's death would pave the way for democracy, but instead the region was overrun with warlords and religious extremists. The deaths of a US Ambassador and several Americans at the embassy in Benghazi plagued former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for years. 'There are two reasons Trump talks about Libya: the first is the chaos after what we did to Gaddafi,' a source told the Post. 'The second is the Libya intervention made it more difficult to negotiate deals with countries like North Korea and Iran.' Experts warned that any effort to overthrow the Iranian regime, led by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, would further destabilize the region and risks fueling radicalization. Trump has also been an outspoken critic of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, calling it 'the single worst decision ever made.' 'Here we are, like the dummies of the world, because we had bad politicians running our country for a long time,' Trump said in 2018, comparing it to 'throwing a big fat brick into a hornet's nest.' The Iraq war was launched under President George W Bush under the pretext that Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction. It resulted in years of sectarian bloodbath and the deaths of 4,500 US service members. Trump insiders also said that the protracted US occupation of Afghanistan also weighed heavily on his mind. The invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 was intended to destroy the Taliban and Al-Qaeda but morphed into a nation building exercise that amounted to one of America's longest and most expensive wars. Trump's decision to show restraint for at least two weeks come despite Iran ramping up strikes and boasting that its nuclear material survived Israel's repeated bombing. The Iranian regime on Thursday was accused of launching at least one cluster bomb at civilian targets, which would be an extraordinary departure from global ethical expectations during war. More than 100 nations signed an agreement in 2008 against the use of cluster munitions, which burst and scatter numerous smaller bombs and are near impossible to accurately detonate. Now, Trump has repeated Israel's allegations that Iran is also close to developing nuclear weapons, despite assurances from his own national intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard just three months ago that that was not the case. 'I don't care what she said,' Trump hit back. 'I think they were very close to having one.' His full-throated criticism of Iran this week has sparked a MAGA civil war as close and loyal soldiers of the MAGA movement, including Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor-Greene, express dissatisfaction at his apparent shift away from his 'America First' mindset. Israel has been launching missiles at Iran in an attempt to cripple its nuclear capabilities since last Friday, and Trump has publicly expressed that he is willing to wade into the war to offer US military strength. But he stepped back from the brink last night as Britain prepared to take part in peace talks with Iran when he vowed to give Tehran two weeks to strike a deal with the West. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, quoting the president. In the previous 48 hours, the US President had demanded Iran's 'unconditional surrender' and threatened air strikes 'in days.' Negotiations will start today with Britain, France and Germany due to sit down with Iran's foreign minister in Geneva. And Iran-backed militias throughout the Middle East have vowed to attack US military bases in the region should the US launch a strike on Iran. 'We reaffirm, with even greater clarity, that should the United States enter into this war, the deranged (US President Donald) Trump shall forfeit all the trillions he dreams of seizing from this region,' Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah said. 'Undoubtedly, American bases throughout the region will become akin to duck-hunting grounds,' the statement added. Meanwhile, the leader of Hezbollah, a pro-Iran Lebanese militant group, said it would 'act as we see fit' in response to the ongoing war between its main backer Iran and Israel. Simultaneously, Iran boasted that all its nuclear material had been moved to 'a safe place' before Israeli missiles struck its nuclear sites. ' Israel hit Natanz, Isfahan, Khandab, and Arak, but they were already evacuated,' Iranian commander Mohsen Rezaei said on Thursday. 'All the materials have been moved to a safe place,' he added. The dramatic developments came on another day of horror as an Iranian ballistic missile struck Soroka Hospital, in Beersheba, which suffered extensive damage. The attack, a direct hit, left 71 injured and saw Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowing revenge. 'Iran's terrorist tyrants launched missiles at Soroka Hospital and at a civilian population in the center of the country,' he said. 'We will exact the full price from the tyrants in Tehran.' Israel's defense minister, Israel Katz, said that Iran's Supreme Leader 'can no longer be allowed to exist', branding him 'the modern Hitler.' Netanyahu also refused to rule out an assassination attempt. The US has previously vetoed two attempts on Khamenei's life. Israel also intensified its aerial attacks on Iran, blowing a large hole in a heavy water nuclear facility in Arak, having warned locals to evacuate the area in advance. Earlier in the week an Israeli strike hit the building housing Iran's state broadcaster in Tehran. Mr Trump's surprise retreat appeared a victory for the UK-led diplomatic push as Sir Keir Starmer appealed for 'cool heads.' The Prime Minister said: 'The principle is we need to de-escalate this. There is a real risk of escalation here that will impact the region, akin to Gaza, and will impact the economy. 'Yes, the nuclear issue needs to be dealt with but it is better dealt with by way of negotiations rather than conflict. 'I have been absolutely clear, we need to de-escalate this.' President Trump's peace envoy Steve Witkoff is also understood to be separately speaking to the Iranian foreign minister, who has repeatedly insisted Iran is acting in self-defence. Britain and Europe were also said to have warned Trump that bombing Iran would put Westerners at risk, fearing that it would trigger a wave of revenge attacks. The two-week time limit is a tactic the President has used before, notably with Vladimir Putin over the future of Ukraine. But, given that deadline has now twice passed without any concessions from the Russian president, questions were last night being asked of how serious all of Trump's tough talk is. Calls for a pause in hostilities came hours after US sources confirmed that the President had signed off detailed plans for US operations against Iranian nuclear facilities, believing they needed to be wiped out to stop Tehran forging an atomic bomb. Israel has attacked what it can but only 30,000lb US 'bunker buster' bombs have the capability to destroy plants such as at Fordow, deep in a mountain. Sources told CBS News that Trump was open to letting Iran shut down Fordow but had made up his mind that it could not continue to operate. 'He believes there's not much choice,' one source said. 'Finishing the job means destroying Fordow.' The Israelis have also said that Operation Rising Lion, as the now seven-day bombing campaign has been called, would be a failure if Fordow remained. Leavitt said that regime change was not Trump's priority and called for people to 'trust President Trump'. She stressed that there was no change in the US's position that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Israel will spread nuclear arms everywhere
Listen to article When ISIS started around 2014, many people opined that this terrorist group was created by the United States in order to further its interests in the Middle East. While that was not true, the United States actually created the conditions, which created the terror group. The US invaded Iraq and captured and tortured some of the men who had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda. Some of those men went on to create ISIS as a result of the humiliation they had faced at the hands of American occupiers. Similarly, the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty has been successful in preventing most of the states around the world from acquiring nuclear weapons not because the Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer, who was accused of selling the formula for nuclear bomb to US-designated rogue states, was confined but because most states did not feel the need to go nuclear. Nation states strongly believed that international laws, international bodies, and especially the United States would do the moral thing if these states ever faced aggression from other countries. That may have changed for good now if not before. Libya was one of those states that gave up its nuclear programme in exchange for benefits and guarantees from the United States. Gaddafi faced the result of that bad calculation and Libya is no longer there as we knew it. North Korea showed defiance in the face of similar pressure to give up its nuclear programme and while it is very poor, it has survived the American onslaughts and shenanigans. Pakistan is a vivid example as well. Iran signed the NPT. It allowed international inspectors on its soil to satisfy the needs of the world that it was not making a nuclear bomb. The result was that Iran was always accused of cheating and planning to rush toward making a bomb. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned the world that Iran would become a nuclear armed state within 3 to 5 years. He first said that in 1992 and then in 1995. He said it in 2015 and before and after that as well. None of it was true. Every time an American president opened his mouth about Iran, he issued a threat against it. Obama said, "I don't bluff" and "all options are on the table" including the "military component". After the 1979 revolution in Iran, America has worked against Iran at every step. It provided chemical weapons to Iraq to be used against Iran. It has imposed sanctions on Iraq and deterred other countries from buying Iranian oil. All despite Iran choosing not to go nuclear or maybe because of it. The truth is Iran never wanted to make a bomb. But that may have just changed. Their calculus, if they have people who can do so much as add and subtract, would only come to one conclusion: Iran must have nuclear weapons in order to deter the world from acting against it. Israel and its unconditional supporter America criticise and impose sanctions on nations that are capable of fighting and defending their sovereignty. Bloody wars are waged against countries that are defenseless, that are not nuclear armed states. Israel would have never ever dared of attacking Iran, had Iran been a nuclear armed state. More importantly, Iran playing the nice guy and being the norms following player have not yielded any defence benefits for it. It has rather weakened its defence. And this is not just playing inside the mind of Iran but rather inside the mind of every nation state. Being in the good books of the US by giving up the thought of nuclear weapons isn't a currency strong enough to be banked upon to ensure defence should a US ally attack you. Israel is creating the desire for states to want to go nuclear. Despite the habit of the world to tap itself on the shoulder for being civilised, in the end survival comes down to brute power. Not values, not education, not anything else.
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Al Jazeera
Songs of Love and War
This film is about the stories of conflict behind four classic Arab songs. Middle Eastern political songs often provide insights into historic events as well as into the songwriters and performers themselves. Where are the Millions?, commissioned by Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, directs its anger at countries that stood by during the first Palestinian Intifada. Alone is a song performed by Lebanese singer Fairuz. Its true meaning is unclear, but some say it relates to an attack from southern Lebanon on an Israeli town in 1974. Letter to a 1967 Soldier is a rallying cry to Egyptians to fight back after defeat in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. The final song, Tell the Sun, was banned in Egypt after the 1967 War. It might be about a political execution or young men building the Suez Canal. Whatever their true meaning, all four songs combine the dual passions of conflict and a deep love for Arab identity.
CNA
5 days ago
- Politics
- CNA
Commentary: Iran will only be more determined to go nuclear now
BUSAN, South Korea: Israel launched an unprecedented attack on military and nuclear targets across Iran on Friday (Jun 13), keeping up strikes over the weekend as it seeks to stop Tehran's halting nuclearisation effort. But the strikes tell every power considering nuclear weapons something else: to build them as rapidly as possible and in secret. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justified the attack as a preemptive strike – implying that Iran was on the cusp of attacking Israel. But it should be better understood as preventive, a first strike far in advance of a problem which ostensibly looms as an existential threat. There is little evidence that Iran was about to strike, nor that Iran currently has a nuclear weapon. Importantly, if it did, Israel almost certainly would not have used force. For anti-Western rogue states particularly, the lesson of this weekend is the same as that of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi's downfall: If you have nuclear weapons, you will not be attacked. The best defence against American or Western action is to nuke up and never denuclearise, no matter what they offer. IRAN WILL ABSOLUTELY GO NUCLEAR NOW Now, there is no reason for Iran to desist from nuclearisation. Mr Netanyahu's claims aside, Iran was not hellbent on building a nuclear bomb. In 2015, Iran struck a deal that limited its nuclear programme – in particular, limits on enrichment that would block its ability to build a nuclear weapon – in exchange for sanctions relief. Known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the deal was negotiated with the United States under former President Barack Obama, along with the United Kingdom, China, France, Germany, the European Union and Russia. The deal did not completely denuclearise Iran, and it was always possible that the nuclear infrastructure left in the country could have been weaponised. But a nuclear weaponisation drive almost certainly would have been detected – as a similar one was in North Korea in the 1990s. And Iran made it easy to detect such actions by agreeing to site inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Nevertheless, US President Donald Trump pulled the US out of JCPOA in his first term. The deal collapsed, and his successor Joe Biden was unable to put it together again. More broadly, hawks in the US and Israel long opposed any deal which left Iran with any nuclear capacity and pushed the debate toward strikes. This past weekend was the culmination of that effort. Israel, and the US by extension, are now committed to military denuclearisation indefinitely. After the Israel strikes, Mr Trump continued to urge Iran to 'make a deal before it is too late'. Iran will almost certainly never negotiate something like the JCPOA again. Even if Tehran did, trust among the parties would likely be so low that any new deal would fall apart. And Iran now has an obvious, huge incentive to nuke up as fast as possible. From Iran's perspective, the US reneged on the deal negotiated in good faith and now let its ally bomb the country. So now it will probably sprint for nuclear weapons as North Korea did in the 1990s and 2000s. Israel's latest strikes have killed nine nuclear scientists and damaged some above-ground sites, but it will be much harder to eliminate Iran's collective expertise and destroy facilities deep underground. So now, the only way to keep Iran from getting one will be to bomb it whenever it gets close – again and again. NORTH KOREA WILL NEVER DENUCLEARISE Other anti-Western states will learn the same lesson. And for those who already have nuclear weapons – North Korea and, less so, Pakistan – the lesson is to never, ever give them up. Its doctrine calls for the use of nuclear weapons at fairly low thresholds of conflict, and it is a serial proliferator. The US and its partners have demanded for 30 years that Pyongyang completely denuclearise. To be sure, complete denuclearisation of North Korea has always been very unlikely. Nuclear weapons are a great point of pride for the North Korean ruling family. They can be used on the battlefield to equalise the fight against a vastly superior South Korea. And they serve to threaten the US with massive retaliation should the US ever use force in the peninsula. But there has long been hope that some mix of concessions – such as sanctions relief or aid – might convince the North Korea to at least cap its warhead totals, permit inspectors and otherwise engage in arms control. This would probably not eliminate the Northern programme completely, but it might keep it at its currently low stockpile total (30 to 50 warheads is the usual estimate). Israel's attacks will be a sharp demonstration why Pyongyang should not do this. North Korea's nukes are the shield which protects it from exactly this sort of airstrike and other, perhaps harsher, military action. Again and again, this nuclear escalation fear has constrained the US, South Korea and Japan from striking, even after provocation. In 2010, Seoul wanted to respond to a deadly sinking of a navy ship in the Yellow Sea and a separate artillery attack on a South Korean island that resulted in civilian deaths. In 2022, Japan wanted to respond to North Korea conducting a long-range missile test over its islands. In each case, there was little to no response, likely for fear of nuclear escalation. THE BEST DETERRENT Israel's airstrikes will likely work in the short term to set back Iran's nuclear programme but in the medium-term they will only worsen the nuclear threat everywhere. The strikes will encourage illiberal, anti-democratic states everywhere to consider a nuclear deterrent as the best means to safeguard their security. Iran negotiated in good faith and was met by hawkish ideology and airstrikes; North Korea did not negotiate, raced for nuclear weapons no matter the costs, and never faces retaliation. Rogues everywhere – including Iran itself – will see the wisdom of the North Korean strategy more clearly after this.
