Latest news with #QuincyInstitutefor
The Sun
a day ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
WASHINGTON: For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran's Islamic Republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with US policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States -- like Israel, which encouraged him -- has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. 'We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want,' said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump 'has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years.' 'We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success,' said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. 'The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well,' he said. Weak point for Iran Yet Trump's attack -- a week after Israel began a major military campaign -- came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel -- besides obliterating much of Gaza -- has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. 'Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the US administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance,' said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. 'The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal,' he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had 'rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace.' Abrupt halt to diplomacy Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former president Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work -- which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. 'Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs,' said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. 'Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests.' Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. 'The US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, US foreign policy, global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order,' he said. 'Its impact will be measured for decades to come.'
New Indian Express
a day ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
WASHINGTON: For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran's Islamic Republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with US policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States -- like Israel, which encouraged him -- has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. "We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want," said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump "has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years." "We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success," said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well," he said.
France 24
a day ago
- Politics
- France 24
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States -- like Israel, which encouraged him -- has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. "We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want," said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump "has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years." "We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success," said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well," he said. Weak point for Iran Yet Trump's attack -- a week after Israel began a major military campaign -- came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel -- besides obliterating much of Gaza -- has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. "Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the US administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance," said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. "The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal," he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had "rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace." Abrupt halt to diplomacy Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former president Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work -- which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. "Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. "Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests." Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. "The US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, US foreign policy, global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order," he said.
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran 's Islamic republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with US policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States -- like Israel, which encouraged him -- has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. "We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want," said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump "has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years." Live Events "We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success," said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well," he said. Weak point for Iran Yet Trump's attack -- a week after Israel began a major military campaign -- came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel -- besides obliterating much of Gaza -- has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. "Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the US administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance," said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. "The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal," he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had "rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace." Abrupt halt to diplomacy Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former president Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work -- which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. "Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. "Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests." Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. "The US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, US foreign policy , global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order," he said. "Its impact will be measured for decades to come."
Time of India
7 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Iran is no pushover: Israel is learning the hard way
By all accounts, Israel's recent attacks on Iran -- marked by airstrikes on nuclear installations and the targeted killing of high-ranking military officials -- represent its boldest offensive gambit. Yet as the conflict draws on, what is emerging is not the picture of a weakened Iran grovelling for a deal, but rather a portrait of Israeli overreach. The Israeli leadership, it now seems, may have significantly underestimated the depth of Iranian resilience, the robustness of its military infrastructure and the reach of its missiles. As there is no let-up in the Iran-Israel conflict, with casualties mounting on both sides as they exchange missile attacks, many think Israel might have made a strategic miscalculation, as it is becoming apparent that it may not be able to subdue Iran on its own. 'They (the Israelis) underestimated the Iranian ability to regroup after the Israelis very successfully targeted the top leadership of the Iranian military and managed to kill several of them,' Trita Parsi, vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told CNN. Parsi said Israel believed they had 'disrupted Iranian command and control' but that idea was 'quickly restructured.' What we are seeing now is that 'Iranian missiles are successful in penetrating all layers of Israel's air defense systems,' Parsi said. Parsi was speaking to CNN as new waves of Iranian missiles rained down in the early hours of Monday morning and struck multiple locations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Esse novo alarme com câmera é quase gratuito em Guarulhos (consulte o preço) Alarmes Undo Also Read | Blind radar, blistering speed: How Israeli jets crippled Iran's air defence in 48 hours, something Russia couldn't do in 3 years The limits of Israel's air power Israel's attack on Iran's Natanz nuclear facility was hailed in some quarters as a major tactical success. However, on closer examination, the limitations of the strike have become starkly apparent. While parts of the facility suffered damage, reports suggest that the most critical sections, especially the subterranean enrichment halls buried beneath layers of reinforced concrete, remained largely intact. The Fordow facility, located deep inside a mountain and even more heavily fortified than Natanz, remains untouched. Intelligence assessments indicate that it would require American-supplied bunker-busting ordnance, likely deployed from American B-2 stealth bombers, to inflict lasting damage on such hardened sites. Despite its advanced air force and deep-strike capabilities, Israel simply lacks the tools necessary to neutralize Iran's nuclear infrastructure completely. Live Events "While the US has B-2 stealth bombers with 30,000lb massive ordnance penetrators that are designed just for this type of strike, Israel's options are more limited — if it is operating by itself," says a report in the Financial Times. "Israeli F-15 fighter bombers can carry 4,000-5,000lb GBU-28 bunker-buster bombs, each capable of punching through 5-6m of concrete. Israel does have such bombs but their numbers are a closely guarded secret, and few analysts believe the country has enough on its own to do the job." Israel's forces 'don't have enough 5,000-pounders' to take out Fordow and Natanz, retired US Air Force General Charles Wald, who now works for the Jewish Institute for the National Security of America, had said in April. 'They can do considerable damage to Iran's nuclear programme,' Matthew Savill, the head of the military sciences department at the Royal United Services Institute in London, told FT. 'It's doubtful they can destroy it all on their own, but I think they are prepared to keep hitting it over time.' This operational limitation has cast a long shadow over the strategic calculus behind the attacks. If the principal objective was to delay or dismantle Iran's nuclear programme, the evidence suggests that the mission fell short. Iran has, in fact, accelerated its nuclear activities in response, sending a clear signal that deterrence through limited aerial bombardment may no longer be viable. One fallout of the Israeli attack is Iran preparing a bill that will push it towards exiting the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The timing of this statement is also crucial, as Israel alleged that Iran is on the verge of building a nuclear bomb. Also Read | Sea shield activated: How Israel's navy used India-developed missile tech to stop Iran's drones Breach of Israeli air defences is a strategic shock Perhaps more disconcerting for Israeli defence planners is the revelation that Iranian missile forces managed to breach several layers of Israel's much-vaunted multi-tiered air defense systems, including the Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow systems. While Israel intercepted many incoming projectiles, a number of Iranian missiles penetrated these defences, causing damage and raising fundamental questions about the effectiveness of Israel's air defence in the face of a determined and technologically evolving adversary. Iran's Revolutionary Guards claimed to have employed a novel attack method that allegedly caused Israel's multi-layered defence systems to target each other. "The initiatives and capabilities used in this operation, despite the comprehensive support of the United States and Western powers and the possession of the most up-to-date and newest defence technology, led to the successful and maximum hitting of the missiles on the targets in the occupied territories," it said. Iran's ability to strike back is imposing an unpredictable cost on Israel as show the striking visuals of damage Iranian missiles have done in Israel. The command has regrouped Israel may also have underestimated the Islamic Republic's institutional resilience. The targeted assassinations of several top-ranking Iranian military commanders were expected to sow confusion within Tehran's defense establishment. Yet, contrary to Israeli expectations, Iran's military apparatus appears to have quickly regrouped. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps , long structured to withstand decapitation strikes, has shown an ability to reconstitute command hierarchies and maintain strategic continuity. This capacity for internal regeneration reveals the fundamental misapprehension at the heart of Israeli strategy: the belief that removing individuals would collapse operational effectiveness. In reality, the IRGC is deeply entrenched, ideologically driven and operationally compartmentalized, making it remarkably resistant to leadership attrition. Can Israel topple the Iranian regime? Although Israeli officials have been careful not to explicitly state that regime change in Iran is their endgame, the scale and nature of the recent strikes, especially the focus on top leadership targets, suggests that undermining the Islamic Republic's stability may well be a hidden objective. US President Donald Trump recently blocked an Israeli plan to assassinate Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, according to two US officials who spoke to Reuters. If Israel has regime change as one of its objectives, this would constitute a grave misjudgment. No regime in the Middle East has survived more pressure, sanctions, isolation and conflict than the Islamic Republic. From the Iran-Iraq War to decades of international sanctions, the regime has cultivated a political and military structure that is deeply entrenched. History suggests that air campaigns alone cannot produce regime change. From Serbia to Libya to Iraq, efforts to dislodge entrenched governments have typically required either massive ground invasions or internal revolutions, neither of which seems to be within Israel's grasp. If Israel's strategy hinges on triggering popular unrest or fractures in top command through airpower, it hasn't appeared to work so far. Israel is trying to drag the US into a war Perhaps the clearest indication of Israel's realisation that it can't go all alone against Iran is its apparent effort to draw the US into a broader conflict. With the realization that its military assets are insufficient to accomplish key strategic objectives, including neutralizing Fordow and toppling or significantly weakening the regime, Israel is lobbying, implicitly and explicitly, for deeper American involvement. This push, however, is fraught with risk. The US, while committed to Israeli security, is also acutely aware of the risks of escalation. A direct US-Iran war would destabilize global oil markets, risk American personnel stationed at military bases across the region, and potentially ignite a multi-front war involving other actors. It is far from certain that the US is willing to be drawn into such a scenario. Trump on Sunday called on Iran and Israel to "make a deal". However, he also suggested that fighting may continue before any agreement is reached. So far, it appears the US would prefer the conflict to end instead of jumping right into it. Israel has demonstrated tactical audacity by mounting bold attacks on Iran, but it may have misjudged Iran's depth, durability and capacity for calibrated retaliation. This has placed the region on a knife's edge as the conflict risks sliding into full-scale war, eventually drawing in the US as well as other actors.
