'As result, Netanyahu 'convinced' Trump to go to war with the help of overoptimistic Israeli intelligence assessments, essentially explaining to him that they only need to bomb Iran for 3-4 days, and the regime would then collapse.'
'Rather unsurprisingly, Netanyahu is ever since blaming his own intel service for the entire operation failing.'
Key Points
- 'For Israel, a 'victory' would be an Iran without the IRGC-regime, or without its ballistic missiles and nuclear programme. Neither of these aims is achievable.'
- 'Israel is entirely out of control -- built as it is on exceptionalism, supremacy and immense volumes of hatred; openly and proudly fascist, and genocidal, and knowing that it's acting with complete impunity.'
- 'The Israeli assassination of Khamenei and other top political and military leaders in Iran have brought to power the ultra-Khomeinists within the IRGC. They have no reason to seriously negotiate with the USA because from their point of view the US government (plus the Senate and the Congress) is not even in a position to negotiate as it's controlled by Israel.'
As we enter the final days of the two-week ceasefire between the United States, Israel and Iran that has halted a war that began on February 28, Washington and Tehran remain poles apart on what they view as a comprehensive agreement.
Will the ceasefire continue? Will the peace talks between Iran and the United States resume after they failed in Islamabad last week?
Tom Cooper, an Austrian aerial warfare analyst and historian who writes on small, little-known air forces and conflicts, and is a specialist in Middle Eastern air forces and those in Africa and Asia, tells Rediff's Swarupa Dutt that with protagonists like Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, the world cannot be sure whether a nuclear threat is simply a threat.
"Iran's nuclear programme is still alive and includes 408-460 kg of uranium enriched to 80%. It still has thousands of missiles buried under rubble," says Cooper.
"And even if the USA stops, Israel is not going to stop, which means that Iran has no reason to stop," adds Cooper, an author and co-author of over 50 books on war and conflict "because it is now headed by ultra-Khomeinists who are more likely to convert Iran into another North Korea, than give up to US-Israel.
"Israel is assassinating any negotiators. Therefore, I do not expect them to make any kind of concessions to the USA, nor to accept any kind of US conditions," says Mr Cooper in part one of two-part interview.
The West has been calling the US-Israel attack on Iran, a conflict, like it did during the Russian invasion of Ukraine three years ago. Is the term a misnomer and why? Or why not?
Sorry, I do not follow the Western media, so I can't really say what they call what is simply the US-Israeli-Emirati war of aggression on Iran.
Is a nuclear threat by US-Israel on Iran simply that -- a threat?
Sadly, under Trump and Netanyahu, one can never be sure, especially since Israel is entirely out of control -- built as it is on exceptionalism, supremacy and immense volumes of hatred; openly and proudly fascist, and genocidal, and knowing that it's acting with complete impunity.
Therefore, there are open talks about deployment of nuclear weapons in the Israeli media and by members of the government.
And, considering Israel's influence -- via the AIPAC -- upon the US Senate and Congress....
[The American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC is a powerful, bipartisan US-based lobbying group founded in 1954 that advocates for strong US-Israel relations.]
'Pakistan's nuclear deterrence was none'
But aren't nuclear threats simply a game of who will blink first much like the Pakistan nuke threat to India during Operation Sindoor in May last year.
There is a difference in so far that last year the Indian air defences shot down over 95% of whatever Pakistan was shooting at India -- ballistic missiles, air-launched ballistic missiles, artillery rockets, and UAVs.
That meant that Pakistan was left without a weapon that could deliver any of its nukes.
In an article earlier, I have said that Pakistan was in possession of a significant nuclear arsenal, but has proven unable to 'deliver' the same upon India, because the Indians were shooting down whatever weaponry the Pakistanis fired at them.
The Indians then grew fed up and they made it clear to Islamabad that they can also destroy whatever target in Pakistan they want to destroy. The Indians felt so 'safe' from Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, that they -- between others -- targeted the Kirana Hills.
The total net result was that Pakistan's nuclear deterrence was none.
In the case of Israel, the country has no problem to deliver a nuclear weapon upon Iran and due to its entirely hollow propaganda -- lies, and mythology -- Israelis feel they have been cornered and so are 'forced', and 'must do so'. There is no comparison.
The fact that US is geographically too far to nuke Iran means it would have used Israel's nuclear weapons? Is that correct?
The mass of US aircraft can deliver 'tactical' nuclear weapons (like B61 free fall bomb). Also there are F-35, F-15, F-16, F/A-18E/F etc, apart from B-1B and B-2A bombers and the Tomahawk cruise missiles. So, distance doesn't matter.
With the two-week ceasefire on, and brinkmanship by the US clearly not working, has Iran won a strategic victory?
Yes, it has -- and then not only for such reasons. Mind that before the US-Israeli-Emirati attack, the passage of the Hormuz Strait was free. Additionally, the US-Israeli-Emirati alliance was not only after 'regime change', which failed anyway, but also after destroying Iran's nuclear programme (which is still there, including, 408-460 kg of uranium enriched to 80%), destroying Iran's missile programme (still there, and still in full strength), etc. Nothing of this was achieved.
'Trump is entirely irresponsible and unaccountable'
Where do you think the war is headed with all parties claiming victory? And what will be victory for each of the three countries?
The situation is such that the Israeli assassination of Khamenei [Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei] and other top political and military leaders in Iran have brought to power the ultra-Khomeinists within the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps].
They have no reason to seriously negotiate with the USA because from their point of view the US government (plus the Senate and the Congress) is not even in a position to negotiate as it's controlled by Israel (through the AIPAC).
In turn, Israel is assassinating any negotiators. Therefore, I do not expect them to make any kind of concessions to the USA, nor to accept any kind of US conditions.
Trump is entirely irresponsible and unaccountable and thus can declare a 'victory' any time, regardless the reason.
For Israel, a 'victory' would be an Iran without the IRGC-regime, or without its ballistic missiles and nuclear programme. Neither of these aims is achievable.
Do you think that even if the US and Israel stop bombing, Iran will not stop until it can clearly define and establish deterrents that guarantee it won't be attacked again?
Even if the USA stops, Israel is not going to stop, which means that Iran has no reason to stop.
'Netanyahu has infiltrated Trump's cabinet'
Netanyahu has clashed with every US president ever since he has been Israel PM. In 1996, he lectured Bill Clinton who grumbled to his staff: 'Who the f**k does he think he is? Who's the f**king superpower here?'
How did he make Trump toe the line and join the war against Iran? What do you think Israel promised Trump?
This is a slightly longer story. First, is that the control over Israel was assumed by Zionist extremists. One of the bi-products of this was that the Netanyahu cabinet de facto forced its own intelligence service into making too optimistic predictions regarding Iran.
In the USA, Netanyahu has, through the AIPAC, infiltrated Trump's cabinet.
Trump is ignoring warnings from his top generals all the time, and has, reportedly, been bribed by $300 million in cash.
[General Dan Caine, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, had cautioned President Trump and senior officials before the war began that a potential military campaign against Iran would involve serious risks -- particularly the danger of being drawn into a long, drawn-out conflict.]
As result, Netanyahu 'convinced' Trump to go to war with the help of overoptimistic Israeli intelligence assessments, essentially explaining to him that they only need to bomb Iran for 3-4 days, and the regime would then collapse.
Rather unsurprisingly, Netanyahu is ever since blaming his own intel service for the entire operation failing.
Netanyahu supported a Mossad strategy aimed at triggering a popular uprising at the outset of the war with Iran but now he is frustrated that those expectations have not materialised.
According to a report by The New York Times, Netanyahu discussed the plan while trying to convince Donald Trump to support military action against the Islamic Republic.
This is a quote from Trump: 'Number one, we have a safe country. We had to take a little detour because we had a madman named Khomeini, who sadly is no longer with us. And we had regime change already. We've knocked out one regime, then we knocked out the second regime. Now we have a group of people that's very... that are very different.'
Please demystify this quote with reference to the following:
a. Was the US ever at threat from Iran?
b. Where is the regime change?
c. Who is the group of people he is talking about?
This is complete nonsense by an incompetent who has no clue on what is he talking about.
Mojtaba Khamenei is his father Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's former chief-of-staff. As such, he's excellently connected, and sitting on the IRGC's money.
The two other principal characters now in power (thanks to Israel's assassination of the ayatollah) are Ahmad Vahidi (IRGC commander) and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf (parliament speaker).
Both are ultra-extremist Khomeinists, more likely to convert Iran into another North Korea, than give up to US-Israel.
I had spoken of this in an article where I wrote that what we have in Iran is the most extremist 'wing' of the IRGC in power: The group of people that know no restraint (that, at earlier times was still exercised by Khamenei).
Mojtaba Khamenei was a chief-of-staff and the money-man already for years, while Vahid and Ghalibaf joined the then still 'future' IRGC back in 1978-1979 when they were in their teens. The IRGC was officially established on 1 January 1981 and these men worked themselves up the chain of command through acts like summary executions during the Kurdish uprising in Iran of 1979.
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff
© 2026