The Iranian regime may be strengthened or weakened - it is just too hard to tell
Incentive to possess nuclear weapons has jumped
Might must not be right - the erosion of rules
How come New Zealand cannot forcefully defend our interest in rules based order
Regime may be strengthened or can have been weakened - it is just too hard to tell
Though the Iranian regime is repressive and unpopular to many Iranians, an unprovoked attack which has killed hundreds of Iranians may rally the cause of national defence. The regime does also maintain support by certain sectors of society; and even those that do not support the government surely look upon Western regime change wars in the region with horror - they don’t want Western “freedom” at the barrel of a gun. Paradoxically, the attacks may strengthen the government rather than weaken it - as the 1980-1988 (far more lethal) Iran-Iraq war did (million+ casualties). Iran was even more isolated in those days, with both the USSR and the USA on Sadam’s side in Iraq (side note: some European firms sold chemical agents to Sadam for horrid gas attacks). However, those were revolutionary times, and times have changed, a twenty year old in 1980 is now sixty five, who knows what a twenty year old today, in Iran’s youthful population of 90 million, is willing to do. In addition, the government of Iran has looked feeble especially in its air defence against the initial Israeli attack. In addition, Western media has consistently got it wrong when it comes to gauging popular sentiment within the country (as it has in many Middle Eastern countries) - whether this is by design or ignorance - who knows - Western media outlets simply do not have good eyes on the national mood in Iran.
Incentive to possess nuclear weapons has jumped
Not only for Iran, but any country which is in US crosshairs. One has to be just nominated a “rogue state” by an erratic and unpredictable US regime, and a B2 may be on its way. Iran has already
No one knows what happens next. But imagine you're the Iranian gov. You give up nuclear weapons in 2003. You try diplomacy for decades only to be bombed by Israel and the USA, both promising your destruction. The rational next move is getting a nuclear weapon to defend yourself. -Lee Fang, Journalist, Twitter/X
Some online betting markets show the chance of Iran developing a nuclear weapon has actually jumped since the US attack.
Trump's message to the world: if you have nukes like North Korea I'll trade love letters with you, if you don't I'll pull out of agreements you're keeping and bomb you during diplomacy. Just devastating to non-proliferation. -Ben Rhodes, Twitter/X
Might must not be right - the erosion of international law
Carl Bildt former Swedish PM and big proponent of rallying Europe against Russian aggression Ukraine was unfortunately disappointed by the outcome
I will look with keen interest on whether 🇪🇺 today refers to international law in what it will say on the 🇮🇱🇺🇸 strikes on 🇮🇷. The 🇬🇧🇫🇷🇩🇪 statement was remarkable for completely ignoring the subject. I hope they understand that by being blind on this issue they undermine their position also on 🇷🇺 war against 🇺🇦. Might must not be right. -Carl Bildt, Twitter/X
Laws do not really work when they are selectively applied - they are no longer laws.
I've been thinking about Eisenhower & how different the world was... you can't have one law for Israel & the US & another law for Iran, otherwise it's not the law. -Rory Stewart, the Rest is Politics
European voice becoming more and more irrelevant - what does Europe actually stand for these days if it cannot denounce an open act of aggression against a sovereign state? Their voice on Ukraine will sounds weak.
How come New Zealand does not forcefully defend our national interest
New Zealand would do well to take counsel from Asian capitals on this one - Japan and South Korea for instance - have taken a strong stance against open American and Israeli aggression. Unfortunately however it appears New Zealand political security types are affected by a black & white threat mentality, which is out of whack with today's world, and NZ's place in it. New Zealand must form its own views on the Middle East and elsewhere, informed by its own interests, values, and history & national project of reconciliation - as a bicultural nation founded on the Treaty of Waitangi. New Zealand’s strong anti-nuclear credentials should stand us in good stead here. Upholding international law on such basic questions of aggression must be primordial for a small state like New Zealand. We could do well to observe other small states like Ireland, or Norway and wield authentic soft power. Instead, we let it wither away.
#NZ is right to call for return to diplomacy on #Iran nuclear issue. Not easy as talks underway were scuttled by Israel & US bombing in what seems to be clear breach of international law. NZ should call that out. -Helen Clark, Twitter/X
Other interesting finds:
Rest is Politics episode with Rory Stewart
Here is on Iranian emphatically rejecting so called do-gooder “freedom lovers” in the West.
Alan MacLeod on X: "Thread🧵 In light of Iran's allegations about WhatsApp sharing user location data with Israel, it's important to understand how deep Israeli intelligence penetration of big tech firms goes. I've been working on this topic for 4 years.
L'oeil Medias on X: "Ardavan Amir-Aslani Franco-iranien: " Moi, si vous voulez, en tant que franco-iranien, j'ai du mal à accepter l'idée que mon pays soit bombardé quotidiennement, toutes les 15 minutes, par une puissance étrangère, et pas n'importe laquelle, un pays poursuivi pour génocide devant
Timothy Snyder on X: "Five things to remember about war: 1. Many things reported with confidence in the first hours and days will turn out not to be true 2. Whatever they say, the people who start wars are often thinking chiefly about domestic politics 3. The rationale given for a war will change" / X
When can “Self Defense” be used as a legitimate argument for an attack?
Article 51 of the UN Charter, which preserves the “inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations”. Self-defense is permissible solely in response to an armed attack. However Western leaders are sing the refrain of “Self Defence” for Israel:
We, the leaders of the G7, reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. In this context, we affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself. We reiterate our support for the security of Israel. We also affirm the importance of the protection of civilians. -G7 Leaders
The prime minister was clear that Israel has a right to self-defense and set out the UK’s grave concerns about Iran’s nuclear program -UK PM Starmer
France reaffirms Israel’s right to defend itself and ensure its security. To avoid jeopardising the stability of the entire region, I call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint and to de-escalate. -French PM Macron
And taking it further:
the utmost respect for the Israeli army and the Israeli government because they have had the courage to do this -German Chancellor Merz
Nuclear facilities, particularly nuclear power plants, enjoy special protection under international humanitarian law (IHL), as codified in the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. These provisions are designed to prevent catastrophic humanitarian and environmental consequences arising from attacks on such installations.
Article 56 of Additional Protocol I (API) and Article 15 of Additional Protocol II (APII) to the Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibit attacks on nuclear power plants and other installations containing dangerous forces, such as dams and dykes, even if they are considered military objectives, if such an attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population