Iran’s Funeral Diplomacy: Martyrdom, Threats and Leverage

Iran is about to bury Ali Khamenei and turn his grave into a stage for nuclear bargaining and regional intimidation.

Next week’s funeral in Mashhad is being packaged as a regime stress test and a loyalty referendum in one.

Officials promise “tens of millions” in the streets, the largest event Tehran has ever seen. Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf — now also wearing the hat of “head of the revenge and funeral delegation” — is calling on Iranians to “write a glorious new page” and to shout for “blood vengeance” for their late leader.

The grief isn’t private, it’s a mobilization order.

Even the family tragedy is being fed into the script. The regime choreographed a farewell ceremony for Khamenei’s daughter‑in‑law and his wife, both mortally wounded in the strike that opened Operation “Lion’s Roar,” the attack that killed the supreme leader. Their funerals will be folded into Khamenei’s own.

Mojtaba Khamenei, the son and designated successor, pointedly skipped the goodbye — a sign of how carefully he’s curating his image as leader, not mourner, before the official oath.

Foreign guests will be carefully chosen: Pakistan’s prime minister Shehbaz Sharif and a senior figure from China’s standing committee are expected to attend, signaling who Tehran still counts as partners.

Around the ceremony, the security machine is turning mourning into a threat display. The “Khatam al‑Anbiya” emergency command has publicly warned Israel and the United States against “any miscalculation” during the funeral week, promising “severe and painful responses.”

Its commander, General Ali Abdollahi, urged “the enemies” to think very carefully — language that’s less about actual battlefield red lines and more about giving the regime an excuse to escalate if anything goes wrong.

In the same breath, the armed forces renewed their loyalty oath to the new leader, Ayatollah Sayyid Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei, and doubled down on two pressure points: the nuclear file and the Strait of Hormuz.

They’re demanding the nuclear issue be pulled out of negotiations and insisting that the Hormuz shipping lane they’ve drawn is under Iran’s “exclusive sovereignty.” Any ship that strays from that track, they warn, will be treated as a target.

So you get four layers at once: a mass funeral designed to project legitimacy at home, open threats to Israel and the U.S. to deter any strike in a moment of vulnerability, a nuclear posture that demands de‑linking the program from talks, and a maritime doctrine that treats one of the world’s key chokepoints as domestic waters.

The regime is trying to turn Khamenei’s burial into a binding contract: loyalty inside Iran, deference in the Gulf, and respect for its nuclear red lines — or else.

For everyone watching from the outside, the translation is simple. Iran is not using the transition to soften its stance. It’s doubling down, wrapping missiles, centrifuges and shipping lanes in black banners and religious slogans. The funeral is not just an end — it’s the launch event for Mojtaba Khamenei’s version of the same project.

#Iran #Khamenei #Tehran #nuclear #Hormuz #China #Pakistan #war #regime #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

Missiles, Fatwas and Uranium: Iran’s New “Negotiation” Manual

Tehran just put its nuclear doctrine back on the table — not in a secret memo, but as an open threat: you touch our leaders, we touch the enrichment levels.

Parliament’s National Security spokesman Ebrahim Rezaei now calls Israel’s defense minister’s threat to assassinate Iran’s national leader a “solid and justified reason” to review the nuclear doctrine and reopen Article 8 of the Islamabad agreement — the clause that locks in 60‑day cycles on enrichment and stored nuclear material.

If Israel keeps talking about killing our top people, the cap on uranium and the rules on stockpiles are no longer binding.

At the same time, speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has boiled Iran’s position down to one line: “We secure concessions not through dialogue, but with missiles.”

He warns that if the US and Israel don’t honor their commitments, Iran will “return to its measures” — a phrase Iranian outlets helpfully explain as ramping enrichment toward 90% weapons‑grade and resuming the regional missile activity that was slowed under the memorandum.

Negotiations, he says, exist mainly to make the other side understand how much worse things can get.

The IRGC is there to add volume and menace. Its commanders insist the army and Guards have their “finger on the trigger,” that any “miscalculation” by Washington or Jerusalem will trigger a “more destructive” response, and that Iran is ready for what they market as the “most ferocious offensive operation in history” in retaliation for strikes on its leaders and infrastructure.

Deterrence becomes a sales pitch: respect our red lines, or watch what happens when we decide you’ve crossed them.

Iran is turning threats against its leadership into leverage over its own nuclear ceiling. Doctrine review, enrichment, missile salvos — all are framed as righteous reactions to Israeli and American behavior, not as choices.

Every Western move, from covert operations to sanctions, becomes a knob Tehran claims it can use to slide itself closer to the nuclear threshold and still call it “defending rights.”

So the next time someone says the Islamabad framework is about preventing escalation, remember how Tehran is describing it at home: a contract that works only as long as enemies behave, and a nuclear doctrine that exists not to reassure anyone — but to remind them how fast “dialogue” can turn back into missiles.

#Iran #nuclear #Ghalibaf #Rezaei #IRGC #Israel #USA #Hormuz #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

#trump #oncle #energy #nuclear

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

📰 Bushehr: The Nuclear Plant That Was Struck, And Wasn’t

An Iranian deputy governor in Bushehr province told state media that “several points,” including the area around the Bushehr nuclear power plant, were hit in the latest U.S. strikes.

Iranian TV reported that an American projectile landed near the facility, and a few hours later there were more explosions reported in its vicinity.

Almost simultaneously, other Iranian outlets insisted there had been no strike on the Bushehr plant itself, and none on Kharg Island either.

That contradiction isn’t bad translation. It’s policy. Opposition-linked Iranian channels say the blasts in the province came from an attack on a “secret” Revolutionary Guards air base — a site that, by definition, does not officially exist and therefore cannot be “hit” in any authorized narrative.

Pro-regime voices, meanwhile, need the nuclear site to appear under threat enough to justify anger and retaliation, but not so damaged that Iran looks naked and incompetent.

Israeli media took the opposite route: they published footage under headlines like “Strike on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant,” then added breathless notes that a U.S. radioactive particle collection aircraft had crossed the Atlantic, proof (they implied) that nuclear facilities were now firmly in the crosshairs.

Reports of strikes also surfaced near Isfahan, home to another nuclear-related site, further feeding the sense that the atom, not just the coastline, is in play.

Iran denies a hit on the plant so it doesn't look exposed, and confirms hits "near" it so escalation stays justified.

Supporters abroad — whether cheering Washington or cheering Tehran — pick the version that fits their own storyline. The nuclear program itself remains the one thing everyone talks about, waves around in speeches, and uses to scare markets, while almost nobody claims to have actually seen damage to the core.

In this war, Bushehr is less a building and more a talking point: a place that’s always “almost” struck, “nearly” contaminated, “possibly” targeted — forever close enough to sell fear, never clear enough to admit what really happened.

#iran #us #bushehr #nuclear #propaganda #mediaWar #fakeTransparency

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

📰 The Mountain Under Fordow: Iran’s Nuclear Depth Chart Keeps Expanding

Public debate keeps asking whether the war “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear program.

Recent analysis of IAEA data says that’s the wrong question. It notes that most commentary fixates on Iran’s 60% enriched uranium — the material that sits one chemical step from weapons‑grade — while ignoring the hundreds of kilograms at 20% and 5%.

If Tehran chooses to further enrich all three tiers, the combined stockpile can yield fissile material for several nuclear devices at once.

The conclusion from nonproliferation experts is blunt: hitting facilities is not enough; the enriched material itself must be removed from Iran, otherwise the program can be rebuilt or repurposed into a “dirty bomb” scenario.

Satellite imagery from late June 2026, published by the Institute for Science and International Security and other monitors, shows continuing heavy construction at the so‑called Pickaxe Mountain complex — Kuh Kolang Gaz‑La — in the Zagros range, just south of the main Natanz enrichment plant.

Analysts estimate tunnels at roughly 80–100 meters below the surface, potentially deeper than the Fordow facility near Qom, which sits about 80–90 meters underground and has long been seen as the “bunker” of the program.

The new site spans several square kilometers, enough, in their view, to house a full‑scale enrichment cascade or secure storage for near‑weapons‑grade uranium.

IAEA inspectors have never been allowed inside Pickaxe Mountain. Commercial satellite photos show intensified truck traffic, expanding spoil piles, reinforced tunnel entrances and hardened perimeters — all the signature moves of a state preparing an underground facility to survive future airstrikes rather than to comply with transparency rules.

As one technical assessment puts it, the facility is not yet operational but is nearing completion, and its depth and size make it a “potential candidate” for any reestablished centrifuge and enrichment hub once above‑ground sites are hit.

Meanwhile, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi is left issuing generic warnings from Vienna.

After multiple projectile strikes near the Bushehr nuclear plant, he has “reiterated calls for maximum restraint to avoid nuclear safety risks,” stressing that nuclear sites and their surroundings should never be attacked.

But these statements track facilities he has partial access to. The mountain complex south of Natanz — the place most likely to become the next core of Iran’s program — remains outside his inspectors’ reach. The watchdog is watching a map that no longer contains the full project.

Above ground, warheads and headlines talk about “ending” the program. Below ground, a three‑tier stockpile of enriched uranium and a tunnel system dug deeper than Fordow keep that program one decision away from revival.

#iran #nuclear #natanz #fordow #pickaxeMountain #iaea #fakeDisarmament

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

How to “Talk” to Iran While Bombing It: The Veterans’ Guide

Four negotiators who’ve spent years in rooms with Iranians are basically saying: what’s happening now isn’t real diplomacy — and it won’t be until Washington chooses a goal and a tempo it can live with.

Trump’s team claims it wants regime change, an end to Iran’s nuclear and regional power, and a fully reopened Strait of Hormuz. Catherine Ashton’s point is simple: pick an endgame. If the U.S. and Iran don’t define outcomes they can both accept, “they’re not trying to do” diplomacy, they’re just performing it.

Federica Mogherini adds that trying to secure all of Trump’s demands at once is “clearly a non‑starter”; negotiations only restart if Washington settles on a realistic ultimate goal instead of a fantasy shopping list.

Mogherini also stresses tone. She recalls 2015 talks where a badly‑timed extra demand triggered a shouting match, and only a long break plus a narrow focus on the nuclear file got things back on track.

Her advice now: fewer impulsive, contradictory public statements, more rational, consistent messaging, and more players at the table to dilute the reflex to treat every sentence like a battlefield.

Timing is another fault line. Elliott Abrams argues against rushing back to broad talks, suggesting only a minimalist Hormuz deal for now: lift the U.S. naval choke if Iran lets shipping run. In his view, the last round left Tehran feeling triumphant and eager to monetize control of the strait, so a quick return to big negotiations would validate that.

Condoleezza Rice goes further: let Iran “stew” in a wrecked economy and internal splits, effectively using time and pressure, not agreements, as the main tools.

Deadlines make it worse. The current ceasefire memorandum gave both sides 60 days to reach a final deal on nuclear limits and Hormuz. Halfway through, the strait is closed, infrastructure is getting hit, and positions have hardened.

Ashton says timelines only help if both parties agree what’s realistically coverable in that period; otherwise they just set clocks on problems built for years, not weeks.

Robert Malley’s reminder is the most brutal for Trump’s style: Iranian talks are designed to be long and meticulous, with every clause revisited and verified. There is no clean “grand bargain,” only grinding detail work. A White House that “prizes speed and simplicity” while escalating militarily is, in his words, guaranteeing that anything it does get will be “very slow and extremely tough.”

Washington wants fast, maximalist wins, Tehran wants guarantees and leverage, and the people who know the file are all saying the same thing — you can fight over straits and bridges, or you can negotiate seriously over one clear objective, but you can’t pretend you’re doing both at once and expect it to end in anything but more war.

#iran #diplomacy #Hormuz #trump #nuclear #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

Araghchi’s War Memoir: How Khamenei Was Killed, Who Decides the Ceasefire, and What Iran Will Never Sell

In his latest interview, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi basically laid out three things: how the assassination of Ali Khamenei exposed an ongoing intelligence breach, how the ceasefire with the US was really approved, and what parts of Iran’s nuclear program are non‑negotiable.

On the assassination, Araghchi says the strike that killed Khamenei at the opening of the war came through an intelligence gap “that still exists and hasn’t been fixed,” one that also distorts decision‑making today.

He describes the morning of the attack almost in real time: at 8 a.m. on Saturday he meets the president and tells him “there is an atmosphere of war.”

At 9 a.m. he goes to Khamenei’s office to brief his chief of staff, Ali Asghar Mir Hejazi, on the Geneva talks — and while he is talking about that war atmosphere, the office itself is hit. That’s how Iran’s top leader dies: under US‑Israeli strikes, while his foreign minister is mid‑sentence.

Araghchi says he only went down into the tunnels for meetings “once or twice,” because from a certain point they felt they had the situation under control and the number of senior government casualties was dropping.

He notes he has not met Mojtaba Khamenei — the son who stepped into the leadership role — at all since his appointment, and that only a very small circle has access to him. That’s a quiet way of saying: the war state is being run by a bunker elite even many ministers don’t see.

On the ceasefire, he says the initial truce with the US was not approved in a big, formal Supreme National Security Council forum but in smaller, tighter meetings.

The council session to ratify the memorandum of understanding on the 10‑point plan ran from 9 p.m. to 3 a.m., and Iran’s condition for accepting the ceasefire was that all ten clauses it proposed would be the basis: recognition of enrichment, lifting sanctions, control and fees over Hormuz, withdrawal of US forces, compensation for war damage, and binding UN Security Council language. In his telling, Tehran forced Washington to accept that framework; in Washington’s telling, none of the heavy items are actually implemented.

On the nuclear file, he says he told Trump directly that uranium enrichment “is not for sale,” because the Iranian people have endured 20 years of sanctions over it.

Trump went public insisting “there will be no uranium enrichment”; Araghchi repeats that enrichment is the line Iran will not cross. That’s the core collision: Trump wants a clean zero‑enrichment headline; Iran wants the war to end with enrichment legitimized and paid for.

Araghchi moves between describing a “12‑day war” and a “40‑day war,” which tracks with the two phases: the initial US‑Israeli air campaign, then the longer cycle that dragged Gulf states in.

He claims that during the conflict one Arab country threatened to attack Iran, and Iran responded by hitting it with missiles every day. He also reveals that before the war they had already defined a code name — “110” — for the scenario of the leader’s assassination, meaning the system had pre‑written protocols for the moment Khamenei was killed.

Taken together, the interview paints a picture of a state that sees itself as both victim and strategist: blindsided by an intelligence hole big enough for a decapitation strike, yet convinced it forced the US to accept its ten‑point ceasefire terms; insisting enrichment is untouchable, while watching Trump publicly deny that; led by a new supreme figure so insulated that even the foreign minister hasn’t met him. It’s less a confession than a warning: Iran thinks it survived “110,” and it thinks that gives it the right to keep fighting — and negotiating — on its own terms.

#iran #Araghchi #Khamenei #ceasefire #Hormuz #nuclear #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

☢️ Israel’s Nuclear Apocalypse™: 30 Years of “Any Minute Now”

Historical fact: since the early 1990s, Benjamin Netanyahu has been promising that Iran will get the bomb “within 3–5 years.”

From his 1992 Knesset speech to his 1995 book, from the cartoon bomb at the UN to endless interviews, the deadline keeps rolling while reality stubbornly refuses to cooperate.

Israeli assessments swing from “by the end of the year Iran will have enough uranium for one bomb” in 2020 to “after the 2025 strikes Tehran has been pushed back two to three years,” but Bibi’s script never changes: “very soon, any day now.”

Campaign fact: in June 2025, the US and Israel hit Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Trump stood in front of cameras and declared that Iran’s “nuclear sites are totally and completely destroyed,” that the threat was over — “obliteration” as official branding.

Months later, US intel and media reports politely walked that back: the program as a whole survived, the clock was set back by months, maybe a year, and significant enriched stock and centrifuges were moved or hidden.

Before long, familiar estimates reappeared: Iran is roughly 9–12 months from a weapon, if it chooses.

Today’s intel line is boringly precise: Iran hasn’t made a formal decision to build a bomb, but it has the technical ability to get there in less than a year, even after airstrikes.

Netanyahu’s rhetoric lives in a different universe: it ignores three decades of missed “red lines” and insists that every new report means disaster is days away — until the next assessment pushes the bomb back to “a few more months.”

🇮🇷 “Mount Pickaxe” and the Engineering of Fear

After the June 2025 war, one thing became obvious: the “destroyed” sites were just the visible layer. According to satellite analysis and Western reporting, Iran has been moving thousands of centrifuges into tunnels under so‑called “Mount Pickaxe” near Natanz and hardening its program deeper into the Zagros rock. Israeli and Western estimates now say Tehran’s breakout time remains around 9–12 months. The capability exists; the political decision does not.

Netanyahu’s system doesn’t know what to do with that ambiguity. For 30‑plus years he has sold the same storyline: Iran is “on the verge,” “months away,” “approaching the point of no return.”

Trump, by contrast, tried to declare the story over: “we reduced Iran’s nuclear project to zero, the threat is gone,” a marketing campaign to book the war as a clean win.

A year later, Mount Pickaxe, missing enriched uranium and fresh intel estimates quietly resurrect the mantra: the program lives, the timeline is back.

The result is institutionalized paranoia. Israeli political discourse ping‑pongs between “we destroyed everything” and “we are one minute from annihilation.” Mount Pickaxe is not just an engineering project; it’s a metaphor. The real program is buried deep, adjusting and surviving. Netanyahu’s fear stays on the surface, feeding on a Schrödinger bomb that is always simultaneously “almost ready” and “just pulverized from the air.”

The Israeli “nuclear apocalypse” has become less a forecast and more a political operating system — one that outlives presidents, contradicts facts and still dictates policy.

#Iran #Netanyahu #Natanz #Fordow #MountPickaxe #nuclear #geopolitics #Israel #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🇸🇦☢️ Nuclear Without Normalization: Washington’s 30‑Year Saudi Bet

The US president, Donald Trump, has approved a 30‑year civil nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia that puts American firms at the center of the kingdom’s reactor and fuel build‑out — and keeps open a conditional door to uranium enrichment on Saudi soil.

The agreement is described as a multibillion‑dollar package meant to steer Riyadh away from Russian or Chinese vendors and lock in US influence over its nuclear infrastructure.

One key clause: US companies could build an enrichment facility in Saudi Arabia if a joint study later finds domestic fuel production economically warranted, with the administration arguing that American involvement is itself a safeguard against military misuse.

In plain terms, that is a structured pathway to a Saudi enrichment capability — a potential pathway to weapons if politics shift.

What the deal omits matters just as much. It does not require Saudi Arabia to adopt the IAEA Additional Protocol, which enables broader and more intrusive inspections beyond standard safeguards. It does not include the “gold standard” imposed in some past US nuclear agreements, which flatly bans enrichment and reprocessing — the model used with the UAE.

Congress will have about 90 days to review the agreement, but blocking it would demand a joint resolution and a two‑thirds majority capable of overriding an expected presidential veto, a threshold that makes rejection highly unlikely.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright is slated to sign with Saudi energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman as early as tomorrow.

The final piece changes the whole picture. The president has separated this nuclear package from the condition that Saudi Arabia normalize relations with Israel — a linkage that was central to earlier “grand bargain” plans and has eroded since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack and the war that followed.

Under Biden, the idea was a three‑part deal: security guarantees, civil nuclear cooperation and normalization bundled together.

After October 7, that political track stalled; now Washington is moving ahead on the nuclear track alone, with a conditional enrichment option, without the Additional Protocol and without the gold standard, on a three‑decade timeline.

Defenders of the deal argue there is a nonproliferation logic: if Saudi Arabia is going to build nuclear plants, better they be supplied and overseen by American companies than by Russia or China, with weaker transparency and no US leverage.

But that case collides with two hard facts. First, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told CBS back in 2018 that if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia would follow “as soon as possible” — an explicit political commitment to match any Iranian bomb.

Second, the US is currently bombing Iran over Hormuz while quietly offering Riyadh a conditional route to enrichment, in a region where the main proliferation fear already runs through Tehran.

In that context, the deal doesn’t just bend US nuclear norms; it rewrites the incentive structure.

A US‑backed Saudi program without the toughest safeguards says that access to advanced nuclear technology can be won without making peace with Israel and without accepting the strict inspection regime Washington used to treat as non‑negotiable.

Over thirty years, what this agreement most reliably guarantees is not stability, but a steady risk of future non‑proliferation crises centered on a kingdom that has already said it will chase Iran’s shadow.

#SaudiArabia #USA #nuclear #uranium #Trump #Israel #IAEA #Iran #MiddleEast #worldorder

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🧨 The New Middle East. Israel Isn’t In It

On February 28, 2026, when the joint US–Israeli strikes on Iran began, Netanyahu promised one thing: Israel helps break the Shia axis, America crowns it as the new regional center, and alliances form around Jerusalem.

Iran’s known nuclear sites were dismantled, Khamenei was killed and replaced within a day by his son Mojtaba, Hezbollah’s leadership was hit — the axis took a real blow. But the political endgame went elsewhere.

The Islamabad memorandum was agreed in mid‑June as a 60‑day framework: reopen Hormuz to commercial shipping, ease the US blockade, and negotiate over Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Netanyahu admitted he did not know its full text and Israel was nowhere near the table.

In July, after renewed US strikes and new American casualties, Iran publicly suspended its commitments, Washington went back to nightly waves of attacks, and the Hormuz crisis returned. Israel was excluded from a deal that then fell apart, while the regional rearrangement carried on without it.

That is the backdrop for the July moves. On July 7, Trump lifted sanctions on Turkey and opened the way to F‑35s despite Israeli objections.

On July 21–22, he approved a 30‑year civil nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia that gives Riyadh a conditional right to enrich uranium without demanding recognition of Israel.

The Saudi deal allows an enrichment plant if a future joint study finds domestic fuel economically justified, with no blanket ban on enrichment and no requirement for the IAEA Additional Protocol.

It doesn’t bring a Saudi bomb closer tomorrow; it rewrites the rules of who gets US nuclear tech and on what terms.

Three old exchanges snap at once. The atom‑for‑recognition bargain is gone: Saudis get nuclear status without normalizing with Israel.

The tech‑for‑no‑enrichment “gold standard” becomes just one precedent the UAE once accepted: after Riyadh’s softer terms, new customers will start from the Saudi baseline, not the Emirati one. And the Israeli “no” stops being a structural veto: big US decisions on Turkey and Saudi Arabia are now made over Israel’s head.

Around that, a new architecture emerges. Riyadh buys status and autonomy; Pakistan sells mediation between Washington and Tehran; Turkey builds capability with Russian, Western and Asian help.

The strikes that broke Iran’s program didn’t end the nuclear story in the region; they changed its cast. For years, Israel mattered because it was the main route into Washington and the hinge of regional deals. After July, that route increasingly runs around it.

The new Middle East is taking shape — just not by Israel, and not for it.

#MiddleEast #Israel #SaudiArabia #Turkey #Iran #nuclear #USpolicy #geopolitics #AbrahamAccords

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🧨 The New Middle East™: Israel as a Side Note

Netanyahu sold Washington a simple fantasy: Israel smashes the “Shiite axis,” America crowns it regional hub, and the new order is built around Jerusalem.

He delivered the demolition part — Iran’s nuclear program wrecked, Khamenei dead, Hezbollah leadership gutted — and then watched the political sequel roll out without him.

While he was declaring “objectives achieved,” Trump was cutting deals Israel wasn’t even allowed to read. The April ceasefire with Iran? Brokered in Islamabad, not Jerusalem.

The June memorandum? Named for Pakistan’s capital, negotiated through Pakistan and Qatar, with no Israelis at the table. By July, the pattern was open: Trump lifts sanctions on Turkey and talks F‑35s over Netanyahu’s objections, then signs a 30‑year civil nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia that opens a legal path to enrichment and demands no recognition of Israel in return.

That Saudi deal is sold as “one step closer to a bomb.” It isn’t — there is no plant, no study, no enriched fuel — but it kills three old bargains that once held the region together.

The tech‑for‑recognition trade is dead: Biden’s offer was reactors and guarantees in exchange for normalization with Israel; Trump split the package and handed Riyadh the nuclear half for free. The “gold standard” — US nuclear technology only if you renounce enrichment and accept intrusive inspections — becomes optional the moment the Saudis get softer terms than the UAE.

And the unwritten rule that big US decisions in the region require Israeli sign‑off evaporates when Turkey’s sanctions and Saudi enrichment go through against explicit objections from Jerusalem.

Everyone else uses the opening. Riyadh buys status and insurance: a possible enrichment plant, more room to defy Washington on airspace and oil, and a quiet test of how far a “partner” can drift before the US pays to keep it.

Pakistan sells what it really has — mediation between Washington and Tehran, the ability to host memoranda and ceasefires — instead of mythical warheads. Turkey accumulates capability from Russia, the West, and East Asia at once, building Akkuyu with Rosatom, shopping for new plants from Seoul, Beijing, and Washington, and sitting under unacknowledged US nuclear weapons at Incirlik.

Israel, meanwhile, discovers it has become both indispensable and irrelevant. Militarily, it helped break Iran’s program and the proxy network that constrained it for a generation. Politically, the road to Washington no longer runs through it.

The Saudis can get nuclear status without saying the word “Israel.” Turkey can get sanctions relief and a path to F‑35s while publicly clashing with Netanyahu. Pakistan can redefine the war’s endgame without inviting Jerusalem to the room.

The war against Iran didn’t end the region’s nuclear question; it changed the casting. The Saudis are buying status, the Pakistanis are selling brokerage, the Turks are quietly building competence. Status can be revoked. Brokerage can be sidelined.

Competence sticks. Israel still has a lot to offer — tech, intelligence, hard power — but its new role is nastier: a powerful player that can’t set the rules and can’t block the deals.

The New Middle East is under construction. Israel is still on the map — just no longer at the center of it.

#Israel #SaudiArabia #Turkey #Pakistan #Iran #Trump #nuclear #geopolitics #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

⚛️ Trump’s Saudi Nuke Deal: Treaty by Pen, Conditions by Post

Yesterday, Trump signed a 30‑year civil nuclear pact with Saudi Arabia that lets US companies build reactors and, after a joint feasibility study, potentially an enrichment facility on Saudi soil.

Today, he jumped on social media and announced that the whole thing is “totally subject” to Riyadh joining the Abraham Accords, with “no enrichment” allowed and only “Civil (Non‑Enriched) Nuclear Facilities” approved.

The text gives Saudi Arabia a path to enrichment; the president’s feed pretends it doesn’t — and makes Israel the gatekeeper after the signature, not before.

On paper, this is the deal Trump’s own team spent a year separating from recognition of Israel. The 123 Agreement reportedly drops the UAE‑style “gold standard”: no blanket ban on enrichment, no mandatory Additional Protocol, no explicit renunciation clause.

It positions US firms at the center of Saudi civil nuclear development and allows a US‑built enrichment facility if a joint US–Saudi study says so — exactly the kind of scheduled mechanism nonproliferation experts warned would weaken guardrails in the middle of a war against Iran’s nuclear program.

Now the same president who delinked nuclear talks from normalization in 2025 is trying to relink them, not by renegotiating the treaty, but by declaring that “if they don’t join the Abraham Accords, the deal is off.”

For Riyadh, this is classic American theater. Saudi officials have said for years they won’t normalize with Israel without a credible path to Palestinian statehood — something Netanyahu’s government flatly rejects.

The kingdom just locked in a signed path to reactors and potential enrichment under US technology; it now watches Trump retro‑fit a political condition whose logic was precisely what his negotiators stripped out. For Israel, it’s a weird victory lap.

Netanyahu’s office calls Saudi entry into the Abraham Accords an “historic leap,” while Energy Minister Eli Cohen publicly frets that if Washington walks away, Riyadh will simply buy its civilian nukes from China, where oversight is weaker.

Officially, Israel backs the pressure. Quietly, it knows the hard question is not “if” there will be enrichment, but “under what conditions, and who will have oversight” — the space where Trump’s tweet and the pact diverge.

The real story isn’t about a bomb tomorrow. Between enriched uranium and a weapon lies an industry Saudi Arabia does not yet have. It’s about status and control.

The UAE accepted no enrichment and intrusive inspections to get US reactors. Saudi Arabia just got a softer deal in writing and a harder narrative online. On the legal side, the gold standard stopped at the Saudi border.

On the political side, Trump is trying to resurrect it as a loyalty test to Israel — editing a signed agreement from his feed, while Congress and Riyadh are left to guess which version of US policy is real.

Who runs nonproliferation in this “new Middle East”: the lawyers who drafted the pact, the president doing nuclear policy by post, or the crown prince who just secured a path to enrichment and can wait out both?

#SaudiArabia #Israel #Trump #AbrahamAccords #nuclear #Iran #MiddleEast #fakeDemocracy #oligarchy #warar #geopolitics #war #fakeDemocracy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

✈️ Trump’s Luxury Jet, Discount Security

Donald Trump wanted a new, glamorous Air Force One in time for America’s 250th birthday — and he got it by cutting corners on the one thing the plane is supposed to guarantee: survival.

Instead of waiting for the fully hardened new 747‑8s under conversion, Trump fell in love with a Qatari royal 747‑8 — chandelier, wood paneling, suede lounge — and ordered it rammed into service as a “bridge” Air Force One on an eight‑month schedule.

The Times investigation shows that the Qatari jet was not brought up to the old Air Force One standard. It has no lower fuselage door with self‑contained stairs, so the president now relies more on local ground equipment in unsecured airports.

It carries only one auxiliary power unit instead of two, reducing backup power for communications and vital electronics.

And the visible infrared countermeasure pods — the laser‑based systems that track and jam incoming missiles — are missing from the usual positions on the wings and tail, even as officials refuse to say what, if anything, replaces them.

Work that normally takes years — cutting new doors into the fuselage, electromagnetic hardening of wiring against nuclear‑type pulses, deep repairs to known 747‑8 frame cracks, crash‑testing side‑facing seats — was compressed to fit Trump’s July 4, 2026 deadline.

A sitting president personally signed off on décor, paint scheme, and the level of defensive systems, while appropriators were told the details were a “national security secret” they couldn’t see.

FAA approvals for the unusual seating arrived just days before his first flight, and the Air Force itself admits it “made trades on some of the less commonly used mission sets,” a polite way of saying certain capabilities were dropped to hit the date.

When US‑Iran strikes resumed and intelligence picked up a credible threat from Iranian proxies against Trump’s aircraft in Ankara, the Secret Service insisted he leave Turkey on the old, fully hardened Air Force One instead.

The new plane was flown ahead to Britain for a troop photo op.

Only after that episode did the White House announce that the Qatari jet will be pulled from service this fall for “upgrades and enhancements,” rebranded as “PLANEMAXXING.”

The system bent to give it to him: more money, more secrecy, fewer safety features. When a real threat finally appeared, everyone trusted the old engineering more than the new ego.

#USA #Trump #AirForceOne #Pentagon #Qatar #security #nuclear #budget #fakeDemocracy #oligarchy

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🇮🇷☢️ Tehran’s Reply: Everything Is Fine. So Let’s Leave the Nuclear Treaty.

Iran’s response to Trump’s “Economic D-Day” rests on one claim: American pressure is proof of American weakness.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Trump’s announcement was a distraction from the United States’ own “unprecedented debt & surging interest costs.” He warned that “doubling down on failed policies” would bring Washington another defeat and harden Iranian hostility. He called U.S. pressure “economic terrorism” against the global economy and national sovereignty.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi put the contradiction more bluntly. Washington, he said, claims Iran is near defeat and “hanging by a thread,” yet asks every ally to help defeat it. The military campaign failed, he argued, and Washington is now calling its next failure economic warfare.

Then came the parliamentary answer.

Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of parliament’s National Security Committee, said the “best response” to Trump’s escalation would be for Iran to leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. He said a withdrawal would require approval from Iran’s senior leadership.

Iran may respond to economic pressure by leaving the legal framework it cites whenever Washington questions its nuclear program.

The committee’s chairman, Ebrahim Azizi, took a different line. He said Iran was monitoring U.S. moves closely and warned that another miscalculation would bring consequences “more severe than before.” He called for an end to the U.S. military presence in the region and for Washington to accept “Iran’s new regional order.”

The IRGC promised an upgrade. Its spokesman, Brig. Gen. Hossein Mohebbi, said Iran is making its weapons more precise, more destructive, and more technologically advanced. If another war starts, he said, its weapons will be different from those used before — in warhead design, accuracy, range, or other capabilities.

Those threats sit alongside a less heroic list of priorities.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has put military reinforcement and food supplies on the same list. The pairing reflects a practical concern: inflation and shortages can erode a country’s ability to sustain a long conflict.

Former president Mohammad Khatami has warned against turning “wartime emotions” into a method of government.

On the ground, fuel shortages have reportedly shut some gas stations in Tehran, while drivers at others waited more than an hour to fill their tanks. At the Two Dolphins market in Dargahan on Qeshm Island, shops were open but the aisles were largely empty. A fuel tank exploded in Tehran. Officials said the cause was under investigation.

Iran also announced the execution of a foreign national, Qassem Hosseini, convicted of taking part in anti-government unrest in Isfahan.

The state says it is preparing stronger weapons, a new regional order, and a response outside the nuclear treaty. It is also managing fuel lines, empty markets, unexplained explosions, and the public mood that comes with them.

#Iran #Trump #NPT #Nuclear #IRGC #Araghchi #Sanctions #Hormuz #MiddleEast

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

🇺🇳⚖️ The Security Council: Two Sides, Same Complaint

Iran and Israel went to the U.N. Security Council with the same grievance: the Council is political, selective, and failing at its job.

Gholamhossein Darzi, Iran’s deputy U.N. representative, said U.S.-Israeli “aggression” had again exposed the Council’s double standards and selective use of international law.

He argued that a permanent member involved in the alleged aggression had blocked the Council from identifying the aggressors.

He also accused the United States, Britain, and France of using Council procedures to advance politically motivated claims about Iran’s nuclear program.

Iran’s legal point was Resolution 2231.

Adopted in 2015, It endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, and replaced earlier U.N. sanctions on Iran with a framework that preserved arms, nuclear, and missile-related restrictions for set periods.

It also created the “snapback” mechanism: if a JCPOA participant alleged significant Iranian noncompliance, previous U.N. sanctions could return unless the Council voted to keep sanctions relief in place. The resolution’s remaining provisions were scheduled to expire on October 18, 2025.

Tehran says that deadline closed the file. Any attempt to invoke or revive 2231 now, Darzi argued, is an abuse of the Council’s authority. France, Germany, and Britain take the opposite position: they triggered the snapback process before the deadline, arguing that Iran had breached its obligations. The dispute is not over whether 2231 existed. It is over whether its enforcement mechanism survived long enough to be used.

Hours later, Israel’s U.N. ambassador, Danny Danon, made the institutional complaint from the opposite direction.

“The Security Council has become very good at holding meetings, but very bad at making a difference,” Danon said. He argued that the Council spends too much time on “political theater” instead of Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. He called for a higher threshold to convene emergency meetings.

Iran says the Council is captured by Washington and its allies. Israel says it is distracted by political attacks on Israel.

Both sides agree the Council is political and ineffective. The disagreement is over which political theater deserves the main stage.

#UN #UNSC #Iran #Israel #Resolution2231 #JCPOA #Nuclear #DannyDanon #MiddleEast

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events 🇺🇸

The Inspector Becomes a Target

The IAEA says it has lost contact with Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran’s answer is to accuse the agency of helping prepare the political and legal case for war.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Rafael Grossi had turned technical reporting into a chain from “political justification” to military aggression.

That is Tehran’s preferred inversion. Inspectors ask where the uranium is. Iran calls them accomplices to the bombing campaign. The watchdog becomes the arsonist because it carried a thermometer.

Trump has made the nuclear issue sound like an election-calendar problem. He said the United States has not attacked Iran “in full” because the midterms are approaching. He said the war could end before the vote.

Then he said it would end “right after” the election. He rejected the idea that it could last through his term.

Trump also said Iran would be treated differently if it had a nuclear weapon. That is the cleanest possible advertisement for getting one.

Washington wants Tehran to abandon the bomb. The president explains why the bomb changes the customer-service experience.

The IAEA Board has referred Iran to the U.N. Security Council over nuclear noncompliance. Iran is limiting inspection access.

The United States is threatening deeper strikes. Tehran says pressure will not make it surrender.

The nuclear file has stopped being a negotiation. It is now a race between enrichment capacity, bunker-busting bombs and the U.S. campaign schedule.

#Iran #IAEA #Nuclear #Trump

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events🇺🇸

Iran’s Seven-Day Ransom Note

Masoud Pezeshkian says Iran will give up uranium enriched to 60 percent. Abbas Araghchi says the Strait of Hormuz can reopen in seven days. First, Washington must lift the blockade, ease oil sanctions and release at least $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets.

In a Fox News interview, Pezeshkian rejected any nuclear-weapons ambition twice: “Absolutely not. Absolutely not.”

He said Tehran was ready to relinquish its 60-percent enriched uranium under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and called dilution “not a big deal.”

Asked where Iran’s estimated 440 kilograms of 60-percent uranium were, he offered a riddle: Washington says it destroyed everything, so either that claim is true or it is false.

Pezeshkian also said Iran wanted a deal with the United States before November’s midterm elections. Later that night, he said America’s midterms did not interest Tehran and played no role in Iranian calculations. Tehran’s message changed depending on whether the interviewer offered a clock or a microphone.

Araghchi’s seven-day proposal is less a peace plan than a sequence for releasing pressure. All hostilities, including in Lebanon, would stop.

The United States would release Iran’s frozen assets, waive sanctions on Iranian oil and end its naval blockade. On the seventh day, Iran would reopen Hormuz.

Comprehensive nuclear talks would begin immediately afterward, replacing the 60-day timetable in the June memorandum.

Iran is offering to reopen a waterway it closed, after the United States meets the price of reopening it. That is not diplomacy in the old sense. It is a seven-day hostage schedule for the world’s energy trade.

An Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesman said the previous form of fighting had stopped, but the confrontation continued. Fewer than 10 commercial ships passed Hormuz that morning. Tehran calls that de-escalation. Tankers call it waiting for permission.

Then came the nuclear rumor. Iranian MP Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani said he had heard from an Arab analyst that Iran had bought a nuclear weapon from North Korea.

#Iran #Hormuz #Nuclear #UnitedStates

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events🇺🇸

China’s Iran Supply Chain

Donald Trump spent the Xi summit calling China’s leader a friend and artificial intelligence “super intelligence.”

Behind the diplomatic confetti, his administration was pressing Beijing over suspected low-yield nuclear tests and shipments that kept Iran’s drone and missile programs alive.

U.S. officials have held quiet talks with China in Geneva, New York and Casablanca about Beijing’s expanding nuclear arsenal and allegations that it has conducted low-yield tests despite a three-decade testing moratorium. Washington wants China to address the claims. Beijing has not publicly provided a substantive answer.

Trump nevertheless called his meeting with Xi “very productive” and predicted “tremendous things” between the two countries. He also claimed Xi liked Trump’s preferred label for AI: “SUPER INTELLIGENCE.” The White House can rename artificial intelligence. It cannot rename a nuclear test.

On Iran, U.S. Ambassador to China David Perdue said Trump told Xi that any direct or indirect Chinese assistance to Tehran was “totally unacceptable.” Iranian customs records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal tell a different story about the supply chain: roughly 1,300 shipments of dual-use components went from China to Iran’s Defense Ministry in the first half of 2026. The consignments included electronics, GPS equipment, motors and aircraft-engine parts usable in drones and missile-guidance systems.

Days before the war began, Chinese suppliers delivered about 300 tons of chemical compounds to Iran’s Defense Ministry. Some chemicals documented in the records, including sodium perchlorate, can be used to produce solid-fuel propellant for ballistic missiles. The shipments continued after the war began, including more than a dozen consignments worth over $6 million in drone-capable parts.

Pezeshkian supplied the financial footnote: “One of the problems we face is that our money is blocked in China.” Beijing keeps Iranian money under lock while Chinese companies keep sending material that can help Iran build weapons.

Trump gave Xi a state dinner. Xi got two more months of trade truce, a lecture on Iran and the right to keep explaining what 1,300 shipments were for.

#China #Iran #Trump #Nuclear

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events🇺🇸

Hormuz, Paid in Advance

Iran offered to reopen the Strait of Hormuz after six days. First, the United States would halt military operations, lift its naval blockade, ease oil sanctions and release at least $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets. Tehran’s sequence was simple: Washington moves first, then the oil route opens.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi presented the proposal in New York through Qatari mediators. It called for a regional ceasefire, including Lebanon and Yemen, followed by a seven-day sequence. Washington would meet Iran’s conditions during the first days. Iran would reopen Hormuz on day six. Nuclear talks would begin on day seven.

Araghchi said shipping could not return to normal by decree after Iran had been bombed, threatened with annihilation and subjected to a naval blockade. Tehran closed the route because its own routes were closed.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had rejected the offer and told aides he expected U.S. attacks on Iran to resume after the November midterm elections. Trump says Iran wants a deal because it is “losing so badly,” while presenting the U.S. blockade as control of Hormuz.

Pezeshkian says Iran is ready for nuclear talks but will not accept what CBS translated as “bullying or coercion.” He also told Al Jazeera that Iran no longer trusts talks with Washington because previous rounds brought sanctions and military action.

That leaves the Iranian president asking why he should meet Trump if an agreement can be signed and then ignored.

Iran treats the Strait as leverage against a blockade. Washington wants the Strait open before it offers Iran anything. Both sides say they want negotiations. Their opening positions are built to make the other side surrender first.

#Iran #Hormuz #Trump #Nuclear

📱 American Оbserver - Stay up to date on all important events🇺🇸