Cenk Uygur and John Iadarola discuss how Trump’s war with Iran is pushing Tehran to dig in for a prolonged conflict.
Archiv: Responsible Statecraft (media)
Surprise strikes signal Iran is digging in for a long war
(August 6, 2026)
In recent weeks, Iran has gone on the offensive, striking commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz and launching a surprise attack on U.S. forces in Jordan. From a distance, these moves look like self-defeating escalation. Why should a badly damaged state, under severe economic pressure, lash out at the U.S. instead of pushing for a ceasefire?
The answer, simply put, is that Iran is digging in for a long war. Whatever Washington‘s intentions, Tehran increasingly interprets sanctions, negotiations, temporary ceasefires and military strikes as different instruments aimed at a single objective: regime change.
As long as this primary objective remains, Iran expects no sanctions relief or meaningful de-escalation. My conversations with Iranian foreign policy analysts suggest that Tehran now believes the war will continue in different forms until the end of Donald Trump‘s presidency.
Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?
That is why Caine’s wording evokes Henry Morgenthau’s wartime vision for Germany. Morgenthau argued that making Germany incapable of renewed aggression required more than smashing its armaments sector. He called for eliminating the metallurgical, electrical, and chemical industries and contemplated a Germany that would become “predominantly agrarian.” Another State Department summary described the plan as looking toward converting Germany into a country “primarily agricultural and pastoral in character.”
No, the administration has not formally announced a Morgenthau Plan for Iran. But that is not the point.
Turkey and Israel are reaping rewards from the chaos in Syria
(December 5, 2024)
How the incoming Trump administration intends to deal with the situation in Syria is anyone’s guess. Given that the president-elect has chosen staunch Israeli supporters to occupy senior posts in his cabinet, there appears to be strong reason to believe that Trump 2.0 policy towards Damascus will be determined to a large degree by Israeli preferences. If so, Washington’s approach may be to weaken and possibly oust Assad from power given the latter’s longstanding alliance with Iran, which remains Public Enemy Number One for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
WSJ conceals Saudi funding of pro-Saudi nuke deal source
Israeli sources speaking to the WSJ acknowledged concerns about nonproliferation safeguards and the potential for a regional nuclear-arms race. But the one expert who was reported as thinking “the idea is worth exploring,” is an executive at an organization that depends heavily on Saudi funding, a potential financial conflict of interest that wasn’t disclosed by the WSJ to its readers.
The WSJ quoted Brian Katulis, described as “vice president of policy at the Middle East Institute think tank in Washington,” supporting the controversial idea.