Diplomacy
Global peace coalition warns of devastating economic fallout and unchecked war crimes amid US-Iran escalation
The 144th consecutive meeting of the International Peace Coalition convened amid profound global tumult, underscoring the necessity of uniting the international peace movement. Moderator Anastasia Battle, alongside co-moderator Dennis Speed, opened the forum by imploring participants to disseminate the dialogue across diverse philosophies, religions, cultures, and nationalities. Emphasizing the critical nature of the current geopolitical juncture, Helga Zepp-LaRouche, founder of the Schiller Institute and initiator of the coalition, delivered the strategic overview.
“There are circumstances beyond their control”
Zepp-LaRouche issued a stark warning that the world is on the precipice of a full-fledged economic and financial crisis, entering the seventh day of a rapidly expanding war. The economic fallout is already materializing, with Gulf nations halting production as the Strait of Hormuz is practically blockaded. Consequently, the export of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and oil has been crippled. Qatar, invoking force majeure, has explicitly signaled that these disruptions stem from circumstances entirely outside their jurisdiction, sending global energy prices skyrocketing.
Furthermore, the Gulf states—including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar—have initiated a comprehensive review of their massive overseas investments. These sovereign wealth funds, previously heralded as a crowning achievement of the Donald Trump administration, are now being leveraged to pressure the US president into a diplomatic pivot. Russian sovereign wealth fund executive Kirill Dmitriev pointedly questioned German leadership, noting their impending lack of energy resources while German opposition leader Friedrich Merz continues to blindly back the unfolding military operations.
Despite the rapid escalation, Zepp-LaRouche dismantled the western media narrative of a swift, decisive victory for the US and Israel. Iran has executed an unprecedented and highly effective campaign against US defense architecture, systematically destroying radar infrastructure associated with both the THAAD and Patriot systems. This tactical blinding of US forces leaves incoming drones and hypersonic Khorramshahr-4 missiles entirely undefended. The depletion of western interceptor stockpiles is being outpaced by the sheer volume of the assault, with the US expending five days’ worth of Tomahawk missile production in merely the first 72 hours of the conflict.
Zepp-LaRouche expressed grave concern over the deep-seated religious fundamentalism driving the military apparatus. Citing US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s barbaric assertion that the conflict was never intended to be a fair fight, she highlighted reports from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation indicating that over 100 US Army officers have inquired about internal briefings linking the war to biblical end-times prophecy and positioning Trump as an anointed figure. She issued an urgent call for international parliaments to investigate this profound religious irrationality currently commanding the world’s most lethal military machine.
“Total destruction of Iran”
The assault’s criminality is glaringly evident in the total suspension of international law. Zepp-LaRouche condemned a double-tap strike on an Iranian school that massacred 180 girls between the ages of 7 and 12, an indisputable war crime designed to obliterate first responders. Domestically, the US War Powers Act was narrowly defeated, yet public support for the war among Trump’s MAGA base has plummeted to a mere 29%. However, relying on midterm elections is a fatal miscalculation given the imminent threat of total war. Reports from the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv confirm that Israel views this as the endgame, explicitly seeking the absolute destruction of Iran without subsequent rounds of engagement.
Concurrently, the US is reportedly courting Kurdish factions in Iraq to open a new ground flank in northwestern Iran, an invasion scenario Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed Tehran is fully prepared to repel. Trump’s insistence on unconditional surrender, coupled with his unilateral rejection of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s son as a successor, underscores a breathtaking disintegration of the global order. Singular voices of moral clarity, such as Pope Francis and Cardinal Pietro Parolin, have warned of an irreparable abyss where justice has capitulated to brute force, a sentiment echoed by Pax Christi. Aside from Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez, the collective west’s complicity will irreversibly haunt its global standing, alienating the BRICS nations and the Global South. The targeting of Iran strategically disrupts the Belt and Road Initiative and the International North-South Transport Corridor, necessitating an urgent pivot back to the UN Charter and a new international security and development architecture.
“Not a single credible report of even 100 anti-government protesters”
Senator Richard Black, a decorated Vietnam War combat veteran and former Virginia state legislator, delivered a searing critique of the ongoing military campaign. Having sustained wounds and witnessed the battlefield deaths of his radiomen, Black underscored his profound reverence for US troops while denouncing the bellicose manipulation of Christian faith to justify the Iranian conflict. He noted that Operation Epic Fury was fundamentally predicated on the flawed assumption that US bombardment would trigger a joyous, popular uprising against the Iranian government.
Instead, an exhaustive analysis reveals a complete absence of domestic rebellion, with zero credible reports of even nominal anti-government protests. Black highlighted the universal psychological reality: populations inherently unite against foreign aggression. The most potent pressure point remains the 21-mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint within Iranian waters that facilitates 20% of global oil transit. The ensuing blockade guarantees that oil prices will violently exceed $100 per barrel, inflicting devastating economic damage on heavily dependent US allies such as South Korea, India, China, and a wholly import-reliant Japan. Europe’s addiction to LNG—exacerbated by the US destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline—further compounds the crisis.
While the administration has floated deploying US destroyers to escort oil tankers, Black warned that any significant American casualties would instantly shatter the already tepid domestic support for the war. Trial balloons regarding boots on the ground—floated by Trump and Representative James Comer—ignore the geographical and typographical immensity of Iran, which dwarfs the primitive terrain of Afghanistan. An invasion driven by demands for unconditional surrender threatens a decades-long “forever war,” resulting in the virtual eradication of Iranian civilization and catastrophic global costs.
The tactical reality resembles a massive chess game where Iran possesses the missile depth to outlast western stockpiles, while the US and Israel leverage absolute air dominance to hunt mobile launchers. Black observed that the recent assassination of aging Iranian leadership, including the relatively moderate 86-year-old Ayatollah Khamenei, resulted from fatal security lapses during deceptive peace negotiations—a hallmark of Israeli military strategy. However, their elimination paves the way for a hardened, dynamic, and less gullible younger generation to assume command. Black concluded with a stark warning against US hubris stemming from the Venezuela operation, cautioning against a covert alliance with captured ISIS and al-Qaeda operatives funneled from Syria into Iraq to subvert the Iranian state.
“The memory is revolutionary”
Former Mexican Congresswoman Maria de los Angeles Huerta forcefully argued that analytical diagnosis must rapidly transition into actionable, coordinated mobilization to halt the global machinery of war and the unchecked impunity of predatory elites. She outlined five ambitious, historical imperatives to counter the fascist elements orchestrating the crisis.
First, Huerta proposed a global citizen investigation network to audit the financial DNA of the war machine. This requires exposing the banks, corporate entities, and fiscal paradises funding the armaments industry and networks of exploitation, ultimately publishing an accessible list of public shame akin to the Epstein logs. Second, she called for massive global campaigns to economically isolate these institutions, utilizing alternative international communication networks to strip away the darkness protecting elite profits.
Third, recognizing that powerful actors deploy armies of lawyers and PR firms to bury their crimes under disinformation, Huerta established that citizen memory must be the revolutionary counter-force. She advocated for a global observatory featuring a “library of infamy” to meticulously archive evidence—from the Gaza massacres to elite trafficking networks—ensuring unhindered access for journalists and victims while initiating relentless legal and political battles against complicit structures. Fourth, she urged the mobilization of multilateral organizations directly from the grassroots base, applying immense pressure through coordinated, visible, non-violent global actions, including symbolic protests and cultural performances outside complicit financial institutions. Finally, Huerta demanded the creation of a robust protection network to safeguard peace defenders from isolation and retaliation.
“Transform our region in a battlefield”
Dr. Beatriz Bissio, associate professor at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, contextualized the crisis within the strict parameters of international law, declaring the aggression against Iran wholly illegal and unprovoked. Prior to the attacks, mediators in Oman had confirmed substantive progress in diplomatic negotiations. The assault, devoid of rational justification, serves Israel’s ambition to eliminate a systemic adversary to its expansionism and a staunch defender of the Palestinian people. Echoing UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, Bissio identified Gaza not as an exception, but as a methodological blueprint utilized by the US and Israel to eradicate all resistance to imperial plans.
Bissio highlighted an ignored open letter sent to President Trump by Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor, a prominent Emirati billionaire. Al Habtoor fiercely questioned the legitimacy of Trump’s unilateral decision, demanding to know who authorized the US to drag the Gulf into an unwanted conflict and transform the region into a battlefield. The letter exposes deep-seated frustration among US allies who host American military bases, viewing their national sovereignty as utterly bypassed and mourning the destruction of highly capitalized regional peace initiatives.
As geopolitical immobility shatters, revealing rapid and unprecedented realignments, the domestic stability of the US is also fraying, with rumblings of potential impeachment tied to disastrous midterm prospects. Concretely, Bissio fully endorsed Huerta’s five-point framework and proposed two immediate initiatives. She advocated for an international boycott demanding the cancellation of the June 17 FIFA World Cup across the US, Canada, and Mexico, arguing such a celebration is irreconcilable with the threat of a nuclear event. Furthermore, she insisted that the United Nations must be permanently removed from New York, citing the Secretary-General’s paralysis and the symbolic necessity of establishing a new security paradigm entirely outside the jurisdiction of the United States.
“Humanity is fighting unhumanity”
French intelligence strategist Francois Martin framed the conflict not as a clash between the US and Iran, or the Global North against the Global South, but as an existential battle where humanity itself is fighting unhumanity. He cited the calculated assassination of 165 Iranian girls, emphasizing that such strikes are never operational mistakes. When an aggressor strips a population of its human essence—reducing them to animals or “sinners”—the deliberate slaughter of children becomes a prerequisite to prevent the maturation of future combatants.
Martin pointed to a second atrocity: the sinking of the Dana, an unarmed vessel returning from a peace congregation in Sri Lanka hosted by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The ship, reportedly carrying American personnel alongside civilians, was annihilated without warning upon exiting Indian waters—an act Martin categorized as pure assassination.
Despite the bloodshed, Martin predicts a brief conflict, driven by logistical exhaustion rather than moral awakening. He assessed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu manipulated Trump with false intelligence claiming Iran was unarmed and highly fragile. Instead of a lucrative victory, Trump has thrust his administration into a swarm of wasps. Without the luxury of time to fabricate congressional justifications—as was done for the Iraq War—and facing an imminent depletion of western munitions alongside soaring $90-per-barrel oil prices, Martin anticipates Trump will soon declare a hollow, rhetorical victory and hastily retreat, abandoning Israel on the front lines. He concurred with diplomat Chaz Freeman that Russia and China are maneuvering the US into a position where it must abandon neo-colonialism in favor of a predictable, multipolar world order.
“Pushed toward the loss of our very existence”
Lebanese sociologist Bassam El Hashim, identifying as a Lebanese Christian, dismantled the prevailing Anglo-Saxon media narrative surrounding Hezbollah. He detailed how the organization is not a fundamentalist terror cell, but a necessary resistance movement forged organically between 1982 and 1985 in direct response to the brutal Israeli invasion and occupation of Beirut.
El Hashim described Lebanon as a subjugated US protectorate, managed from a sprawling, 2,000-square-meter American embassy housing up to 7,000 intelligence personnel, operating in tandem with US naval and air bases. This apparatus exerts crushing pressure on the Lebanese government, dictating domestic crackdowns and nullifying state legitimacy. The populations of southern Lebanon, relentlessly displaced and massacred by Israeli militias since 1948, had no recourse but armed defense. While Iran provided crucial initial funding and training post-1979, Hezbollah now operates with profound strategic independence.
The resumption of hostilities is entirely Israeli-manufactured, El Hashim argued. Following a November 2024 ceasefire that Hezbollah scrupulously maintained, Israel spent the subsequent 16 months systematically violating the accord, bombing villages, and forcibly displacing Lebanese citizens northward. He warned that Netanyahu’s display of the “Greater Israel” map at the UN General Assembly signals a definitive intent to subjugate the entire region. Unable to conquer the Arab world militarily, the US-Israeli axis employs deliberate subversion, utilizing regime change and sectarian fragmentation—as seen recently in Syria and Iraq—to ignite civil wars, positioning the Lebanese Armed Forces against Hezbollah to fracture the nation from within.
Concluding the marathon session, Zepp-LaRouche introduced breaking, though unconfirmed, intelligence that Iran has thus far utilized only its antiquated missile inventory, which successfully penetrated the Iron Dome. Tehran is reportedly preparing to deploy an untouched arsenal of advanced, hypersonic weaponry, indicating the tragedy is far from its climax.
In a final, urgent directive, Zepp-LaRouche demanded that western politicians and parliamentarians be forced to publicly address the massacre of the Iranian schoolchildren. The deafening silence from European capitals—save for Spain—exposes an intolerable double standard that strips the collective west of its remaining moral credibility. Condemning the simultaneous strangulation of Cuba, the persecution of Venezuela, and the military operations in Gaza, she warned that this unchecked complicity will trigger a historic geopolitical blowback, calling on the global citizenry to ruthlessly implement the proposals laid out by Huerta and Bissio to forge a new paradigm of international justice.
Diplomacy
Defense Priorities director warns US air strategy in Middle East faces tactical limits
The collapse of a tentative memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran, coupled with the diminishing strategic returns of American air power, has left the United States locked in an unsustainable, low-intensity conflict with Iran, according to Benjamin Friedman, Policy Director at the Washington-based think tank Defense Priorities.
Speaking in an interview on the YouTube channel Harici with host Sarp Sinan Hacır, Friedman attributed the failure of the short-lived US-Iran memorandum primarily to the Trump administration’s diplomatic missteps, vague draft language, and unrealistic expectations regarding a comprehensive settlement.
“Both sides really deserve some blame, but the Trump administration deserves the bulk of the blame for drafting an agreement that was so vague on key terms,” Friedman said, citing ambiguities surrounding the timeline for unfreezing Iranian assets and the scope of American commitments to restrain Israeli military operations in Lebanon.
Friedman emphasized that deep-seated mistrust in Tehran, exacerbated by repeated instances where diplomatic engagement was followed by Israeli or American military strikes, led Iranian negotiators to adopt an unyielding posture. At the same time, he noted that Iran likely miscalculated by using disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz to aggressively force leverage.
“The Trump administration remained intent on this sort of grand bargain that would restrain Iran seeking weapons development… and I think they continue to misread the Iranian willingness to sign that kind of deal,” Friedman noted, adding that Tehran viewed its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz as essential despite the risk of provoking further strikes.
Expressing deep skepticism over the prospects for a lasting diplomatic breakthrough, Friedman criticized the administration’s reliance on informal envoys such as Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner over professional diplomatic channels, predicting that the baseline outcome will remain an unpredictable, episodic conflict.
“What’s more likely is a kind of on-off-again kind of war—sort of what we’re in now, where we have occasional strikes, with the United States perhaps by accident adopting the Israeli model of ‘mowing the lawn’ periodically,” Friedman said.
Addressing the efficacy of US air power, Friedman argued that military operations against Iranian targets have reached a point of diminishing returns. While early strikes successfully eliminated critical high-value assets—such as over-the-horizon radar systems that targeted anti-ship missiles—Iran’s ballistic missile and long-range drone capabilities remain largely intact and operational.
He pointed to a recent strike on a base hosting US personnel in Jordan, launched from western Iran over a distance exceeding 1,000 kilometers, as evidence of Tehran’s sustained strike precision and the tactical limits of American interdiction efforts.
“The war is a failure for air power even in a tactical sense,” Friedman stated. “Initially, we looked at it and said we had a lot of success in destroying targets, but as more information came out, it turned out they had maybe more than half of their missiles and launchers survive the initial phase of the war.”
Friedman observed that the global proliferation of low-cost, high-precision guidance technology has permanently altered the strategic landscape, neutralizing the traditional invulnerability of forward-deployed US installations. “The precise effects of air power that used to be almost a monopoly of the United States… is actually making our posture in the region less sustainable,” he said, warning that similar vulnerabilities would be vastly amplified in any potential high-intensity conflict with China.
As an alternative to open-ended military engagement, Friedman suggested that Washington consider a complete military withdrawal from the region, even if it entails accepting Iranian transit fees on commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. “The cost of preventing that through perpetual outbursts of warfare is much higher than just accepting it,” he noted.
Turning to regional dynamics, Friedman addressed Israel’s current absence from active strike operations against Iran, characterizing it as a calculated move to preserve its own air defense interceptors while relying on Washington to bear the operational and political burdens of containment.
On European security and the broader alliance structure, Friedman offered a critical assessment of the NATO summit in Ankara and the administration’s “NATO 3.0” concept. He described the white paper led by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as an effort to coerce European states into escalating defense expenditures and purchasing American hardware under the threat of reduced security guarantees, rather than executing a structured, strategic US posture adjustment.
“This is not a real US withdrawal; it’s a kind of pressure to up your loyalty in a particular way,” Friedman said, noting that major European powers such as Germany, France, and the UK lack a compelling existential incentive to construct independent, large-scale conventional war-fighting capabilities.
Regarding bilateral relations with Ankara, Friedman noted that US-Turkish tensions have eased considerably following the shift in American posture in Syria and progress toward resolving long-standing friction points, including the F-35 program and S-400 procurement. He added that while Israeli leadership under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed frustration over Washington’s constructive engagement with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the White House has maintained its strategic course despite pressure from domestic pro-Israel lobbying groups.
Addressing internal Republican Party dynamics, Friedman highlighted the evolving public stance of Vice President J.D. Vance, whose cautious criticism of Israeli influence and emphasis on divergent national interests reflects broader ideological shifts within the conservative base.
“Vance is more representative of the shift in the Republican Party,” Friedman said. “He’s criticizing them in a limited way and saying, ‘Our interests are different.’ From the perspective of those of us who would like the United States to have a more distant relationship from Israel, it’s progress.”
Looking ahead to the upcoming US midterm elections, Friedman anticipated that a loss of congressional control by the Republican Party would severely curtail the administration’s domestic executive overreach, though its structural impact on foreign policy execution and Middle Eastern operations would remain comparatively limited.
Diplomacy
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham pledges full support to Ukraine in meeting with Zelenskyy
UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham has met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Portsmouth, England.
Zelenskyy is the first world leader Burnham has met in person since taking office, with the prime minister committing to building a “firm partnership” between the United Kingdom and Ukraine.
Demonstrating their support, the two leaders toured a military base in Portsmouth where 200 Ukrainian troops are currently undergoing naval training exercises.
Burnham described his meeting with the Ukrainian president as “warm” and said he plans to visit Ukraine soon.
“We will build this together and address the various issues President Zelenskyy is facing, many of which we discussed today,” Burnham said.
The meeting follows an announcement by London that it will share intellectual property rights to assist Kyiv’s war effort.
The new prime minister announced that the UK will share the “Stone Cloak” electronic warfare system—which is fitted to drones to prevent detection—and will assist Ukraine in mass-producing the technology.
Burnham has focused primarily on domestic matters since replacing Keir Starmer, who faced criticism from elements within his own party for spending too much time abroad and focusing heavily on foreign affairs.
However, Burnham sought to signal continuity in Britain’s policy toward Ukraine. In one of his first phone calls after becoming prime minister last week, Burnham invited Zelenskyy to visit the UK “as soon as possible.”
Starmer spent his final full day as prime minister in Kyiv, where he announced £255 million in funding for Ukraine.
Speaking to Sky on Monday, Zelenskyy said his telephone conversation with Burnham had been “very good.”
The Ukrainian leader noted that Starmer had previously assured him that “the new government would maintain the policy of supporting Ukraine during the war.”
The new prime minister told the Ukrainian leader it was “no coincidence” that he was his first international visitor since moving into Downing Street.
“The purpose of this is to send a very clear message. We stand 100% with Ukraine, I personally stand 100% with you, and I will fully deliver on every commitment this country has made to Ukraine,” Burnham said.
Diplomacy
Ukraine targets first prototype of European Freyja missile defense system in early 2027
As Ukraine continues to lobby allies for new weapons capabilities to counter Russian missile strikes, the country aims to have a prototype of the Freyja anti-ballistic system, developed in partnership with European allies, ready in the first half of next year.
David Aloyan, deputy secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council and director of the Freyja project, stated—as reported by Reuters—that an international steering committee tasked with calculating research and development costs will meet for the first time in the near future.
The anti-ballistic coalition was officially established two weeks ago at a summit held in the French capital, Paris. The summit was attended by leaders of 10 European nations, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, alongside roughly 12 defense industry contractors.
Providing details on the timeline, Aloyan said: “We have an ambitious goal because we are working on a very tight schedule. We aim to have a viable prototype that can show its first practical results in the first half of next year.”
Ukraine remains chronically dependent on US-made Patriot air defense systems, which are currently the only weapons capable of reliably intercepting Russia’s hypersonic and high-velocity ballistic missiles. However, Patriot deliveries have faced persistent disruptions driven by political fluctuations, low inventory levels, and extended production cycles.
The Russian military intensified its ballistic missile strikes this month against the capital, Kyiv, and the southern port city of Odesa. Facing salvos of dozens of missiles, Ukraine was unable to destroy the majority of incoming targets due to a severe shortage of interceptor munitions.
The Ukrainian government has indicated that it is prepared to contribute a launch vehicle and an interceptor missile to the Freyja initiative. In comments made this month, President Zelenskyy remarked that the project has now become purely a “matter of testing,” expressing hope that the system will become operational within a year.
Kyiv expects its allies to provide specialized expertise and technology in advanced radars, sensors, and missile guidance and control electronics. Defense contractors participating in the project include Eurosam—the consortium behind the SAMP/T system—as well as Leonardo, Thales, and Saab.
Fire Point, the Ukrainian missile and drone manufacturer that developed the Flamingo cruise missile, announced that it will serve as the primary industrial partner for the project. The company disclosed last month that it had reached an agreement with German defense producer Hensoldt to supply the radar components required for the initiative.
The Freyja project stands out as an effort to construct a lower-cost alternative to the Patriot system, on which many European nations also rely. Other European air defense assets, such as the Franco-Italian SAMP/T and the German-made IRIS-T, have not yet demonstrated sufficient operational capability in intercepting ballistic missiles.
Zelenskyy likened the operational framework of the Freyja coalition to a Lego arrangement, in which defense industry leaders assemble interconnected components.
Emphasizing the flexibility of the design, Aloyan noted that manufacturers have been tasked with developing a system architecture featuring interchangeable components, stating:
“The core logic of this system is that it possesses an open architecture. If Denmark says, ‘I want a Freyja system configured with a Danish-made Weibel radar,’ that is possible. If Sweden states that it wishes to integrate a Saab system, that presents no issue either.”
Aloyan added that establishing a dedicated administrative body or fund to direct all project contributions and secure stable, continuous financing remains among the options under consideration.
The Ukrainian official stressed that direct corporate participation alongside sovereign governments would streamline bureaucracy, concluding: “The coalition must advance on practical grounds rather than political ones.”
-
America2 weeks agoUS agricultural superpower status at risk as trade wars shift global markets to Brazil
-
America2 weeks agoUS controls $13 billion in Venezuelan oil revenues with little transparency, raising congressional concerns
-
Europe2 weeks agoUS secures multi-billion-dollar energy and AI deals at Three Seas summit in Dubrovnik
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoPalantir CEO Alex Karp says he would not vote for ‘pro-Russian’ AfD in Germany
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoWorld Bank warns US-Iran conflict could slash global growth to 1.3% as inflation looms
-
Middle East2 weeks agoPentagon faces severe budget crunch as Middle East operational costs drain key military funds
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany accelerates African energy diplomatic push to secure natural gas and green hydrogen
-
America2 weeks agoAIPAC cuts online donation links for Democrats after Israel aid vote
