By Sabiu Abdullahi

Iran’s armed forces have issued a strong warning to Israel over what they described as a possible attack on Tehran’s diplomatic mission in Lebanon.

A military spokesperson said on Wednesday that Iran would respond by targeting Israeli embassies across the globe if such an action takes place.

Abolfazl Shekarchi, spokesperson for the Iranian armed forces, spoke during a live television broadcast. He said, “if Israel commits such a crime, it will force us to make all Israeli embassies around the world our legitimate target.”

His remarks followed a statement by the Israeli military a day earlier. On Tuesday, Avichay Adraee, the Arabic-language spokesperson for the Israeli army, said it “warns representatives of the Iranian regime who are still in Lebanon to leave immediately before being targeted”, and gave them 24 hours to depart.

The exchange comes amid rising hostilities between Iran, the United States, and Israel. Iran has faced joint US-Israeli airstrikes since February 28. Reports indicate that more than 40 senior Iranian government officials have been killed in the bombardment. Among those reported dead is Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.

The strikes have also affected civilians. More than 1,000 non-combatants have lost their lives, according to reports. The attacks prompted Iran to launch retaliatory measures.

Washington has accused the government led by Khamenei of suppressing its citizens and pursuing nuclear weapons development. Tehran has denied the claims and rejected the allegations.

The situation has continued to heighten tensions across the region, with both sides exchanging threats as the conflict deepens.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

President Bola Tinubu has ordered an immediate suspension of the new cashless payment system at airport toll gates nationwide, citing widespread chaos that has caused numerous passengers to miss their flights.

The decision was announced on Wednesday by the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo, following the Federal Executive Council meeting at the State House, Abuja.

Keyamo stated that the President intervened out of concern for the welfare of citizens, who have faced hours-long delays due to severe gridlock at the access roads to major airports.

“Mr. President was very concerned about the welfare of Nigerians and the fact that most Nigerians were losing their flights,” Keyamo told reporters. “So Mr. President, out of empathy, directed today that we suspend the present system because it creates a lot of gridlock, and Nigerians are suffering as a result of it.”

The cashless policy, implemented less than a week ago by the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), was designed to eliminate corruption and optimize revenue collection after more than 50 years of cash transactions. It required motorists to use prepaid cards or electronic payments at toll gates.

However, the transition was plagued by bottlenecks, leading to massive traffic congestion—particularly at the Lagos and Abuja airport toll gates. Videos on social media showed queues stretching for kilometres, forcing travellers to depart for the airport hours earlier than usual.

While reaffirming the government’s commitment to a cashless system, Keyamo clarified that the President’s directive prioritises public convenience over the immediate elimination of cash.

“The major reason why Mr. President took this decision is to eliminate the present gridlock… not that the President is happy with the cash system,” the minister explained.

In the interim, a hybrid system will be implemented, allowing for both cash payments and the use of FAAN cards already purchased by motorists. The minister revealed that the government will now engage private sector participants to develop a more seamless electronic system that prevents future traffic disruptions.

“Mr. President said if we have to pay commission, we have to pay commission, but we’ll bring in private sector participants to help us devise a much more efficient payment system that will still eliminate cash at the gate,” Keyamo stated.

He added that the President has ordered a swift resolution and has directed the ministry to report back to him on the progress of a new, more efficient system.

By Uzair Adam

Former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has explained his decision to remain silent during interrogation by the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), describing the investigation as politically motivated.

In written statements made under caution on February 19 and 20, 2026, while in ICPC custody and in the presence of his lawyer, Ubong E. Akpan, El-Rufai said his refusal to answer questions was deliberate and based on legal advice.

He maintained that he was exercising his constitutional right to silence and would only address any allegations before a competent court of law.

The former governor stated that after nearly two years of investigation, the anti-graft agency should present its findings before a judicial authority rather than seek further explanations from him.

He argued that only a judge could determine whether the probe amounted to political persecution.

El-Rufai, who served as governor of Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023, also outlined his educational and professional background in his initial statement, noting his studies at Ahmadu Bello University, as well as at Harvard University and the University of London.

He recounted his career in public service, including his roles as Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory.

The ICPC had secured a 14-day remand order from a Chief Magistrate Court in Bwari to detain him, with the order set to expire on March 5, 2026.

Should the agency fail to file charges before then, he may regain his freedom upon the lapse of the court-approved detention.

In a follow-up statement dated February 20, El-Rufai reaffirmed his stance, stressing that he would not respond to additional documents or questions outside the courtroom, again citing his constitutional rights.

The development adds a new dimension to the ongoing standoff between the former governor and the anti-corruption agency, as attention now turns to whether formal charges will be filed before the remand period expires.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has alleged that Iran attempted to assassinate President Donald Trump, as he announced the killing of a senior figure linked to the plot.

Hegseth made the remarks during a press briefing at the Pentagon on Wednesday, where he provided updates on the ongoing conflict with Iran. He referred to recent interceptions of drones and rockets by American forces and praised the strength of the US military.

He said: ‘Yesterday, the leader of the unit who attempted to assassinate President Trump was hunted down and killed.

‘Iran tried to kill President Trump, and President Trump got the last laugh.’

The defence chief also vowed retaliation for American personnel killed in the fighting. He stated that the United States would ‘avenge’ the four servicemen and women who died in attacks involving Iranian drones and rockets.

Hegseth stressed that operations are still underway. He said the mission is not ‘accomplished’. He cited a recent naval action in which a US submarine sank an Iranian warship that, according to him, ‘thought it was safe in international waters’.

Hegseth added: ‘This was never meant to be a fair fight, and it’s not a fair fight… they’re going down.

‘More and larger waves are coming; we are just getting started.’

A Defence Department map displayed during the briefing outlined the first 100 hours of what has been named Operation EPIC FURY. The chart detailed a series of strikes across Iranian territory.

Meanwhile, Iranian authorities reported a rising death toll from the conflict. Iran’s Foundation of Martyrs and Veterans Affairs said at least 1,045 people have died so far. The agency explained that the figure reflects bodies identified and prepared for burial.

The fighting entered its fifth day with continued airstrikes by the United States and Israel on Tehran and other cities. Israeli forces targeted members of Iran’s leadership and security services. Iran responded with missile launches and drone attacks aimed at Israel and locations across the region.

Residents in Tehran reported explosions at dawn. State television broadcast images of damaged buildings in central areas of the capital. The city of Qom and several other locations also came under attack.

The Israeli military said one of its F-35 fighter jets shot down a piloted Iranian Air Force YAK-130 aircraft over Tehran on Wednesday.

The conflict has intensified tensions across the Middle East, with both sides signalling that further military action may follow.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Spain has pushed back against pressure from the United States after President Donald Trump warned that Washington could halt trade ties over Madrid’s refusal to support American military strikes on Iran.

In a national broadcast from the Moncloa Palace, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez set out his government’s position in clear terms. He told citizens that Spain’s stance could be reduced to three words: no to war. He also stressed that one “illegality” could not be met with another, framing the issue as a matter of principle and international law rather than political rivalry.

Tensions escalated when Spain declined to grant the United States permission to use the shared military bases at Morón and Rota for operations targeting Iran. Spanish authorities described the strikes as unjustified and risky. In response, Trump labelled Spain a “terrible” partner and threatened to cut off all trade between the two countries.

The warning has raised concerns about a key economic partnership. The United States ranks among the top destinations for Spanish exports and remains a major source of investment. Although no formal sanctions or tariffs have been announced, the prospect of trade restrictions has unsettled investors and business leaders.

Spain’s approach aligns with its recent foreign policy record. The government has adopted firm positions on conflicts it believes may violate international law. It has criticised Israel’s actions in Gaza and recognised a Palestinian state ahead of several European Union members. At the same time, Madrid has backed Ukraine in resisting Russia’s invasion, while urging restraint to avoid broader escalation elsewhere.

Spanish officials have also invoked the memory of the 2003 Iraq invasion. That conflict, which Spain supported under a previous administration, sparked widespread protests at home. Many citizens still regard that decision as an error that increased insecurity and carried lasting costs. Leaders now argue that military action can produce consequences that endure well beyond the battlefield.

The dispute unfolds at a delicate time for Spain’s coalition government. It faces political pressure in parliament and allegations of corruption involving individuals close to the leadership. However, recent opinion polls indicate that a significant number of Spaniards hold unfavourable views of Trump. Analysts say this could reduce the domestic fallout from the diplomatic clash.

For Madrid, the confrontation extends beyond Iran or access to military facilities. It touches on Spain’s broader role in global affairs. The government maintains that adherence to peace and international legality reflects national values and long-term interests. Critics counter that challenging the United States may expose the country to economic strain that could affect ordinary citizens.

The next phase depends largely on Washington’s response. If the White House moves from rhetoric to concrete measures, trade relations could face serious disruption. Until then, Spain remains in a tense standoff that tests both its diplomatic principles and its economic stability.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

A new economic assessment has indicated that the United States’ military action against Iran could impose a heavy financial burden on the American economy, with potential losses reaching as high as $210 billion.

Kent Smetters, a fiscal analyst and director of the Penn Wharton Budget Model, said the conflict has already unsettled trade flows, global energy markets, and fuel prices. He explained in an interview with Fortune that estimating the exact cost of the war remains difficult due to uncertainty surrounding its duration and scope.

According to his projections, the economic loss could stand at about $115 billion under current conditions. However, he noted that the figure could be as low as $50 billion or rise to $210 billion, depending on how events unfold.

“One problem I have with cost of war calculations is that they really do ignore the counterfactual,” he told the outlet. “If Iran really did get a nuclear weapon, then we might have spent a lot more on military and even repair of cities later on.”

President Donald Trump has acknowledged the possible strain on the economy. He has proposed measures aimed at stabilizing energy supplies, including government-backed insurance and naval escorts for oil tankers passing through strategic routes in the Gulf.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday on Truth Social. “No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD. The United States’ ECONOMIC and MILITARY MIGHT is the GREATEST ON EARTH.”

Speaking with reporters in Washington, the president admitted that oil prices could remain elevated “for a little while,” but expressed confidence that costs would eventually decline. He said once the conflict ends, “these prices are going to drop, I believe even lower than before.”

Energy markets have already reacted to the hostilities. By the end of trading on Tuesday, West Texas Intermediate crude rose by more than five percent. Data from the American Automobile Association also showed that the national average price for a gallon of gasoline increased by more than 10 cents.

Economic observers say the overall impact will depend largely on the length of the war and whether key shipping lanes remain secure.

“Markets are right now really under-pricing the tail risk of a sustained engagement and an operation that does not wrap up quickly, restore travel through the Strait of Hormuz and get everything back to de-escalation and normal in a timely manner,” former Biden economic adviser and chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative, Alex Jacquez, told The Associated Press.

Beyond the broader economic effects, the military campaign itself may require substantial federal spending. Estimates suggest the operation could add about $65 billion in budgetary costs as U.S. air and naval forces mobilize across the region.

In a letter to Congress, President Trump stated that it is “not possible at this time to know” how long the mission, known as Operation Epic Fury, will continue.

“Although the United States desires a quick and enduring peace, it is not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary,” Trump wrote Monday.

He has earlier indicated that the bombing campaign could last “four to five weeks.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The United States Embassy in Nigeria has warned of possible protests in Abuja today, March 4, 2026, and advised American citizens to take precautionary measures.

The alert, which was posted on the Embassy’s official Facebook page, highlighted concerns about demonstrations in the Federal Capital Territory. The mission linked the development to the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran.

“The U.S. Embassy in Abuja informs U.S. citizens that there is a high potential for protests in Abuja today, March 4, 2026, due to the current conflict with Iran.

Previous protests by some groups have resulted in violent clashes between the group and Nigerian security forces.

The Embassy strongly recommends that all U.S. citizens in Abuja remain in their residences on Wednesday, March 4.”

In its advisory, the Embassy outlined steps Americans should take to reduce risk. It urged citizens to avoid areas where protests may occur and to stay away from large crowds. It asked them to exercise caution if they find themselves near gatherings. The mission encouraged them to follow local media reports and stay conscious of their surroundings. It also advised them to keep a low profile and review personal security arrangements.

The alert further directed U.S. citizens to keep their mobile phones charged in case of emergency and to carry valid identification at all times. It warned them to remain vigilant in public places such as shopping centres, cinemas, and places of worship. The Embassy also asked individuals to take note of emergency exits whenever they enter buildings and to vary travel routes and times to reduce predictability.

Despite the warning, the Embassy confirmed that visa and other consular services remain operational.

“The Consular Sections of Embassy Abuja and Consulate General Lagos remain open. Please monitor our website for updates.”

For assistance, the Embassy provided contact details for its offices in Abuja and Lagos. The Abuja office is located at Plot 1075 Diplomatic Drive, Central District Area. It can be reached at +234 209 461 4328, while after-hours calls can be made to +234 209 461 4000 by pressing zero. Emails can be sent to AbujaACS@state.gov.

The U.S. Consulate General in Lagos is situated at 2 Walter Carrington Crescent, Victoria Island. It can be contacted at +234 201 460 3400 during and after business hours. Its email address is LagosACS@state.gov.

The State Department’s Consular Affairs office in Washington can also be reached at +1 888-407-4747 or +1 202-501-4444.

The Embassy encouraged Americans to enrol in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program to receive security updates. It also asked the public to follow its official social media accounts for more information.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The United States has recorded an estimated loss of almost $2 billion in military assets within the first four days of its military campaign against Iran, according to figures compiled by Anadolu Agency.

The report shows that Iran has damaged military equipment valued at about $1.902 billion across several locations in the Middle East since hostilities began on Saturday.

The most costly single asset affected is the US AN/FPS-132 early warning radar system stationed at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. The radar, valued at $1.1 billion, was struck by an Iranian missile on Saturday. Qatari authorities later confirmed that the facility was hit and sustained damage.

On Sunday, three F-15E Strike Eagles were lost in what officials described as a friendly fire incident involving Kuwaiti air defence systems. Although all six crew members survived, the aircraft were destroyed. The estimated replacement cost for the three jets stands at $282 million.

During its initial retaliatory operation, Iran targeted the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain. The strike destroyed two satellite communication terminals and several large structures within the facility. Open-source intelligence assessments identified the damaged terminals as AN/GSC-52B systems. Each unit is estimated to cost around $20 million, including deployment and installation expenses.

Iran also announced that it had destroyed the AN/TPY-2 radar component of the THAAD Anti-Ballistic Missile system deployed in Al-Ruwais Industrial City in the United Arab Emirates. Satellite imagery reviewed through open-source intelligence indicated that the site was indeed hit. The radar component alone is valued at approximately $500 million.

When combined, the value of the damaged assets amounts to $1.902 billion.

Multiple US sites targeted

Iran has reportedly targeted at least seven US-linked military locations in the region since the conflict escalated. These include the Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain, Camp Arifjan, Ali Al Salem Air Base and Camp Buehring in Kuwait, Erbil Base in Iraq, Jebel Ali Port in the UAE, and Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar.

In Kuwait, images taken after reported strikes showed collapsed rooftops at various sections of Ali Al Salem Air Base. Camp Arifjan recorded the deaths of six US service members. A widely shared video from Camp Buehring captured a drone flying over the base before exploding within its perimeter.

At Erbil International Airport in Iraq, where US forces are stationed, footage verified by The New York Times indicated repeated strikes over the weekend. Smoke and flames rose from the installation. Satellite images taken on Sunday morning revealed that four structures in one section of the base had either been damaged or destroyed. Fires continued into early Monday.

In Dubai, satellite imagery from Sunday showed smoke rising from a large building inside a fenced US Navy recreational zone at Jebel Ali Port. Although the site is not officially designated as a US base, it remains one of the navy’s most frequently used ports in the region.

Diplomatic missions also hit

In addition to military installations, several US diplomatic missions in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE came under attack.

The US Embassy in Riyadh was struck by two drones. The Saudi Defence Ministry reported “limited fire and minor material damage” within the compound. The Washington Post later reported that the CIA station located inside the embassy complex was also hit.

The US Embassy in Kuwait City faced drone and missile strikes. Smoke was seen near the compound. Authorities have not released detailed information about the extent of the damage. The embassy announced it would remain closed “until further notice,” while non-essential staff and family members were evacuated.

In the UAE, a suspected Iranian drone struck a parking area near the US Consulate General in Dubai. The incident caused a fire, which local authorities quickly brought under control. The consulate compound experienced some impact, though no major structural damage was reported.

The escalation marks one of the most significant direct confrontations between the United States and Iran in recent years.

By Anas Abbas

Russia and China have publicly criticised the ongoing military campaign by the United States and Israel against Iran, warning that it risks destabilising the Middle East and undermining diplomatic efforts.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made direct contact with his Israeli counterpart, urging an immediate halt to the bombardment of Iranian territory. China has framed the strikes as a setback to negotiations that had been making headway in addressing Iran’s nuclear programme and regional security concerns. According to him, military action interrupted progress that was being achieved through talks.

In a statement released by China’s foreign ministry, Wang stressed that continued fighting would deepen instability, increase civilian suffering, and fray international norms governing sovereign relations. He reaffirmed Beijing’s preference for diplomatic engagement over force and called for all parties to resume peaceful negotiations without delay.

On the same day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov echoed similar concerns in Moscow, questioning the justification for the attacks. He pointed out during a press briefing that there is no credible evidence that Tehran was actively pursuing a nuclear weapon, the publicly stated reason for the military action.

Lavrov argued that the strikes could have the opposite effect of what their architects intended, potentially driving Iran and other states to seek nuclear capabilities as a deterrent.

Lavrov warned that the conflict may prompt a broader nuclear arms race in the region if countries feel compelled to arm themselves in response to military threats. He also criticised the US and Israeli approach as “unprovoked aggression,” underscoring that such actions violate international norms and threaten regional peace.

Russia has offered to assist in diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis but has firmly rejected any justification for the current offensive campaign.

Both Beijing and Moscow are pushing for renewed diplomatic channels to be opened, including through international institutions and direct talks, emphasising that military solutions cannot resolve deeply rooted political disputes. Their positions signal widening international concern over the conflict and mounting pressure for a ceasefire and negotiated settlement.

By Ahmed Musa Husaini

In June last year, during the 12-Day war, I described the situation as the end of peace in the middle-east, arguing that a broader conflict between Iran and its proxies on one hand, and US-Israel and their gulf lackeys on the other, is inevitable.

Israel exists on three myths: that it is the only democracy in the middle-east, that it is a strategic asset for the US and the Christian West’s bulwark against an irrational Islamic and Arab enemy, thus positioning itself as US guarantor of American energy security, protector of western maritime lines, and other US/western interests without the need for permanent American boots on ground.

These myths lack any basis in facts or rational geopolitics. Israel is an apartheid state, a security liability for the US, and the biggest source of instability in the region that continues to occupy territories of it’s neighbors and violates more international laws and UN conventions than any country on earth.

Since its founding in 1948, Israel has fought multiple wars with its Arab neighbors. In the early years post-1948, Egypt emerged as its most sophisticated threat due to its size as the most populous Arab nation and its border with Israel, making it impossible to be decisively defeated by Israel in any conventional way.

Aware of such threats, Israel, worked through the US, to sign a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979, in what Israeli leaders and analysts referred to as the “most important strategic shift in Israel’s history,” one that reshaped Israel’s strategic environment in profound ways. It effectively neutralized the most powerful Arab military power, decapitated the Egypt-led Arab military coalition which had crossed Suez Canal in 1973 and took Israel by surprise. With Egypt now removed from the strategic equation, Israel could focus its resources elsewhere.

That’s why Menachim Begin was able to make far-reaching concessions to the Egyptians in 1979: returning the Sinai peninsula along with dismantling over 170 military Israeli installations, as well as the handing over of the Alma oil fields which at the time supplied half of Israel’s energy needs with estimated $100 billion in untapped reserves. To this day, the US pays Egypt $1.3-1.5 billion annually to maintain that agreement.

With the removal of the Egyptian threat, the years from 1979 to the end of the cold war marked a period of Israeli undisputed military superiority. It was Israel’s golden age, a period of unparalleled conventional military dominance. Nowhere was that superiority displayed than in its invasion of Lebanon in 1982 (and its defeat of Syrian forces) in order to dislodge the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).

Ironically, it was Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and its prolonged occupation of southern Lebanon that gave birth to Hezbollah. Hurting from the suffering and humiliation of the Shiite constituents in Southern Lebanon, Hezbollah emerged (under IRGC’s tutelage) with the explicit goal of ending Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, a feat it achieved in 2000 when Israel was finally chased out of Southern Lebanon.

In the same vein, the eruption of the First Intifada due to years of Israeli occupation and subjugation of Palestinian Arab people led to the birth of Hamas as a military threat. Prior to that, Hamas was a local charity organization with a vast network of schools, clinics, mosques, and youth clubs, providing crucial social services and embedding itself in the daily life of Palestinian communities. Immediately after the outbreak of the first intifada, Sheikh Ahmad Yassin and other leaders announced the formation of Harakatul Muqawama Al-Islamiya – the Islamic Resistance Movement, known by its acronym as Hamas.

With the end of cold war, Israeli focus shifted to Iraq. Israeli illusion of invincibility was shattered during the Gulf War, with Saddam’s Iraq firing 39 scud missiles at Israeli population centers. For the first time, the Israeli home front was attacked by a different type of weapon that renders its air superiority ineffective, an experience that gave birth to Israel’s famed missile defense technology.

With the elimination of Saddam in 2003 in another costly US war at the behest of Israel, Israel’s new focus shifted to Iran. Iran represented a different kind of threat. For a start, Iran is a non-Arab, Shiite power, with a nuclear and missile delivery technology, and a network of proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen; posing a challenge to Israel’s military dominance in ways its strategists could not have imagined in the heady days after its peace treaty with Egypt in 1979 or the elimination of Saddam in 2003.

In the build up to the Israeli-instigated US invasion of Iraq, Netanyahu even told the US Congress that removing Saddam Hussein from power would usher in a period of peace and stability in the Middle-east. Immediately Saddam was removed, the incitement shifted to Iran, and if Iran were to be removed today, Israel would create a new enemy to continue justifying its belligerence.

The fact is, Israel is created from chaos, from tragedy: the dispossession of millions of indigenous Palestinian Arab populations. The existence and survival of Israel as an occupier, expansionist, racial and ethnic state is predicated on endless chaos and conflict. Even if Hezbollah, Hamas or Iran do not exist, Israel would create one.

The current war with Iran is nothing but a continuation of Israeli impunity under American patronage, in order to guarantee Israel’s qualitative military edge, preserve America’s diplomatic monopoly, and continue to create conditions for continuous US presence in the middle-east.

That’s why Trump’s own objectives for the war keep changing, from regime change and liberating Iranians, to destroying Iranian defense capabilities and industrial infrastructure. Just days ago, the Iranians have agreed to most of Trump’s demands about halting uranium enrichment and the commitment not to pursue nuclear weapons, but negotiations for the US and Israel were just a smokescreen to buy time and reposition forces in the region.

I am under no illusion about American military superiority. If Iran were to fall today, if the Iranian threat were to be eliminated today, Israel would create another threat. Already, Israeli leaders are talking about Muslim nuclear-armed Pakistan and Muslim NATO member Turkey. For Israel to exist, a new enemy must be created after the elimination of the last one, a forever war is needed.

This state of forever war is important for Israel’s domestic population. The Israelis disagree on everything except on the treatment and subjugation of their Arab neighbors. Creating an external enemy serves as a unifying force against an existential threat, thus suppressing internal political and ethnic divisions, distract from their leaders (Netanyahu’s) domestic and personal failures, and delegitimize political dissent as betrayal.

It also has an international dimension. First on the basis of strategic interests by projecting Israel as America’s strategic asset against a common Muslim Arab enemy while conveniently ignoring Palestinian Christian suffering. And most importantly, from an apocalyptic dispensationalist theological belief that the triumph of Israel and the ensuing conflict are prophesied conditions for the “End Times,” culminating in the Battle of Armageddon and guaranteeing the return of Christ. To these groups, which form a core part of the Republican Party’s base and hold immense political influence, unconditional support for Israel is a religious duty and the conflict must continue and even intensify to fulfil a biblical prophecy.

These three elements: the need for an enemy, the value as an American proxy, and the political weaponization of apocalyptic theology make Israel’s policy of forever war not just a failure of American policy in the middle-east, it is the American policy itself. Israel will be locked into a cycle of creating and perpetuating enemies even if all its neighbors surrender.

But nature abhors vacuum. The resistance dynamic will always run its course. Actions will generate reactions. Israeli occupation and subjugation will create collective suffering, and collective suffering creates anger, desperation and desire for revenge, leading to radicalization and the emergence of violent resistance groups whose promise of resistance and dignity will always find fertile ground for recruitment and popular support. And the cycle repeats.

This is exactly what is happening in the current war on Iran. Iran knows quite well it cannot stand the combined military might of the US and Israel, but it chose to fight with dignity rather than face humiliation and surrender. This heroic and noble stand alone, whose story will be told across generations, will galvanize resistance movement across every inch of the middle-east, whose seeds will germinate in the next 20-30 years to trigger seismic geopolitical events across the region as was seen in the Iranian Revolution of 1979 and recently the Arab Spring.

Victory for Iran is not in militarily defeating the US, it is in denying the US and Israel their objectives of regime change and submissive leadership. It is the same victory the Taliban recorded in Afghanistan and the resistance bloc recorded in Iraq after over 20 years of US aggression and occupation.

The solution to all these lies first in saving Israel from itself, from its perpetual sense of forever war and tendency to self-destruct. Israel must be forced to exist as a single biracial state with equal rights for Palestinians and Jews, just as was the case with Apartheid South Africa. And secondly, America’s diplomatic monopoly must end. Asking America to broker a peace involving Israel is akin to asking Iran to broker peace involving Hezbollah. It is against the basic law of natural justice and fairness to ask the state that sponsors, arms, shields, and protects one side to serve as impartial broker.

To Achieve that, the Arabs, Israel’s immediate environment and victims, must do their part. These countries, are run by regimes who continue to ignore the suffering of their people in order to appease their American patrons. The world (Russia or China or any rival power) will not do the job for them. Neither Israel nor their American patrons will change their behavior without incentives. More Abraham Accords can be signed, and more middle-eastern governments can be co-opted into the illusion of American patronage and Israeli security, but as long as the Arab street reeks of domestic discontents and regional outcry against Israeli aggression, as long as the Palestinian question remains unsolved and Israeli belligerence remains untamed, a forever war is in our hands.