General

Two Ancient Civilizations, One Modern Rupture: How China is Gradually Turning on the Jews

/4 Comments/in /by

On February 24, 2026, the Times of Israel published a report that would have been almost unthinkable a decade earlier. Antisemitism has been rising in China, a country previously considered almost free of anti-Jewish hatred, according to a new research study by the Jewish People Policy Institute. Anti-Jewish tropes had moved from marginal online spaces into official media, academia, and state-sanctioned discourse. The phenomenon, JPPI senior fellow Shalom Wald found, had intensified sharply following the Gaza conflicts in 2021 and 2023.

“When the nation with the second-largest population in the world and one of the principal architects of the global information environment permits the dissemination of antisemitic ideas, fuels them, or tolerates them, its conduct resonates far beyond its borders,” warned JPPI president Yedidia Stern. The findings were particularly striking because antisemitism in China was developing without a historical background of Jewish persecution and without a significant Jewish presence in the country. Approximately 2,500 to 3,500 Jews live in mainland China according to the Jewish Virtual Library, with another 3,500 to 5,000 in Hong Kong according to local community organizations.

The Oldest Encounter

Jews have lived in China longer than in almost any country outside the Middle East. Jews have lived in China longer than in almost any country outside the Middle East. According to the Sino-Judaic Institute, the earliest communities arrived during the Tang dynasty, roughly the 7th to 10th centuries CE, settling along the Silk Road trade routes. The most famous of these communities established itself in Kaifeng, the imperial capital of the Song dynasty, where Jews built a synagogue in 1163 and received audiences with the emperor, according to scholar Xu Xin’s research at Nanjing University. A 1489 stone inscription at the Kaifeng synagogue records that Jews entered China during the Later Han dynasty, between 25 and 220 CE, and lists the Chinese surnames adopted by the community, though scholars note this early date reflects community tradition rather than documented evidence.

For centuries, these communities lived in relative peace, experiencing none of the pogroms or expulsions that defined Jewish life in Europe. The Kaifeng community gradually assimilated into Chinese culture, intermarrying and adopting Confucian practices while maintaining fragments of their religious identity.

Shanghai, the Refuge at the End of the World

The modern chapter of Chinese-Jewish relations began in the 19th century, when Sephardic Jewish merchants from Baghdad, led by families like the Sassoons and Kadoories, established vast commercial empires in Shanghai and Hong Kong. They built synagogues, schools, and hospitals. However, there was a dark side to the Sassoons’ economic influence in China. The most consequential and well-documented controversy remains opium.

Jewish merchant David Sassoon entered the India-to-China opium trade in the 1830s after establishing his trading house in Bombay, and by the 1860s David Sassoon & Co. had become one of the largest opium trading firms operating between India and China, competing with established houses like Jardine Matheson and Dent & Co. The family operated its own fleet of clipper ships for fast delivery, according to Stanley Jackson’s biography “The Sassoons”.

While Dent & Co. collapsed in 1867 due to financial pressures including competition and post-Civil War economic disruption, Jardine Matheson remained a major competitor throughout this period and continues operating today. The Sassoons accumulated substantial wealth from the opium trade, though precise profit figures are difficult to verify. The family’s subsequent empire in real estate, banking, textiles and shipping, including significant holdings in Bombay and Shanghai, was built substantially on this initial capital according to historians including Maisie Meyer in “From the Rivers of Babylon to the Whangpoo”.

Fast forward to the 20th century, after Kristallnacht in November 1938, as country after country closed its doors to Jewish refugees, Shanghai became one of the last open ports on earth. The city required no visa for entry due to its unusual international administration. Between 1938 and 1941, more than 20,000 European Jews fled to Shanghai, most of them from Germany and Austria, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. They settled primarily in the Hongkou district, creating a vibrant community of cafés, newspapers, schools and synagogues amid desperate poverty, as documented by the Shanghai Jewish Refugees Museum.

When Japan occupied Shanghai and Nazi representatives, including Gestapo chief Colonel Josef Meisinger, pressured the Japanese army to devise plans against the Jewish population, Japanese officials refused to comply, and the community survived the war intact, according to historian David Kranzler in “Japanese, Nazis & Jews” and Marvin Tokayer in “The Fugu Plan.”

China long celebrated this history. The Shanghai refuge became a cornerstone of Chinese-Jewish goodwill, invoked by diplomats on both sides as evidence of a civilizational bond between two ancient peoples. The JPPI report noted that this positive narrative endured for decades. But in 2024, the report found, the Chinese government began to “uproot” those memories. A nonpolitical musical about the Shanghai refugees was canceled in Beijing. In the city of Harbin, memorial plaques were removed from buildings once belonging to the Jewish community, including the former synagogue, and a small Jewish museum was closed. “Inevitably, the Nazi practice of eliminating all traces of Jewish contributions to Germany comes to mind,” the JPPI report observed.

Sun Yat-sen, the Father of China, and His Jewish Allies

The political entanglement between Jews and the founding of modern China runs far deeper than the refugee story. Sun Yat-sen, the revolutionary leader revered on both sides of the Taiwan Strait as the father of the nation, was an outspoken admirer of the Jewish people and an early supporter of Zionism. On April 24, 1920, Sun wrote a letter to N.E.B. Ezra, the founder of the Shanghai Zionist Association, calling Zionism “one of the greatest movements of the present time” and declaring that “all lovers of Democracy cannot help but support whole-heartedly and welcome with enthusiasm the movement to restore your wonderful and historic nation, which has contributed so much to the civilization of the world.” The original signed letter was re-discovered in the archives of the National Library of Israel in 2021.

Sun’s connection to the Jewish world was not merely rhetorical. His most colorful personal aide was Morris Abraham “Two-Gun” Cohen, a Polish-born Jew from London’s East End who became Sun’s bodyguard, arms buyer, and confidant. According to the Jewish Policy Center, Cohen first encountered Chinese immigrants in western Canada in the early 1900s, defended them against discrimination, and was invited to join Sun’s revolutionary Tongmenghui organization. He trained Chinese-Canadians in military combat, secured weapons for the revolutionary army, and in 1922 traveled to China to serve as Sun’s aide-de-camp.

Cohen rose to the rank of major general in the Chinese National Revolutionary Army, making him the only Westerner to hold such a rank in the Chinese military. After Sun’s death in 1925, Cohen maintained relationships with both the Nationalist and Communist factions. Chiang Kai-shek appointed him de facto Minister of War from 1926 to 1928. During World War II, Cohen refused to evacuate Hong Kong, staying behind to help Sun Yat-sen’s widow Soong Ching-ling escape before being captured and tortured by the Japanese in Stanley Prison Camp. He was later repatriated through a prisoner exchange.

Cohen’s last great act may have been his most consequential for Jewish history. According to the Jewish Press, in 1947, the Republic of China (then holding a seat on the UN Security Council) intended to oppose the UN Partition Plan for Palestine. Cohen used his personal influence with Chinese officials to convince them to abstain, helping ensure the vote that gave birth to the State of Israel. He later helped arm the new state during the 1948 War of Independence.

The Jewish Revolutionaries Who Helped Build the Communist Party

The Jewish connection to China’s political transformation extended beyond the Nationalists. Soviet Comintern agent Grigori Voitinsky, born to a Jewish family, played an important role in the establishment of the Chinese Communist Party in 1921, as documented by historian Hans van de Ven in “From Friend to Comrade.” Voitinsky traveled to China in 1920, met with Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao, the future CCP leaders, and helped transform their theoretical interest in Communism into an organized political movement. It was only after Chen’s meetings with Voitinsky that the first communist cells were established.

Mikhail Borodin, born Mikhail Gruzenberg to a Jewish family in Belarus, became perhaps the most influential foreign advisor in the Chinese revolution, as detailed in Dan N. Jacobs’ biography “Borodin: Stalin’s Man in China.” Dispatched by Moscow, he served as Sun Yat-sen’s principal Soviet advisor, brokering the alliance between the Kuomintang and the fledgling CCP that would shape Chinese politics for decades. Borodin reorganized the Kuomintang along Leninist lines, facilitated the admission of CCP members into the Nationalist party, and helped establish the Whampoa Military Academy that trained a generation of Chinese military leaders on both sides of the civil war. When Sun Yat-sen was asked whether he knew Borodin’s real name, Sun reportedly replied “I know. It is Lafayette.”

Karl Radek, born Karl Sobelsohn to a Jewish family in Galicia, served as rector of Sun Yat-sen University in Moscow, where he trained Chinese students who would become leaders in both the Communist and Nationalist movements, according to Warren Lerner’s biography “Karl Radek: The Last Internationalist”. Adolph Joffe, born to a wealthy Jewish family in Crimea, was the Soviet diplomat who negotiated the Sun-Joffe Manifesto of 1923, the foundational agreement for Soviet-Chinese cooperation that shaped the trajectory of the Chinese revolution, as recounted in Bruce Elleman’s “Diplomacy and Deception”.

The Coin That Flipped

For most of the post-1949 era, this history produced a distinctly positive Chinese view of Jews. Wald himself wrote in a 2004 JPPI report that the Chinese reflected little or none of the traditional forms of antisemitism, though he warned even then of the risk of a resurgence of “the old canard of a Jewish world conspiracy.” That earlier report found that “many Chinese often tend to see the Jews as a mirror of their own history, they admire Jewish wealth and successes, they respect the great contributions that Jews have made to Western civilization, and they perceive themselves and the Jews as representing the ‘two oldest living civilizations.'”

Since Israel and China first established formal diplomatic relations in 1992, China’s mainstream discourse about Israel was overwhelmingly positive, as analysts noted. A 2014 survey by the Anti-Defamation League found that 20% of Chinese agreed with negative stereotypes of Jews, placing relatively low compared to other countries. r

But the JPPI’s 2026 report identified a sharp reversal. “Philosemitism and antisemitism are two sides of the same coin in China,” the report stated, noting that the same generalizations once used to praise Jews were now being used to vilify them. Admiration for Jewish intelligence and financial acumen had been reinterpreted as evidence of a malevolent force undermining the global order.

The Algemeiner reported that according to the JPPI study, China’s Communist Party leaders had originally supported Zionism. Sun Yat-sen praised the movement in 1920. In 1948, the Communist Party’s People’s Daily praised the founding of Israel. But since then, China’s sympathies shifted dramatically, with Beijing recognizing a Palestinian state in 1988 and more recently moving closer to Hamas and Iran.

The Geopolitical Engine Behind the Shift

The JPPI report identified the current trend as not “homegrown” but driven by strategic geopolitical shifts. Three forces converged. First, China’s escalating rivalry with the United States led Beijing to perceive Jews as having significant influence over American policy, translating hostility toward the United Stats into anti-Jewish rhetoric. Second, China’s growing alignment with Arab and Muslim-majority nations, including Iran, incentivized the adoption of anti-Israel narratives. Third, a broader adoption of anti-Western narratives framed Israel and Jews as extensions of Western power.

The report identified 2021 as the turning point. After the short Gaza war that year, a Chinese UN delegate accused Israel of war crimes, an unusual move. The Algemeiner noted that Wald identified at least three factors driving the shift. Israel, under American pressure, had made Chinese investments in hi-tech and infrastructure more difficult. “The Chinese expressed their resentment quite openly,” Wald wrote. Simultaneously, China was expanding its presence in the Arab Middle East, offering major economic cooperation and long-lasting political ties. And the October 7 attacks and subsequent Gaza war provided the catalyst for a second, stronger, and still unabated antisemitic wave.

The mechanisms of transmission were varied. Chinese social media platforms became fertile ground for propaganda. The Times of Israel report noted the case of blogger Lu Kewen, who claims 15 million followers and quoted from Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, telling readers to identify Jews by their “long nose.” Another influencer, Su Lin, declared after October 7 that “Hamas acted too softly.” Because China maintains strict control over digital and other media, the JPPI report suggested these ideas were “officially sanctioned” or at least tolerated by authorities.

Since October 7, 2023, social media has been inundated with criticism of Israel and even Jewish influence on U.S. foreign policy. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has refused to accept this shift as organic, instead building a case that foreign governments — China chief among them — are engineering it.” In September 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu escalated a months-long rhetorical offensive against China into one of the sharpest public confrontations between the two countries in recent memory.

Speaking before approximately 250 U.S. state legislators at Israel’s Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem on September 15, Netanyahu directly accused China and Qatar of orchestrating coordinated media campaigns designed to erode Western support for Israel. He likened the effort to a new form of siege, warning that both nations were funding bots, artificial intelligence tools, and paid advertisements across Western social media platforms, including TikTok. He repeated the charge on Israel’s i24News channel, describing a media blockade funded with enormous sums by Qatar and China. The accusations came in the aftermath of Israel’s September 9 strike on Hamas leaders in Doha, which triggered a severe international backlash and deepened Israel’s diplomatic isolation, including a European Commission proposal to partially suspend its association agreement with Israel.

On a broader geopolitical note, China is a key member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an organization that is opposed to U.S. hegemony on the Eurasian plane. China has a strong interest in cooperating with embattled countries like Iran to ensure geopolitical and economic stability in West Asia. For example, China imported roughly 1.38 million barrels per day of Iranian crude in 2025, accounting for over 80% of Iran’s total oil exports and making Beijing effectively Tehran’s only major customer, all routed through a shadow fleet to disguise the oil’s origin and evade U.S. sanctions. With roughly half of China’s total oil imports transiting the Strait of Hormuz and Chinese refiners already cutting processing runs as the February 2026 U.S. and Israeli strikes threaten that chokepoint, Beijing has a direct economic stake in keeping Iran stable and the strait open.

Moreover, China’s military relationship with Iran stretches back to the 1980s, when Beijing supplied Tehran with fighter aircraft, over a thousand tanks, and hundreds of missiles during the Iran-Iraq War, later shifting toward technology transfers that helped Iran build its own missile production capabilities. After Israel’s 12-day war in June 2025 devastated Iran’s air defenses and killed top military commanders, China quietly accelerated its support, delivering HQ-9B long-range air defense systems through an oil-for-weapons barter arrangement, providing access to its encrypted BeiDou-3 satellite navigation system, sharing real-time satellite intelligence on U.S. naval movements, and sending attack drones while negotiating the sales of supersonic anti-ship missiles.

These moves come against a broader backdrop of the Chinese political class becoming increasingly aware of how organized Jewry being the real sovereigns in American foreign policy circles. Chinese officials and state media figures like Dong Manyuan, the former Vice President of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s own think tank (CIIS), claimed that the United States has been “severely kidnapped” by Jewish-derived political forces. Similarly,  CGTN anchor Zheng Junfeng declared that Jews “dominate finance, media and Internet sectors”, while former Global Times editor-in-chief Hu Xijin claimed that the U.S. campus protests during Israel’s recent Gaza campaign revealed that the “Jewish political and business alliance’s control over American public opinion has declined.” Even bestselling author Song Hongbing, whose Currency Wars sold over a million copies, promoted the theory that Jewish bankers, principally the Rothschilds, secretly control the Federal Reserve and Western governments.

Given these geopolitical realities, it is not in the least surprising that China is allowing and even fomenting anti-Israel and anti-Jewish attitudes through soft-power mechanisms on social media undermine the Judeo-American empire in the information war. All in all, China is capitalizing on the post-October 7 cultural mood swing against Israel to advance its grand strategy of undermining U.S. primacy on the global stage.

Patricia Marins updates the war; on X

/1 Comment/in /by

@pati_marins64
War Causes $3.2 Trillion Losses in Global Markets and pressure US-Israel The United States is deploying its B-52 bombers to attack Iran, along with more B-2s, in a move that appears aimed at devastating Iran and forcing surrender. Today, missiles and drones continued hitting Israel and U.S. bases, but with one detail: almost no reaction from air defenses, which are likely being conserved to protect assets like airports, energy infrastructure, and military industry.
With daily costs potentially reaching $10 billion and, according to The Economic Times, losses of $3.2 trillion in global markets already reported in the first 48 hours of war, this is generating more pressure to end the conflict. Israel’s central bank governor has announced estimated losses of $17–20 billion. If Israel’s losses are that high, how much are the American ones?
The order is to intensify efforts to end the war quickly. However, the waves of bombings hitting Iran do not seem to have that effect. Iran’s entire military doctrine was built around such scenarios, which is why it has such an extensive network of multi-kilometer underground bases. I see no possibility of the war ending in the coming days for several reasons, including:
1. In addition to their naval strength of hundreds of remaining assets, Iran still maintains a sustained rate of fire, deploying dozens of missiles and hundreds of drones every daqui ;
2. The decentralization of operations. For example, anti-ship missiles are operated by four forces: IRGC, navy, army, and aerospace forces. The same decentralization applies to drones and other military assets, creating resilience;
3. The belief that the US and Israel cannot sustain a long war. Iranians know that, although missile attacks have been reduced, current waves are enough to continue neutralizing most U.S. bases in the region, maintain economic chaos in Israel and Arab countries, and drive losses in global markets;
4. Iranians are certain that no matter how many bombs fall, they will emerge victorious, since there is no way to destroy their nuclear program except by themselves, and the war has virtually suppressed internal opposition movements.
5. The attacks have not sparked internal guerrilla movements or any uprising against the government. On the contrary, the level of violence has increased support for the regime. It’s that old story: if the dose of the medicine is too high, it can have the opposite effect.
Ironically, Iran is heading toward a scenario similar to Ukraine’s, where everyone knows there’s no way to win against the Russians, but the cost keeps getting higher. In fact, when I read Pentagon reports, they remind me a lot of the Russian MoD’s in the early days of the Ukraine invasion. Iranian missiles and drones launched today face almost no resistance from air defenses already depleted in many areas, the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, Iranian naval forces are nearly intact, markets are in panic, and Iran still has dozens of underground military fortresses loaded with missiles and equipment. Anyone who thinks the US and Israel can sustain this war for weeks in this scenario is very optimistic.

Prof. Mearsheimer on Judge Nap: “It is almost impossible for me to see how Israel and the US win this war.”

/3 Comments/in /by

On 3 March 2026, I was on “Judging Freedom” talking about the Iran war. I told the Judge that the Trump administration was dragged into this war by Israel and its enormously powerful lobby in the US. Both Secretary of State Marco Rubio and House Speaker Mike Johnson have admitted as much and it is clear from listening to and reading the discourse on the internet that many Americans understand that this is another war for Israel. Iran was no threat to the US and there was no reason for Trump to attack it.

I also emphasized that it is almost impossible for me to see how Israel and the US win this war. It seems that victory for this aggressive tag team requires not only regime change in Iran, but replacing the regime with new leaders who are subservient to Israeli and American wishes. If those two things do not happen, Iran will surely keep its nuclear enrichment capability; keep building ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, & long-range drones; and keep supporting Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah. The likelihood of this war producing an Iranian regime that is subservient to Israel and the US is close to zero in my estimation.

For Iran to win, all it has to do is survive and not end up as a pawn of Israel and the US. Even if its missile inventory is greatly diminished, its nuclear enrichment capability is crippled, and its infrastructure is badly damaged, it matters little if the regime survives or is replaced by a regime that refuses to kowtow to the tag team. Remember that in the Vietnam War, the US won virtually every battle and lost the war.

Glenn Diesen interviews Col. Douglas MacGregor: A New World Emerges: Iran Will Win & Israel May Not Survive

/2 Comments/in /by

Mark Wauck: Day 4 Op Epstein Fury: Early Update

/1 Comment/in /by
Summary of the disaster so far…

First we have an update on the destruction of some of Iran’s naval assets. While Trump was crowing about destroying some Iranian ships that were left at the docks, I speculated that these were vessels that were deemed expendable or indefensible in the circumstances—crews would not be put to risk. It appears that was the case:

Patricia Marins @pati_marins64

From the 8 ships sunk and visually confirmed- , 3 were from 60s and without any relevance, 3 unarmed an 2 more modern frigates. Where are the others 25-30 Iranian ships and 28-30 submarines?

Shahryar Pasandideh @shahpas

A waste of a munition against an essentially unarmed ship (the Makran and Kordestan should not be confused with the Shahid Mahdavi) and an unnecessary pollution hazard. The waters of the Persian Gulf, which Iran shares with the Gulf Arab states, are slow to circulate and flush.

Joseph Dempsey @JosephHDempsey

20h

INS Makran, a former oil tanker converted into an Expeditionary Mobile Base (ESB), indicated damaged in strikes at Bandar Abbas naval base, Iran.

I can’t vouch for Marins’ numbers—Wikipedia lists Iran as having 20 submarine. Of these, three are Russian Kilo class subs, which are very dangerous attack subs—extremely quiet, well armed. Their presence in the area should be very concerning to the USN and they are probably the most significant asset the Iranian navy possesses for this type of war. Most of the rest are mini-subs. These are most likely designed for coastal operation, so useful for keeping the USN at a distance—little is known about their range, but they carry two torpedoes. Beyond the submarines the Iranian navy operates numerous fast patrol ships—some can reach 100 mph—which are armed with anti-ship missiles. These present a very real asymmetric threat.

More generally, Marins notes this morning:

An operation planned entirely for a 5-day war

As we’ve been discussing over the past few days, the shortage of interceptors is already critical and is directly affecting the United States, Israel, and their allies, who are now openly accusing the U.S. of turning its back on them and prioritizing Israel’s protection instead.

Not to mention the failure to evacuate the bases, with soldiers reportedly hiding in hotels in the face of such obvious bombardment in a conflict of this scale. …

In the best-case scenario, there will only be enough ammunition left for another 4 days if Iran returns to its initial pace of attacks.

But that’s not even the main concern. In the configuration most oriented toward anti-missile defense, which is almost certainly the loadout of the two Carrier Strike Groups currently stationed in the region, the number of Tomahawks should range between 300 and 500 missiles.

Since hundreds have already been expended in the last 3 days, it’s quite possible that no more than 100–150 remain or even less.

That’s the point I made before the war started. That the interchangeable launch silos (able to accommodate both anti-missile and Tomahawks) would be heavily skewed toward defense rather than toward the offensive Tomahawks.

So, in addition to the interceptor shortage, the Tomahawk inventory is also dropping fast, and they can only be reloaded in port. Although the Navy is working on at-sea reload capability, it is still not operational.

Everything was planned for a lightning war that never materialized.

Now, in the big picture, this is very big.

Collingwood @admcollingwood

3h

Maybe because, given the midterms are coming, the traders at Henry Hub know that Donald Trump could easily impose export controls.

Philip Pilkington @philippilk

5h

European natural gas prices are absolutely soaring. Henry Hub in the US is pretty muted. Weird considering LNG demand from the US is going to increase significantly.

So, the Euros cut themselves off from cheap Russian energy to import expensive US gas. Who wants to bet that Trump would inflict pain on American consumers in the event of major shortages just to accommodate allies? Me neither. And it gets worse.

Iran has struck Fujairah, which is the only Gulf energy hub that lies outside the actual Persian Gulf, beyond the Strait of Hormuz. The only bypass of the Strait. Energy analysts didn’t count on this and assumed that energy would continue flowing from Fujairah. Fujairah is also an important support and resupply facility for the USN Fifth Fleet.

Image



Shanaka Anslem Perera @shanaka86

BREAKING: Fujairah is not just a port. It is the terminus of the Habshan-Fujairah pipeline, the UAE’s only bypass around the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran just struck the escape route.

Every analyst modelling the Hormuz closure built their base case on 4.0 to 6.5 million barrels per day of bypass capacity through pipelines terminating outside the Strait. Fujairah was the linchpin of that assumption. Saudi Aramco’s East-West Petroline to Jeddah was the other.

On March 1, Iranian missiles hit Ras Tanura, Saudi Arabia’s primary export terminal. On March 3, Iranian drones reached Fujairah Oil Industry Zone. Debris from an intercepted drone ignited a fire at the facility. Contained quickly, no casualties, operations resumed.

But the message to reinsurers is not about this fire. It is about the next one.

The bypass capacity that every energy desk on Wall Street uses to argue Hormuz disruption is manageable just became a target set, not a solution. Reinsurers now must model not only Hormuz transit risk but bypass terminal risk. The insurance withdrawal that shut down 80% of Hormuz transits can now extend to the infrastructure the market assumed would compensate.

$79 Brent assumes the bypass works. Iran just demonstrated that the bypass is within range.

Recalculate everything.

Rethink that lightning 5 day war.

@calvinfroedge

22h

Friday: weekend war, we’ll kill Khamenei and the people will rise up

Saturday: 4 day war, people need some encouragement, we have people in mind

Sunday: 4 week war, our people are dead, not sure what comes next, maybe civil war

Monday: Boots on the ground

What’s next? Trump is likely on the phone to Tel Aviv seeking instructions.

Will Schryver @imetatronink

11h

 Running Dry

Less than 72 hours into this exercise in madness, US stockpiles of air defense interceptors are manifestly running dry.

That is to be expected when you expend 10+ to intercept just 1 or 2 incoming missiles.

This debacle continues to progress from bad to worse.

Statement by Permanent Russian Federation Representative Vassily Nebenzia at UNSC Briefing in connection with US and Israeli Strikes against Iran

/in /by

Mr. President,

We would like to thank the Secretary-General for his briefing.

First of all, we would like to express our strong disagreement with the fact that today’s meeting is convened under the agenda item “The situation in the Middle East.” We wish to recall that Russia and China requested the briefing be held under the item “Threats to international peace and security.” The same request was also contained in a letter from our Iranian colleagues. The aggression to which Iran has been subjected today has already spurred the escalation in the region and is liable to spill over far beyond the region, especially given that one of the two initiators of this military misadventure is far from being a State of the region. Attempts by the British presidency to artificially “downplay” the magnitude of danger of the current situation are simply unacceptable.

The Presidency also grossly scorned Russia and China’s request to invite Jeffrey Sachs, professor of Columbia University, as a briefer at today’s meeting. Normally, our British colleagues invariably assert the importance of involving civil society representatives in Security Council meetings whenever possible. But obviously, this does not apply to cases whereby internationally recognized academics can reveal the truth that may turn out unflattering to Western governments.

Mr. President,

In recent hours, we have witnessed another extremely dangerous surge in escalation in the Middle East. In the early hours of February 28, the United States and Israel began launching massive military strikes on the territory of Iran. It was publicly declared that one of the targets of the attack was the country’s senior political leadership, as well as civilian nuclear facilities. In real time we are getting reports from the Iranian authorities about casualties, including among civilians: more than 200 people have died in 24 provinces of the country. We were particularly grieved to learn about the strike targeting a girls’ school in Minab, where 85 children are reported to have been killed. We express our sincere condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims and we wish a speedy recovery to the injured. Our country is taking all necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of Russian citizens who are currently in the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI).

Mr. President,

The actions taken by Washington and West Jerusalem are nothing but yet another unprovoked act of armed aggression against a sovereign and independent UN Member State, in violation of the UN Charter and of the fundamental principles of international law. Such actions are openly geared towards further meddling in Iran’s internal affairs and destroying the State that is “disfavored” by the West. As we warned previously, this reckless move by the United States and Israel has triggered a sharp escalation of the situation throughout the region, affecting Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

Moreover, the US and Israel’s military operation is a genuine betrayal of diplomacy. Yet again, these countries are bringing to bear military force against Iran at the very height of negotiations – just as they did in June 2025. As recently as the day before yesterday, on February 26, Geneva hosted the latest round of US-Iranian talks facilitated by Oman. As Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Arakchi noted, the parties agreed to continue the dialogue. For our part, we emphasize that the Russian side has repeatedly received signals that Israel has no interest whatsoever in a military confrontation with Iran. And now, despite its willingness to engage in the diplomatic process, Tehran is once again being stabbed in the back. Moreover, Washington has been regorously building up its military presence in the region for a very long time, which only attests to the fact that the aggression against Iran was plotted in advance.

The actions of the US and Israel risk spiraling into a humanitarian and economic catastrophe. Of particular concern, once again, are the threats to nuclear and radiological safety and security.

US President Donald Trump has announced today that this operation is aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But such claims are ungrounded. Tehran has consistently stated that it has no such plans and is complying with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Moreover, Iran has repeatedly stressed its readiness to place the preservation of its status as a non-nuclear-weapon state at the heart of new agreements with the US, provided that Iran’s legitimate right as a state party to the NPT to develop peaceful nuclear technologies is respected and upheld.

Against this backdrop, we deem completely unfounded all the attempts by Western countries to justify this US-Israeli aggression by citing alleged threats to international peace and security supposedly emanating from Iran’s nuclear program. We can’t but recall here that the only credible sources of information on this matter are the relevant reports of the IAEA Director General. And these reports have never indicated that Iran could be developing nuclear weapons. The facilities being hit are under the Agency’s safeguards, which means that they cannot, a priori, be used for such activities. We expect that the IAEA Director General, Rafael Grossi, will give unambiguous assessments and will condemn this yet another act by the USA and Israel to undermine the authority of the NPT and the global non-proliferation regime as a whole.

Under no circumstances can nuclear facilities, including the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, be targeted by armed forces. That is unacceptable.

Mr. President,

We note that what was being done today is the latest phase of consistent escalatory moves taken by Western countries against Iran. These moves include the US-Israeli strikes against the country’s territory in June 2025 and the open interference of the US and its allies in Iran’s domestic political situation this past January. We also remember the failed attempts by the United Kingdom, France, and Germany to trigger the mechanism for reinstating anti-Iranian Security Council resolutions, that is the “snapback” mechanism. That did not happen owing to the efforts of Russia and a number of other UN member States who repeatedly and exhaustively explained why the UK, France and Germany had no right to invoke that mechanism.

However, none of this worked out, and the US and Israel once again resorted to the use of military force. What immediately comes to mind are obvious parallels with the events of 2003, when US representatives were trying to justify the US invasion of Iraq by waving a vial with some powder in this very chamber, alleging that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, which no one ever found. In 2023, future US Vice President Jay D. Vance said that the Iraq campaign was “unforced,” that innocent Iraqis and Americans died as a result of it, and that Washington needed to learn this lesson. However, as it turned out, this lesson was never learned.

In the statements of our European colleagues (we will hear more of them today), we do not hear words of condemnation for the aggression, nor do we hear about the deaths of many Iranian civilians. What we hear instead are, for example, the words by French President Emmanuel Macron: «The Iranian regime must understand that it now has no other option but to engage in good faith negotiations to end its nuclear and ballistic programs, as well as its regional destabilization activities». Similar assessments were voiced by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. These absurd statements were then underpinned by a joint statement by the leaders of the UK, France, and Germany, who condemned only “Iran’s strikes on countries in the region.”

Colleagues, just think for a moment – this is being said at a time when Iran has been subjected to military attack in the midst of active negotiating process. The hypocrisy of our European colleagues knows no bounds. This is not even a case of “double standards”; it is some kind of parallel reality or the other side of the looking glass. In the English language, there is a term that perfectly describes this situation – “victim-blaming.” One gets the impression that London, Paris, and Berlin are living in “la-la land” they created for themselves, trying to make the whole world believe in their illusions. However, attempts to mislead the international community are doomed to failure – any sane person is perfectly aware of who is responsible for the latest unchecked escalation.

Mr. President,

We demand that the United States and Israel immediately cease their aggressive actions. There are no and will never be any alternatives to a peaceful and diplomatic resolution of the Iranian issue, including its nuclear component. We insist on the immediate resumption of political and diplomatic settlement efforts in pursuit for solutions based on international law, mutual respect, and balance of interests. Russia stands ready to provide all necessary support for such efforts.

Thank you.

Mark Wauck: Asymmetric Wars Are Different

/1 Comment/in /by

Asymmetric Wars Are Different

That’s the title of Patricia Marins’ new post. I’ll paste it in with some comments. Before I do so …

I’ve seen claims that the IRGC says it hit the USS Lincoln. However, other posts suggest that what happened—and I saw this reported last night—is that a remote operated resupply ship associated with the Lincoln’s CSG was taken out of action. For now I’d go with the earlier report.

Here’s Marins:



Patricia Marins @pati_marins64

1h

Asymmetric Wars Are Different

You don’t measure an asymmetric war by saying you need to assassinate leaders to gain any advantage, especially when that includes opposition leaders. A war needs to be won on the theater of operations, not through political assassinations.

You don’t measure a war by the number of bombings. They need to be efficient enough to inhibit asymmetric actions, and that’s far from happening due to Iran’s size, the capillarity of its operations, and the scale of its arsenal.

Regarding “the capillarity of [Iran’s] operations,” Iran publicly made a point of mentioning before the war started that all commanders had replacements. Araghchi today also mentioned the decentralized nature of Iranian military operations. They knew that the US/Israel would strike at central command nodes, so they prepared for that. This directly militates against Trump’s hoped for “short war.”

How can we talk about air superiority at this point? Iran’s MiGs, despite being outdated, are all intact, and certainly many air defense units are still operating, which is why no one has entered Iranian airspace.

No B-2 will penetrate Iran with MiG-29s in operation. And locating and neutralizing these MiGs, which can operate from any highway, takes some time.

There are reports of a corvette sunk and a frigate damaged, but Iran still operates dozens of ships (corvettes, frigates, catamarans and robust patrol boats).

It’s too early to talk about the end of the war. Knowing what posture the Iranian navy will take is crucial for calculating the conflict’s duration.

The photos I’ve seen—and readers probably have to—show the destroyed ships sitting at docks. That strongly suggests that Iran knew those larger surface ships wouldn’t be defensible at sea, so they were left in the harbor. The smaller fast boats and sub-surface assets appear to be still operational.

The advantage in military power in an asymmetric war against Iran will always be with Israel-US, and that shouldn’t be the parameter for calculating the conflict’s duration, but rather Iran’s capacity to sustain operations while wearing down a much larger power than its own.

That is, once again, Iran’s strategy. It worked in June and it appears to be working again.

And we have to measure that capacity day by day, as Iran operates many underground bases it calls missile cities, replete with missiles and many silos across various cities.

It’s estimated that Iran still possesses 25 missile cities with up to 60 silos and launch points each, plus dozens of bunkers and tunnels also used for launches. Degrading Iran’s capacity will be a gradual and exhausting task, with high costs for US-Israel.

And it’s not enough to bomb the surface structure, blocking the tunnels of these Iranian bunkers.

At night, they reopen the entrances with internal machinery and carry out launches quickly.

At the second day, the attacks with penetrating munitions on hangars is what Israel is doing, but at this stage of the war, I don’t believe the planes are staying in hangars.

The situation is much more complex and takes more time than that. It requires hundreds of drones rotating and monitoring all these installations 24/7, which doesn’t exist yet.

This is the point, which I mentioned earlier, of Iran touting how many drones it has shot down. Off the top of my head, I believe the number cited was 22.

After four years, the Russians haven’t been able to stop the Ukrainians from operating aircraft, and Iran is three times larger than Ukraine.

Yesterday, Iran shot down a Hermes 900 drone. Even monitoring activities must be done in a way that avoids losing assets.

The Hermes 900 is the most advanced, but there are others that have been used.

There’s a lot of fog of war in the air, giving the impression of the conflict’s end when it’s just at its beginning.

We’ll be talking about the final phase when Israeli and American planes are flying over Tehran and American ships are in the Strait of Hormuz. Now the question is about who will run out ammo,

…

I would say that if, within the next 3-4 days, the number of Iranian missile launches is not substantially reduced, the munitions situation will begin to seriously concern the US–Israel coalition.

There is no American operation against Iran today. Israel remains the protagonist in the action, employing far more aircraft and intelligence assets and getting support from US.

As we noted in an earlier post, the US is already concerned about the munitions situation. Alastair Crooke maintains that Iran is in the drivers seat vs. Trump’s goal of a short war victory.