240 Comments
User's avatar
Bill Darrow's avatar

Excellent piece. Your ability to explain the bigger picture, overlooked elsewhere, is much appreciated. Looking forward to your coverage of these epic events.

Michael Atkinson's avatar

Bill,

Thank you for sharing. Would you, Sheryl Tunnicliffe, Kim Shieh, Gabriela Popescu, Нація підприємців, John Hardman, Mary Allen-Maris, Amir Kahns, Jon Epps, Kathy L, Miguel Sanchez and all please also see/share our information from Captain Dan Hanley, Captain Rob Balsamo, Amber Quitno, Professor Tony Martin, Scott Hagen, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Professor Graeme MacQueen, and others and help us improve it if you can. Thank you!

https://michaelatkinson.substack.com/

🦖👀

Marc Svetov's avatar

Great piece! I think you're right: it's eventually all about China ... but in the meantime, to eliminate Iran as a threat and enemy in order to achieve an anti-Islamist, enforced peace is paramount. What a relief! Let's hope ...

Danilo Mejia's avatar

China does not benefit from instability in Iran or the Persian Gulf, as it relies on stable energy markets. Russia is China’s main oil and gas supplier, while Iranian oil—though discounted—is far more important to Iran than to China. The Iranian protests were largely driven by economic grievances rather than a unified regime-change movement, and claims of 30,000 deaths remain unverified, with actual casualties likely far lower. All countries involved — Iran, China, Russia, and the United States — rely heavily on technology to monitor, influence, and control populations, especially during unrest. From Iran’s perspective, efforts to jam or counter foreign communications systems such as Starlink, including technological support from China, are acts of national self-defense. Tehran frames both its internal security measures and regional posture

as defensive responses to external pressure from the United States and Israel

Harry Storm's avatar

Yes of course from Iran's perspective, efforts to jam internet access to prevent the outside world from learning about the Regime's massacre of its own citizens are acts of "self-defence." And that's another reason why the Regime must fall. "Actual casualties likely far lower." Let's say they are far lower, say, 90% lower, 3,000 innocent protesters slaughtered by their own government. You OK with a regime that does that, has a religious end-of-the-world desire, is spending vast amount of resources to acquire nuclear weapons, and threatens a country that already has nuclear weapons with annihilation? I'm not.

Danilo Mejia's avatar

Your concern about human rights is understandable. No government should kill protesters. But if we are going to speak about morality and outrage, it cannot be selective.

On February 28, a U.S. strike reportedly hit a girls’ school in Minab, Iran, killing about 169 people, many of them schoolgirls. Young girls attending school should never become victims of geopolitical conflict.

If we truly care about innocent lives, that concern must apply equally—to protesters, civilians, and children killed in war. Human rights lose their meaning when outrage is directed only at the actions of governments we oppose while ignoring tragedies caused by our own side.

Harry Storm's avatar

That civilians get killed in war is an unfortunate byproduct of war. That’s why it’s best not to be a bellicose nation that threatens other nations with annihilation, shouts death to America! death to Israel, slaughters its own people, and puts girls schools next to IRGC headquarters. And curious, did you express these same concerns when iran was slaughtering its own people, something that didn't happen in war, but was a decision made by a bloodthirsty regime concerned only with its own survival.

Danilo Mejia's avatar

God bless you Harry

Notes from the underground's avatar

Time to arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic

Harry Storm's avatar

if you think the U.S. and Israel are losing, you're delusional. Can't blame you

though. There are so many deluded "experts" and commentators who think so too. It's almost like they want the brutal dictatorship to survive.

Notes from the underground's avatar

Even if an Israel-led US force ‘prevailed’ in Iran, you know and I know it doesn’t end there.

Harry Storm's avatar

Please lend me your crystal ball. all I know is that a different regime that isn't into annihilating other countries would be an improvement.

David Stevens's avatar

Pete Hegseth has an Armageddon complex. Have you read his books? No wonder he's a drunk. You'll have noted that U.S. army officers are quoting Bible end of times narratives to their troops. There's pushback... strongly worded letters... but to the trump administration?!! Trump has been prayed over and blessed by Evangelical, Pentacostal hierarchs. He's on board. When HE goes, the Earth goes with him. Thoughts & prayers, people.

Harry Storm's avatar

None of that negates anything I wrote in my comment, starting with Hegseth, whom I didn't even mention.

David Stevens's avatar

I spelled pentecostal incorrectly. There's no "edit" feature. Mea culpa.

Harry Storm's avatar

There is an edit feature. Check out the three dots on the right.

David Stevens's avatar

Share link to comment

Hide comment

Report

Thank you for your time, Mr Storm. I'm used to sites that let me zip in and correct typos, spelling, rearrange wording, and so on. Substack is big on monetising, less so on their technology.

Richard David's avatar

You can believe what you want. Everyone has their preferred objective.

Harry Storm's avatar

thanks for that bit of innocuous, self-evident pap.

Michael Ketley's avatar

This is not going to end well……

Marc Hess's avatar

Very insightful. Thank you

The Gadfly Doctrine's avatar

Zineb is right to widen the aperture beyond Iran. But she still frames the problem as if destroying a Chinese ‘asset’ in Tehran restores American leverage. That assumes the decisive variable is positional. It is not. It is industrial.

The question is not who holds ground in the Gulf. It is who controls replenishment.

In Thucydides Trapped, I argued that Allison’s collision model (Allison 2017) and Mearsheimer’s offensive realism (Mearsheimer 2001) misread the era because they assume war remains a contest of force ratios and resolve. Operation Epic Fury proves the opposite. The United States can strike. It can project. It can destroy. What it cannot do, at scale and speed, is reconstitute.

China controls 60–70 per cent of rare earth mining, over 90 per cent of processing and roughly 94 per cent of high-performance neodymium magnet production. Those magnets sit inside missile seekers, aircraft actuators, radar systems and precision guidance kits. A Tomahawk fired is not simply a symbol of resolve; it is a depletion event. An interceptor launched in the Red Sea is not just deterrence; it is an entry in an industrial ledger.

If Washington escalates in Iran, munitions stocks shrink. If it settles and sanctions lift, Chinese first-mover infrastructure and energy contracts remain. Either path leaves Beijing entrenched in the production structure that Susan Strange identified as the core of structural power (Strange 1988).

Deterrence, in this environment, is no longer about threatening annihilation. It is about convincing the adversary that you can reload. After Iran, that credibility is thinner than rhetoric suggests.

The rising power does not need to collide. It needs to outlast.

https://alkoch55.substack.com/p/thucydides-trapped?r=kmlt&utm_medium=ios

Andrew from London's avatar

Great post, I am OK with Allison, Mearsheimer is just one of Lenin useful idiots.

Our so called Western leaders had decades to realise that Russia and China are not friends but enemies and prepare accordingly.

Instead people like Bush and Blair saw God in Putins eyes.

Saintly Obama is responsible for quite a bit of that in Middle East with his idiotic deal with Iran.

Chute Me's avatar

No rare earth minerals without the energy to mine them.

The Gadfly Doctrine's avatar

A closure of the Strait of Hormuz would primarily affect crude oil flows used for transport fuels and petrochemicals. Oil accounts for roughly 0 to 1 percent of China’s electricity generation. By contrast, coal provides about 55 to 60 percent, hydropower 13 to 15 percent, wind 13 to 14 percent, solar 11 to 12 percent, and nuclear around 4 to 5 percent. Rare earth mining and processing draw on this domestically supplied electricity mix.

So the sharper question is not whether China would have electricity. It is how Beijing would prioritise allocation under stress. Given central control over grid dispatch and industrial planning, strategic sectors such as rare earth processing would likely move up the queue rather than down it.

In that scenario, American access to rare earth elements would hinge less on Chinese energy constraints and more on Chinese export licensing decisions.

Matt L's avatar

Opening act was Venezuela. But agree with the rest. America is clearing the board of strategic distractions ahead of 2027. Whether that is regime change or turning said distraction into a US client. I wouldn't want to be in Cuban leadership's position right now.

Andrew from London's avatar

I love Cuban cigars, but refusing to go there to avoid providing hard currency to ghastly communist dictatorship (unlike my mates).

Let's hope Cuba transitions to something better soon.

Hopefully peacefully.

Denis Kaufman's avatar

Interesting article. I agree with the strategic chess. I disagree with the conclusion that Trump is the one to appreciate the necessity. Attacking Iran to unhinged China's Middle East strategy is high risk. For one, Iran itself isn't a pushover. For another Trump hasn't demonstrated any strategic savvy to date. This gambit may be coming out of of the Joint Staff, previous administration's planners, with a dash of guidance from Israel and perhaps some Arab capitals. If it originates in the Joint Staff and planners who worked in previous administration's, they are people subject to to being sacked on whims of Gabbard, Rubio, Hegseth or Loomer. Who then would be competent to see it through. Also, China are not stumps. What is to stop them, having perceived a US goal of weakening China's ability to neuter a US Response to a Taiwan attack, from acting preemptively while we are engage in Iran. Lastly, isn't the easiest course for China to offer Trump a "special prize" and some favorable terms in a future naming deal and some copyrights on an Ivanka shoe deal, or crypto deal for Trump fits? And what leverage is China building g with their new found friendship with Canada?

I pee freely's avatar

Oh yeah cause the Chinese military is just ready to go right now. I mean it's not like they just carried out a Stalin like purge of officers from the top of joint command all the way down to junior officers. That's the kind of army you just know will have no issues starting a major conflict operation in a 48 hour timeline. Oh yeah they'll do great. Hopefully they are stupid enough to do it, wouldn't even need usa involvement the Japanese, Korean and aussies should be enough

Denis Kaufman's avatar

Your handle reminds me of the old axiom. There are folks who learn by reading and observing, folks who learn by doing, and folks who learn by peeing on an electric fence.

Scott C. Rowe's avatar

I read your first book “Yellow River” with great interest. It reminded me of the earlier book “Fifty Yards to the Outhouse” by Willy Makit and Betty Wont.

Andrew from London's avatar

So you are another one with TDS like my friends in London.

I am sure in your book, Kamala would be much better leader than Trump and Obama deal with Iran was perfect?

What about considering that Trump supported analysis and execution plan of his officials.

That all it matters with leadership in this context.

Who is better leader in your view in the West?

Macron, Starmer, German chancellor?

Maybe new PM of Japan.

Canada is lucky that their neighbour is USA.

With Russia as neighbour they wouldn't exist.

Denis Kaufman's avatar

Based on your syntax, I'm going with you being a Rusdian bot with a broke translation app.

Victorine Warner's avatar

carny is great friends with starmer and macaron. Hes also doing his best to destroy Canada's relationship with the US. He wants to play with the big boys but he's burning Canada while he's at it and he doesn't care. He's such a small minded man. He wants to be a billionaire. He thinks that will get him into the big boys sandbox. Don't forget everybody, Canada has oil. and carny thinks its best to leave it in the ground. Someone should clue him in. Then disregard him like the non-entity that he is.

Dave Dunham's avatar

Russia is a neighbour and Canada still exists….

Bob Drew's avatar

Denis you need treatment for TDS, Dude

mich ooganna's avatar

Canada has now instantly. changed its position. The present Canadian PM Carney is not the same degree of idiot as former PM Trudeau. With regard to rare earth minerals, British material engineers have just now invented a new form of aluminum which will replace these at about 1:1,000 of the cost. The stranglehold of China is about to end.

Nishi's avatar

Fantastic writing. You are a true strategic thinker. Thanks a lot for the full context here.

Trent Berger's avatar

This gives Trump and his idiots the benefit of the doubt. While the China MAY be true it would be purely coincidental, this is about Trumps profiteering, need to show his manliness, and distraction, all done without coalition building and proper war planning. It’s articles like these which normalize Trump into a rationale actor he is not. Your article while enlightened further muddies the water when you omit his irresponsible impulsive behavior like gutting USAID, firing top military officials on personal grounds, etc. Thanks for laundering and sane washing MAGA.

Trent Berger's avatar

You’re calling this “derangement,” but what you’re actually doing is giving Trump the benefit of the doubt he’s never earned, pretending he’s playing 3D chess and somehow doing it for the country’s benefit….THAT is derangement or TDS.

His record doesn’t support that fantasy. It shows impulsiveness, self-interest, and a willingness to undermine alliances and democratic norms—see Ukraine, Russia, and the 2020 election. That’s not strategy. That’s a pattern.

And yes, part of that pattern includes deeply questionable associations—like his long-documented pedophile connection to Epstein. That alone should make people pause before treating him as some uniquely principled actor.

What you’re doing is projection. You call critics “deranged,” while treating loyalty as rational. It’s the same playbook Trump uses—throw out accusations like “cheater” or “pedophile” or worse instead of dealing with substance.

And your cancer example actually proves my point. If he cured cancer, yes I’d hate him because he no doubt would withhold from blue states and sell it to the highest bidder. Thinking he’d be benevolent for the sake of mankind and not exploit it for his own insecure power profit and vanity? THAT IS TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME.

Go drink some bleach redneck.

Paul Kirwin's avatar

You just spent how many words(?) doing exactly what you accuse the scary orange man of doing.

Stephen R. Pickard's avatar

Not really. Tump has never made sense. So a lot of people tell me. Just the other day a person came up to me and said" Sir, Trump is an idiot. The biggest in the history of the world. " Seriously if you can find one trace of human dignity in the man, you are amazing. Even God vomits when talks. Or so a lot of people are saying.

Paul Kirwin's avatar

I’m not sure if you’re just clowning around or seriously trying to convince me of ‘something’ but I appreciate the laugh either way. Thank you.

Stephen R. Pickard's avatar

Just having fun in the manner of Trump. Not trying to convince you of anything. I am sure that your views are pretty well set.

Paul Kirwin's avatar

I read and I reason. My views change as I learn. I hope yours do too.

Trent Berger's avatar

Being coherent and rational? When was the last time the pedophile bankrupt incontinent uneducated rapist ever acted that way?

Victorine Warner's avatar

Another tds sufferer

I pee freely's avatar

A really bad case of trump derangement syndrome in action. He could cure all cancers and you'd still be making this same inane comment whose only evidence consists of your own deluded belief in your ability to mind read.

mich ooganna's avatar

Please don't confuse Trump's domestic policies (with which many I disagree) and his foreign policies which may seem confusing and my be even to him. Nevertheless, they are right

Trent Berger's avatar

Oh please Trump has no coherent policy, foreign or domestic. It’s all me me greed greed using our country’s 250 years worth of resources for his own vanity and grievances. This war is an impulsive obscene illegal act to distract from Trump being a pedophile and extract tribute from his Arab and Jewish state cronies. Don’t sanewash him on this site. Trump is abhorrent pedophile who needs to be destroyed Qdaffi style.

Nick's avatar

Give your TDS-addled brain a rest.

Trent Berger's avatar

Go buy some Trump crypto coin MAGAIT

Nick's avatar

Unlike you, I have self control 🤣

Trent Berger's avatar

Really? You’re a troll. I see your Substack profile. Go drink some bleach redneck.

Nick's avatar

Good, then you know i oppose leftists and islamists.

I prefer ivermectine. But you TDS types already know that

Victorine Warner's avatar

Another sufferer of tds

OrientExpress Marga Zambrana's avatar

Excellent analysis that perfectly explains what Trump is doing in Iran. Congratulations and happy to follow and quote you in future interviews.

Christopher P's avatar

Very illuminating, but I very much doubt that Trump himself understands any of this in the slightest. The man is demonstrably ignorant of geopolitics and any strategy, he is just a salesman and the front man for others. Who though? Not his clown car of a cabinet. Rubio? One assumes the remaining professionals in State and the intelligence agencies and DOD made this happen, or encouraged Trump as he sought a distraction from Epstein and his other domestic scandals.

I pee freely's avatar

Classic idiotic orange man bad take. The guy is much smarter than you sore lowers will ever give him credit because a leftist never ever reconsiders his opinions, never mind changing them! No CNN told you orange man bad your new npc firmware installed successfully

Andrew from London's avatar

Great post.

Like other forums there are many posters with TDS.

In their view Biden was mentally fit to run for 2nd term and Kamala had IQ of Nobel Prize winner and made speeches worthy of Winston Churchill.

Still, I hope this attack was not about regime change. Decapitation strategies rarely work.

I guess USA and Israel discovered something which forced them to act now.

Richard Ellison's avatar

brilliant take, U pee

Maury's avatar

Brilliant article!🙏

John Hardman's avatar

This sounds like "sane washing" Trump and Hegseth to me. "Living well is the best revenge." China is busy acquiring assets while the U.S. is chasing ideological liabilities. After the dust settles, China will pick up the pieces and carry on with business. The U.S. will stir things up and then leave. China then will step in and establish new relationships with whoever is left standing. China and India need cheap fuel and Iran will continue to need paying customers. Any vacuum created will be filled by China.

"Iran is a key strategic partner in China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), formally joining in 2019 to enhance connectivity between East Asia, Central Asia, and Europe. As a vital node in the BRI, Iran offers critical energy resources and logistical routes that bypass maritime risks, supported by a 25-year$400 billion cooperation agreement focused on infrastructure, energy, and, increasingly, technology." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–China_25-year_Cooperation_Program#:~:text=Based%20on%20the%20agreement%2C%20China,signing%20off%20on%20the%20program.

I pee freely's avatar

Oh I'm sure everyone is just lining up to be a Chinese ally right now. Just look how well it worked out for Venezuela and Iran.

John Hardman's avatar

Venezuela and Iran were illegally invaded by the U.S., not China. To the rest of the world, China looks like the adult in the room.

Fereydoun's avatar

Excellent piece. Thank you very much. China has remained the top beneficiary of all US sanctions. China has bought cheap and discounted oil from Venezuela, Russia and Iran and currently lives on 1/5 billion barrels of oil in stock, the highest in history. Iran is under bombs and no voice form Beijing.

Mizanur Rahman, Ph.D.'s avatar

Zeinub Ribua offers a pragmatic analysis of the U.S. & Israeli war against Iran. She argues that the U.S. is waging this war as a part of their bigger geopolitical reset for the strangulation of China. If her argument is valid, an immediate implication is that the war will risk being prolonged and engulfing the entire Middle East into a chaos. The early development that Ayatollah Khameini and senior Iranian officials are assassinated and that Trump wants a regime change in Iran was met by Iranian response targeting the U.S. and Israeli military targets across the Middle East. Whereas the U.S. and Israel will seek a quick cinematic victory, the Islamic Republic & its allies would seek a protracted war of attrition bleeding the U.S. and Israeli forces. Time will say if the U.S. can close this war as planned.

Kurt's avatar
Mar 1Edited

Interesting, well considered, I wouldn't get into a debate on the thesis...excellent for Friday afternoon faculty cocktail party conversation ...but it's a tad too tidy, as if all loose ends are wrapped up, we can now wash our hands of the situation, and single laser focus can be applied to global considerations that are the antithesis of tidy.

America has never had a coherent China policy, in fact, incoherency for the last century describes it well, and I've seen no evidence that there is a coherent policy anywhere in the future. I'm sure somewhere in the American machinery some smart people were working this into the equation, but as a catch all explanation for what are extremely complicated issues with no apparent or clear outcomes, claiming something is "all about" a specific and particular concern seems simplistically premature.

Guy Barnett's avatar

Very informative and insightful piece. Thank you for publishing this!

Fbrbhk's avatar

An incredible article. Thank you.