Connect with us

News

‘Fight Them!’: the night Iran’s missile spectacle rattled Israel

Published

on

‘Fight Them!’: the night Iran’s missile spectacle rattled Israel

Just after dark on Saturday in Tehran, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards picked up a phone and issued an order to begin “Operation True Promise” — an unprecedented aerial assault by the Islamic republic on the Jewish state.

After Major General Hossein Salami read out the names of the senior Iranian military officials whose killings, in a suspected Israeli air strike on April 1 in Damascus, the guards were seeking to avenge, he chanted a verse from the Koran.

“Fight them!” he said. “Allah will chastise them at your hands, and He will lay them low and give you victory over them.”

Within minutes, the attack began — a swarm of drones took off on a nearly 2,000km, hours-long flight to Israel, soon to be followed by missiles. It was the first direct confrontation between the two most powerful militaries in the Middle East, arch-rivals entangled in a decades-long shadow war marked by Israeli assassinations and Iran’s sprawling Axis of Resistance, which has brought its proxy militias and Iranian soldiers right to Israel’s border.

With Iran’s assault, soon thwarted by Israel’s sophisticated aerial defences, that conflict burst out of the shadows. In Tehran, some rushed to petrol pumps and grocery stores, and others to Palestine Square, draped in Iranian flags. In Isfahan, people cheered as missiles flew over the grave of Mohammad Reza Zahedi, the general killed in Iran’s diplomatic compound in Damascus by the air strike that Israel has not publicly claimed.

Advertisement

In Washington, US President Joe Biden had already cut short a vacation on Saturday and headed back to the White House, worried that this may just be the first volley in an all-out war between Israel and Iran.

In Israel, where the assault had long been anticipated, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plane, the Wing of Zion, took off for safety from Nevatim air base as the missiles approached. Around the same time, dozens of fighter aircraft and defensive systems were deployed to fend off the attack — not just Israeli, but British, Jordanian and American.

At 8pm local time, neighbours saw Netanyahu’s motorcade speed from the Jerusalem home — reportedly fitted with an anti-missile shelter — of a billionaire friend where the Israeli premier and his wife had spent the Sabbath.

What followed was a social media spectacle, perhaps exactly as Iran intended. Across Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, a macabre parade of drones lit up the night sky, their lethal payloads cheered on by some, including in Beirut, where ravers at a nightclub paused dancing briefly to watch a projectile streak overhead.

What Tehran was banking on, said Holly Dagres, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, was a demonstration of might visible to all.

Advertisement

“In the eyes of the clerical establishment, this mission was a success because they were able to hit Israel directly from Iranian soil [and] demonstrate that [despite] its dated Shah-era fighter jets and air inferiority, it now had command of the sky.”

As the drones began their hours-long journey, Israelis huddled at home, staying close to bomb shelters, and after six months of war in Gaza, a stoic humour kicked in. “First direct flights from Iran to Israel since 1979,” joked one Israeli, referring to the year of the Iranian Revolution.

But the gallows humour masked an existential dread around which Netanyahu has fashioned his own political career over the past decade: that a full-fledged war with Iran was eventually inevitable.

Even now, after Israel escaped almost entirely unscathed from the Iranian assault — a child was injured by shrapnel, a military base was lightly damaged and few of the missiles managed to penetrate Israeli airspace — his response will decide if this remains a single, deadly round of tit-for-tat attacks, or the precursor to the war he has long warned about.

Hours after Salami gave the orders in Tehran, and Israel’s air defences had intercepted 99 per cent of the assault, Iran declared its mission accomplished: “the operation is over”.

Advertisement

Around then, Netanyahu was on the phone to Biden, reportedly being told that Israel’s successful defence was enough of a victory, and that the US would not join in any counter-retaliation.

“The president told the prime minister that Israel really came out far ahead in this exchange,” said a senior US official. “Israel took out the IRGC’s . . . leadership in the Levant [and when] Iran tried to respond, Israel had clearly demonstrated its military superiority.”

Israel has faced barrages of rockets from Hizbollah and Hamas for years, fending them off with its vaunted Iron Dome. The sight of its interceptors chasing threats low over the Tel Aviv skyline are by now a familiar sight.

But this was the first time the Jewish state has been attacked by another country since 1991, when Saddam Hussein fired dozens of Scud missiles at Tel Aviv and Haifa while Iraq was at war with Israel’s closest ally, the US.

Back then, Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was persuaded by George W Bush not to retaliate. This time around, Netanyahu may prove less receptive to that argument, given the scale of Iran’s assault; Iran launched more ballistic missiles at Israel in one hour this weekend than Iraq did during weeks of war.

Advertisement

As Biden watched from the Situation Room at the White House, at least 100 ballistic missiles were streaking through the skies, minutes from Israeli territory.

But in the balance, Iran may have given Biden’s argument a small boost. Having telegraphed the assault for two weeks, and having mostly used slow-moving drones that Israel’s air defences could easily track and eliminate, Tehran lowered the possibility of mass casualties.

Despite Iran’s superior numbers, Israel’s military hardware is far more sophisticated  Graphic comparing Israel and Iran's military might.

Those drones, some of which — the Shahed-136 — are similar to those Russia has unleashed in Ukraine, have proven easy to take down. Even Ukraine’s limited air defences have done so. At the same time, said an Israeli official, the swarm of drones was designed to probe Israel’s responses and track the locations and trajectories of its defensive assets.

“They learned a lot about us, and we learned a little about them,” said the official. “It was an education.”

Iran’s missiles were less easily deflected but, given the advance warning, Israel had placed its most sophisticated, multibillion-dollar missile defences on high alert. The Arrow system took out most of the cruise and ballistic missiles, while Israel’s allies picked off the rest.

“The Iranians took into consideration the fact that Israel has a very, very strong, multi-layered, anti-missile system,” said Sima Shine, a former official at Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency with a focus on Iran. “And they probably took into consideration that there will be not too many casualties.”

Advertisement

Shine said the assault was similar to the one Iran launched after the 2020 assassination of the IRGC’s revered Qassem Soleimani on the orders of then US President Donald Trump. Then, as now, Iran telegraphed the assault on US troops in Iraq, giving them notice to take defensive measures that resulted in zero casualties under a televised attack.

Demonstrators wave Iranian and Palestinian flags as they gather at Palestine Square in Tehran on April 14 after the assault against Israel had been launched © Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

“From Iran’s point of view, it was a show — ‘we have the capability. We have all different missiles and drones. We can do it. We prefer not to escalate it into a war,’” said Shine. “The fact that we can sit now and talk about the waiting and seeing and thinking and not retaliating is because there were no casualties.”

Indeed, almost immediately after the attack ended, Israel returned to a regular, if martial, rhythm. Citizens were told they no longer needed to shelter, and by Monday night all restrictions on public gatherings would be lifted countrywide.

But the country was still at war, with Hamas, if not Iran. And in the north, just as they have almost daily for the past six months, Israeli warplanes pounded Hizbollah targets in retaliation for rocket attacks earlier that night.

“We intercepted. We stopped [the attack]. Together we will win,” declared Netanyahu on X, signalling that, while this barrage may be over, Israel’s war was not.

Advertisement

News

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

Published

on

Senate Adopts GOP Budget, Laying the Groundwork to Fund ICE and Reopen DHS

The Senate early Thursday morning adopted a Republican budget blueprint that would pave the way for a $70 billion increase for immigration enforcement and the eventual reopening of the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans pushed through the plan on a nearly party-line vote of 50 to 48. It came after an overnight marathon of rapid-fire votes, known as a vote-a-rama, in which the G.O.P. beat back a series of Democratic proposals aimed at addressing the high cost of health care, housing, food and energy. The debate put the two parties’ dueling messages on vivid display six months before the midterm elections.

Republicans, who are using the budget plan to lay the groundwork to eventually push through a filibuster-proof bill providing a multiyear funding stream for President Trump’s immigration crackdown, used the all-night session to highlight their hard-line stance on border security, seeking to portray Democrats as unwilling to safeguard the country.

Democrats tried and failed to add a series of changes aimed at addressing cost-of-living issues, seizing the opportunity to hammer Republicans as out of touch with and unwilling to act on the concerns of everyday Americans.

Here’s what to know about the budget plan and the nocturnal ritual senators engaged in before adopting it.

Advertisement

The budget blueprint is a crucial piece of Republicans’ plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end a shutdown that has lasted for more than two months. After Democrats refused to fund immigration enforcement without new restrictions on agents’ tactics and conduct, the G.O.P. struck a deal with them to pass a spending bill that would fund everything but ICE and the Border Patrol. Republicans said they would fund those agencies through a special budget bill that Democrats could not block.

“We can fix this with Republican votes, and we will,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and the Budget Committee chairman. “Every Democrat has opposed money for the Border Patrol and ICE at a time of great peril.”

In resorting to a new budget blueprint, Republicans laid the groundwork to deny Democrats a chance to stop the immigration enforcement funding. But they also submitted themselves to a vote-a-rama, in which any senator can propose unlimited changes to such a measure before it is adopted.

The budget measure now goes to the House, which must adopt it before lawmakers in both chambers can draft the legislation funding immigration enforcement. That bill will provide yet another opportunity for a vote-a-rama even closer to the November election.

Democrats took to the floor to criticize Republicans for supercharging funding for federal immigration enforcement rather than moving legislation that would address Americans’ concerns over affordability.

Advertisement

“This is what Republicans are fighting for,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the Democratic leader. “To maintain two unchecked rogue agencies that are dreaded in all corners of this country instead of reducing your health care costs, your housing costs, your grocery costs, your gas costs.”

Democrats offered a host of amendments along those lines, all of which were defeated by Republicans — and that was the point. The proposals were meant to put the G.O.P. in a tough political spot, showcasing their opposition to helping Americans afford high living costs. Fewer than a handful of G.O.P. senators crossed party lines to support them.

The G.O.P. thwarted an effort by Mr. Schumer to require that the budget measure lower out-of-pocket health care costs for Americans. Two Republicans who are up for re-election this year, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, voted with Democrats, but the proposal was still defeated.

Republicans also squelched a move by Senator Ben Ray Lujan, Democrat of New Mexico, to create a fund that would lower grocery costs and reverse cuts to food aid programs that Republicans enacted last year. Ms. Collins and Mr. Sullivan again joined Democrats.

Also defeated by the G.O.P.: a proposal by Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, to address rising consumer prices brought on by Mr. Trump’s tariffs and the war in Iran; one by Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, to require the budget measure to address rising electricity prices, and another by Mr. Markey to create a fund to bring down housing costs.

Advertisement

Senator Jon Ossoff, a Democrat who is up for re-election in Georgia, also sought to add language requiring the budget plan to address health insurance companies denying or delaying access to care, but that, too was blocked by Republicans.

While Republicans had fewer proposals for changes to their own budget plan, they also sought to offer measures that would underscore their aggressive stance on immigration enforcement and dare Democrats to vote against them.

Mr. Graham offered an amendment to allocate funds toward a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the apprehension and deportation of adult immigrants convicted of rape, murder, or sexual abuse of a minor after illegally entering the United States. It passed unanimously.

Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, sought to bar Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and other services, and criticized the organization for providing transgender care to minors. Senator John Kennedy, Republican of Louisiana, also attempted to tack on the G.O.P. voter identification bill, known as the SAVE America Act. Both proposals were blocked when Democrats, joined by a few Republicans, voted to strike them as unrelated to the budget plan.

The Republicans who crossed party lines to oppose their own party’s proposals for new voting requirements were Ms. Collins along with Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

Advertisement

Ms. Collins and Ms. Murkowski also opposed the effort to block payments to Planned Parenthood.

Continue Reading

News

Who is John Phelan, the US Navy Secretary fired by Pete Hegseth?

Published

on

Who is John Phelan, the US Navy Secretary fired by Pete Hegseth?

The firing of US Navy Secretary John Phelan is the latest in a shakeup of the American military during the war on Iran, now in its eighth week.

The Pentagon said Phelan would leave office immediately.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“On behalf of the Secretary of War and Deputy Secretary of War, we are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy,” said chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell. “We wish him well in his future endeavours”.

His firing comes at a critical moment, with US naval forces enforcing a blockade on Iranian ports and ships, and maintaining a heavy presence around the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime.

Although the Pentagon gave no official reason for the dismissal, reports indicate the decision was linked to internal disputes, including tensions with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Advertisement

Phelan’s removal is part of a broader pattern of dismissals and restructuring within the US military under President Donald Trump’s administration – including during the current war.

So, who is John Phelan, and what impact could his firing have on US military strategy?

Who is John Phelan?

As the US Navy’s top civilian official, Phelan had various responsibilities, including overseeing recruiting, mobilising and organising, as well as construction and repair of ships and military equipment.

He was appointed in 2024 as a political ally of Trump, despite having no prior military or defence leadership experience.

Before entering government, Phelan was a businessman and investment executive, as well as a major Republican donor and fundraiser — a background that is fairly common among Trump appointees and advisers. The US president’s two top diplomatic negotiators, for instance, are Steve Witkoff — a real estate businessman with no prior diplomatic experience – and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Advertisement

According to the Reuters news agency, Phelan’s tenure quickly became controversial. He faced criticism for moving too slowly on shipbuilding reforms and for strained relationships with key Pentagon figures, including Hegseth and his deputy, Steve Feinberg.

rump with U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant General Michael Borgschulte and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan (R) before the game between the Navy Midshipmen and the Army West Point Black Knights at M&T Bank Stadium [File: Tommy Gilligan/Imagn Images/Reuters]

In addition, Phelan was reportedly under an ethics investigation, which may have weakened his standing in the administration.

Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao, who was also reported to have a difficult relationship with Phelan, has become acting secretary. Fifty-four-year-old Cao is a 25-year Navy veteran who previously ran as a Republican candidate for the US Senate and House of Representatives in 2022 and 2024 respectively, but was unsuccessful on both occasions.

Democrats have criticised Phelan’s removal, calling it “troubling”.

“I am concerned it is yet another example of the instability and dysfunction that have come to define the Department of Defense under President Trump and Secretary Hegseth,” said Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Advertisement

Who else has the Trump administration fired since the war with Iran began?

Phelan’s removal is the latest in a series of senior military leaders being fired or are leaving during the US-Israeli war on Iran, in addition to others since Trump was re-elected.

Among the most notable dismissals was Army Chief of Staff General Randy A. George, in the first week of April. George was appointed in 2023 under former US President Joe Biden.

According to reports, Hegseth also fired the head of the Army’s Transformation and Training Command, a unit concerned with modernising the army, and the Army’s chief of chaplains. The Pentagon has not confirmed their dismissal.

Why is Phelan’s dismissal significant?

The 62-year-old’s removal comes during a fragile ceasefire with Iran, as the ⁠⁠US continues to move more naval assets into the region.

The Navy is central to enforcing Trump’s blockade of Iranian ports to restrict Iran’s oil exports and apply economic pressure on Tehran, as the US president looks eager to wrap up the war, which is deeply unpopular to many Americans.

Advertisement

However, there are no indications that Trump is willing to end the blockade or other naval operations in the Strait of Hormuz, as negotiations between Washington and Tehran have come to a standstill.

Tensions have escalated in recent days after the US military seized an Iranian container ship. The US claimed it was attempting to sail from the Arabian Sea through the Strait of Hormuz to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas.

Tehran responded by describing the attack and hijack as an act of “piracy”.

Iran has since captured two cargo ships and fired at another.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Not a Deal-Breaker: White House Downplays Iranian Action Near the Strait

Published

on

Not a Deal-Breaker: White House Downplays Iranian Action Near the Strait

Just two weeks ago, President Trump threatened to wipe out Iran’s civilization if it did not open the Strait of Hormuz. Days later, he said any Iranian “who fires at us, or at peaceful vessels, will be BLOWN TO HELL!”

Yet on Wednesday, after Iran seized two ships near the Strait of Hormuz, the White House was quick to argue the action was not a deal breaker for potential peace negotiations.

“These were not U.S. ships,” Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said on Fox News. “These were not Israeli ships.” Therefore, she explained, the Iranians had not violated a cease-fire with the United States that Mr. Trump has extended indefinitely.

She cautioned the news media against “blowing this out of proportion.”

The surprisingly tolerant tone from the White House suggests Mr. Trump is not eager to reignite a war that he started alongside Israel on Feb. 28 — a war that has proved unpopular with Americans and has gone on longer than he initially estimated.

Advertisement

The president on Tuesday extended a cease-fire between the United States and Iran that had been set to expire within hours, saying he wanted to give Tehran a chance to come up with a new proposal to end the war.

The American military has displayed its overwhelming might during the war, successfully striking thousands of targets. But it remains unclear whether Mr. Trump will accomplish the political objectives of the war.

The Iranian regime, even after its top leaders were killed, is still intact. Iran has not agreed to Mr. Trump’s demands to turn over its nuclear capabilities to the United States or significantly curtail them. And the Strait of Hormuz, a key passageway for world commerce that was open before the war, remains closed.

Nevertheless, the White House has repeatedly highlighted the military successes on the battlefield as evidence it is winning the war.

“We have completely confused and obliterated their regime,” Ms. Leavitt said on Fox Wednesday. “They are in a very weak position thanks to the actions taken by President Trump and our great United States armed forces, and so we will continue this important mission on our own.”

Advertisement

The oscillation between threats and a more conciliatory tone has long been one of Mr. Trump’s signature negotiating strategies.

Potential peace talks between the two countries are on hold. Vice President JD Vance had been poised to fly to Islamabad for negotiations. But the trip was postponed until Iran can “come up with a unified proposal,” Mr. Trump said.

The United States recently transmitted a written proposal to the Iranians intended to establish base-line points of agreement that could frame more detailed negotiations. The document covers a broad range of issues, but the core sticking points are the same ones that have bedeviled Western negotiators for more than a decade: the scope of Iran’s uranium enrichment program and the fate of its stockpile of enriched uranium.

Mr. Trump has not spoken publicly about the cease-fire, other than on social media. On Wednesday, he also posted about topics including “my Apprentice Juggernaut” — a reference to his former television show; the Virginia elections, which he called “rigged”; and a new book about Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending