What is behind the massive, savage attack upon Iran?
23 June, 2025. Minor amendments 24 June, 2025
Introduction
The very recent, and extremely intense attacks on the state of Iran have appropriately been received by a universal condemnation from – as far as we know – all parts of the Marxist left. Including ourselves (See “War by Proxy: The Iraq-Iran War – for ‘Compass’ 1980”
MLRG 21 June 2025; and “Arbeit Zukunft: Stop the War on Iran!” MLRG 22 June, 2025 ).
These attacks began with Israel’s most recent, sudden attack on Iran on 13 June 2025:
These aggressions consisted of Israel killing key military, administrative, and scientific personnel in waves of attacks:
“Israel said it had killed a newly installed senior Iranian military official on Tuesday, just days after his predecessor was slain, further destabilizing Iran’s military chain of command as the war entered its fifth day.
Since Israel began bombing Iran on Friday (13 June), it has killed at least 11 senior generals while striking Iranian nuclear sites and missile launchers, in what it calls an effort to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
On Tuesday morning, the Israeli military said it had killed Maj. Gen. Ali Shadmani, describing him as the most senior military commander in Iran. He was appointed to his post four days ago, replacing a general who was killed by Israel on the first day of hostilities…
A senior Israeli defense official said that the killing of General Shadmani reflected Israel’s decades-long effort to infiltrate Iran’s intelligence services, as well as the careless mistakes senior Iranian officials have been making as they try to flee Israeli attacks.”
Natan Odenheimer, David E. Sanger, Farnaz Fassihi and Michael Levenson “Israel Says It Assassinated Iran’s Most Senior Military Commander
New York Times, June 17, 2025
Our perspective has been to stress the continuity of such Israeli attacks since October 7, 2023, with the prior attempts of USA imperialism allied with the Israeli state – to re-draw the map of the USA. These have entered on enabling Israel to be a fulcrum for the USA in the Middle East, and to eliminate any trace of resistance.
This overall theme is one which we have written upon previously (For examples of only the more recent, see “On Palestine, the Palestine Liberation Movement, and USA Imperialism: A Marxist-Leninist View”; November 6, 2023 at MLRG November 6 2023, and;
“From October 7, 2023 to October 2024 – and the Aftermath October 7th 2023” at MLRG.October 2024).
However, we have not yet explicitly linked that strategic aim of the USA imperialists with another, but a more long-term main strategic goal.
Namely that of preparing the next major inter-imperialist war. That is where the USA aims to block, and if need be, fight a war with Chinese imperialism. This is another theme, however, that we have long been writing about (See most recently for example, Bay of Bengal – Naval Cauldron of China versus USA – Behind the drama of Sheikh Hasina’s flight from Dakka, August 2024 ). We also have pointed out that this is a major ‘logic’ for Trump’s sanctions war (See for example:
“Theses on The Trump 2 Administration and the USA Ruling Class: A re-set to a new imperialist order”; MLRG.online 13 April, 2025)
Here we explicitly rectify our own omission in relation to the USA-Israeli attack on Iran, in this article.
Admittedly, the main part of this article is designed to outline the multiple and long-standing patterns of the subterfuge and lying manoeuvering of Trump and his imperialist predecessors as USA presidents. However, we also try to sketch the relationship of this war – to the coming inter-imperialist war of the USA against China. It seems to be the case currently that the close links of Iran with China are not so well understood by parts of the Marxist left.
Another surprising omission on the left in general, has been the apparent failure to adequately and explicitly recognise the duplicity and conspiratorial capacity of recent USA Presidents Biden and now Trump, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. In this we mean that the current war on Iran is only one end result of the ‘casus belli’ provided by the October 2023 terrorist actions of Hamas.
The left has largely not raised the possibility of these events having been “allowed” to happen by a “benign neglect” of transparent and visible preparations by Hamas operatives. We argue this is central to later events (See “From October 7, 2023 to October, 2024 – and the Aftermath October 7th 2023”, at MLRG.October 2024).
Yet – Marxists know that the history of imperialism in the Middle East has long been one of deceptions. It is unwise to use the deprecating cover of citing ‘conspiracy theory’ – as a substitute for recognising the far-sightedness of our enemies.
Leaving aside the earlier colonial era penetration of the Middle East (including Persia – Iran) by the various forces of the British, French, German and Tsarist Russia empires, the more immediately relevant period begins with the devious and secretive land divisions in the Skyes-Picot Agreement. (See “On Palestine, the Palestine Liberation Movement, and USA Imperialism: A Marxist-Leninist View”; November 6, 2023 at MLRG November 6 2023 ).
This current war of aggression is simply the latest instance of imperialist deceptions in the Middle East. Here we follow some of the dirty steps most recently taken.
1. Road to USA bombing was one of complete deception
By Tuesday, 17 June, 2025:
“Israeli strikes had killed at least 224 people and wounded more than 1,800 others in Iran, “according to the Iranian health ministry.” In Israel, at least 24 people have been killed and about 600 others wounded, according to the government.”
Odenheimer, Sanger, Fassihi, Levenson; “Israel Says It Assassinated Iran’s Most Senior Military Commander”; NYT June 17, 2025
Israel also began to ‘soften’ up the nuclear construction sites in Iran, but Israel was limited by the depth to which these targets had been protected:
“Later on Tuesday (17 June), the Israeli military launched more airstrikes, with dozens of aircraft bombing the Isfahan area of central Iran, targeting missile launchers, according to Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin, the Israeli military’s chief spokesman. He said in a televised briefing that Iran still had “significant capabilities that could cause serious damage.”
President Trump declared on Tuesday that “we now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran” and called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” amid growing signs that the United States was considering joining Israel’s bombing campaign.
Military analysts have said that only the United States has the 30,000-pound bombs and B-2 stealth bombers capable of destroying Iran’s most heavily fortified nuclear enrichment site, known as Fordo, which is built into the side of a mountain.”
NYT Ibid; 17 June
As noted – the Israeli state lacked the necessary very high military payload to deliver the final blows to the deep underground construction sites.
For example, one of the main targets was at Fordow or Fordo.
This facility was estimated by some to lie at a depth of half a mile:
“Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who has visited the facility, said last week that it was half a mile underground. But he may have been speaking in general terms, and most estimates put it 260 to 360 feet below the surface of the mountain.”
Samuel Granados, Junho Lee, Jeremy White and Leanne Abraham; “A Long Way Down: What It Takes to Hit Iran’s Deepest Nuclear Site”; New York Times; June 20, 2025
“But (Israel) lacked the military capacity to cause significant damage to Fordow and waited for the US’s intervention.”
Andrew England and Mehul Srivastava in London, Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran, and Neri Zilber; “Where is Iran’s uranium? Search continues for 400kg stockpile“; Financial Times; June 23, 2025
Nonetheless, the Israelis had “softened up” these sites with intense bombing:
“Israel targeted the Natanz facility on the first day of its strikes and has hit it again, causing damage to its overground and underground plants, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said last week. Israel also hit the Isfahan site twice.”
Samuel Granados, Junho Lee, Jeremy White and Leanne Abraham; “A Long Way Down: What It Takes to Hit Iran’s Deepest Nuclear Site”; New York Times; June 20, 2025
However, the USA certainly has the necessary technical-military capacity to penetrate this depth:
“Iran built its most critical nuclear enrichment facility, Fordo, deep inside a mountain to shield it from attacks.
But the United States has a bomb that experts think could probably reach the subterranean site. President Trump is considering a plan to use it.
Only the U.S. military has the 30,000-pound GBU-57, or Massive Ordnance Penetrator, that may be able to destroy Fordo, and it is the only armed force with aircraft that can carry out a mission with it.”
Samuel Granados, Junho Lee, Jeremy White, and Leanne Abraham; “A Long Way Down: What It Takes to Hit Iran’s Deepest Nuclear Site”; New York Times; June 20, 2025
There has been a long record of lies and deceptions in the conduct of this war to date. The story of the so-called negotiations is one facet of this.
These “negotiations” were between the USA and the state of Iran. Indeed, the fifth in a chain of such meetings was due to take place on 23 June. The Iranian Foreign Minister and Chief negotiator – Abbas Aragchi – was awaiting further discussions, both with the European Union and with the USA. But news then came of the USA bombing:
“The Iranian government now faces a choice between potentially accepting the “unconditional surrender” demanded by Trump, or resisting U.S. and Israeli attempts at disarming the country and potentially destroying its government. In response to the attacks and threats, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi responded on X, “Last week, we were in negotiations with the US when Israel decided to blow up that diplomacy. This week, we held talks with the E3/EU when the US decided to blow up that diplomacy. What conclusion would you draw?”
Later, in a speech at an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Istanbul, Aragchi said, “I don’t know how much space is left for diplomacy. We are now assessing the damage, but my country has been attacked—and we will respond.”
Murtaza Hussain; “A New Line Crossed”: The U.S. Provokes Iran With Attacks on Nuclear Sites. Iran now has been forced to decide how to respond to US attacks on its sovereignty”; ‘Dropsite’ June 2, 2025; at https://substack.com/@mazmhussain
Thus, to pre-empt further “negotiations”, Trump and the USA government launched an attack on Iran on Saturday, June 21, 2025. This was after long preparations in high secrecy to deceive onlookers, especially, of course, Iran and its people :
“On Saturday (i.e. June 21), plane spotters using flight tracker apps noticed B-2 stealth bombers based in Missouri flying to the Pacific, sparking speculation they were heading to Guam to prepare for an attack on Iran.
As experts debated why the B-2s were flying towards Guam and not Diego Garcia, an Indian Ocean location closer to Iran, where the US and UK have a base, the US was already conducting a top-secret attack on Iran.
Very early Saturday morning Eastern time, seven other B-2s took off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. Unlike the planes that flew to the Pacific and made themselves detectable at times, the seven B-2s flew east in stealth mode. Roughly 18 hours later, they dropped 14 massive bunker-buster bombs on two of Iran’s three nuclear sites that were hit in the strikes.
After the strikes on Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said Operation Midnight Hammer involved very tight operational security and “misdirection”.
“The scope and scale of what occurred… would take the breath away of almost any American if you had an opportunity to watch it in real time,” Hegseth said.”
Demetri Sevastopulo, Henry Foy, James Shotter, David Sheppard; “How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”; Financial Times (FT); 23 June 2025.
“The bombing raid, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, was also the first use in conflict of the 30,000lb GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, widely believed to be the only bomb able to penetrate Iran’s subterranean Fordow nuclear site. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said Fordow was the “primary target”.”
“Trump taunts Iran with prospect of ‘regime change’ after strike on nuclear sites”;
Steff Chávez, Demetri Sevastopulo, James Politi, Najmeh Bozorgmehr, Bita Ghaffari, Neri Zilber; “Trump taunts Iran with prospect of ‘regime change’ after strike on nuclear sites”; FT 22 June, 2025
Centcom is based at the Pentagon and stands for U.S. Central Command. A former Deputy Director praised the “tight” operation:
“Mark Kimmitt, former deputy director for strategy and plans at Centcom, said the operational security was impressive. “In my years in the military and government, I never saw it this tight.”
Demetri Sevastopulo, Henry Foy, James Shotter, David Sheppard; “How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”; Financial Times; 23 June 2025.
But Kimmitt also outlined the extent of the deception, which probably also extended to the governments of Europe and Canada – while being closely coordinated with Israel:
“Kimmitt said sending B-2s to Guam was a “nice little head fake”, but that the key strategic deception came earlier. “The ultimate deception was Trump laying down a two-week timeline for negotiations and then attacking Iran three days later, a classic Trojan horse,” he said.
On Thursday (i.e. June 19 June), Trump gave Tehran a “maximum” of two weeks to reach a nuclear deal with the US, suggesting that a strike was not imminent. Two days later, the US struck the three Iranian nuclear facilities.
But there were signs that Trump had made his decision, even if he had not made the final order, by Thursday. Three people familiar with the situation said he left leaders at the G7 in Canada last weekend with the impression that he would strike Iran.
They said he had presented options to other leaders. A fourth person said he told the group that de-escalation had not and would not work. He told the leaders that any attack would involve one run against Iran.
“It was clear to me that he was already preparing his talking points,” said one of the people.
However, following the G7, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said Trump said “nothing… to suggest he’s about to get involved in this conflict”.
When the UK, France, Germany and the EU held talks with Iran on Friday, UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy was unaware of the imminent attack. But he tried to convince Iran that it could not afford to slow-walk negotiations with Washington, according to one person close to the talks. “Lammy really tried to get the Iranian delegation to focus on the word ‘within’ after Trump said, ‘within two weeks’,” the person said.”
Demetri Sevastopulo, Henry Foy, James Shotter, David Sheppard; “How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”; Financial Times; 23 June 2025.
That the USA and Israel were joint players is indubitable. The Israeli Cabinet had a ringside seat at the theatre:
“The US did, however, co-ordinate with Israel, according to the Israeli government. Israel’s security cabinet also watched the American strikes in real time, according to one person familiar with the matter. “
The US and Israel also engaged in co-ordinated deception ahead of Israel launching its attack on Iran on June 13. Leaks to the Israeli media suggested that Netanyahu and Trump had held a fractious phone call over Iran with Trump pushing for a diplomatic solution, which one person familiar with the call said was an attempt to dupe Tehran.”
“How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”; Ibid; Financial Times; 23 June 2025.
2. Impressive display of new technical military weapons
There is little reason to doubt the military skills and high-tech skills of the USA:
“Doug Birkey, head of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, said the bombers used a “conceal-reveal” tactic with some planes making themselves detectable at times, while the others stayed stealth.”
Demetri Sevastopulo, Henry Foy, James Shotter, David Sheppard; “How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”; Financial Times; 23 June 2025.
3. What have the attacks achieved?
Initial reports from the USA military and politicians – and Trump himself – have exulted, claiming “obliteration” of the intended nuclear capacity target of Iran:
“General Dan Caine, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said seven B-2 bombers had dropped 14 “bunker buster” bombs on targets in Iran.
In a social media post on Monday, Trump said: “Obliteration is an accurate term!”. He added: “The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye!!!”
“How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”: Ibid Financial Times 23 June, 2025
But very soon, a due caution was being injected by more sober analysts:
“The US bombers also targeted a separate site at Natanz, while a nuclear submarine was used to fire Tomahawk missiles at a third site in Isfahan.
While Vance claimed the US had “destroyed the Iranian nuclear programme” and Trump earlier said it was “obliterated”, Pentagon officials were more cautious pending a full assessment.
“Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,” said Gen Caine.”
“How the US used stealth and decoys to launch surprise attack on Iran”: Ibid Financial Times 23 June, 2025
“By Sunday afternoon, however, American officials had tempered the optimism of the night before, saying that Iran’s nuclear facilities might have been severely damaged, but not entirely destroyed.
Mr. Vance acknowledged that there are questions about the whereabouts of Iran’s stock of near-bomb-grade uranium. He and Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed that a regime change in Tehran — which could mean a protracted U.S. engagement — was not the goal.
But Mr. Trump, whose operation was the subject of praise in news coverage not just from allies but some of his critics, had already moved on, hinting in a Truth Social post that his goals could be shifting.”
Mark Mazzetti, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman, Eric Schmitt, Helene Cooper; “Shifting Views and Misdirection: How Trump Decided to Strike Iran”; New York Times; June 22, 2025
It is quite unknown by those outside Iran – it seems – what has happened to the enriched Uranium that Iran has laboriously accumulated:
“The fate of Iran’s nuclear programme, and attempts by the US and Israel to destroy it, could hang on the Islamic republic’s more than 400kg of uranium enriched to levels just short of weapons-grade.
After US stealth bombers dropped 30,000lb bunker-buster bombs on the Islamic State’s main nuclear sites, Donald Trump claimed the “key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated”.
There is little doubt that the sites Tehran has been using to produce highly enriched uranium — Natanz and Fordow — have suffered severe damage. A third site in Isfahan, used in the fuel cycle but also for storage, was hit by Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from an American submarine.
But as the Trump administration conducts its damage assessment, the critical question will be whether Iran’s programme has been destroyed, or simply pushed into smaller, secret facilities that are harder to find.
The answer depends significantly on what has happened to Iran’s 408kg stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 per cent purity — close to the 90 per cent purity required for weapons.
“It comes down to the material and where it is,” said Richard Nephew, a former senior US official who worked on Iran in the Obama and Biden administrations. “On the basis of what we’ve seen at this point, we don’t know where the material is. We don’t have any real confidence that we’ve got the ability to get it any time soon.”
“I think you would be foolish,” he added, “if you said that the programme was delayed by anything more than a few months.”
Marco Rubio, US secretary of state, said “no one will know for sure for days” whether Iran attempted or was able to move highly enriched uranium.”
Andrew England and Mehul Srivastava, Najmeh Bozorgmehr, Neri Zilber; “Where is Iran’s uranium? Search continues for 400kg stockpile“; Financial Times; June 23, 2025.
At the very least, this must be considered somewhat surprising – that this is “unknown”. Given the phenomenal ability of Israeli intelligence to know the inner mechanics and details of the Iranian state. The Israeli targeted killings of key Iranian personnel have vividly demonstrated their ability thus far. How come the imperialists now state that they do not know about the whereabouts of the Uranium?
4. The ultimate deception: The truth of Iran’s and Israel’s nuclear capacity
We know full well that Israel has nuclear power, and we do not need here to discuss it. Other than this is a “given” for the bourgeois commentators. no one has raised this in any meaningful terms recently. Certainly not since the attacks on Iran began.
It actually remains unlikely that the Iranian state could, even before the Israeli and USA bombing, have been able to complete a nuclear bomb programme. The charge that they were on the brink has been made repeatedly over some 40 years by Israel, and in particular by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu:
“Iran has spent decades building its nuclear program. It has enriched uranium — to generate energy, it said — but not yet enough to make bombs. Still, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saw this as intolerable. Iran’s leaders have threatened to destroy their country many times (and have often vowed “death to America,” too). So Netanyahu has spent a generation on a global public campaign to convey the urgency of the threat. Two decades ago, Netanyahu warned that Iran might be three to five years from making nuclear bombs. A decade ago, he said it could be “weeks away.”
Robert Draper; “The Iran Emergency – We explain how Iran’s nuclear program became a crisis so quickly”; New York Times; June 20, 2025
However, this is most likely all to be a specious allegation. If as Netanyahu claimed “two decades ago,” that Iran was “3-5 years away from making nuclear bombs” – it is remarkable that the same type of terminology is being used.
More sober assessments from USA intelligence do not agree with Netanyahu – but concede that the truth of this has become “irrelevant”:
“U.S. intelligence agencies continue to believe that Iran has yet to decide whether to make a nuclear bomb even though it has developed a large stockpile of the enriched uranium necessary for it to do so, according to intelligence and other American officials.
That assessment has not changed since the intelligence agencies last addressed the question of Iran’s intentions in March, the officials said, even as Israel has attacked Iranian nuclear facilities.
Senior U.S. intelligence officials said that Iranian leaders were likely to shift toward producing a bomb if the American military attacked the Iranian uranium enrichment site Fordo or if Israel killed Iran’s supreme leader.
The question of whether Iran has decided to complete the work of building a bomb is irrelevant in the eyes of many Iran hawks in the United States and Israel, who say Tehran is close enough to represent an existential danger to Israel.”
Julian E. Barnes U.S. Spy Agencies Assess Iran Remains Undecided on Building a Bomb”; New York Times June 19, 2025
The director of national intelligence – Tulsi Gabbard – was perhaps unwittingly, overly-honest to the world – when she declared that Iran “was not building a nuclear weapon”. She was later rebuked by Trump as he was coming very close to bombing Iran:
“In her opening statement to a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on March 25 about the Intelligence Community’s (IC) 2025 Annual Threat Assessment, Gabbard stated, “The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.”
In an interview with reporters aboard Air Force One on June 17, Trump said he believed Iran was “very close” to obtaining a nuclear weapon. Asked about Gabbard’s statement on the IC assessment in March, Trump responded, “I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one.”
Robert Farley and Lori Robertson, “Fact-checking Trump, Gabbard comments on Iran nuclear capability, “: FactCheck.org
at June 20, 2025
In reality the situation is very similar to the one that served as a pretext to invade the Bush USA and his “coalition of the willing” on Iraq. Recall the slapping down of Hans Blix – head of UNMOVIC ( United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission):
“The USA bullied the UN to get the ‘international support’ it needed to invade Iraq under ‘legal’ cover. So it built up a ‘case’. Steadily, the heat was turned up on Iraq and Saddam Hussein. UN Special Commission Inspectorates were given authority by the UN Security Council Resolutions to inspect Iraq for Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and chemical weapons. But the scientists and objective inspectors (such as Hans Blix) were undermined. Under the pretext that the Iraqi government was evading such inspections, Operation Desert Fox was launched. This intense four-day bombing of Iraqi lasted from 16 December 1998 to 19 December 1998, by the United States and the United Kingdom…
The USA claimed aggression was needed to prevent Iraq from making and stock-piling, so-called ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ (WMD). UN Security Council Resolution 1441 authorized new weapons inspections by the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Saddam accepted.
Unfortunately for the USA, UNMOVIC chairman Hans Blix and IAEA Director General Mohamed El-Baradei found no evidence “or plausible indication” of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq.
By March 2003, Blix stated there was no evidence of WMD.
Yet, the Iraqi invasion of Iraq led by the USA and with a coalition of countries (2003–2011) proceeded. “
Theses #181; and #183; MLRG.online “Theses on Kurdistan – A Marxist-Leninist Framework, Part Two”; December 2019; at MLRG_2025
What is the story of Iran’s civil nuclear capability?
Iran’s first foray into a civilian nuclear program was in 1974 under the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. This was a program that was encouraged by the comprador Shah’s imperialist masters, the USA:
“1957, when Iran first signed a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with the Eisenhower administration. The United States was then encouraging countries to engage in the peaceful exploration of nuclear science through President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” initiative.
In 1967, with American help, Iran built a small research reactor in Tehran that still exists. A year later, it signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, a symbol of the shah’s desire to be accepted into the club of Western nations.
Flush with cash from the 1973 oil shock, the shah then opted to rapidly expand Iran’s civil nuclear program, including developing a homegrown enrichment capacity. He sent dozens of Iranian students to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to study nuclear engineering.”
Mark Landler; “Iran’s Nuclear Dreams May Survive Even a Devastating American Blow”; New York Times June 23, 2025
When even the USA began to balk at this nuclear expenditure under the Shah of Iran, he turned to Europe:
“Henry A. Kissinger, then the secretary of state, sought to impose safeguards on Iran’s program, which the shah rejected. As a result, France and Germany, rather than the United States, won lucrative contracts to build Iran’s industry. German companies began constructing the Bushehr nuclear power plant in 1975, a project that was halted after the Iranian revolution in 1979
Mark Landler; “Iran’s Nuclear Dreams May Survive Even a Devastating American Blow”; New York Times June 23, 2025
We previously pointed out that the Ayatollah Khomenei regime was initially favoured by the USA over the nationalistic dual power democrats led by Bani-Sadr ( War by Proxy: The Iraq-Iran War – for ‘Compass’ 1980; at MLRG.21 June).
After the exile of Bani-Sadr, no determinedly nationalistic forces were recognisable for a period. Later, one portion of the Clergy recognised the need to modernise, and became known as “the reformers” – although it remained a comprador class. Initially led by Ayatollah Rafjansani, this stratum of the leadership formed the more ‘flexible’ part of the comprador class within the Clerical government. It was allied to the bazaar merchants. Rafjansani went in search of foreign investors. He went anywhere:
“Rafsanjani traveled to Moscow within weeks of Khomeini’s death in June 1989 . . . In 1991, Tehran signed preliminary agreements with Japanese and European companies for developing several oil and gas fields – the first foreign investments in the sensitive upstream sector since the revolution. His administration also welcomed the return of flagship American corporations such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola.”
Suzanne Maloney; “Iran’s Political Economy since the Revolution”; New York, Cambridge U Press; 2015p.209-211; 213;
While Rafjansani was not too fussy, he was spurned by the USA on multiple occasions for investment. However, according to the political economist Suzanne Maloney – he was most successful with China:
“Perhaps the most significant aspect of Iran’s new international outreach was the initiative to expand relations with Beijing. This reflected official gratitude for China’s wartime help in arms sales and missile development, as well as opportunism among an Iranian leadership more inclined toward economic liberalization than political moderation. The then-Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati visited Beijing in late 1988, expressing Iran’s desire to benefit from Chinese technology, labor, and industry, and met with qualified support from Premier Zhao Ziyang. Khamenei followed with a 1989 state visit. Rafsanjani praised Beijing as a “true friend of Iran” and set out to encourage China’s involvement in the reconstruction program. During this period, China also began to play an integral role in reviving Iran’s nuclear program. Iran’s outreach corresponded to China’s economic transformation, the energy demands of a supersize economy growing at epic rates, and Beijing’s desires to counter- balance U.S. political domination of the world A series of high-level visits helped spur a gradual expansion in Chinese assistance; in 1993, China issued its first three formal loans for Iranian trade and development activities.
During this period, China’s need for raw materials and energy grew substantially, and in addition to the expanding energy trade, Chinese companies began investing in the exploitation of Iran’s mineral resources, a sector that featured prominently in Iran’s first Five-Year Development Plan. Projects included a joint venture on a $350 million copper mine in East Azerbaijan in 1996 and a contract to build a $200 million aluminum smelter in Arak awarded to a Chinese state-affiliated firm in 2001. Other Chinese investments
in Iran included dam building, hydroelectricity, thermoelectricity, manufacturing, and agricultural development… Bilateral trade doubled between 1996 and 1999, and over the subsequent five years, China’s exports to Iran expanded by 360 percent, a larger expansion than any other Chinese market.”
Maloney S; Ibid; p.215
This relationship became especially entrenched as the succeeding government in the USA continued hostilities towards Iran. Indeed, the first false “predictions” of Iran’s proximity to nuclear weapons came during Clinton’s Presidency of the USA:
“The Clinton administration had taken office in 1993, determined to isolate both Iran and Iraq under the rubric of “dual containment.” …Washington sought formally to brand the Islamic Republic as a “rogue” state and draw the international community into unprecedented cooperation around isolating Tehran. The bilateral tensions manifested themselves from Israel to the Gulf, and U.S. and Israeli officials were predicting that Tehran might have a nuclear weapon “within five years. Still struggling to maintain consensus around economic reforms, Rafsanjani sought to push back against U.S. pressure. He accused Washington of leading “an orchestrated propaganda campaign … to discourage Iranian people by exaggerating our economic difficulties.”
Maloney S; Ibid p. 245
It is likely that even then the vision of removing Iran from the map of the Middle East was being considered. Whatever the Iranians did to solicit USA’s understanding fell on stony ground.
“The International Atomic Energy Agency has inspectors in the republic who frequently visit Fordow, Natanz, and other declared facilities. But Israel’s bombing campaign put a halt to those inspections.
Even before the strikes, the UN nuclear watchdog lacked oversight over all of the thousands of advanced centrifuges Iran developed after Trump in his first term pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal that severely restricted Tehran’s activity.
Iran’s co-operation with the IAEA had also severely deteriorated in recent years, impeding the agency’s ability to conduct inspections to the level agreed in the 2015 agreement.
After Iran was censured in an IAEA resolution, days before Israel launched its attack, Iran also revealed that it had built a previously undeclared enrichment facility — the country’s third.”
Andrew England and Mehul Srivastava in London, Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran and Neri Zilber ; “ Where is Iran’s uranium? Search continues for 400kg stockpile“; Financial Times; June 23, 2025
What is the nuclear situation now? It is likely that the Israelis simply want to seize whatever enriched Uranium there may be in Iran:
“One Israeli official said that if Tehran and Washington resumed talks on allowing Iran to have a peaceful nuclear energy programme, Netanyahu might insist Tehran hand over any highly enriched uranium to be transported and stored outside the country.
A second official acknowledged that Iran could have spirited away at least some of its highly enriched stockpile. But the officials added that after Israel last week assassinated at least 11 Iranian nuclear scientists, the regime would struggle to create an “efficient, miniaturised nuclear weapon”.
“Andrew England and Mehul Srivastava in London, Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran and Neri Zilber; “Where is Iran’s uranium? Search continues for 400kg stockpile“; Financial Times; June 23, 2025
Where it exactly is – is as discussed above, is apparently still unknown:
“A day prior to Israel’s attacks on Iran, Iranian officials stated they had already built and prepared another secure nuclear facility for enriching uranium inside the country. Top International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) officials said previously that they are “not so sure” about the location of Iran’s existing enriched uranium stockpiles, and whether they had been moved out of the targeted locations before the attacks took place. “At a time of war, all nuclear sites are closed,” IAEA director Rafael Grossi said, adding that “all our inspectors who are still in Iran… are not inspecting—no normal activity can take place.”
Murtaza Hussain; “A New Line Crossed”: The U.S. Provokes Iran With Attacks on Nuclear Sites. Iran now has been forced to decide how to respond to US attacks on its sovereignity”; ‘Dropsite’ June 2, 2025; at https://substack.com/@mazmhussain
5. What is the real goal of the joint USA-Israel attack on Iran?
So if the intent of the bombing is not to destroy any mythical Iranian nuclear weapon capability, what is/are the real reasons?
Firstly, it is very likely that a “regime change” is desired by the USA and even more so. By the Israelis:
“It’s not politically correct to use the term, “Regime Change,” but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “MIGA!,” he added.
Trump’s comments about Tehran come after top US officials said they were not seeking a different government in Iran.
“Our view has been very clear that we don’t want a regime change. We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it’s already been built out,” US vice-president JD Vance told NBC on Sunday.
“We want to end their nuclear programme, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement,” he said.
Steff Chávez, Demetri Sevastopulo, James Politi , Najmeh Bozorgmehr , Bita Ghaffari , Neri Zilber; “Trump taunts Iran with prospect of ‘regime change’ after strike on nuclear sites”; FT 22 June, 2025
Secondly, we argue that the events cannot be dissociated – or viewed in isolation from – other indications of a major collision and confrontation between the USA and its allies on the one hand, and China and its allies on the other. What are these other events? They certainly include battles over the government forces in Bangla Desh because of access to naval sites;
The major fault-lines internationally have fallen as any Marxist or pragmatic realist would have expected. The major European powers have in the most disgusting manner – supported the USA and Israel. Arguably, the most disgusting of these leaders was Frederick Merz:
“Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, said that Israel’s attacks were benefiting democratic countries around the world.
“This is the dirty work that Israel does for all of us,” he said in an interview with ZDF, a German television station. Iran, Mr. Merz added, has “brought death and destruction to the world with attacks, with murder and manslaughter, with Hezbollah, with Hamas.”
Odenheimer, Sanger, Fassihi, Levenson “Israel Says It Assassinated Iran’s Most Senior Military Commander”; NYT June 17, 2025
Despite the thus far weak attempt of French imperialism to become a counter-weight to the USA – most of the EU and certainly Britain – fall over themselves to ally with the USA and Israel. Where is this game going?
6. The reality of the moves towards USA war on China
In “Bay of Bengal – Naval Cauldron of China versus USA – Behind the drama of Sheikh Hasina’s flight from Dakka” MLRG August 2024, we wrote:
“The vulnerability of China’s oil supply through the Strait of Malacca was highlighted when former Chinese President Hu Jintao termed it as the ‘ Malacca Dilemma’. In other words, the steady supply of oil through sea lanes to China was contingent on the narrow Strait of Malacca to being open and free for navigation.”
(Anasua Basu Ray Chaudhury & Pratnashree Basu (2016) Meeting
with China in the Bay of Bengal, Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, 12:2, 143-160).
The concept of the “Maritime Silk Road’ has been therefore heavily promoted since October 2013, by China’s President Xi Jinping (Mohd Aminul Karim; “China’s Proposed Maritime Silk Road: Challenges and Opportunities with Special Reference to the Bay of Bengal Region; Pacific Focus, Vol. 30, No. 3 (December 2015), 297–319)
(See MLRG.online – “Bay of Bengal – A Naval Cauldron Pitting China versus USA” – at: Bay Bengal & China )
However the oil originally comes to the Indian Ocean and the Malucca Straits from the Arabian Gulf. Hence, about a third of all China’s oil supply comes from the Arabian Gulf – including a heavy proportion from Iran:
“China buys a third of all oil coming out of the gulf… and helped broker a rapprochement two years ago between Iran and Saudi Arabia, another big exporter of oil from the Persian Gulf.
By contrast, the United States buys less than 3 percent of the oil coming out of the Persian Gulf, notably from northern Saudi Arabia. The United States became an overall net exporter of oil in 2020 as fracking technologies enabled a big increase in domestic oil production.
Iran’s oil exports have declined steeply in recent years after the United States and Europe imposed broad prohibitions on the purchases of Iran’s oil in an effort to pressure Tehran to abandon its nuclear weapons program.
Its exports rebounded partially last year when China stepped up its purchases of Iran’s oil, but at a deep discount to world prices. Beijing leaders have long contended that the sanctions against Iran are not binding on China because the United Nations has not endorsed them. Sales by Iran’s state oil company to China represent about 6 percent of Iran’s entire economy, and are equal to about half its government spending.
Keith Bradsher; U.S. Bombing of Iran Keeps Oil Markets on Edge”; New York Times 24 June 2025
Of itself, this also implies that Iran will be more reluctant than otherwise to close the Straits of Hormuz:
“Military action by Iran to interrupt the flow of oil would mostly harm China, which is closely aligned with Iran and buys nearly all of Iran’s oil exports.
“Iran is unlikely to escalate against energy targets while its own energy export facilities remain intact,” analysts at the Eurasia Group, a research firm, wrote in a note. “However, increased Iranian harassment of tanker traffic is likely in the coming days.”
Keith Bradsher; U.S. Bombing of Iran Keeps Oil Markets on Edge”; New York Times 24 June 2025
While world oil supply for most countries has not been a problem, this is contingent upon the Straits being open:
“Oil stockpiles have been building since early January, leading to an increase of more than 200 million barrels, according to the research firm S&P Global Commodity Insights. The oil cartel known as OPEC Plus, which includes Saudi Arabia and Russia, has stepped up its production targets several times this year, which had sent oil prices tumbling.
“The world has enough oil,” two S&P analysts, James Bambino and Richard Joswick, wrote in a report. “Even if Iranian exports are affected, physical oil balances are sufficient, so long as the Strait of Hormuz remains open — and we expect that it will.”
Keith Bradsher; U.S. Bombing of Iran Keeps Oil Markets on Edge”; New York Times 24 June 2025
Conclusions:
To this point we may conclude:
1) That we are closer to a nuclear confrontation now – than before the strikes against Iran. Why? Because Russia’s representative – China’s ally recall – states that it could provide nuclear warheads to Iran:
“Russian ex-president Dmitriy Medvedev claimed that a “number of countries” are ready to provide Iran with nuclear warheads after the attack, adding that “enrichment of nuclear material—and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons—will continue.”
It is unclear how much Medvedev speaks for Russia’s official stance, but his statements echo comments made by other prominent Russian ultranationalists in the wake of the attack, and Aragchi is expected in Moscow for a previously expected meeting with Putin today. Depending on how Iran now chooses to react, a new phase of the war between Iran and Israel—and its allies—may have officially commenced. The diplomatic path is now viewed by the Iranian side as untrustworthy, given repeated attacks that have already taken place in the midst of talks. The likelihood that the Trump administration will engage in escalated violence and military attacks in an effort to achieve its stated goals—even if that means a major long-term war with Iran aiming at regime change—now looks very strong.”
Murtaza Hussain; “A New Line Crossed”: The U.S. Provokes Iran With Attacks on Nuclear Sites. Iran now has been forced to decide how to respond to US attacks on its sovereignty”; ‘Dropsite’ June 2, 2025; at https://substack.com/@mazmhussain
2) That with no working class party of significant size in Iran, the Iranian people face a massive crisis as Israel and the USA start to tear the country apart.
3) The toilers and working classes must urgently aid the Iranian people by calling an international ‘No War’ movement
An urgent need worldwide is for the regeneration of genuine Marxist-Leninist parties.
Down with USA and Israeli attacks on Iran!
For defence of the Iranian people!
