Is Iran's Delay Making Anglo-Zionists Crazy?

The Jerusalem Post is a sort of Fever Swamp of fake news and speculation when it comes to geopolitical matters. That’s a given—I mean, Caroline Glick is a featured writer for the JPost, which should tell you all you need to know. However, the story that the JPost ran yesterday—following Fox News’ relaying of a story out of Kuwait—is getting some attention. Including an official and vociferous denial from the US National Security Council. Here’s what’s going on—but, first, be aware that the original story was rewritten, but not exactly deleted:

MenchOsint @MenchOsint

The Jerusalem Post deleted the fantasist article where they claimed that the US revealed to Iran the names of Mossad agents who were involved in the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh.

Did the US expose Mossad agents behind Haniyeh's death to Tehran?

2:05 AM · Aug 15, 2024

OK, so the idea here is that the US is desperate to convince Iran that it wasn’t in on the Haniyeh assassination. Exposing Mossad agents to Iran would be done, supposedly, as a sign of US “good faith”. That would be accompanied by behind the scenes concessions that the US would make to Iran to persuade Iran to keep retaliation against Israel for the assassination low key. With that in mind, here’s the current version of the JPost story:

US NSC to 'Post': Claims of sharing intel of Mossad agents with Tehran 'categorically false'

The report first originated from a Fox News article, citing a report in the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Jarida.

But the story wasn’t simply withdrawn by the JPost in shame and embarrassment. The Fox News article was taken down but the gist of the original article remains at the JPost. The Fox News article also remains accessible through the link below. It’s highly tendentious in typical Anglo-Zionist style, including such nonsense as that Iran is led by “minions” of Putin, who tells the Iranians what to do and not do. The question remains, Is this report simply the usual Anglo-Zionist paranoia or was it sparked by real fear that the some elements within the US ruling class are seeking to distance the US from Israel? That, of course, is a constant fear of Zionists, for good reason: Israel has become a real threat to US national security.

Here’s the substance of the current JPost article:

The US National Security Council denied reports on Wednesday that a high-ranking American security delegation, mediated by Oman, secretly traveled to Tehran to share information in an effort to appease Iran.

The report first originated from a Fox News article, which has since been taken down, citing a report in the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Jarida, which allegedly spoke to an unnamed source in Iran's Supreme National Security Council.

“This is categorically false,” a US National Security Council spokesperson told The Jerusalem Post.

Fox News reported that the delegation allegedly sought to deliver messages to Tehran in order to de-escalate the tensions in the region between Iran and Israel. 

According to the report, this delegation was sent to convey to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei that the Biden-Harris administration was "kept in the dark" by Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the assassinations of Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah's Fuad Shukr. Israel took responsibility for the assassination of Shukr but has yet to comment on the death of Haniyeh in Tehran. 

…

Fox News also reported on the recent development, noting that the American delegation was speculated to arrive in Iran through Turkey, landing at the Payam-e-Khorram Airport in Karaj last Thursday and engaging in a two-hour meeting with Iranian officials before returning to Turkey. 

Allegedly, the American delegation presented a list with the names of ten Mossad agents within Iran whom the Americans believed were involved in the assassination, directly or indirectly.

The idea of the US identifying Mossad agents to Iran for almost any reason appears far fetched, to say the least. However, the general idea behind the story is worth considering—has the US made concessions to Iran, to hold off a war that would almost certainly be a disaster for the US? That’s the idea that Simplicius advances in a brief comment on these reports:

As a quick aside, for those who’ve accused Iran of cowardice for potentially backing down, new reports indicate Iran may have been persuaded by some desperate quid-pro-quo on the U.S. side in exchange for Iran not carrying out the massive strikes, which would humiliate the U.S. and force it into a war on Israel’s behalf which it cannot win, and which would likely end the U.S. empire for good:

Note that Simplicius presumes that Iran’s retaliation would simply be an escalation of the April missile strike/demonstration. That should not be considered a foregone conclusion. It appears to be the desired result of the Israeli assassinations on the part of those fanatics who are hoping for a cataclysmic Middle East war in which the US would destroy Iran on Israel’s behalf. Iran, however, is playing a long game—one which the Anglo-Zionists will certainly lose. A cataclysmic war is the only way out that the Anglo-Zionists can see. However, there is a good argument to be made—which has been made by Chas Freeman—that Iran will not allow its actions to be dictated by Israeli provocations. Accepting US concessions and responding in ways that would be asymmetric—at least with regard to the conventional expectations—might will fit in well with Iran’s long game.

Viewed in this way, the stories appearing at Fox and the JPost may signal the growing anxiety in the Netanyahu government—and the Israel Lobby in the US—that Iran will not fall into the trap of igniting a general Middle East war, which would only satisfy apocalyptic Zionist fantasies. Those fantasies are based on the claim that Iran is governed by mad terrorists with no self control, who can be easily induced to escalate in the desired fashion in response to Zionist provocations—rather than the evidence based view that Iran is governed by highly rational actors who may well respond to provocations in asymmetric ways that take the long term into account.

This dawning realization—that Iran will respond in its own way in its own time—probably accounts for Netanyahu’s threats to “preempt” Iran by going ahead and attacking Iran even though Iran has declined, so far, to attack Israel. The flaw in that, of course, is that it puts Israel even further in the wrong than it already is, and so that ploy—ignored by Iran—has been shelved for now.

The related concern for Netanyahu is that the US appears to be getting cold feet. The US position appears to have gone through a number of back and forth phases, perhaps signaling internal disagreements in the regime. While there was a period of American saber rattling, Iran remains unrattled. In the meantime, the US military—naval and air arms—are being maintained at a high level of readiness in the Middle East, in effect on a war footing. On the one hand, this is a very expensive position to be in, involving considerable wear on personnel and equipment and keeping enormous military resources totally occupied. On the other hand, all this war prepping is having no discernible effect, including not on the Houthi blockade of the Red Sea. In fact, the US Navy is openly stating that it is unable to break the blockade and the Pentagon will commit only to helping defend Israel—not to attacking Iran. This appears to signal a realization that the current standoff, which is controlled by Iran and works only to Iran’s advantage, can’t continue indefinitely and that Netanyahu’s plan for a major war is unacceptable to the US military. And yet the US sanctions war on Iran isn’t working either.

Complicating matters, of course, is that the US is now entering the presidential campaign season. American finds itself divided, although the fact receives little discussion. Influential members of the Ruling Class favor war to the hilt—in the Middle East, in Russia (yes, the Kursk invasion was NATO planned and supported—maybe even with significant NATO military personnel), and in the Far East. Normal Americans, on the other hand, are fed up with forever wars. An explosion of warfare involving American boys and girls will bring this division front and center at a particularly sensitive time, potentially throwing American politics into chaos. If I were a major nation being threatened and sanctioned by the Anglo-Zionist Empire at this juncture, I would be looking for some way to play on the divisions in America.

We shall see.