The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.
From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."
Hegseth warns Iran to “back off” as US airstrikes on Houthis ramp up in response to Red Sea attacks.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Sunday that the United States would conduct "unrelenting" strikes against the Houthis in Yemen until the militant group ceases their military actions targeting US assets and global shipping.
Speaking
on Fox News on Sunday, hours after the Trump administration launched
strikes against the Iran-backed Yemeni terror group, Hegseth said the
campaign was a response to the scores of attacks the Houthis have launched on ships since November 2023 and served as a warning to Iran to stop backing the group.
"This
will continue until you say 'We're done shooting at ships. We're done
shooting at assets,'" Hegseth said, adding that the US had no interest
in the Yemeni Civil War.
“We
don’t want a long, limited war in the Middle East," he continued. "This
is about stopping the shooting at assets in that critical waterway to
reopen freedom of navigation, which is a core national interest of the
United States."
He ended his response with a direct message for the Islamic Republic.
"Iran has been enabling the Houthis for far too long. They better back off."
Protesters, mainly Houthi supporters, rally to show support to
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, in Sanaa, Yemen December 20, 2024
(credit: REUTERS/KHALED ABDULLAH)
Iranian state
media reported on March 16 that “the commander of the Islamic Revolution
Guards Corps (IRGC), Major General Hossein Salami said that Yemen’s
Houthi “resistance movement makes its decisions independently.”
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio countered Salami's assertions in a Sunday interview with CBS News's Face the Nation.
"There's
no way the... Houthis would have the ability to do this kind of thing
unless they had support from Iran. And so this was a message to Iran:
don't keep supporting them, because then you will also be responsible
for what they are doing in attacking Navy ships and attacking global
shipping."
The Houthis reintroduced a threat to attack all Israeli ships on March 12.
The terrorist organization also said that US attacks on Yemen posed a more real threat to international shipping in the Red Sea.
The other agencies include the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and the Minority Business Development Agency.
President Trump signed an
executive order that is focused on reducing the size of seven federal
agencies, including the one that oversees Voice of America, which is
called the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM).
The other agencies include the Federal Mediation and Conciliation
Service, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and the Minority
Business Development Agency.
The order directs the leaders of the agencies to maintain core
functions that are legally required and reduce operations to the minimum
that's required by law.
The testimonies provide a rare window into the fractures within Iran’s military and growing discontent among its ranks.
(Illustrative) A silhouette over an Iranian flag.(photo credit: SHUTTERSTOCK)
Several Iranian officers believe that Hamas and Hezbollah
will not recover in strength and have also spoken out against the
Islamic Republic regime in a rare interview with the N12 news site
published on Saturday.
Javad, a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)
operative, spoke publicly for the first time to Israeli media,
revealing his past involvement in suppressing protests, his recruitment
into the extremist Basij militia, and shared details of the Islamic
Republic’s reaction to the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh
in Tehran last July.
“It
was an incredibly precise intelligence operation,” he said. “Mossad
knew exactly where he was staying, down to the room number. It showed
just how deeply Israeli intelligence had penetrated the IRGC.
“The
Revolutionary Guards were in complete shock,” he added. “They didn’t
even issue a statement. Israeli intelligence is highly effective, though
their ground operations still have weaknesses, according to IRGC
personnel.”
The
assassination of Haniyeh was just the beginning. Months later,
Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah was also eliminated. But
the biggest blow came when Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria collapsed, a
development Javad described as devastating for Tehran.
Funeral
of members of Iran's IRGC who were killed in an Israeli airstrike on
Syria, in Tehran (credit: MAJID ASGARIPOUR/WANA (WEST ASIA NEWS AGENCY)
VIA REUTERS)
“The IRGC lost one of its strongest
fronts in Syria,” he explained. “Now, Syria is acting in Israel’s
interests against Hezbollah. That was a crushing defeat for Iran.”
He
added: “Israel has been systematically targeting key figures. Even
Nasrallah admitted Hezbollah had suffered a serious setback. The IRGC
knows Hamas and Hezbollah may never fully recover, so they’re putting
its hopes in advancing operations from Yemen.”
“I’m
Shi’ite, and until recently, there were videos of me at rallies,” Javad
said. “But I see things differently now. The ones calling Israel
corrupt are drowning in corruption themselves.”
According to Javad, government corruption has spiraled out of control.
“Corruption in Iran has doubled,” he said. “People are starting to wake up.”
When asked if others in the IRGC shared his doubts, he recalled an incident in Tehran.
“During
a mission, one of the Revolutionary Guards jokingly said ‘Death to
Palestine,’ and we all laughed. But if he had said it seriously, they
would have silenced him immediately.”
A former supporter of the regime
Javad
was a staunch supporter of the regime, but he found himself persecuted
from within, losing his religious privileges and social standing. The
betrayal shattered his faith in the Islamic Revolution.
Other
former members of the Islamic Republic’s military who spoke to N12
include Arash, a retired lieutenant-colonel in the Iranian Air Force and
special forces veteran, who shared an insider’s view of Iran’s military
structure.
Iran’s
armed forces are divided between the IRGC, which is loyal to Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and funds proxy militias, and the regular
Iranian Army, which is gradually being weakened as resources are
funneled elsewhere. Tensions between the two have escalated,
particularly after Israeli airstrikes crippled Iran’s air defense
systems.
Arash claimed that some within the regular army are waiting for an opportunity to turn against the regime.
“If
another attack happens, it could spark open conflict between the IRGC
and the army,” he said. “The Iranian Army is made up of ordinary people.
That’s why they’re more disillusioned with the regime compared to the
Revolutionary Guards.”
Both Javad and Arash expressed support for Israeli military action against Iran’s ruling elite.
“Israel
took out the S-300 air defense systems provided by Russia. Now, Iran is
left with outdated technology from the Iran–Iraq War,” Javad admitted.
“No country likes being attacked, but in this case, 95% of Iranians were
happy when Israel struck those sites.” Arash agreed with Javad’s
statement.
“People
want Israel to go even further – hit IRGC bases, take out Quds Force
commanders – so that the people can rise up and overthrow the regime
themselves,” Arash said. “Netanyahu should order a strike on Khamenei’s
residence. Then, the army could seize political centers and declare
Iran’s freedom.” Javad echoed this sentiment.
“Israel
doesn’t chant ‘Death to Iran.’ We were once allies. Now we hope
Israel’s military strength can help the Iranian people reclaim their
country.”
These
testimonies provide a rare window into the fractures within Iran’s
military and growing discontent among its ranks. As tensions escalate,
their accounts suggest that opposition to the regime may be far deeper
than it appears.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is set to lead the NIH, vowing to restore public trust in science and end political interference after the COVID-era failures of U.S. health agencies.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is the right man to lead the National Institutes
of Health (NIH), and the best man to calm the rough political waters
overwhelming health care and scientific integrity.
Hysteria ‘lives loudly’ in the Trump 2.0 resistance. The legacy
media, Democrats, and many in the old establishment are untethered from
reality; the rage rhetoric against the President’s priorities is unlike
anything we’ve witnessed in recent memory. Regrettably, Trump resistance
for resistance’s sake is causing fear and confusion in the public
health community.
Dissent is critical in open, healthy discourse. Where this
administration goes wrong or where there is legitimate disagreement over
ideas and policy, contrarian voices are needed – and expected. Holding
the powerful accountable is necessary in a Democracy. However, as we saw
recently during the President’s speech before a Joint Session of
Congress, many elected officials care more for political theatrics than
finding common ground for compromise and reform.
As the editor of RealClearHealth, I spend a substantial
portion of my time engaging with myriad advocacy groups, policy experts,
and media representatives occupying the health-policy space. Much of
the conversation since Trump’s inauguration has focused almost entirely
on ‘How Trump, Kennedy, et al. are going to destroy public health and
ignore science’ – some have even warned that Trump’s health agenda will
kill people. Policy experts, respected advocates, and the legacy media
are dealing in gossip, rumors, and half-truths – it’s shocking. Putting
ideology over reason and prioritizing politics over science.
Walking straight into this storm is Professor Jay Bhattacharya,
President Trump’s nominee to lead the NIH. As Dr. Bhattacharya
demonstrated in his Senate confirmation hearing, he is a man not only
with an intellect that the American people can trust, but someone who
will implement a pro-science agenda. Gone will be the days of
weaponizing science for political purposes – like we saw during the
COVID-19 pandemic. What’s more, Dr. Bhattacharya showed himself to be a
man filled with grace, a man who is empathetic. And he’s been courageous
in terms of stepping up to speak the truth, especially during the COVID
shutdowns and mandates. In fact, during the pandemic, Dr. Jay was often
a lone voice asking for wisdom and science to lead the day.
It is inexplicable how many of Trump’s critics are acting like we
didn’t just suffer catastrophic failure of our public health
institutions. These critics are opposing reform, so it seems, just
because the ideas are coming out of the Trump administration. Our public
health community needs a reset. These (partisan) critics refuse to
recognize that they’ve completely lost the trust of the American people.
To put it bluntly, the Biden health agencies and the Dr. Fauci regime
wrecked the public’s trust in our health agencies.
Jay Bhattacharya will lead a revolution at the NIH where scientists
will be empowered to follow the science and not be pushed to participate
in politics or ideology.
Dr. Bhattacharya will win the public trust back so Americans once again trust the science.
***
This article was originally published by RealClearHealth and made available via RealClearWire.
Israel strengthens its air force with three new F-35s, moving toward a fleet of 75 by 2027, alongside other key upgrades.
The IDF announced on Sunday that three F-35i aircraft have landed at Nevatim Air Force
Base, purchased from US defense giant Lockheed Martin, which increases
Israel's quantity of F-35 aircraft to 42 out of 50, which are already
fully purchased.
These
three aircrafts actually arrived last week but were only announced on
Sunday as part of a long-standing deal spaced over a period of years to
raise Israel from 25 to 50 F-35s.
The Jerusalem Post
has learned that in around two more months, three more aircraft will be
delivered, with another three being delivered later in 2025 and the
last two of the existing order in 2026.
In
2023, Israel, the US government, and Lockheed Martin signed a deal for
25 additional F-35s to eventually raise the number of aircraft to 75,
which will mean a third squadron, and additional steps in that process
took place in mid-2024.
Israeli Air Force F-35s seen arriving to an Israeli base, on March 15, 2025 (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)
F35 deliveries starting in 2027
The first third squadron of F-35 deliveries will start in 2027
Israel signed on to the F-25 program in 2010, and its F-35 program became operational in 2017.
During
the current war, the F-35 has undertaken over 15,000 flight hours on
all fronts, which Israel must cope with, from Iran to Yemen, Syria,
Lebanon, and Gaza.
In
addition, over the course of the war, the IDF said that it modified its
F-35 aircraft to be able to fire JDAM munitions from its wings as
opposed to its original design of dropping munitions out of the
aircraft's belly.
Even before the war, the F-35 was considered crucial in the MABAM “war between wars” against Iranian proxies in Syria.
It has stealth technology, which makes it more able to strike targets
throughout the Middle East with impunity, and its surveillance and
intelligence capabilities far exceed Israel’s older F-16 and F-15
aircraft.
For
example, it is said to be easily capable of outwitting Iran’s S-300
anti-aircraft missile defense system, and possibly even the S-400
system, whereas other Israeli aircraft would have more trouble.
Outgoing
Lockheed Martin Israel CEO Joshua (Shiki) Shani has previously said,
“We are proud to support the Israel Defense Forces in providing the
F-35, and honored that the Israeli government has announced its intent
to purchase additional F-35s.
Israeli Air Force F-35s seen arriving to an Israeli base, on March 15, 2025 (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)
“The
Israel Air Force has proven its capabilities in critical operations
with the 116 and 140 Squadrons, and we are looking forward to building
on this strong performance. With a combination of stealth, sensor fusion
and electronic warfare, the fifth generation the F-35 will ensure the
Israel Air Force stays ahead of current and evolving threats,” he said.
At the same time, Israel has moved forward on some parallel advancements and investments in the air force’s future.
After
years of delay, the Defense Ministry has been moving forward with 25
F-15 EX Boeing fighters from the US to help replace its aging F-15
aircraft.
In November 2022, Israel finalized an agreement to purchase four Boeing KC-46A midair-refueling aircraft.
Each
of those new aircraft elements is also some years from being delivered
to Israel but would also eventually boost Jerusalem’s capability for
attacking Tehran’s nuclear program, if needed.
In 2024, the number of Israel’s Jewish births was 138,698 – 73% higher than 1995 (80,400), compared to 42,911 Arab births – 18% higher than 1995 (36,500).
In 2024, Jewish births were 76% of total births, compared to 69% in 1995. The surge of Jewish births has taken place due to the unprecedented rise of births (since 1995) in the secular sector, notwithstanding a rising level of education, income and wedding age and expanded urbanization. Since 1995, Israel’s ultra-orthodox sector has experienced a mild decrease of fertility, while the modern orthodox rate of fertility has been stable.
In 1969, Israel’s Arab fertility rate was six births higher than the Jewish fertility rate. In 2022, Jewish fertility rate – 3;Israeli Muslims – 2.86.
Muslim fertility rate has been Westernized: Jordan –
2.87 births per woman, Iran – 1.91, Saudi Arabia – 1.87, Morocco –
2.25, Iraq – 3.1, Egypt – 2.65, Yemen – 2.82, the United Arab Emirates –
1.61, etc.
Israel’s robust Jewish fertility rate reflects robust optimism,
patriotism, attachment to roots, communal solidarity, frontier-mentality
and less abortions. Arab demographic Westernization is
attributed to sweeping urbanization, enhanced status of women
(education, employment, rising wedding age, shorter reproductive period)
and expanding use of contraceptives.
Authoritarian regimes often enforce strict clothing laws to assert their dominance over their citizens' physical and ideological autonomy.
Iranian woman holds a photo of Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei during a rally that marks the 46th anniversary of Iran's 1979
Islamic Revolution in Tehran, Iran, on February 10, 2025.(photo credit: Hossein Beris/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images)
Iran is employing
advanced technologies such as drones, facial recognition systems, and a
citizen-reporting app to enforce its strict hijab laws, a United Nations report published on Friday revealed.
The
report, compiled by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission
on Iran, highlighted severe human rights violations by Iranian
authorities following widespread protests triggered by the death of
22-year-old Mahsa Amini in regime custody in September 2022. It comes
following two years of investigation, which included interviewing some
285 victims and witnesses and analyzing over 38,000 articles of
evidence.
Amini
was detained by the so-called “morality police” for allegedly failing
to adhere to the country’s hijab regulations. The protests, among the
most significant acts of resistance since the fall of the Shah, ignited
nationwide demonstrations that quickly evolved into a broader movement
against the government’s oppressive policies, particularly its
restrictions on women’s rights and freedoms. The rallying cry of the
protests became “Woman, Life, Freedom,” symbolizing the demand for
gender equality and personal liberty.
Human
rights groups stated that at least 500 people were killed during the
protests - whereas state media reported that the number was closer to
200- with almost 20,000 arrested.
“In
suppressing the 2022 nationwide protests, Iranian authorities committed
grave human rights violations, some of which we found to constitute
crimes against humanity,” stated Sara Hossain, Chair of the Fact-Finding
Mission.
Chair of the United Nations' Independent International Iran
Fact-Finding Mission Sara Hossain speaks during a press conference at
the UN Offices in Geneva, on March 14, 2025. (credit: Fabrice
Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)
“We received
numerous distressing testimonies of severe physical and psychological
abuse, as well as widespread violations of fair trial and due process
rights, including cases involving children as young as seven,” Hossain
added.
Since
April 2024, the Iranian government has intensified its crackdown on
women who resist the mandatory hijab law through the implementation of
the Noor Plan. The report asserted that women human rights defenders and
activists have faced criminal penalties, including fines, lengthy
prison terms, and, in some instances, the death penalty for peacefully
advocating for human rights.
Speaking
in Geneva at a Human Rights Council session, Hossain emphasized that
ethnic and religious minorities in Iran were “specifically targeted
during the protests,” with some of the most severe abuses occurring in
minority-dominated regions that were epicenters of the demonstrations.
Testimonies collected both within and outside Iran and shared with the
Iranian government detailed instances where men, women, and children
were detained “at gunpoint” and subjected to psychological torture, such
as having nooses placed around their necks.
The
Fact-Finding Mission, composed of senior human rights experts acting
independently, noted that these measures contradict pre-election
promises made by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to relax the strict
enforcement of hijab laws. Instead, the government has increasingly
relied on technology, surveillance, and state-backed vigilantism to
maintain control. The Noor Plan is a perfect example of how the regime
has transitioned from physical enforcement, with its use of the morality
police, to digital surveillance to crack down on resentment and
protestation.
The Iranian government’s increasing reliance on technological programs, such as AI,
facial recognition, and digital policing, also closely mirrors China’s
mass surveillance state, particularly its use of advanced technology to
suppress minorities, such as the Uyghurs, in the province of Xinjiang.
In China, the government employs facial recognition cameras,
AI-driven predictive policing, and social credit systems to control the
Muslim Uyghur population, effectively creating a hi-tech police state.
Iran is now adopting a similar model, expanding digital monitoring into
everyday life.
In
recent years, Tehran and Beijing have deepened their technological
cooperation, with Iran likely importing Chinese surveillance tools and
AI capabilities to strengthen its domestic repression.
The
key difference, however, is that while China disguises its actions
under the pretense of counterterrorism, Iran is explicitly using these
technologies to police religious behavior and enforce gender
discrimination.
Shaheen
Sardar Ali of the Independent Mission explained, “Online surveillance
has become a key tool for state repression. For example, Instagram
accounts have been shut down, and SIM cards, particularly those
belonging to human rights defenders, including women activists, have
been confiscated.”
Ali
also highlighted the use of the “Nazer” app, which allows vetted
citizens to report individuals seen without the mandatory hijab. “This
technology,” she said, “is highly invasive and extends the reach of
state surveillance significantly.”
The
report further states that 10 men have been executed in connection with
the 2022 protests, while at least 11 men and three women remain at risk
of execution. The Mission expressed serious concerns about the lack of
fair trials, including the use of confessions obtained through torture
and other due process violations.
The
findings of the Fact-Finding Mission will be presented to member states
at the Human Rights Council next Tuesday. Established by the Council in
November 2022, the Mission was mandated to investigate alleged human
rights violations in Iran linked to the protests that began in September
of that year, with a particular focus on women and children. It was
also tasked with gathering, analyzing, and preserving evidence of these
violations to support potential legal proceedings.
Iran’s hijab laws and domestic strife
In
December, the Iranian parliament (Majles) approved the latest “Hijab
and chastity bill.” The bill mandates the wearing of a hijab for all
women in public and online forums for girls as young as 12.
Following
the 2022 “Amini protests," a survey revealed that 93% of women opposed
the imposition of the hijab. Additionally, approximately 40%-45% of
women in the country no longer adhere to the mandatory hijab law. This
widespread defiance poses a significant challenge to the regime, as the
hijab is seen not merely as a religious symbol but as a tool of control
over the population.
Authoritarian
regimes often enforce strict clothing laws to assert dominance over
both the physical and ideological autonomy of their citizens. The
Iranian government’s inability to tolerate non-compliance with hijab
laws underscores its reliance on such measures to maintain authority.
In
response to the protests, the Iranian government implemented severe
measures to suppress dissent, including internet blackouts, restrictions
on social media, and the use of tear gas and live ammunition against
demonstrators. By the spring of 2023, the protests had largely
diminished, but the regime retained firm control over the country.
A
more recent survey conducted last year in Iran indicated a significant
shift in society’s attitudes, particularly among the youth. Nearly 40%
of young Iranians expressed no belief in God and rejected the concept of
an Islamist state.
This
growing secularization and disillusionment with theocratic rule
highlight a broader rejection of the ideals that underpinned the Islamic
Revolution over 45 years ago.
The
decline in religious beliefs and the desire among young Iranians for
modernization also reflect a broader trend in the Muslim world, as seen
in countries like Saudi Arabia, where Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman
has pursued policies to modernize the nation and move away from strict
Islamic mandates.
There
are also economic and religious factors in the growing dissent among
Iranians domestically. The streets of Tehran are rife with unhappiness,
while ordinary workers are deeply unhappy with the ruling regime due to
financial costs. This battle is not just about hijabs but a larger
crisis of legitimacy for the regime.
Khamenei’s
ongoing propaganda and desire to place himself as the protector of the
Muslim people does not impress ordinary Iranians. His continued support
of proxy groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas in their wars against Israel
has led people in Iran to view the regime’s priorities as askew -
prioritizing supporting former president of Syria Bashar al-Assad to the
tune of $50 billion for example - instead of improving the lives of the
Iranian people.
The
regime’s failure to address these critical issues, such as economic
instability, high inflation rates exceeding 40%, and widespread
shortages of essential resources - like electricity, natural gas,
gasoline, and water - as well as the hijab issue, has further eroded
public trust.
These
challenges are continuously contributing to a sense of dissatisfaction
and hardship among the population, undermining the regime’s legitimacy
more than 45 years after the revolution.
Despite
its efforts to maintain control, the government’s inability to resolve
these systemic problems has led to widespread disillusionment,
particularly among younger generations who no longer see the Islamic
Republic as a viable or desirable model of governance.
Modern prosperity is tied to certain industrial products, including chemicals, steel, cement, food and paper, according to the J.P. Morgan report. Approximately 80% of the energy inputs for these products is fossil fuels.
While the legacy media often reports that the world is rapidly transitioning away from fossil fuels to renewable energy, a new report from J.P. Morgan shows
that narrative is simply not correct. Since 2010, $9 trillion has been
spent globally on wind, solar, electric vehicles energy storage,
electrification and power grids, but despite this expensive effort —
mostly at taxpayer expense — the share of final energy consumption by
carbon-free energy sources is advancing by approximately a scant 0.3% to
0.6% per year.
Michael Cembalest, Chairman of Market and Investment Strategy for J.P. Morgan, explains in “Heliocentrism,”
the 15th annual energy paper by the investment firm, that the reason
fossil fuels remain the dominant source of energy is that modern
prosperity is tied to certain kinds of industrial products, including
chemicals, steel, cement, food and paper. Approximately 80% of the
energy inputs for these products are fossil fuels. JPMorgan Chase is the world's fifth largest bank by total assets, with $3.9 trillion as of 2023.
“As things stand now, modern prosperity is highly reliant on fossil fuels,” Cembalest said in a podcast
on the report. Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., retired professor of
environmental studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder,
estimates on his “The Honest Broker” Substack that at the current pace, the world will not be carbon free until sometime after the year 2200.
Solar accounts for 2% of total final energy
Cembalest notes that solar capacity, both utility scale and
rooftop, is exploding and represents two-thirds of new generation
capacity. It will reach about 75% of all new generation capacity for the
rest of the decade.
“There's a lot of people that are so focused on the growth
in solar power that they believe that solar power, typically bolted on
with some energy storage, can represent the dominant share of where we
get our energy from,” Cembalest said.
Solar accounts for approximately 6% of global electricity
generation. However, electricity is only about 33% of the total energy
people consume, according to the paper, and by some estimates it’s only about 20%.
Translating all that solar power to a share of final energy
consumption, which includes all forms of energy, solar is only 2% of
total final energy and will grow to 4% to 5% by the end of the decade.
“While that's impressive growth from a low base, we
obviously need to be more focused on the other 95% of where we're going
to get our final energy consumption from and rather than just the solar
on its own,” Cembalest said.
Heliocentric
This misperception about the energy transition is why Cembalest, he explained, chose the “Heliocentric”
title, referring to the idea that the sun revolves around the Earth, as
opposed to the other way around. While completely accurate, the concept
was resisted for centuries as opponents and even the Holy Roman Church
insisted the science was settled. It was not until the mid-1500's that the theory was generally adopted.
“While we should be trying to decarbonize as much as we
possibly can, we have to be realistic about the pace at which this can
be done,” Cembalest said.
He disputed other predictions of a rapid industrial
transition to renewable energy. He said such transitions can happen, and
as an example, he pointed to the transition from open hearth furnaces
to basic oxygen furnaces in steel production that began in the 1960s and
1970s and took 20 years to complete. That new technology, Cembalest
explained, reduced steel production times to 10% of what they were,
which allowed for a reduction in 80% to 90% of energy costs.
“When you have a transition that can pay for itself, like
this, it can happen rapidly, but that's not the case with the transition
[to non-carbon energy] that we're experiencing now,” he said.
Transmission and brownouts
Cembalest noted other impediments in the transition to non-carbon energy sources. These include the cost and time it takes to build transmission lines.
Electrification, which seeks to transition away from gas-powered
appliances to those powered by electricity, runs up against the fact
that natural gas is much cheaper than electricity. Cembalest said this is true globally and not just in the U.S.
He also noted that as the U.S. has increased its share of
renewables on the grid, reserve buffers, which is the amount of
electricity generation required to meet demand during peak times, have
been shrinking. “We're getting more and more close to the point where we
might have some kind of brownout situation,” he said.
The findings of the Morgan report are in line with the latest edition of the Energy Institute’s “Statistical Review of World Energy,”
which found that coal, natural gas and oil remained the dominant source
of energy in 2023, and coal consumption and production hit record
highs.
While renewables are seeing growth, these analyses show
that like it or not, fossil fuels are going to be with us for many
decades to come.
Should Europe regard Russia as an eternal mortal foe or consider turning it into a tolerable neighbor -- if not a friend -- in a few years' time?
In the past two weeks...
Macron has been all over the place with the alacrity of a butterfly. He
has assumed that the 80-year alliance between European and American
democracies is over, that NATO is dead, that Russia is determined to
conquer Europe and that war -- if not World War III -- is inevitable.
Talleyrand might have invited Macron to wait and see if the Oval
Office show doesn't have a sequel that might twist the plot in another
direction, now that Zelensky has opened a new dialogue with the new US
administration.
[Talleyrand] would have asked the French president to wait and
see whether or not Trump attends the planned NATO summit to be held in
The Hague, Netherlands, on June 24-25.
Foch could have quipped that you can't push back a foe just by
big-talk. If you really wish to pin Putin's back to the floor, then end
his control of Ukrainian skies. That means giving Ukrainians some of the
warplanes that EU member states own.
Should Europe regard Russia as an eternal mortal foe or consider
turning it into a tolerable neighbor -- if not a friend -- in a few
years' time?
In the past two weeks, France's President Emmanuel Macron
has been all over the place with the alacrity of a butterfly. He has
assumed that the 80-year alliance between European and American
democracies is over, that NATO is dead, that Russia is determined to
conquer Europe and that war -- if not World War III -- is inevitable.
Pictured: Macron meets with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky at
the EU headquarters in Brussels on March 6, 2025. (Photo by Ludovic
Marin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
As France's President Emmanuel Macron casts himself as Europe's new
leader in a joust against US President Donald Trump, he might do well to
have a look at two great Frenchmen who advised against haste and
hubris.
The first is that paragon of diplomacy, Talleyrand, who managed to
survive four regimes, including one created by a bloody revolution and
another that set Europe on fire before drowning it in blood.
One day, Talleyrand was called in by an angry Napoleon, who ordered
him immediately to draft a declaration of war on Austria in reaction to
"insults from Vienna". The diplomat did so but, as he later recalled,
kept the war declaration under his pillow until the following day, when
the Emperor ordered him to forget about it as France wasn't ready for
war.
Prudence was the better part of valor.
The next great Frenchman that Macron should have a look at is Marshal
Ferdinand Foch, Supreme Allied Commander on the western front in World
War I. Receiving cables from frontline generals begging him to visit
urgently, Foch got into his car, commanding the driver: "Make haste
slowly, I am in a hurry!"
Foch is also known for other gem quotations, including this one from
one of his cables to Paris from the frontline: "My center is giving way,
my right is retreating, situation excellent, I am attacking." Later, he
commented on the Treaty of Versailles: "This is not a peace treaty; it
is an armistice for twenty years."
In the past two weeks, however, Macron has been all over the place
with the alacrity of a butterfly. He has assumed that the 80-year
alliance between European and American democracies is over, that NATO is
dead, that Russia is determined to conquer Europe and that war -- if
not World War III -- is inevitable.
But what caused that haste, which, as we know, can't but produce waste or worse?
The answer is the political version of "The Apprentice" reality TV
show that Trump staged with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in
the Oval Officer, plus a few of the hundreds of tweets, or whatever they
call them now, that the US president darts at the world each week.
What might the ghosts of Talleyrand and Foch advise?
Talleyrand might have invited Macron to wait and see if the Oval
Office show doesn't have a sequel that might twist the plot in another
direction, now that Zelensky has opened a new dialogue with the new US
administration.
Talleyrand would have also invited Macron to take no notice of John
Bolton's broken record about Trump planning to destroy NATO, a record
played for almost six years. Instead, the foxy diplomat would have asked
the French president to wait and see whether or not Trump attends the
planned NATO summit to be held in The Hague, Netherlands, on June 24-25.
All we know is that NATO Secretary-General and former Dutch Prime
Minister Mark Rutte is working with Washington Sherpas to prepare the
summit.
Justin Trudeau has been replaced as Canadian Prime Minister by Mark
Carney, who owes his success in the Liberal Party leadership contest
partly to a surge of Canadian nationalism prompted by Trump's talk of
rising tariffs and annexation. A banker and economist, Carney is better
placed to reduce the political heat and promote a serious review of
trade and economic ties between the two neighbors.
While the threat from Putin must not be minimized, it would be
foolhardy to exaggerate it out of nervousness. For four decades, Russia
occupied two-thirds of the European continent from the Oder-Neisse line
to the Urals. The USSR's population was twice that of Russia's today.
With Warsaw Pact allies, the USSR had the world's biggest war machine,
with thousands of tanks and warplanes, and millions of men in infantry
divisions, not to mention thousands of nuclear warheads.
Yet, military historians agree that the Soviet juggernaut was never
in a position to conquer Europe even if the US had not been on the side
of the Europeans. After all, in World War II, Britain managed to fight
the German military giant alone for more than two years, albeit with the
lend-lease arrangement from the US.
In June 1994, Russian troops had to leave Germany in trains hired
from the French SNCF and Deutsche Bahn, which means that had they wished
to march on Paris they would have had to hitch a ride.
The wily Foch might have noted that building the kind of war machine
that Macron and Ursula von der Leyen talk about could take between five
and ten years.
Foch could have quipped that you can't push back a foe just by
big-talk. If you really wish to pin Putin's back to the floor, then end
his control of Ukrainian skies. That means giving Ukrainians some of the
warplanes that EU member states own.
The 10-year Soviet war in Afghanistan ended when President Ronald
Reagan provided the Mujahedin with Stinger missiles to destroy Soviet
helicopter gunships that controlled the skies of the war-torn land.
Macron talks of building a European defense system, which requires a
massive leap forward in industrial development, scientific and
technological research and economic and political re-configuration, all
of which require massive popular support, something that EU leaders take
for granted at their peril.
The two French wise men of the past might have made another
suggestion: Why not try to stop a war that one protagonist can't win and
the other can't lose? That requires thinking before acting, rather than
vice versa, a fact that injects the element of time in any calculation.
In two years' time, with US mid-term elections, will Trump be in the
unassailable position he is in today? Does Putin have the stamina of a
long-distance runner in a war that has given him advances at a snail's
pace? Should Europe regard Russia as an eternal mortal foe or consider
turning it into a tolerable neighbor -- if not a friend -- in a few
years' time?
In other words, as the ghosts of Talleyrand and Foch might have said: Don't do today what tomorrow you may regret having done.
Gatestone Institute would like to thank the author for his kind
permission to reprint this article in slightly different form from Asharq Al-Awsat. He graciously serves as Chairman of Gatestone Europe.
Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan
in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable
publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.
Trump’s DOJ speech called out corruption, promised justice reform, and sent the media into a frenzy over his bold rebuke of the establishment.
What did you think of Donald Trump’s speech at the Department of Justice
on Friday? It was one of those speeches that divides the world. I liked
it. But even while watching it, I asked myself, “Gosh. What is The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, the Associated Press, etc., going to make of this?”
Actually, I did not ask myself that because I knew they would explode in horrified rage. The Times,
for example, carried a trembling story under the headline “Trump’s
Grievance-Filled Speech Makes Clear His Quest for Vengeance Is
Personal.” In case that wasn’t clear enough, a subhead explained that
“The sole offense of those President Trump singled out in remarks at the
Justice Department appeared to have been trying to hold him accountable
for his actions.” Oh really?
Just to show how dispassionate the Times is about Donald Trump, we learn from his byline that Alan Feuer, the reporter who wrote this cri de coeur, “covers extremism and political violence for The Times, focusing on the criminal cases involving the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol and against former President Donald J. Trump.”
Extremism, eh? Political violence, you say? According to Feuer,
Trump’s address was “a grievance-filled attack on the very people who
have worked in the building and others like them. As he singled out some
targets of his rage, he appeared to offer his own vision of justice in
America, one defined by personal vengeance rather than by institutional
principles.”
Perhaps Alan Feuer had tapped into a different address. The one I saw
was plenty plainspoken. Trump identified some of the bad actors, from
Joe Biden and Merrick Garland on down, that had done so much to corrupt
the Department of Justice over the last four years. He also mentioned
James Comey, the disgraced former director of the FBI who was
instrumental in propagating the Russia collusion hoax and destroying the
career of Gen. Mike Flynn. He did not mention, but might have, former
FBI agents like Peter Strzok, once deputy assistant FBI director. It was
Strzok who, during the Trump 2016 presidential campaign, assured his
paramour Lisa Page not to worry about Trump’s winning that election.
Quoth Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right?
Right?!” “No,” replied Strzok. “No, he won’t. We’ll stop it.”
Somehow, Alan Feuer never got around to figures like Peter Strzok,
Andrew McCabe, or the FBI agent who actually altered an email to say
that Carter Page was not a CIA asset when in fact he was, thus
getting the ball rolling on “Crossfire Hurricane,” the FBI’s clandestine
investigation of the first candidate and then President Trump.
In fact, the FBI was part of the biggest political scandal in the
history of the United States: the effort by highly placed—exactly how
highly placed we still do not know—members of one administration to
mobilize the intelligence services and police power of the state to spy
upon and destroy first the candidacy and then, when that didn’t work,
the administration of a political rival.
Reporters like Alan Feuer, and his counterparts elsewhere in the
wards of anti-Trump hysteria don’t like it when Trump calls bad people
“bad people,” but that is just too bad. Feuer says that the “sole
offense” of those Trump singled out was trying to hold Trump
accountable. In fact, Trump’s real tort was having had the temerity to
be elected in the first place. It was that outrage that provided the
only predicate for the weaponization of the Department of Justice, the
FBI, and the intelligence agencies.
Trump’s speech at the DOJ was full of praise for Attorney General Pam
Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and other newly ascendant members of
the DOJ team. He outlined some of the major challenges law enforcement
faced, beginning with the border crisis and the scourge of fentanyl. But
his main point was that a two-tier system of justice is no system of
justice. On the contrary, it is a travesty of justice. The mouthpieces
of Leviathan had their collective knickers in a twist because Trump was
brazen enough to call out the perversion of the DOJ under Joe Biden,
Merrick Garland, and Christopher Wray. Joe Biden’s attempt on his way
out of office to pardon so many bad actors looks like it might backfire.
Why? For a couple of reasons. One, he wasn’t really issuing pardons.
Rather, he issued a sort of plenary indulgence for any crimes that they
may have committed (not quite a “pardon,” since in many cases there was
no charge of which they might be pardoned).
Then, too, it turns out that those get-out-of-jail-free cards might
not have been signed by good ’ole Scranton Joe but by an autopen when
Joe was physically (or perhaps only mentally) absent. Is that
constitutional? This thoughtful law article suggests that the answer may well be “no.” The matter of the Constitution’s signature requirements (Article I, § 7, clause 2)
is something that President Trump might want to have his Department of
Justice look into with respect to that promiscuous sea of indulgences
with which Joe Biden left office.
In any event, while the regime media is full of fletus et stridor dentium
while it wanders around in outer darkness, Donald Trump was clear about
the fact that his Department of Justice was going to be very different
from the stasi-like operation of the previous administration. “We will
expel the rogue actors and corrupt forces from our government,” Trump
said.
We will expose and very much expose their egregious crimes and severe misconduct, of which was levels never seen before.
It’s going to be legendary. It will also be legendary for those who
seek justice. We will restore the scales of justice in America, and we
will ensure that such abuses never happen again in our country.
