By Mandy Turner
The United States is not being potentially “dragged into” a war with Iran by Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Trump administration fully supports Israel’s actions as an essential part of its strategy to impose pro-American regimes across the world to protect its interests and allies. In the Middle East, this means forcing states into economic and security agreements with the United States and Israel.
Since Israel launched its war against Iran in the early hours of June 13, 2025, Western politicians have leapt to defend its actions. The UN Charter explicitly outlaws the use of force by one state against another state – the only exceptions are self-defense or if the UN Security Council has authorised it. This explains why Western states – particularly the UK, France, Germany, and the United States – support Israel’s assertion that its missile attacks on Iran, which by Wednesday had killed around 650 Iranians, are in self-defense. Iran’s retaliatory missile strikes against Israel have killed 24 Israelis.
Israel’s self-defense argument is based on the claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. This, Israel argues, constitutes an existential threat, so it launched a “pre-emptive strike.”
On June 12, just hours before Israel’s attack, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, passed a resolution that declared Iran in breach of its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Specifically, the resolution accused Iran of not complying with requests for information on its nuclear material and stockpile of enriched uranium.
The resolution passed with 19 nations voting in favor, three against, and 11 abstentions.
United States’ ‘gerrymandering’ at the IAEA
Two days before the IAEA vote, the United States put pressure on eight countries to vote with it or abstain. This gives credence to Iran’s criticism of the resolution being “politically motivated” and “orchestrated” by the United States and the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany).
Earlier this month, Iran announced it had seized thousands of documents on Israel’s nuclear weapons program. On June 4, it was reported that Iran was going to include a demand for a “nuclear-free Middle East” in its discussions with the United States. Iran has been calling for this since 1974.
This is where your warning bells should start ringing.
Israel bombed Iran two days before scheduled talks between Iran and the United States, which was why the Iranian regime was caught by surprise. This reeks of duplicity by the Trump regime because an unnamed Israeli official confirmed to Israeli media that “there was full and complete coordination with the Americans.”
Israel does not act without the permission of the United States. In 2008, Israel sought American support for a bombing raid on Iran, but President George W. Bush refused to approve it, so Israel backed down.
Nuclear weapons and non-proliferation
The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is an international agreement aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. Iran is one of 191 states participating in the NPT.
Signing the NPT is voluntary and by doing so a state agrees to the IAEA conducting inspections to verify that nuclear materials are not being used to develop weapons.
Israel is one of only five states that does not participate in the NPT – the other four are India, North Korea, Pakistan, and South Sudan.
Israel is not a signatory to the NPT but has nuclear weapons. Iran is a signatory to the NPT but it has no nuclear weapons and US intelligence assesses it is not trying to build them. It is important to directly state these facts to show how fundamentally skewed this whole discussion has become.
No Western state officially acknowledges that Israel has nuclear weapons, even though it was confirmed by the CIA in 1968 to US President Richard Nixon.
This is where your warning bells should be turning into a grade five alarm hooter.
North Korea was initially a signatory to the NPT but withdrew in January 2003, citing US aggression as the reason. The previous year, in January 2002, President Bush designated North Korea part of an “axis of evil” that also included Iraq and Iran. Withdrawing from the NPT was a smart move by North Korea because of what happened to Iraq the following year.
‘Regime change’ in Iraq was based on lies about its nuclear weapons
In March 2003, a US-UK military invasion overthrew the Ba’athist regime of Saddam Hussein, imposed a US-run “international administration,” and plunged Iraq into a deadly insurgency. This disastrous and illegal Western military action killed half a million Iraqis and displaced nearly 10 million to neighboring states and beyond. It also led directly to the emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS or Da’esh).
The UK and the United States argued that its “regime change” invasion was to prevent Iraq from developing nuclear weapons. These claims were later proven to be false – a huge lie spun by British and American political elites to garner support for an illegal war that had a devastating impact on Iraq and the wider region. But for the United States, its main goal was achieved – to remove a regime blocking US interests and install an American military base on Iraqi soil.
This was all part of the Project for the New American Century, an agenda and think tank that emerged in the 1990s to advocate for the imposition of US power across the world by changing regimes by force if necessary. These ideas and the people promoting them, known as neoconservatives or “neocons”, were embedded in the Bush administration and were the driving force behind the war against Iraq. As a think tank, the Project for the New American Century closed its doors in 2006, but its main ideas echo in Donald Trump’s plans for a “Greater America.”
Why the UK went to war in Iraq provides important lessons for today
In the UK, where I live, a web of deceit was spun to manufacture support for the UK to participate in the United States’ regime change war on Iraq, despite the UK public being opposed to it.
On 18 March 2003, the UK House of Commons voted to approve British military intervention in Iraq. To mark the anniversary of this vote, 20 years on, I wrote a report on lessons learned with Chris Doyle, director of Caabu, the cross-party parliamentary advocacy group that promotes peaceful relations between the UK and the Middle East.
We interviewed MPs and Lords who took part in the vote, from across the political spectrum, including those who voted for, against, and abstained. A prominent reason given by these politicians for their voting choice was that they trusted Prime Minister Tony Blair and government briefings, which claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could be launched within 45 minutes of an order from Saddam Hussein.
Peter (now Lord) Hain, then Foreign Office Minister, told us: “I genuinely believed the intelligence and the intelligence has proven to be absolutely false. So, we went to war on a total lie. And had I known that it was false at the time, I would have not supported it.”
Western leaders are providing cover for Israel’s real war aims
In the past few days, the UK has sent more fighter jets to the Middle East to defend Israel. On June 14, Prime Minister Keir Starmer pledged support for Israel’s attack and declared that Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The following day, on June 15, Chancellor Rachel Reeves stated that further UK military assets could be used to defend Israel.
On June 13, an opinion poll showed that only 19 percent of the UK public supported backing Israel in its war against Iran, compared with 50 percent that said Britain should not support either side.
The British public were lied to in 2003 by Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair to support an illegal war. It is being lied to now by Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer to support another illegal war.
Western leaders are either completely ignoring Israel’s stated aims in Iran or support these aims.
In a “statement to the people of Iran” on December 12, 2024, Netanyahu urged them to rise up against their leaders and said that Israel was “defending civilisation against barbarism.” Netanyahu repeated this call on June 14, 2025, indicating that Israel’s real goal is to promote “regime change” in Iran.
“Regime change” is a term that obscures an ugly, brutal objective that is illegal under international law. Deliberately overthrowing the leadership of a government by external military force always plunges a country into violent chaos. But this is what Israel wants – to destroy Iran and neutralize a source of opposition to its dominance across the region, particularly over Palestinians.
Under cover of its attack on Iran, Israel is continuing to violently seize land from Palestinians and crush opposition in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
In Gaza, Israel is continuing its genocidal war. Its military strikes on Iran are diverting the world’s attention, so this is easing pressure on Israel to end its policy of starvation and killing of unarmed Palestinian civilians queueing for food aid.
Meanwhile in the West Bank, since Friday Israel has imposed a lockdown, sealed the entrances to many Palestinian towns and villages, and sent a new military division of 10,000 soldiers to the Jordan Valley. It is ludicrous to accept Israel’s argument that this is required in “self-defense” because the only state bordering the Jordan Valley is Jordan which is intercepting Iranian rockets and drones heading towards Israel. Under the cover of war, Israel is trying to permanently annex the West Bank.
But Palestinians are not the only ones experiencing Israel’s violence.
Since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, Israel has occupied large parts of southern Syria, has carried out over 600 bomb attacks, and is building military bases. On 5 June, BBC journalists covering this story were arrested and expelled, after being violently interrogated by Israeli soldiers. Like in Gaza, Israel does not want the world to know what it is doing in Syria.
Israel is also occupying parts of southern Lebanon and launching attacks on the capital, Beirut.
Calling these land seizures “buffer zones” taken in self-defense masks Israel’s plans to expand its borders to create a “Greater Israel” across the Middle East. Israel sees an opportunity to seize more territory – as it did in 1948 and 1967 – and to eliminate all opposition to its settler colonial apartheid rule over Palestinians.
Characterising Israel’s war against Iran as “self-defense” also helps to obscure the fact that the United States has long wanted to remove the current Iranian regime. Its underlying goal is to tie all states in the region into economic and security cooperation with the United States and its main ally, Israel. Removing the current Iranian regime – an ally of China and Russia – is an important step toward total US dominance of the Middle East in an emerging multipolar order.
The synergies between ‘Greater Israel’ and ‘Greater America’
There is ample evidence that Israel’s plans are in synergy with the Trump administration’s plans.
On June 12, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff gave a speech at the United Hatzalah gala in New York, that “a nuclear Iran represents an existential threat to Israel as does an Iran with a large amount of missiles. That is as big a threat as the nuclear threat. And this is an existential threat to the United States and the free world and the entire GCC.” Note Witkoff’s reference to non-nuclear missiles and his mention of the Gulf countries.
On June 13, Elise Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Leadership, stated: “The Iranian terror regime has proven that it can never be trusted.” Trump has called Stefanik one of his biggest allies.
On June 14, US Ambassador to Israel Mick Huckabee stated: “Iran isn’t just attacking Israel but your fellow Americans who live here.” This suggests that America might respond if a US citizen is killed in Israel during one of Iran’s missile attacks.
On June 17, American officials said that President Trump was considering air strikes on Iran, and Trump took to social media to issue an ultimatum of “unconditional surrender” to Iran.
Compare these hawkish statements from the US administration with a May 2025 public opinion poll that 69 percent of the American public prefer that neither Israel nor Iran have nuclear weapons.
These comments from US officials are therefore part of an attempt to manufacture consent amongst its population for Israel’s war against Iran, possibly in preparation for more visible US involvement.
Israel’s bellicose stance towards its neighbours is mirrored by the US administration. Trump’s threats to take over Greenland, Panama, and Canada by economic or military force show that his plans to “Make America Great Again” means a “Greater America” expanded well beyond its current borders.
A March 2025 opinion poll shows overwhelming opposition from the American public for US territorial expansion by military force. But President Trump has carried on making these threats regardless.
The United States and Israel are not just strategic allies; they also share a common vision which does not bode well for their neighbors. Both states are a threat to world peace.
Mandy Turner is an independent writer affiliated with Security in Context as a senior researcher.
