In May, The New York Times reported that Iran’s former president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had allegedly been recruited by the United States and Israel to assume power if the Iranian regime was toppled.
Ahmadinejad has long had a troubled relationship with the Iranian establishment. He publicly accused senior regime figures of corruption, was later barred from running for president, saw several of his aides arrested, and was eventually placed under house arrest.

It’s remarkable to witness the level of ignorance displayed by certain public officials, segments of the media, and various analysts when evaluating the rationale behind the joint American–Israeli military operation against Iran.

As with many contemporary challenges, the case for foreign intervention in Iran has a clear precedent: NATO’s intervention in the former Yugoslavia against the regime of Slobodan Milošević.

The first phase focuses on oil. Owing to sanctions, much of Venezuela’s oil production is effectively frozen. Under this plan, American companies would help rehabilitate oil production and facilitate sales, while profits would be managed in a way intended to benefit the Venezuelan population rather than fuel corruption or sustain the regime.

On the morning of January 3, U.S. special operations forces arrested Venezuelan leader Nicolás
Maduro in a highly coordinated operation that immediately drew global attention. U.S.
authorities allege that Maduro oversaw an extensive drug-trafficking network that harmed
American interests. Critics, some quoted by The New York Times, questioned whether the scale
of narcotics flows from other regions poses a more immediate threat, raising broader questions
about the operation’s justification.