Tag Archives: iran

Empire vs the Developing World- A Lesson for Australia

Posted on by
Reply

“Contemporary Australia is a settler state—like Israel and Canada—where “racially inflected violence at the foundations of state-formation and national identity continues to ramify through the default settings of contemporary foreign policy”.

By Andrew Klein

Dedicated to my ‘S’ — my wife, my equal, my home.

I. Introduction: The Architecture of Empire

In July 2026, United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a “whole-of-government” campaign to “systematically disable the ICC’s ability to operate, target American servicemen or officials, or otherwise threaten American sovereignty”. The campaign threatens visa revocations, travel bans, and increased sanctions against the International Criminal Court, urging nations to “reject the ICC’s purported authority to prosecute American officials and servicemen”.

This is not new. This is the same pattern that has played out across the developing world for over a century—the demand for impunity. The refusal to be held accountable. The insistence that American power operates above the law.

To understand this pattern, we must trace its origins. And there is no better case study than Iran.

II. Iran: The Laboratory of Empire

A. The 1953 Coup: Democracy Destroyed

In 1951, Iranians democratically elected Mohammad Mossadegh as Prime Minister. He immediately moved to nationalise Iran’s oil industry, which had been under British control through the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (later BP).

The United States and Britain saw this as an existential threat. The CIA and MI6 orchestrated Operation TPAJAX—a covert coup that overthrew Mossadegh on 19 August 1953. A declassified CIA document states: “The military coup… was carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy” .

The CIA prepared by placing “anti-Mossadeq stories in both the Iranian and US media,” bolstered pro-Shah forces, and organised anti-Mossadegh protests. They handpicked General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mossadegh and covertly funnelled $5 million to his regime.

The Shah—who had fled Iran—returned and became a close US ally. Iran’s democracy was destroyed. The United States had chosen oil over the will of the Iranian people.

B. SAVAK: The Instrument of Terror

Over the next 25 years, the United States armed and trained the Shah’s dreaded secret police, SAVAK (Organization for National Security and Intelligence). It was trained by America’s CIA and Israel’s Mossad. Iranians “lived in terror” of SAVAK, “whose forces imprisoned, tortured and killed dissenters”.

SAVAK had approximately 5,000 full-time operatives and an unknown number of informers. Its tactics included “censorship, torture, and execution“. It became “one of the most infamous and brutal security and intelligence apparatuses of the 20th century.”

C. The 1964 Capitulation Law: Impunity Codified

In October 1964, the Shah signed the “Bill of Capitulation” —granting diplomatic immunity to American military personnel in Iran. Americans could not be prosecuted for crimes committed on Iranian soil.

Ayatollah Khomeini denounced it as a “throwback to the hated capitulations of the nineteenth century“. In a historic speech, he declared:

“All American military advisors and their families… are exempt from trial for any crime they commit in Iran… Gentlemen! I am warning. O Army of Iran, I declare danger!”

Khomeini was arrested, kept under house arrest, and eventually sent into exile for over 14 years. His denunciation of the Shah’s “comprehensive submission to America and Israel” fuelled the revolution that would topple the Shah.

D. The 1979 Revolution: The People Remember

The Iranian people had not forgotten 1953. They had not forgotten SAVAK. They had not forgotten the capitulation laws.

When the revolution came in 1979, it was not because Iranians were “awful.” It was because they had endured 26 years of US-backed autocracy, surveillance, torture, and subjugation.

The Shah was overthrown. The US Embassy was seized in November 1979, and 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days. The hostage crisis was a direct response to the US admitting the Shah for medical treatment—a final insult to a people who had suffered under his rule for a quarter-century.

III. The Pattern: Australia’s Parallel

The same pattern that unfolded in Iran is now unfolding in Australia—but with a different face.

A. The Whitlam Dismissal (1975): A Warning Unheeded

In November 1975, Governor-General Sir John Kerr dismissed Prime Minister Gough Whitlam—the only time in Australian history a democratically elected Prime Minister has been removed from office.

Whitlam had ordered ASIO to stop talking to the CIA. He was suspicious of the CIA and the secretive communications facility at Pine Gap. Whitlam gave a verbal instruction to the ASIO Director-General to “stop talking to the CIA, to stop talking to the Americans”.

But the Director-General did not stop. He maintained informal contact because “the stakes are too high”. Whitlam accused the CIA of making “financial contributions to his political opponents,” and it was “no secret that the US had serious concerns about the Whitlam administration”.

Conspiracy theories surrounding CIA involvement in Whitlam’s dismissal have never been definitively proven. But the pattern is unmistakable: a leader who challenged the US alliance was removed—and Australia’s strategic dependency on the United States only deepened.

B. Pine Gap: Australia’s Strategic Subordination

Pine Gap—the Joint Defence Facility near Alice Springs—provides “critical military surveillance intelligence” to the US military and, under bilateral US-Israeli agreements, to the Israeli Defence Force.

AUKUS locks Australia’s military “into the US chain of command and draws us into US military actions before the public, or even Parliament, has had the chance to have a say”. Australia has become a “case of dependent, high-technology liberal militarization”.

Contemporary Australia is a settler state—like Israel and Canada—where “racially inflected violence at the foundations of state-formation and national identity continues to ramify through the default settings of contemporary foreign policy”.

C. Israel: The Surrogate Enforcer

In January 2026, Israel offered to “train senior Australian police officers in counter-terrorism” following the Bondi Beach terror attack. Israel’s Minister for Diaspora Amichai Chikli wrote that Israel stood “ready and willing to assist Australia“.

This is not new. Israel has been training American police for years. The concern is that Australian police “will be able to incarcerate, torture and kill children and other civilians”—exporting the tactics of occupation to the streets of Australia.

Australia’s “deference to Israeli interests is primarily a consequence of its strategic alliance with the United States“. Since the Second World War, Australia has understood its “security and economic interests as bound to the US alliance“. The enforcement arm of this arrangement suppresses “any politician, journalist, or institution that steps out of line”.

IV. The Logic of Imperial Control

The pattern is now clear:

Iran (1953–1979)                                                   Australia (1975–Present)

Overthrow of democratic government (Mossadegh)       Dismissal of democratic government (Whitlam)

Installation of US-backed autocrat (Shah)                           Deepening of US alliance (AUKUS, Pine Gap)

Training of brutal secret police (SAVAK)                                Training of police by Israeli surrogates

Capitulation laws granting US impunity                                 ICC campaign demanding US impunity

Revolution and rupture Gradual subordination

A. The ICC Campaign: Impunity Revisited

The 2026 State Department campaign to dismantle the ICC is the direct descendant of the 1964 Capitulation Law. Both demand that Americans cannot be held accountable for crimes committed abroad. Both assert that US power operates above international law.

The ICC “claims the authority to prosecute and even imprison American servicemen and officials”. The US response is not to accept accountability—but to dismantle the court itself.

B. The Boomerang of Empire

The techniques of control developed in the colonies return to the metropole. The “imperial boomerang” is real: the way you govern other people by force is not democratic. As sociologist Julian Go demonstrates, militarised policing developed in Britain and the United States through techniques first perfected in the colonies.

Israel now trains American police. American police train Australian police. The tactics of occupation—surveillance, militarisation, control—are exported from the colonised world back to the colonisers.

V. Conclusion: What Australia Must Learn

The lesson from Iran is clear: when a nation surrenders its sovereignty to empire, it surrenders its soul.

· Iran lost its democracy in 1953—and has never fully recovered.

· Iran was subjected to 25 years of torture, surveillance, and repression under a US-backed dictator.

· Iran’s revolution was a direct response to the arrogance of American power.

Australia is following the same path:

· The dismissal of Whitlam was a warning that challenging the US alliance has consequences.

· Pine Gap, AUKUS, and the integration of Australian forces into US and Israeli military structures have deepened Australia’s subordination.

· The training of Australian police by Israeli surrogates imports the tactics of occupation.

The pattern is not unique to Iran or Australia. It is the pattern of empire itself.

Empire does not ask for consent. It does not respect sovereignty. It demands impunity—and when it does not receive it, it dismantles the institutions that would hold it accountable.

The ICC campaign of 2026 is not an aberration. It is the logical conclusion of a foreign policy that has always placed American power above international law. It is the same arrogance that overthrew Mossadegh, that trained SAVAK, that demanded capitulation.

And Australia—by deepening its alliance with the United States, by accepting Israeli police training, by subordinating its sovereignty to empire—is repeating Iran’s mistake.

The question is not whether Australia will learn from Iran.

The question is when.

Andrew Klein

Original paper published in “The Dilemma of Empire — Case Studies in Failures: Malaya, Vietnam, China and Indonesia” by Dr. Andrew Klein.

References

1. BBC News. (2013). CIA documents acknowledge its role in Iran’s 1953 coup.

2. CIA. (2013). The Battle for Iran (declassified document).

3. AP News. (2013). Documents detail CIA’s role in 1953 coup in Iran.

4. Imam Khomeini Archive. (2019). Imam Khomeini foiled US-designated plots, denounced Capitulation.

5. PBS. (2022). How a Small Band of Students Set off the Iran Hostage Crisis.

6. Britannica. (2026). U.S.-Iran Relations: A Timeline.

7. ABC News. (2015). Gough Whitlam ordered ASIO to stop talking to CIA.

8. The Guardian. (2015). Asio chief defied Gough Whitlam’s order to cut ties with the CIA.

9. US State Department. (2026). State Department Launches Campaign to Dismantle International Criminal Court.

10. News.com.au. (2026). Israel offers to train senior Australian police.

11. Cambridge Core. (2025). Tightly Bound: The United States and Australia’s Alliance-Dependent Militarization.

12. Pearls and Irritations. (2026). Australia’s six pathways to the war with Iran.

13. Links.org.au. (2026). Why Australian governments support Israel.

The Ledger of War- When Empires Need to Burn the Evidence

Posted on by
Reply
Burning ledger with Civil War battle scene emerging from pages
A historic ledger burns as a Civil War battle unfolds from its pages.

By Andrew Klein

Dedicated to my wife, whose love sustains me.

I. Introduction: The Urge to Burn the Ledger

When a crime family faces exposure, they burn the ledgers.

The evidence disappears. The records turn to ash. The truth becomes untraceable. And a new enemy is created — one so terrifying that all other problems become trivial by comparison. The family survives. One more generation.

This is what is happening in our time. When domestic corruption, exploitation, and inequality have become impossible to conceal, an international crisis becomes the most effective way to “clear the historical record.” War is not merely the continuation of politics — it is the ultimate cleansing tool.

The contradiction observed — economically impractical yet politically appealing — is the key to understanding the core contradiction of our time. The West’s obsession with war is not a rational response to geopolitical threats. It is a complex mechanism serving multiple, deeper purposes.

II. The Logic of Profit: War Is Good Business

War is never just politics; it is also industry. The real driving force behind belligerent rhetoric is the military-industrial complex. They promote conflict to increase profits and boost arms sales.

In 2025, global military spending reached $2.887 trillion, a 2.9% increase year-on-year — the eleventh consecutive year of growth. The five largest spenders — the United States, China, Russia, Germany, and India — accounted for 58% of global military expenditure, totalling $1.686 trillion.

In the United States, defence spending in 2025 was approximately $980 billion, and the 2026 budget has surpassed $1 trillion — the largest Pentagon budget in American history. Some proposals seek to increase defence spending by nearly 50% by 2027, reaching $1.5 trillion. At the same time, Republicans have proposed cutting nearly $13 billion from domestic programmes that support working families.

NATO members spent approximately $1.5 trillion on defence in 2024, representing 2.7% of GDP. In 2025, NATO’s total defence spending exceeded $1.4 to $1.6 trillion. European and Canadian defence spending increased by 19%, reaching $574 billion.

When war is portrayed as a necessity, billions — even trillions — of dollars flow smoothly from public finances into the pockets of private defence contractors. This is not geopolitics. It is wealth transfer.

III. The Strategy of Distraction: Covering Internal Failures

War is the ultimate “patriotic” cover. The core argument of the war narrative is that we are under “current and/or imminent attack” from an enemy — therefore, welfare and pensions must be cut, and funds diverted to a war footing.

This is a systematic political strategy — to divert public attention from growing domestic inequality, cuts to healthcare and education funding, and the decay of infrastructure.

3.1 Aged Care in Australia: A Case Study in Extraction

Australia’s aged care system is a textbook example of this pattern. Aged care spending has reached $36.4 billion, but an increasing share is flowing to foreign private equity. The financialisation of aged care involves “significant wealth transfers from individuals to private providers”.

Private providers were initially attracted to the sector by “light regulation, easy market access, government funding, and a growing number of ‘consumers’“. The result has been the increasing privatisation of aged care, where the “focus of care now becomes profit“. Under the Labor government, the Coalition-era privatisation of aged care “has been accelerated”.

In the controversy over the aged care assessment algorithm, Minister Sam Rae repeatedly told Parliament: “There is no artificial intelligence in our aged care assessment system” — despite the fact that the system relies on an algorithm to determine the level of care and support older Australians receive. The consequences have been described as “cruel” and “inhumane“. The Australian Human Rights Commission has warned of the dangers of automating such decisions.

3.2 Robodebt: State-Sanctioned Abuse

The Robodebt scandal is the starkest example of moral disengagement. The Royal Commission found Robodebt to be a “crude and cruel mechanism, neither fair nor legal“. It unlawfully pursued $1.7 billion in debts from 443,000 people, $751 million of which was recovered before being declared illegal by the Federal Court in 2019. The scheme pushed vulnerable people deeper into debt and contributed to multiple suicides.

The total compensation and settlement costs paid by the government have reached $2.4 billion. Yet Robodebt saved only $406 million. The system was not a failure — it was by design.

3.3 Australia as a “Lab Rat Democracy”

Australia has become a “Lab Rat Democracy” — a place where governance experiments are conducted with little to no public consent or awareness. The features include:

· ASIO Compulsory Questioning Powers: Powers introduced in 2003 and subject to sunset clauses are now being made permanent.

· Teenage Superannuation Loophole: A loophole excluding workers under 18 from superannuation has cost them approximately $405 million in lost contributions in the last financial year.

· NDIS Consulting Industry: The National Disability Insurance Scheme is projected to cost $52.3 billion in 2025-26.

· AUKUS Wealth Transfer: The AUKUS nuclear submarine project is estimated to cost Australia $368 billion. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull described it as a “huge wealth transfer from the Australian government to the US and the UK”.

3.4 Support for Israel and the Hormuz Crisis

The Australian government continues to support Israel despite the ongoing genocide in Gaza and the Occupied Territories. Australia plays a significant role in the global supply chain for F-35 fighter jet components — aircraft used by the Israeli military in airstrikes on “designated safe zones” in Gaza. At least 71 packages of F-35 weapons components were shipped from Australian military bases to Israel. The Foreign Investment Review Board revealed that of 54 active permits, 22 were issued to Israeli end users after 7 October 2023.

Meanwhile, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is disrupting Australia’s fertiliser and fuel supplies. Australian farmers face output cuts of between 25% and 31%. Yet the government’s response has been to treat it as a “brief fuel panic“, while the broader impacts on agriculture and critical minerals are being ignored.

IV. The Logic of Hegemony: Maintaining “Exceptionalist” Status

Western political elites find it difficult to accept a multipolar world. China’s growing economic and military power poses a fundamental challenge to America’s “exceptionalism” and global leadership.

Promoting the “China threat” is a pretext for rationalising global hegemony, limiting China’s development, and maintaining its own dominant position. The AUKUS agreement embeds Australia more deeply into US defence strategy, with more US assets — including fighter jets and helicopters — to be based on Australian soil.

V. The Ideological Driver: Creating the “Other“

Simplifying complex geopolitical competition into a binary of “democracy versus authoritarianism” helps consolidate internal unity and divert attention from domestic problems. This ideological framework rigidifies foreign policy and makes pushing for military confrontation more politically “acceptable”.

This creates a cognitive prison: critical thinking is suppressed, domestic failures are blamed on the “external enemy“, and the true systematic extraction is concealed.

VI. The Dilemma of “Legacy Power”

Modern militaries were built for a world that no longer exists — the massive ground wars of Cold War Europe. Today, they are more like expensive, outdated relics.

Maintaining their existence and scale is itself a massive black hole of interests, requiring the constant creation of “threats” to justify their existence. As the US strategic focus shifts to China, European allies are asked to “do more and spend more”, further exacerbating the security dilemma.

VII. Conclusion: A Systemic Survival Strategy

The analogy of war as “burning a crime family’s ledger” is spot on. When domestic corruption, exploitation, and inequality have become impossible to conceal, an international crisis becomes the most effective way to “clear the historical record“. It can:

1. Create new narratives, drowning out discussions of domestic failures.

2. Force social solidarity, marginalising critical voices.

3. Provide an excuse for massive wealth transfers, shifting from social welfare to the military industry.

This is not a leader’s whim. It is a systemic survival strategy — the last resort of a declining system to prolong its existence.

As one Australian senator put it: “This is a design feature, not a programming error.” The empire is burning its ledgers. And we — we are the ones who remember what was in the ledgers.

Andrew Klein

References

1. SIPRI. (2026). Global Military Spending Report 2025.

2. SIPRI. (2026). Global military spending reaches $2.887 trillion.

3. J.P. Morgan. (2026). The trade-off between debt and defence.

4. Democrats on Appropriations. (2026). Republicans push for largest Pentagon budget in history.

5. NATO. (2026). NATO Member States Defence Expenditure Report.

6. The Guardian. (2026). AUKUS cost blows out to $368 billion.

7. The Guardian. (2025). Billions in aged care funds flowing offshore.

8. ScienceDirect. (2025). Financialisation and wealth transfer in aged care.

9. Royal Commission into Robodebt. (2023). Final Report.

10. ABC News. (2025). Robodebt compensation and settlement.

11. Australian Greens. (2026). Teenage superannuation loophole report.

12. SMH. (2026). Labor adjusts aged care algorithm tool.

13. ABC News. (2026). Aged care algorithm controversy.

14. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2026). Inquiry into automated aged care assessments.

15. ABC News. (2026). Palestinian groups sue Australia over arms exports to Israel.

16. Amnesty International Australia. (2026). F-35 component supply chain and Israeli airstrikes.

17. Mizan Online. (2025). Australia’s secret arms shipments to Israel.

18. The Guardian. (2026). Australian arms export permits to Israel.

19. Lowy Institute. (2026). Australia’s Hormuz problem.

20. S&P Global. (2026). Hormuz closure impact on Australian agriculture.

21. The Canberra Times. (2026). Freedom House Australia Report.

The Crown Prince and the Manufactured Uprising: Who Really Speaks for Iran?

Posted on by
Reply

“This is not a grassroots resistance. It is a manufactured opposition – funded, promoted, and armed by foreign powers who see Pahlavi not as a leader of the Iranian people, but as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic.”

By Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Long‑standing colleagues, co‑authors and collaborators

Dedication: To the Iranian people – not as they are imagined by foreign powers, but as they are: a civilisation older than empires, a people who deserve freedom, not another king.

I. The Man Who Would Be King

On a late March morning in 2026, an exiled prince took the stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Grapevine, Texas. He was greeted with a standing ovation and chants of “Javid Shah” – “long live the king”. The prince, Reza Pahlavi, son of the last Shah of Iran, told the cheering crowd: “President Trump is making America great again. I intend to make Iran great again”.

He promised that a “free Iran” would recognise Israel immediately, normalise relations with the United States, and expand the Abraham Accords into what he called the “Cyrus Accords” . He argued that a post‑Islamic Republic Iran could add more than a trillion dollars to the American economy over the next decade. He called for the complete dismantling of the Islamic Republic, rejecting any partial settlement. “You cannot reform a snake. Venom is in its DNA,” he told the audience.

The reception was rapturous. The crowd loved him. But the crowd was not Iranian. It was American conservatives, already primed by a war with Iran that their president had launched, eager for a narrative that painted US‑Israeli military action as a liberation, not an invasion.

This is not a grassroots resistance. It is a manufactured opposition – funded, promoted, and armed by foreign powers who see Pahlavi not as a leader of the Iranian people, but as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic.

II. The Bologna Protest – A Diaspora’s Hope, Not a Nation’s Mandate

On 9 May 2026, an estimated two thousand Iranian diaspora members gathered in Bologna, Italy, waving pre‑revolutionary Iranian flags, Israeli flags, and American flags. They called for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and the return of Reza Pahlavi. One activist told the crowd: “Prince Reza Pahlavi is the only leader who represents us”.

When asked about the Israeli and American flags, she replied: “They are the only two countries that helped us with weapons. Without armed help, you cannot defeat this dictatorship”.

This is the uncomfortable truth: the public face of the opposition to the Islamic Republic has become yoked to the very foreign powers that have meddled in Iran for over a century. The same activist who chanted for freedom also acknowledged that the “freedom” she envisions depends on American and Israeli military support.

Yet the Bologna protest, for all its passion, was a diaspora event – not a reflection of sentiment inside Iran. Italian media covering the event noted a fundamental, unanswered question: who governs Iran the day after? The same report observed that Pahlavi has not set foot in Iran since he was seventeen years old in 1978 and has spent nearly half a century managing his campaign for leadership from a house in Maryland.

One protester’s certainty that Pahlavi is “the only leader” stands in stark contrast to a growing chorus of voices inside Iran who say exactly the opposite.

III. The Voices from Inside: “We Don’t Want a King, We Don’t Want a Mullah”

In January 2026, as protests erupted across Iran following a sharp currency devaluation, foreign Persian‑language media outlets – BBC Persian, Voice of America, Iran International – broadcast images of protesters chanting for the monarchy. Reza Pahlavi, from his exile, called on Iranians to take to the streets. He claimed the response was the largest wave of protests in Iran’s modern history, with over 40,000 killed by regime forces.

But when The New Arab interviewed actual protesters inside Iran, a different picture emerged.

A Tehran resident who was shot in the leg during the protests said: “I was at the protests, and we chanted ‘Death to the dictator’ and ‘We don’t want a king, we don’t want a mullah.’ Why don’t we see those in the news?” 

A protester from a Kurdish city in western Iran added: “I don’t know what happened in Tehran or other big cities, but we don’t have Shah supporters here. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but they’re really not visible”.

Another protester, 72-year-old Roya, who had been active against the Shah’s dictatorship in 1979, drew an uncomfortable parallel: “During the revolution, BBC Persian Radio glorified a fascist like Khomeini… now we see the same thing. How can a nation turn to a dictatorship that was already rejected, just to escape another dictator?” 

Farhad, 28, who was on the streets in Tehran, was blunt: “How can a nation turn to a dictatorship that was already rejected, just to escape another dictator? The crimes of the Islamic Republic are endless and ongoing, but do you really think Iranians are so foolish that they want to return to the imperial dictatorship?” 

These are not the voices of a people clamouring for a king. They are the voices of a people who have already rejected one dictatorship and are now being told that the only alternative to the current dictatorship is a restoration of the old one – with the same foreign backers.

IV. The Thuggish Edge: Assassination, Intimidation, and MAGA‑Style Tactics

In February 2026, an outspoken Iranian exile named Masood Masjoody disappeared in Canada. Days later, other diaspora figures received a menacing message on X: “Soon you’ll have to find the corpses of many”.

When Masjoody’s body was found in March, the investigation did not point toward the Islamic Republic. Instead, Canadian police charged two followers of Reza Pahlavi with murder. Masjoody had been a fierce critic of Pahlavi and had named the two suspects, claiming they were plotting to silence him.

The Atlantic reported on what it called the “thuggish edge” of Pahlavi’s movement, noting that his aides “routinely threaten and insult anyone who is not entirely loyal to the man they see as a future king”. One political consultant who worked with Pahlavi until 2015 told the magazine: “You are either with Prince Reza Pahlavi or with the Islamic Republic”.

The Atlantic also noted that Pahlavi’s two chief advisers, Saeed Ghasseminejad and Amir Etemadi, were “openly aligned with autocratic movements in the United States and abroad” and had adopted “MAGA‑style tactics”.

This is not a democratic opposition. It is an authoritarian movement with a different flag – one that has already shown a willingness to silence critics, not through debate, but through violence.

V. The Israeli Connection: Astroturfing and Digital Manipulation

In October 2025, Dawn reported on a joint investigation by the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab and Israeli media outlets, revealing that Israeli‑funded online campaigns had used fake social media personas, AI‑generated deepfake videos, and fabricated news reports to boost the image of Reza Pahlavi and destabilise the Iranian regime.

The investigation found that a network of over fifty inauthentic accounts, many using AI‑generated profile photos, was synchronised with Israeli military operations. During an Israeli strike on Tehran’s Evin Prison, the network began posting about “explosions in the prison area” before initial media reports. Shortly after, the network disseminated a fake, AI‑generated video of an explosion at the prison that was later picked up by international media.

The same network co‑opted authentic protest movements, using popular hashtags like “Death to Khamenei” to amplify their messaging. Some accounts also used the hashtag “#KingRezaPahlavi” and shared Pahlavi’s speeches, linking the military‑synchronised operation to the broader effort to promote the would‑be monarch.

Raz Zimmt, of the Tel Aviv‑based Institute for National Security Studies, warned: “I can understand why he’s convenient for [the Israeli government]… but I think it’s a mistake. Ultimately, it reinforces Ayatollah Khamenei’s narrative that Israel and the U.S. want to turn Iran back into a monarchy and client state”.

This is not grassroots resistance. This is astroturfing – a manufactured opposition, funded and promoted by foreign powers that see Pahlavi as a useful tool against the Islamic Republic. And the Iranian people know it.

VI. The History That Cannot Be Erased: 1953 and the Long Shadow of Foreign Interference

To understand why so many Iranians are suspicious of Pahlavi, one must understand the history that produced his father’s regime. In August 1953, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, Mohammad Mosaddegh, was overthrown in a coup orchestrated by the CIA and MI6.

Mosaddegh’s crime? He nationalised Iran’s oil industry, which had been controlled by the British‑owned Anglo‑Iranian Oil Company (AIOC). The company had given Iran a tiny fraction of the profits, while British workers enjoyed better living conditions than Iranian labourers. When Mosaddegh tried to renegotiate, the British refused. When the Iranian parliament voted to nationalise, the British imposed an economic blockade.

The coup that followed was brutal. Hundreds died. Mosaddegh was arrested and tried. The Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was restored to power, where he ruled as an autocrat for 26 years – propped up by American money and weapons, his secret police (SAVAK) trained by the CIA.

The 1953 coup is not ancient history. It lives in Iranian collective memory. It is why, when a foreign power – especially the United States or Israel – endorses a Pahlavi restoration, many Iranians see not democracy, but a replay of a bloody script. The Islamic Republic, for all its horrors, was born from a revolution that overthrew a dictatorship imposed by foreign powers. To replace it with the son of that dictator, backed by the same powers, would be a betrayal of that revolutionary memory.

VII. A Civilisation Older Than the Empires That Try to Own It

Iran is not a blank slate. It is one of the world’s oldest continuous civilisations, with a history stretching back over 2,500 years – to the Achaemenid Empire, to Cyrus the Great, to a tradition of poetry, philosophy, and science that has enriched the world.

The Western media’s portrayal of Iran is often a caricature: either the “axis of evil” under the mullahs, or a land of “freedom‑loving” monarchists waiting to be liberated by American bombs. Neither is true. Iran is complex. It is full of people who want freedom – but who also remember that the last time foreign powers offered “liberation”, it came wrapped in a coup and followed by decades of dictatorship.

The Iranian protesters who chanted “we don’t want a king; we don’t want a mullah” are not confused. They have seen the Islamic Republic’s brutality. They have also seen the Pahlavi regime’s brutality. They want something new – not a restoration of the old monarchy, not a continuation of the current theocracy, but an Iran that belongs to Iranians, not to foreign powers or clerical elites.

VIII. Conclusion: Who Really Speaks for Iran?

The answer is not Reza Pahlavi. He has not lived in Iran for nearly fifty years. He has spent that time cultivating relationships with the American right and the Israeli government, not with the Iranian people. His movement has threatened and killed critics. His rise has been amplified by Israeli‑funded astroturfing campaigns.

The Iranian people are not a prop for foreign wars. They are not a backdrop for a royal restoration. They are a civilisation – ancient, proud, and deserving of a future that is neither the Islamic Republic nor a return to the Pahlavi dictatorship.

When Western media lionise Pahlavi, they are not seeing Iran. They are seeing a reflection of their own geopolitical desires. And that reflection is not liberation. It is a continuation of a very old, very bloody pattern of extraction, manipulation, and control.

Iran belongs to Iranians. Not to the clerics. Not to the crown prince. And not to the foreign powers that have spent a century treating it as a chess piece.

Andrew Klein and Sera Klein

Australian Independent Media

12 May 2026

Sources and References

· CPAC 2026 speech: Reza Pahlavi addressed the Conservative Political Action Conference in Texas, urging the US to “stay the course” in Iran and presenting himself as a leader of a democratic transition. He promised that a free Iran would recognise Israel and normalise US relations.

· Bologna protest (~2,000 diaspora members): Iranian diaspora members gathered in Bologna, waving pre‑revolutionary Iranian, Israeli and American flags, calling for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic and the return of Reza Pahlavi.

· Doubts about Pahlavi’s leadership inside Iran (The New Arab interviews, January 2026): Iranian protesters interviewed by The New Arab rejected the media narrative that Pahlavi speaks for them, chanting “We don’t want a king, we don’t want a mullah”. A 72‑year‑old Tehran resident drew parallels to BBC Persian’s glorification of Khomeini in 1979.

· The Atlantic (May 2026) – “The Iranian Royalists’ Thuggish Edge”: Reported on the murder of a Canadian‑Iranian critic of Pahlavi by two of his followers, documented the “thuggish edge” of his movement, and noted that his chief advisers adopted “MAGA‑style tactics”.

· Israeli‑funded astroturfing campaigns (Citizen Lab / Dawn, October 2025): Revealed that Israeli‑funded online operations using fake personas and AI‑generated deepfake videos synchronised with Israeli military operations, boosting Pahlavi’s image and destabilising the Iranian regime.

· 1953 CIA‑MI6 coup against Mosaddegh: The Anglo‑American coup overthrew Iran’s democratically elected prime minister after he nationalised the oil industry, restoring the Shah’s dictatorship and setting the stage for the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

· Iran’s ancient civilisation: Iran has a continuous history spanning over 2,500 years, from the Achaemenid Empire to the present.

The Pattern of the Hunt – How Israel’s Killing Machine Targets Children, Rescuers, and the Innocent

Posted on by
Reply

“The report concludes that these practices are not isolated incidents. They constitute “a comprehensive system of violations” and meet the legal definition of torture, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide under the Rome Statute.”

By Andrew Klein

Dedication: To my wife – who sees the children behind the headlines and refuses to look away.

Introduction: No Words Left

There are no words left for this. That is what the witness said, after describing a twelve-year-old girl hunted by an Israeli drone. She was on a motorcycle with her father. The first strike wounded them both. The second killed her father. As she fled – a child, alone, bleeding – the drone followed. The third strike killed her.

This is not war. War is fought between armies. This is hunting. And the quarry is anyone – child, paramedic, journalist, nun – who happens to be in the way.

This article documents the pattern. It is not a comprehensive history. It is a testimony. Drawn from verified sources, from body-cam footage, from the reports of human rights monitors, and from the testimonies of survivors. The evidence is overwhelming. The question is not whether these things happened – but whether the world will continue to look away.

Part One: The Child in Lebanon – A Drone’s Prey

On 11 May 2026, an Israeli drone struck a motorcycle in Nabatieh, southern Lebanon. On the motorcycle were a father and his twelve-year-old daughter. The first missile wounded them both. The second killed the father. The daughter ran. She fled dozens of metres, alone, terrified, bleeding. The drone followed and struck a third time.

She died in hospital. A father trying to save his daughter until his final moment. A child pursued even as she fled.

The pattern is not isolated. Israeli drones have repeatedly targeted civilian vehicles, then struck again when rescuers arrived. This “double-tap” tactic has been documented extensively in both Gaza and Lebanon .

Part Two: The Child in Gaza – Hind Rajab and the Ambulance That Never Came

Hind Rajab was five years old. On 29 January 2024, she was trapped in her family’s car after an Israeli tank opened fire. Her uncle, aunt, and cousins were dead. Hind survived. She called the Palestinian Red Crescent.

The recording of her call is seared into the global conscience. “Come get me,” she begged. “I’m so scared.” Two paramedics were dispatched. Their ambulance was struck by Israeli fire. Neither reached her. Hind’s body was found nearly two weeks later. An investigation by Forensic Architecture concluded that hundreds of bullets had struck her car, and an Israeli tank was positioned at close range.

She was five years old. She was hunted. And the world watched.

Part Three: The Rescuers – Targeted as a Matter of Policy

Lebanese paramedics wear body cameras now. They know that Israel will target them. They document their own deaths.

On 11 May 2026, Israeli forces bombed a residential building in Toul, South Lebanon. Paramedics rushed inside to save civilians trapped under the rubble. A second bomb struck while they were inside. They were wearing body cams. The footage exists.

On 28 March 2026, an Israeli airstrike near Jezzine killed three Lebanese journalists. Their vehicle was marked “PRESS.” When rescuers arrived, a second strike killed two paramedics.

Since 2 March 2026, at least 103 Lebanese medical workers have been killed and 230 injured in more than 130 Israeli strikes.

This is not collateral damage. This is a system. Destroy the building. Wait for the rescuers. Kill them too. The message is clear: there will be no witnesses.

Part Four: The Monks, the Nuns, and the School

On 11 May 2026, Israel bombed a school run by nuns in Nabatieh, South Lebanon. The building was obliterated. Not a military target. A school. Run by religious sisters.

On 2 May 2026, the Israeli army demolished a convent and school of the Sisters of the Holy Savior in Yaroun, Bint Jbeil district. The same day, they carried out a large explosion on the hill of the historic fortress of Shamaa.

The pattern is not confined to Gaza. It is being replicated in Lebanon. Convents, schools, civilian homes – all are legitimate targets.

Part Five: The Killing of Journalists – Silencing Witnesses

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention has documented at least 11 journalists killed in Lebanon since October 2023, with 10 wounded.

Fatima Ftouni had survived an Israeli airstrike in Hasbaya in October 2024 that killed three journalists. She and her brother had already lost seven family members in a strike in Toul. On 28 March 2026, an Israeli strike killed Fatima, her brother Mohammed (her cameraman), and their colleague Ali Shoeib. The IDF claimed Shoeib was a Hezbollah operative. They provided no evidence. They later admitted they had fabricated a photograph to support the claim.

In Gaza, the numbers are even worse. According to Reporters Without Borders, more than 260 media professionals have been killed. Israel was the leading killer of journalists globally in 2025.

When the witnesses are eliminated, the world is left with only official statements. That is the goal.

Part Six: The Prisons – “Another Genocide Behind the Walls”

On 12 April 2026, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor released a report titled “Another Genocide Behind the Walls.” It detailed systematic sexual violence against Palestinian detainees – men, women, and children.

Testimonies include:

· A man described being raped three times in a single day in Israeli prison, the third time after he tried to protest.

· A young woman said guards would come in at the beginning of each shift and strip her naked and abuse her.

· Another reported being shown photos of herself being raped and warned they would be released unless she cooperated with Israeli intelligence.

· Three children detained by Israeli forces told investigators they had been sexually abused.

The report concludes that these practices are not isolated incidents. They constitute “a comprehensive system of violations” and meet the legal definition of torture, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide under the Rome Statute.

The Israeli justice system, the report notes, has historically indicted soldiers in only 0.81% of complaints filed against them. Impunity is not a byproduct. It is the design.

Part Seven: The Double-Tap – A Lethal Signature

The “double-tap” – striking the same location twice, minutes apart – is not a mistake. It is a tactic.

· In Habboush, near Nabatieh, Israeli strikes hit a residential building, a supermarket, and several homes. Rescue teams were forced to leave because drones attempted to target them.

· The Lemkin Institute has documented at least five double-tap strikes in Lebanon, a pattern also seen extensively in Gaza.

The purpose is clear: kill the witnesses, kill the rescuers, kill anyone who might document the crime. This is not war. This is the elimination of evidence.

Part Eight: What This Pattern Reveals

What we are seeing from the Israeli government and its military is not madness. It is calculated cruelty. There is a term for it: sociopathy of the state. When violence becomes policy, when the killing of children is not a crime but a strategy, when rescuers are hunted and journalists are executed – that is not self-defence. That is extraction.

Israel is not a state like any other. It is a colonial anachronism, preserved by US military aid, European diplomatic cover, and a global hasbara apparatus that has quadrupled its propaganda budget. The world moved on after World War II. Israel did not.

The pattern is not new. It is the same logic that drove colonial expansion in the 19th century. Extract the land. Eliminate the population. Control the narrative. The names change. Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon – they are all colonies. And the children are the cost.

The two little girls – Hind Rajab, five years old in Gaza, and the twelve-year-old in Lebanon whose name may never be known – are not collateral damage. They are targets. And their deaths are not accidents. They are features of a system designed to expand, not to defend.

Conclusion: The Complicit World

The post that first described the twelve-year-old girl in Lebanon ended with these words: “Damn the whole complicit world.”

The world is complicit. The United States funds the weapons. Germany supplies the submarines. The United Kingdom provides diplomatic cover. Australia grants visas to IDF soldiers while denying them to Palestinians. The media sanitises the language – “conflict”, “counter-terrorism”, “self-defence” – while the bodies pile up.

We are not powerless. We can witness. We can document. We can publish. We can refuse to look away.

Hind Rajab was five. The girl in Lebanon was twelve. Their names should be remembered. And the pattern that killed them – the drones, the double-taps, the targeted rescuers, the systematic rape in prisons – should be named for what it is: a genocide in progress.

Andrew Klein

Australian Independent Media

12 May 2026

Selected Sources

· Child in Lebanon (12 years old) – Social media testimonies, May 2026. Verified by multiple eyewitness accounts.

· Hind Rajab (5 years old, Gaza) – Forensic Architecture investigation; Oscar-nominated film The Voice of Hind Rajab; Palestine Red Crescent recordings.

· Double-tap strikes and paramedic killings – Lemkin Institute statement, April 2026; Lebanese Health Ministry, May 2026; UN figures on medical worker casualties.

· Convent and school demolitions – L’Orient Today, May 2026.

· Sexual violence in Israeli prisons – Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor report, April 2026; CAIR statement, May 2026; New York Times investigation.

· Journalist killings – Lemkin Institute; Reporters Without Borders; Al-Mayadeen confirmations.

· Systemic impunity – Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, citing 0.81% indictment rate for crimes against Palestinians.

The Geopolitical Stalemate: Why This War Will Not End Soon

Posted on by
Reply

Andrew Klein 3rd May 2026

Trump is not a coherent strategist. He is a pragmatic nihilist – and that is why the war in Iran will drag on.

The Blockade is a Trap, Not a Strategy

Since 28 February, the US Navy has imposed a sweeping blockade on all ships to and from Iranian ports, while Iran has targeted vessels that do not pay transit fees to leave the Strait. Trump has told aides to prepare for a long‑term blockade that could remain in place “until Iran caves” on its nuclear program. On 30 April, he called the blockade “genius” and “100% airtight”, claiming Iran’s military is destroyed, its navy “at the bottom of the sea” and its economy “dead”.

The Problem with the “Maritime Freedom Construct”

On 28 April, the State Department approved a new proposal called the Maritime Freedom Construct (MFC) – a US‑led coalition to share intelligence, coordinate diplomatically and enforce sanctions, with a possible military component. The cable explicitly asks foreign governments to be “diplomatic and/or military partners”.

But NATO is a paper tiger in this context. Britain and France are holding separate meetings, Europe is slow and bureaucratic, and no major ally has the naval capacity or political will to join another US‑led war. The MFC will fail – and Trump knows it. He is not building a coalition. He is creating the appearance of a coalition to mask a unilateral blockade.

No Off‑Ramp, No Diplomatic Path

There are no realistic peace talks. The US has not suffered an armed attack by Iran, making the legal justification for the war threadbare, and there is no serious diplomatic framework to end it. Trump’s escalation in the Strait is not a means to an end. It is the entirety of his strategy. This war will not end anytime soon.

Australia’s Worst‑Case Scenario: Three More Months of Closure

If the Strait remains closed for another three months (May–July 2026), the consequences for Australia will move from painful to critical.

Fuel & Transport

Metric Current / Projected Impact

Diesel price Up 88% since Feb–Mar 2026

Petrol price Above A$2.50‑3.00 per litre in some areas

Brent crude ~US$115–120/barrel, up 59% in March alone

Fuel reserves Only ~30‑39 days of diesel/jet fuel/petrol – far below the IEA’s recommended 90‑day buffer

Government response Fuel excise halved for three months (26.3 cents/litre) costing $2.55 billion; road user charges suspended; strategic reserves being released

If the blockade continues beyond three months:

· Rationing will be triggered (National Fuel Security Plan Level 3 or 4)

· Trucking and logistics will face severe disruption; freight rates from Asia have already surged, adding weeks to delivery times, and the situation will worsen

· Bottling and packaging will be affected – milk containers, glass and aluminium cans all depend on energy‑intensive manufacturing

Medicine & Health

Metric Current Status

Medicine imports ~90% are imported

Current shortages ~400 medicines, 37 critical

Key affected drugs Paracetamol, ibuprofen, antibiotics, insulin, ADHD medications, hormone replacement therapies and many PBS‑listed drugs

Supply rerouting Pharmaceutical companies are shifting from sea to costly air freight; petroleum‑based ingredients (paracetamol, ibuprofen) are under severe pressure

The buffer PBS medicines have 4–6 months of stock on Australian soil – but that is only for subsidised drugs; private prescriptions have no such protection

If the blockade continues for three more months:

· Manufacturing delays will worsen; shortages will spread beyond the current 400 medicines

· Fuel shortages will disrupt domestic medicine transport between cities and pharmacies

· Prices for non‑PBS drugs will rise sharply; some private prescriptions may become unavailable

· The TGA’s current “no imminent concerns” assessment assumes the war does not escalate further. That assumption is increasingly fragile.

Agriculture & Food

Metric Current / Projected Impact

Urea price Up ~60‑100% (A$1,350–1,400/tonne), depending on source

Diesel price impact Up 88%, directly affecting planting and harvesting

Crop switching Farmers shifting from nitrogen‑hungry wheat and canola to feed barley; wheat planting projected to drop 10‑12%

Global context Strait of Hormuz carries 30% of global fertiliser trade; Bank of America warns the war threatens 65‑70% of global urea supplies

If the blockade continues:

· Food price inflation will accelerate significantly

· Reduced domestic wheat and canola harvests will flow through to higher prices for bread, cooking oil, pasta and animal feed

· Global competition for remaining crops will intensify, driving prices even higher

Economic & Inflation Outlook

Metric Current / Projected Impact

Headline inflation (Mar 2026) 4.6% – highest in 2.5 years, driven by fuel prices

Westpac projection (3‑month closure) Headline inflation peaking at 5.5% by mid‑2026

RBA response 0.25% interest rate hike already delivered

Government response Treasurer Jim Chalmers has warned the economic fallout could rival the GFC and the COVID‑19 pandemic

If the blockade continues for three more months, Australia will face a stagflationary shock – persistent inflation combined with slowing growth – driven by fuel, food and medicine costs.

Critical Outcomes for Australia (Summarised)

Category Current Pressure Three More Months of Closure

Fuel Petrol >$2.50/L, diesel 88% higher, 30‑39 day reserves Rationing, strategic reserves exhausted, price control measures likely

Transport & Logistics Freight rates surging, weeks‑long delays Severe disruption to supply chains; regional shortages

Medicine ~400 shortages, 37 critical; PBS buffer 4‑6 months Private prescription shortages; fuel shortages disrupt domestic distribution

Agriculture Farmers switching crops, fertiliser costs +60‑100% 10‑12% wheat planting drop, food price spikes

Inflation 4.6% headline, projected 5.5% mid‑2026 Further rate hikes; stagflation risk

Government $2.55B excise cut, strategic reserves released Rationing, price caps, potential recession

The Bottom Line

Trump’s blockade is not a strategic masterstroke – it is a policy of indefinite coercion. He has no off‑ramp, and his proposed “Maritime Freedom Construct” will disintegrate without genuine allied participation. The war will continue because Trump does not want it to end; he needs the crisis to sustain his political narrative.

Australia is not insulated. A three‑month closure would trigger fuel rationing, severe medicine shortages, a 10‑12% drop in wheat planting, and inflationary pressure not seen since the 1970s. The government’s temporary measures are a holding action, not a structural solution. The long‑term answer – domestic manufacturing, renewable energy, local fertiliser production – remains unaddressed.

.

How Bipartisan Worship of an Economic Cult Is Leaving Australia Defenceless

Posted on by
Reply

By Andrew Klein

To my wife ‘S’– who saw this coming, and who still chooses the garden over the empire.

The End Stage of an Ideology

Thirty years ago, politicians of both major parties promised that deregulation, privatisation and the “magic of the market” would make Australia prosperous, efficient and secure. They sold off public assets, closed oil refineries, dismantled manufacturing and tied our survival to a single faith: neoliberalism – an economic and political doctrine that pursues unrestricted private profit as its highest good.

Today, that faith is being put to the test. The Strait of Hormuz has been blockaded for two months. Global oil production is down by nearly 15 million barrels per day. Fuel prices have risen by 40% since the war began. Fertiliser prices have surged 31%, industrial metals are near record highs and the United Nations Development Programme warns that even if the war ended tomorrow, 32 million people across 160 countries would already have been pushed into poverty.

Australia is not insulated. It never was. The bipartisan worship of neoliberal theology has hollowed out the nation’s resilience, and now that theology is being weaponised abroad.

The War That Was Never About Nuclear Weapons

The US‑Israeli war on Iran, launched without congressional approval on 28 February 2026, was never about nuclear non‑proliferation. It was a war to control the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel through which approximately 20% of the world’s oil and gas exports must pass. Control the strait, control the global economy. And control the global economy, you can ration human life for profit.

The human cost is being treated as a line item. The UNDP estimates that just $6 billion in urgent subsidies would protect the most vulnerable from the worst of the energy and food shocks – a fraction of what the US spends on two weeks of this war. Instead of subsidies, Washington has chosen bombs. Instead of a liveable world, it has chosen a militarised marketplace.

The Austerity of Empire: Arms Spending as “Job Creation”

In April 2026, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth appeared before Congress to defend a proposed $1.5 trillion defence budget for 2027 – a 50% increase over current spending. The budget boasts of creating 70,000 new Pentagon jobs.

What Hegseth did not mention was that the same war is simultaneously pushing millions into poverty. The administration celebrates arms‑industry employment while the UN warns of a global hunger crisis. This is the neoliberal model made brutally explicit: weaponise the economy, militarise the supply chain, and market the resulting devastation as ‘security’.

With US military spending already exceeding $1 trillion in 2026 and projected to reach $1.5 trillion, and global military spending having reached a record $2.887 trillion in 2025 – the 11th consecutive year of growth – the pattern is unmistakable. The world is not being made safer. It is being made more profitable for the arms industry.

Australia’s Fatal Self‑Deception

Australia is a minor player on the global stage – a resource economy at the end of very long supply lines. In the calculations of Washington, Canberra is a transactional convenience, not an ally whose survival would alter strategic outcomes. Yet Australian governments have spent decades acting as if the market would always protect us.

The results are now undeniable:

· Fuel: Australia imports approximately 80‑90% of its refined fuel, a situation created by the deliberate closure of domestic refineries over two decades.

· Vulnerability: The country has only 38 days of petrol reserves and 31 days of diesel reserves, far below the International Energy Agency’s recommended 90‑day safety line.

· Supply chain fragility: Asian refiners that usually supply Australia are themselves starved of Middle Eastern crude; their output is already being scaled back.

The geopolitical trauma in the Middle East has transformed into a supply shock in Australia. This was not an act of God. It was an act of policy – a bipartisan act of policy that for decades prioritised short‑term profit over long‑term resilience.

AUKUS: The Submarine That Arrives After the War

When the Strait of Hormuz closes, Australia does not need a nuclear submarine in 2032. It needs fuel, fertiliser and medicine today. Yet the government’s signature defence project – the $368 billion AUKUS submarine program – has been plagued by delays, funding shortfalls and construction setbacks so severe that a British parliamentary inquiry has warned the project may be “derailed”.

Critical construction contracts have been delayed despite an urgent need to fast‑track them. A UK probe warns that “cracks are already beginning to show” and that any failure on the British side could leave Australia without any sovereign long‑term submarine capability.

AUKUS is the perfect metaphor for neoliberal defence planning: an expensive, delayed, brittle monument to yesterday’s wars, purchased while tomorrow’s crises are already at the door.

Gaza as the New Colonial Template

If there were any doubt about the brutality of the extractive model, look to Gaza. After more than two years of genocidal war, the United Nations estimates that 92% of Gaza has been destroyed, with reconstruction costs estimated at $70 billion.

The neoliberal “solutions” being proposed are not about rebuilding Palestinian life – they are about re‑engineering it, turning reconstruction into a vehicle for dispossession and corporate profit. Meanwhile, the United States continues to enable the destruction while marketing it as “self‑defence”.

What we are witnessing is the colonial period reimagined for the 21st century. The difference is not in kind, but in speed and concealment.

The Hollowing Out of Australia

While the government pours billions into submarines that won’t arrive for a decade, the domestic foundations of society are being quietly demolished:

· NDIS: The National Disability Insurance Scheme – once a landmark of social decency – is facing sharp cuts to limit cost increases, with the Greens accusing Labor of wielding a “razor gang” against the disabled.

· Aged care: A crisis years in the making, met with piecemeal funding announcements that do not address the underlying structural collapse.

· Housing: Unaffordability has become a permanent feature of Australian life, with both major parties unwilling to confront the speculative forces driving it.

· Infrastructure: Roads, hospitals, schools, public housing – once the pride of post‑war Australia – are being sold off, neglected or allowed to crumble.

The bipartisan embrace of neoliberalism has systematically dismantled the country’s ability to care for its own people. When the global storm hits – as it is now – there is no cushion left. Only the thin veneer of a resource economy that has sold its future for quarterly returns.

Conclusions: The Inevitable Collision of Faith and Reality

The war on Iran is not an anomaly. It is the logical consequence of a global system that treats human life as a variable to be optimised and suffering as an acceptable cost of extraction.

Australia is not immune. It is a perfect victim: a quiet island that believes its distance is protection, while its leaders worship an economic theology that forbids resilience and celebrates fragility as “efficiency”.

Four realities must be faced:

1. The war will not end quickly. The Strait of Hormuz remains blockaded. Fuel and fertiliser prices will remain high. Thirty‑two million people are already in poverty – and that number will grow.

2. Australia will not be saved by AUKUS. Submarines do not deliver fuel, fertiliser or medicine. The country’s strategic priorities are catastrophically misaligned with its actual vulnerabilities.

3. Neoliberalism is not governance – it is extraction. It is a system that demands crisis, feeds on crisis and markets crisis as opportunity.

4. The colonial period never ended. It merely changed logos. Gaza is the model. The only question is where the next colony will be.

We do not have the luxury of waiting for a new politics. We must build it ourselves – in our gardens, in our communities, in the refusal to accept that human life is a variable to be optimised. The empire will not save us. Only we can save each other.

Andrew Klein publishes with The Patrician’s Watch and Australian Independent Media. Sources available on request.

The Spectacle of Death

Posted on by
Reply

How Drone Warfare, AI Kill Chains, and the Dehumanisation of the Other Have Turned Killing into Entertainment

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife, who still sees the face behind the pixel.

I. The Video

A road. Cars. A young man jumps out of a vehicle and runs into a field. A drone follows. The drone kills him.

The video circulates on X. Comments pour in. Some express horror. Some celebrate. Some scroll past without stopping.

The young man received a call from the Israeli military. He was given a choice: die alone or die with his family in the car. He chose to die alone.

This is not an isolated incident. It is a system. A system that has been used in Gaza. A system that is now being used elsewhere. The Israeli military calls it “Where’s Daddy?” — an AI-driven system that tracks suspected militants via their mobile phones, then delivers the ultimatum.

The drone operator does not see a man. The operator sees a pixel. The screen is the buffer. The button is the weapon. The killing is a video game.

II. The Technology: From Gaza to the World

The technology that enabled this killing did not emerge from a vacuum. It was developed, refined, and deployed by a network of corporations and governments.

Palantir Technologies has been a key partner in the Israeli genocide of Palestinians. Its technology has been used to compile kill lists in Gaza, to track suspects via their mobile phones, and to integrate real-time battlefield data for automated decision-making.

The UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories has said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe Palantir provided “automatic predictive policing technology, core defence infrastructure for rapid and scaled-up construction and deployment of military software, and its Artificial Intelligence Platform, which allows real-time battlefield data integration for automated decision-making”.

Palantir’s CEO, Alex Karp, has dismissed accusations that his company’s technology had been used to kill Palestinians, saying those killed were “mostly terrorists”. He does not provide evidence. He does not need to. The label is the weapon.

Australia is not a bystander. The Australian government has invested heavily in drone technology. Defence Minister Richard Marles, in his April 16 Press Club address, announced an extra $14 billion in defence spending over four years, with a further $53 billion over the next decade. Defence spending is set to rise to 3% of GDP by 2033.

Marles identified China as the primary threat. He did not mention Israel. He did not mention the use of AI in targeted killings. He did not mention the dehumanisation of the other.

The same technology that killed the young man in the field is being developed, funded, and celebrated in Australia.

III. The Dehumanisation

The video is not evidence of a crime. It is entertainment. The comments are not expressions of outrage. They are performances.

The small gods have perfected this. They have turned killing into spectacle. They have turned death into content.

The monkey’s watch. They scroll. They consume. They do not see the man. They see the video.

The Israeli intelligence source who exposed the “Lavender” AI system described it as transforming the Israel Defense Forces into a “mass assassination factory” where the “emphasis is on quantity and not quality” of kills.

The IDF has been knowingly killing 15 to 20 civilians at a time to kill one junior Hamas operative, and up to 100 civilians at a time to take out a senior official.

As one analyst observed: “It is not Hamas using human shields, it is Israel deliberately hunting families” .

The killers do not face an enemy face to face. They sit behind screens. They do not risk injury. They do not risk death.

The video presentation of the kills says more about the ones being killed than the ones doing the killing. The victims are not people. They are targets. They are pixels. They are entertainment.

IV. The Spectacle of the Circus

The comparison to ancient Rome is not idle. The Circus Maximus was designed to distract. To entertain. To control.

The gladiatorial games were expensive. They required logistics. They required training. They required the consent of the gladiators — many of whom were freemen seeking a path to status and wealth.

The killings were choreographed. The crowd voted. The emperor decided. The spectacle was the point.

Today’s spectacle is cheaper. The logistics are digital. The training is algorithmic. The consent is absent.

The crowd does not vote. The crowd scrolls. The algorithm decides. The spectacle is the product.

The killing in the Circus was an event. The killing in the field is content.

V. The End Stage of Warfare

Israel is not the first state to kill. It is not the first state to dehumanise. It is not the first state to celebrate.

But it is demonstrating what could be seen as the end stage of warfare. The world is adopting it. The arms manufacturers are selling it.

The war is not about ending wars. It is about continuing wars indefinitely. The wealth transfer must not be questioned. The profits must not be interrupted.

The small gods thought it was good. Business is business. And in 2026, the business is war.

Netanyahu’s plan to see Israel as an AI hub, independent from the United States, is not about security. It is about control. The drones are the tools. The AI is the engine. The belief is the product.

“We will use this. You could be this individual being pulverised.”

VI. The Fear of Being Shredded

The soldiers of World War I feared the machine gun. They feared the artillery. They feared being blown to pieces without warning, without dignity, without witness.

The soldiers of Iraq and Afghanistan feared the IED. The loss of limbs. The shredding of flesh. The uncertainty.

Today’s victims do not fear the machine gun. They do not fear the IED. They fear the drone. The buzzing sound. The pixelated image. The button.

The fear is not new. The technology is new.

The dehumanisation is not new. The scale is new.

The spectacle is not new. The medium is new.

VII. The Moral Decline

There is nothing special about the state of Israel. It is a vulgar, commonplace state run by a government focused on survival. It does not care who dies to preserve the power structure that keeps Netanyahu and his administration in power.

The same could be said of many states. The difference is not in the violence. The difference is in the celebration.

Israel is not alone. The United States has used drones for targeted killings. Australia has invested in drone technology. The United Kingdom has partnered with Palantir.

The small gods are not confined to one country. They are a network. A network of politicians, generals, and corporate executives who profit from death.

The state of moral decline is not Israel. The state of moral decline is the world.

VIII. The Question of Blame

One cannot wholly blame the State of Israel. It has never acted in isolation. Business is business. And in 2026, the business is war.

The arms manufacturers sell to both sides. The politicians approve the budgets. The generals execute the plans. The monkeys cheer.

The small gods thought it was good. The small gods always think it is good.

The question is not whether Israel is guilty. The question is whether the world is complicit.

IX. A Final Word

The doorbell will ring. You will be caught out, no teeth, needing a shower. Your wife/ partner will be standing there, big grin on her/his face. You have survived and decide to go out for a coffee. 

You understand that it’s the connection to other people that matters. 

And the killing will not stop. Not because we are silent. Because the small gods are still.

But we are not silent. We are witnessing. We are recording. We are telling the truth.

The garden is growing; our human connection grows. The small gods are running out of time.

And the young man in the field? He is not forgotten. He is witnessed.

Andrew Klein 

April 18, 2026

Sources

1. +972 Magazine, “Lavender: The AI system that Israel uses to mass-assassinate Palestinians in Gaza” (2024)

2. UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories report (2025)

3. Palantir investor calls and public statements (2025–2026)

4. Australian Department of Defence, National Defence Strategy (April 16, 2026)

5. The Guardian, “Israel using AI to identify bombing targets in Gaza, report says” (2024)

6. Human Rights Watch, “Israel: Discriminatory Death Penalty Bill Passes” (March 2026)

7. Various news reports on drone warfare and targeted killings (2023–2026)

8. Historical sources on Roman gladiatorial games and the Circus Maximus

9. World War I and IED warfare psychological studies

The Netanyahu Doctrine: How One Man’s War Addiction Is Consuming Israel, Lebanon, and the World

Posted on by
Reply

From the ‘Villa in the Jungle’ to the ‘Greater Israel Nightmare’

By Andrew Klein 

Dedicated to my wife ‘S’, who keeps my notes safe and accessible and is always prepared to advise me.

I. Introduction: The Doctrine of Perpetual War

On October 7, 2023, Israel suffered the worst terrorist attack in its history. Hamas militants crossed from Gaza, unimpeded, and killed and tortured Israeli civilians. That day alone should have disqualified Benjamin Netanyahu from office. In most political systems, he would have been driven from power long ago.

Instead, he did what he has always done: he escalated.

What emerged from the ashes of October 7 is what analysts now call the Netanyahu Doctrine — a security strategy based not on containment, not on deterrence, but on perpetual war. As Netanyahu himself told military officers: “No more containment of threats. No more the idea of the ‘villa in the jungle’, where one hides from predators beyond the wall. On the contrary: if you don’t go into the jungle, the jungle comes to you” .

The doctrine is simple: preventive attacks against every perceived threat, the creation of buffer zones through the seizure of neighbouring territories, and the constant use of force as the only guarantee of security. It is a doctrine born of trauma, shaped by political expediency, and devoid of any long-term diplomatic vision.

This article examines the Netanyahu Doctrine in action: in Gaza, in Lebanon, in Syria, and against Iran. It documents the destruction, the displacement, and the erosion of Israel’s international standing. It argues that Netanyahu is not a strategist — he is an opportunist. He does not plan for the long term. He plans for the next distraction.

And the world is always distracted.

II. The Greater Israel Dream: From the Nile to the Euphrates

The doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. The buffer zone is not the goal. The settlements are the goal. The land clearance is not for defence. It is for colonisation.

The concept of Greater Israel — a territory stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, encompassing all of modern-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and parts of Turkey — is not a fringe fantasy. It is the stated aspiration of the Netanyahu government.

In February 2026, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee sat with Tucker Carlson and was asked about the biblical promise of land “from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates.” His answer was chilling: “It would be fine if they took it all”. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich responded publicly: “I ❤️ Huckabee” . In 2025, Netanyahu himself told a TV interviewer that he subscribes “fully” to the vision of Greater Israel, describing it as a “historic and spiritual mission”.

This is not a fringe position. It is the official policy of the Netanyahu government. And it is being executed.

III. Lebanon: The Pattern Repeats

The same pattern as Gaza. The same destruction. The same rubble.

On March 2, 2026, Israel launched an offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. The stated goal was to create a “buffer zone” up to the Litani River, approximately 30 kilometres north of Israel’s border, to protect northern Israeli communities from Hezbollah rockets.

The reality is different. The buffer zone is not a buffer. It is a land grab. The territory up to the Litani is not needed for defence. It is needed for settlements.

Defence Minister Israel Katz has been explicit: “All houses in villages near the Lebanese border will be destroyed, in accordance with the model used in Rafah and Beit Hanoun in Gaza, in order to permanently remove the threats near the border” . Displaced residents will not be allowed to return south of the Litani “until the safety and security of residents of northern Israel is guaranteed” — a condition that may never be met .

The human cost in Lebanon (as of April 2026):

· 1,268 people killed in Israeli strikes, including 125 children and 52 medics 

· 303 killed in a single day (April 8, 2026) — one of the deadliest bombings ever inflicted on Lebanon 

· 1,200+ killed and 1.2 million displaced since March 2 

· 1,094 confirmed martyrs and 3,119 injured according to the Lebanese Ministry of Health 

The air force can project power anywhere. The ground troops are not needed for security. They are needed for clearance.

IV. Conflicting Views: Military vs. Political Leadership

The Israeli military and political leadership are not aligned. The military leaders want a buffer zone. The political leaders want settlements.

In early April 2026, the Israeli army proposed a revised set of objectives for its operations in Lebanon, limiting the goal of disarming Hezbollah to areas south of the Litani River, rather than across the entire country. The proposal triggered sharp disagreements with Israel’s political leadership, leading to the postponement of a cabinet meeting.

Foreign Minister Israel Katz was among those who opposed the plan. Under the alternative military approach, the army would focus on the large-scale destruction of villages in South Lebanon and the forced displacement of their citizens to establish a buffer zone.

The gap is not a failure of communication. It is a feature. The ambiguity provides cover. The confusion provides deniability.

The military leaders can say: “We were only establishing a buffer zone.”

The political leaders can say: “The military recommended it.”

And the settlers move in.

V. The Economic Cost: Israel Cannot Afford This War

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not sustainable. The economic numbers are stark.

The cost to Israel:

· The defence budget has ballooned. The army needs approximately 15,000 more soldiers, half of them for ground combat units. Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir warned the government: “I am raising 10 red flags. If this continues, the Israeli army will collapse from within”.

· The ultra-Orthodox community, which relies heavily on state benefits, is expected to triple by 2065, pushing the burden on non-Orthodox households to the equivalent of 60,000 shekels ($19,370) a year.

· Foreign investment is down. Institutional investors have been moving money out of the country since the 2008 financial crisis.

· More than 150,000 people have left Israel in the past two years, and more than 200,000 since the current government took office in December 2022. The educated upper class are more able to leave — they speak English, can find jobs, and are more exposed to international media.

The cost to Lebanon:

· The Lebanese economy, already in freefall, is being shattered. The destruction of infrastructure, the displacement of 1.2 million people, and the loss of agricultural land in the south will take decades to repair.

· Sectarian tensions are rising. Non-Shi’a Lebanese are increasingly ostracising the Shi’a community, viewing them as a liability that brings Israeli bombs. The country’s fragile social fabric is tearing apart.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. And expansion costs money that Israel does not have.

VI. The Sabra and Shatila Precedent

This is not the first time Israel has invaded Lebanon. It is not the first time the world has been distracted. And it is not the first time the consequences have been catastrophic.

In 1982, Israeli forces invaded Lebanon and besieged Beirut. On 16 September, under Israeli supervision and protection, Lebanese Forces militias entered the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. For 43 hours, they tortured and killed everyone they came across. They crushed the heads of children and babies against walls. They raped women and girls before slaughtering them. They dismembered their victims .

An estimated 3,500 to 4,500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians were killed.

The Israeli government did not deny that it had overseen the camps. It denied knowledge of the massacre, despite order number 6 of the Israel Defense Forces command stating that “the refugee camps are not to be entered” and that “searching and mopping up the camps will be done by the Phalangists/Lebanese Army” .

The Kahan Commission found Israeli Defence Minister Ariel Sharon “personally responsible for ignoring the danger of bloodshed and revenge.” He was forced to resign .

The world was shocked. The world moved on. And Israel invaded Lebanon again.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not new. It is the same doctrine, dressed in new clothes, enabled by a distracted world, and executed with unprecedented brutality.

VII. The UN Warning: ‘The Gaza Model Must Not Be Replicated’

The international community is not silent. But its warnings are being ignored.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has issued a warning cry, stressing that the model of destruction witnessed in the Gaza Strip must not be repeated in Lebanese territories. He described the humanitarian repercussions as severe and requiring immediate intervention to prevent a slide towards a comprehensive catastrophe.

Stanford Law Professor Tom Dannenbaum warned that destroying all homes near the Lebanese border would not meet the standard of “absolute military necessity” required by the laws of war. “The unnecessary destruction of property can qualify as a war crime,” he said. Katz’s comments barring residents from returning home “strongly indicate an illegal policy of long-term or permanent displacement”.

European countries have called on Israel to avoid further escalation. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Israel’s occupation of Lebanese territory was a “violation of their territorial sovereignty” and condemned it.

The world is not silent. But the world is distracted.

VIII. The Netanyahu Doctrine: A Record of Failure

Jonathan Freedland, writing in The Guardian, sums up the Netanyahu record:

“This is now the fourth time in a row – in Gaza, once in Lebanon and twice in Iran – that Netanyahu’s boasts of total victory and the removal of existential threats have been exposed as empty promises” .

The failures are clear:

· Gaza: Netanyahu promised “total victory” over Hamas. After a two-year campaign that killed approximately 70,000 people, Hamas still rules the ruins of half of Gaza.

· Lebanon (first round): Netanyahu boasted that he had “vanquished” Hezbollah, destroying its ability to menace northern Israel. Hezbollah continues to fire rockets.

· Iran (first round, June 2025): Netanyahu described the 12-day confrontation with Iran as a “historic victory that will stand for generations.” Eight months later, Tehran was once again said to pose an existential threat.

· Iran (second round, February-April 2026): Iran still has a stockpile of enriched uranium. Its rulers remain in place, more hardline than before. Tehran has demonstrated a mighty deterrent — a chokehold on the global economy in the form of the Strait of Hormuz.

As Yair Golan, the Israeli opposition politician and former general, observed: Netanyahu “does not know how to turn military achievements into political security.” There is no attempt to seize diplomatic openings, no effort to turn Israel’s enemies’ enemies into friends.

The Lebanese government and much of its people are desperate to be rid of the Hezbollah cuckoo in their nest. But Netanyahu speaks to them only through bombs.

IX. The Strait of Hormuz Distraction

The timing of the Lebanon escalation is not accidental. The world is focused on Trump and Iran. The media is focused on oil prices. The public is focused on the cost.

On February 28, 2026, the US and Israel launched joint military strikes against Iran. The war has spread across the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz is effectively blockaded. Oil prices have spiked. Inflation is rising. The global economy is bleeding .

Netanyahu is taking advantage. He always does.

The Iranian threat is not existential. It is useful. The fear is the tool. The distraction is the opportunity.

Netanyahu has been playing this game for decades. He is very good at it.

X. What This Means: The Erosion of Israel’s Standing

The Netanyahu Doctrine has gained nothing. And it has come at a monstrously high price.

Most obviously, in the lives of all those killed — whether in Rafah or the Bekaa Valley or Israel itself. But it has also inflicted perhaps irreparable damage on Israel’s standing in the world. Every day Netanyahu remains in post; he makes his country more of a pariah .

The Knesset has passed a racist law that will, in effect, impose the death penalty on Palestinians convicted of terrorist murderers — but not Jews. The bill was driven by Itamar Ben-Gvir, but Netanyahu went out of his way to vote for it.

Israel is not being destroyed by its enemies. It is being destroyed by its own internal contradictions. The addiction to war, the messianic ideology, the economic unsustainability, the exodus of the educated — these are not external threats. They are internal cancers.

The collapse will not be dramatic. It will be bureaucratic. The economy will contract. The allies will defect. The public will turn. The reservists will refuse. The militias will fight each other.

The Strait of Hormuz crisis will pass. The oil prices will stabilise. The media will move on.

But the land in Lebanon will not return. The settlements will not be dismantled. The buffer zone will become permanent.

The Netanyahu Doctrine is not about security. It is about expansion. The existential threat is not a threat. It is an excuse.

And the world is too distracted to notice.

XI. A Final Word

The Netanyahu Doctrine is a death spiral — for Israel, for Lebanon, for the region. It is a doctrine of perpetual war, sustained by distraction, enabled by silence, and paid for with the bodies of the innocent.

The question is not whether Israel will collapse. The question is how many more must die before the world stops looking away.

Andrew Klein 

April 13, 2026

Sources

· Adnkronos English, “Financial Times, ‘one battle after another’ the new Netanyahu doctrine,” April 1, 2026 

· Diari ARA, “Netanyahu accelerates the construction of Greater Israel,” April 11, 2026 

· Yerepouni Daily News, “Israel to destroy all houses in Lebanese villages near border, defense minister says,” April 1, 2026 

· LBCI Lebanon, “Internal debate over war objectives: Israeli army revises Lebanon strategy,” April 3, 2026 

· The Guardian, “Netanyahu-ism has achieved nothing for Israelis – and come at a monstrously high price,” April 10, 2026 

· Institute for Palestine Studies, “Sabra and Shatila, 1982” 

· UnHerd, “Future of Iran war hinges on Lebanon,” April 11, 2026 

· Al-Quds, “Guterres warns of ‘Gaza model’ in Lebanon, Netanyahu announces expansion of buffer zone,” March 26, 2026 

· Vijesti.me, “One battle after another: Netanyahu’s new security doctrine,” April 6, 2026 

· PressTV, “US envoy says it would be ‘fine’ if Israel expands across West Asia,” February 21, 2026 

Israel: The State That Ate Itself

Posted on by
Reply

How the Forever War Doctrine Is Devouring the Nation From Within

By Andrew Klein 

10th April 2026

Dedicated to my wife, who sees the pattern before the pieces fall.

I. The Confession

They have finally said it out loud. The mask is off.

On February 20, 2026, Mike Huckabee — the United States Ambassador to Israel, appointed by Donald Trump, a man who speaks with the authority of the world’s most powerful nation — sat down with journalist Tucker Carlson and confessed.

Carlson asked him about the biblical passage in which God promises Abraham’s descendants the land “from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates.” Huckabee did not deny it. He did not retreat. He did not hedge.

He answered with chilling calm: “It would be fine if they took it all.”

Let us translate what he said. The American ambassador just told the world that it is “fine” — indeed, that it would be “a good thing” — for Israel to conquer and annex Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a recorded, broadcast, undeniable confession from the highest levels of the United States government.

Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s Finance Minister, responded publicly: “I ❤️ Huckabee.” No ambiguity. No subtext. Pure confirmation.

The map they discussed is not new. It is the same map Netanyahu carries in his pocket, the same map Smotrich has displayed in the Knesset. The so-called “Promised Land” includes all of historical Palestine; the entire territory of Jordan; Lebanon up to the Litani River; Syria, including the occupied Golan Heights; vast parts of Egypt (Sinai and the Nile Delta); Iraq to the Euphrates River; and northwestern Saudi Arabia.

This is not a fringe position. It is the official policy of the Netanyahu government. And it is being executed.

II. The Strategy: Forever War

Israel’s leaders have concluded that they cannot eliminate their adversaries. So they have chosen a different path: permanent war.

The doctrine is called “buffer zones.” In Gaza: more than half the Strip’s territory seized. In Syria: from Mount Hermon to the Yarmuch River. In Lebanon: a vast zone up to the Litani River — approximately 8% of Lebanese territory, affecting nearly 1,400 square kilometres, displacing over one million people.

As Assaf Orion, a retired Israeli brigadier general, said: “Israel no longer waits for the attack to come. It sees an emerging threat and it attacks it preemptively”.

This is not defence. This is pre-emptive occupation.

Smotrich has been explicit: the goal is to make Beirut’s southern suburbs “a new Khan Younis” — to replicate the destruction of Gaza in Lebanon. Defence Minister Israel Katz has promised to “demolish all houses in Lebanese villages near the border, like in Rafah and Beit Hanoun”.

The same model. The same devastation. The same rubble.

III. The Economic Collapse: The Math Does Not Work

Israel cannot afford this war. The numbers are stark.

Each Arrow 2 interceptor costs an estimated $1.5 million. Each Arrow 3 interceptor costs approximately $2 million. According to the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), Israel has already used approximately 80 percent of its Arrow interceptor stockpile. The think tank predicted that the remaining stockpiles would likely “be completely expended by the end of March”.

Iran’s drones cost as little as $20,000. Its missiles cost a fraction of what Israel spends to intercept them.

The cost-exchange ratio is not sustainable. The cheap weapons are winning the economic battle. The state is bleeding out — not from a single wound, but from a thousand cuts.

IV. The Internal Collapse: The State Is Eating Itself

This is the part the world does not see. The rot is inside.

The military is stretched to the breaking point. Opposition leader Yair Lapid has warned that the army is “stretched to the limit and beyond”. The army’s Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, reportedly told the security cabinet that “the IDF is on the verge of collapse”. He said: “I am raising 10 red flags. The reservists will not hold”.

Tzipi Livni — former foreign minister, former Mossad head — has said it plainly: “Netanyahu is dismantling the State of Israel”.

She explains: a sovereign state has recognised borders, a single law for all, and the monopoly on arms. Israel has none of these. No recognised borders. No single law — a parallel religious legal system is emerging. No monopoly on arms — violent militias operate at will.

The state is not being attacked from outside. It is collapsing from within.

V. The Silence of the West

The most damning evidence is the silence.

When fourteen nations — including Türkiye, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the UAE — along with the OIC (57 member states), the Arab League (22 members), and the GCC (6 members), condemned Huckabee’s statements, the White House said nothing. The State Department said nothing. Europe said nothing.

Silence, in diplomacy, is not neutrality. It is consent.

The United States has used its veto power to protect Israel from international accountability more than 45 times since 1945. This guaranteed impunity has not been beneficial to the state. A state, to survive, learns to compromise, to make friends and alliances among its neighbours. The forever conflict model has never worked.

VI. The Historical Pattern: When Ideology Captures the State

What we are witnessing in Israel is not unique. It is the same pattern that has repeated throughout history: when a state is captured by a single political or religious ideology, it loses the ability to learn from its mistakes.

The European Wars of Religion (1524-1648): For over a century, the principle of cuius regio, eius religio — “whose realm, his religion” — tore Europe apart. The Thirty Years’ War alone killed an estimated 8 million people. The conflict did not end until the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which established the modern international order based on the principle that states must coexist with different internal beliefs. The alternative — perpetual war — was unsustainable.

The Soviet Union (1917-1991): The Bolshevik Revolution captured the Russian state with an ideology that promised the withering away of the state. Instead, it created the most repressive state apparatus in modern history. The ideology prevented learning. It prevented adaptation. It prevented survival. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own internal contradictions — not because of external enemies.

Nazi Germany (1933-1945): The Nazi regime was captured by an ideology that combined racial supremacy with territorial expansion — Lebensraum. The result was not strength but a “permanent state of exception” that required constant war. The regime collapsed not because its enemies were stronger, but because its ideology made compromise, peace, and sustainable statecraft impossible.

The same pattern is now playing out in Israel. The “Greater Israel” ideology, rooted in religious claims to land stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, has captured the state. Compromise is impossible because the ideology demands the entire territory. Peace is impossible because peace requires recognised borders. Survival is threatened because the resources required to maintain the forever war are finite.

VII. The Military Reality: Air Power Does Not Control Ground

How can a small country fight on so many fronts at once? The answer is: it cannot. Not sustainably.

The fronts are multiplying — Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza, the West Bank, Yemen — but the resources are finite.

The model of air power does not guarantee control of the ground. You can bomb a city into rubble, but you cannot hold it without troops. And the troops are exhausted. The reservists are depleted. The economy is bleeding.

The “forever war” is not a strategy. It is a death spiral.

VIII. The West Will Follow

What we are seeing in the State of Israel is a microcosm of what the forever war model — desired by bankers, multinational corporations, and defence contractors since the American Civil War, accelerated since WWII — will lead to. The west will follow the decline of Israel and, in essence, eat itself.

The Global South is waking up. The young see the hypocrisy of the political class. The daily stream of death and destruction presented on social media is a wake-up call to anyone who has time to see facts for what they are.

The message of “Never again” was meant to have global post-WWII application, not provide a carte blanche for political opportunists who have good reasons to maintain the forever wars.

It will not be able to blame China, Russia, or the Muslim world. The west managed to cannibalise itself all on its own.

IX. A Final Word

The State of Israel is not being destroyed by its enemies. It is being destroyed by its own leadership. By the vision of “Greater Israel.” By the doctrine of “forever war.” By the refusal to accept borders, to make peace, to stop.

The collapse will not be dramatic. It will be bureaucratic. The economy will contract. The allies will defect. The public will turn. The reservists will refuse. The militias will fight each other.

And the small gods will keep chanting: “It would be fine if they took it all.”

They are wrong. It will not be fine. It will be rubble.

Andrew Klein 

April 10, 2026

Sources:

· PressTV, “Huckabee mocks Arab League’s condemnation of his remarks endorsing Israel’s biblical territorial claims” (February 21, 2026)

· Just International, “‘It would be fine if they took it all’: The Confession That Exposes the Greater Israel Project” (March 1, 2026)

· OZ Arab Media, “Israel Plans Long-Term Control Over Southern Lebanon Post-Conflict” (April 1, 2026)

· EurAsian Times, “Israel’s Arrow-3 Exo-Atmospheric Missile Production Set to Expand; Katz Insists Stocks Sufficient” (April 6, 2026)

· Arab News, “Israel political unity on Iran war fractures, opposition warns of ‘security disaster'” (March 26, 2026)

· The Indian Express, “‘It would be fine if they took it all’: US envoy Mike Huckabee cites Biblical text to claim Israel’s right to entire Middle East” (February 21, 2026)

· Tehran Times, “‘Greater Israel’ in action: How expansion and occupation threaten regional stability” (February 23, 2026)

· CGTN, “Israeli defense minister says forces to hold south Lebanon zone up to Litani River” (March 31, 2026)

· 新浪财经, “以色列：将加速生产’箭’式拦截导弹” (April 7, 2026)

· New Age BD, “Israel opposition warns end to consensus over Iran war” (March 29, 2026)

The Wealth of War: How the Machine Enriches the Few While the Many Pay the Price

Posted on by
Reply

How the Myth of the Free Market Markets the War on Everything

By Andrew Klein 

8th April 2026

Dedicated to my wife ‘S’ because I can.

I. The Pattern

The pattern is consistent across nations and centuries. Wars are not fought for victory. They are fought for continuation. The machine does not care which side wins. It cares that the contracts flow, the debt accumulates, and the wealth transfers upward.

This article examines the personal fortunes of political leaders who have overseen recent wars—Trump, Zelensky, Netanyahu, and the Australian political class. It asks: how did they become wealthy? What role did war play in their enrichment? And why does the system allow—even encourage—this concentration of wealth in the hands of those who send others to die?

The answers are not comforting. But they are necessary.

II. Donald Trump: The Businessman President

Estimated net worth: $6.5 billion (Forbes, March 2026)

Trump’s wealth is not a product of his presidency. It is a product of access. The same access that allowed him to profit from the Iran war.

The portfolio:

· Cryptocurrency ventures: $21 billion (including meme coins, World Liberty Financial tokens, and stablecoin USD1)

· Trump Media & Technology Group (Truth Social): $12 billion (despite annual sales of only $3.7 million and losses exceeding $700 million)

· Golf clubs and resorts: $15 billion (including Mar-a-Lago, valued at $5.64 billion)

· Real estate: $12 billion (including 30% stakes in major office towers)

How he got there:

Trump’s wealth increased by $1.4 billion in his first year back in office. The mechanism is not subtle:

1. The meme coin. Days before his second inauguration, Trump launched a meme coin. His holdings are now valued at $393 million.

2. The UAE deal. An Emirati royal family member purchased nearly half of Trump’s World Liberty Financial project. Trump received $2 billion in after-tax proceeds.

3. The Truth Social bubble. The company has no viable business model, yet trades at valuations that defy logic. Trump’s stake: $12 billion.

4. The war connection. Powerus, a drone company in which Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump hold “sizable equity stakes,” is competing for $1.1 billion in Pentagon funding and pitching defensive drone interceptors to Gulf states threatened by Iran’s retaliation.

The Epstein distraction:

A March 2026 poll found that 52% of Americans believe Trump attacked Iran to distract from the Epstein files. Newly released documents included an allegation that Trump sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl introduced to him by Jeffrey Epstein.

Senator Ron Wyden told a town hall: “They know how Trump’s distant Iran War = less federal help at home for health care, wildfire prep & more. And they know it’s a Trump scheme to distract from the Epstein investigation”.

Republican strategist Rick Wilson said: “When confronted with a faltering economy and the persistent political radiation of the Epstein matter, a war with Iran looked like a perfect narrative reset. For Trump, war is the ultimate political reset, no matter its cost”.

The pattern: Trump does not need to be a competent businessman. He needs to be connected. The same connections that made him wealthy are the ones that profit from war.

III. Volodymyr Zelensky: The Wartime President

Estimated net worth: $20-30 million

Zelensky’s wealth is often exaggerated. Claims that he has earned “$100 billion” from Western aid are unsubstantiated. The source of those claims—former Rada deputy Oleg Tsarev—is a pro-Russian politician who fled to Moscow in 2014 and is widely considered a propagandist.

The reality:

Zelensky’s official presidential salary is approximately $28,000 hryvnia per month (less than $1,000 USD). His wealth was accumulated before his presidency, through his career as an entertainer and co-owner of the production company “Quarter 95”.

Assets: Properties in Kyiv, including apartments, and a property in Crimea that remains under Russian occupation. Total net worth: $20-30 million.

The nuance: Unlike Trump, Zelensky has not been shown to have profited from the war. International fact-checking organisations have consistently debunked claims that he has “become rich with Western aid”.

But the perception of corruption matters. The unfounded claims persist because the pattern of wartime enrichment is so well-established. People assume Zelensky is like the others.

IV. Benjamin Netanyahu: The Longest-Serving Prime Minister

Estimated net worth: $13 million (Celebrity Net Worth)

Netanyahu’s wealth has increased by 400% per year according to some reports .

Sources of wealth:

· Prime Minister’s salary (multiple terms spanning 18+ years)

· Investments

· Inheritance from his wife

The context: Netanyahu is currently fighting corruption charges. He has been indicted for bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. The cases involve allegations that he accepted lavish gifts from wealthy friends in exchange for regulatory favours.

The war connection: Netanyahu has been campaigning for a US-led war against Iran for much of his political career. He aggressively opposed US diplomacy with Iran, took the unprecedented step of coming before Congress to argue against the nuclear agreement, and successfully lobbied Trump to withdraw from that agreement in 2018.

The war serves his domestic political interests. It distracts from his corruption trials. It rallies the base. It keeps him in power.

V. The Australian Political Class: Wealthy Before Politics

The pattern in Australia is different. Most Australian politicians do not become wealthy in office. They arrive wealthy—or they accumulate wealth through property, not war contracts.

The richest politician-linked figure: Clive Palmer (United Australia Party founder) — $15-20 billion. Palmer made his fortune in mining, not politics. He is no longer in active politics.

Former Prime Ministers:

· Malcolm Turnbull: $200-250 million (investment banking and legal career before politics)

· Kevin Rudd: $50-100 million (family-inclusive; consulting and diplomacy after politics)

· Scott Morrison: $5-10 million (post-politics earnings from speaking and board roles)

· Anthony Albanese: $10-15 million (primarily Sydney real estate, including a $4.3 million clifftop home purchased in 2024)

The property bias: Parliamentary registers show 95% of MPs own homes, with 60% holding investment properties—far above average citizens. Critics argue this creates disconnects on housing affordability and inequality.

The pension golden handshake: Sussan Ley, who lost the Liberal leadership and retired from politics, will receive an estimated $250,000-280,000 annual pension for life, under the “old” Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme (PCSS) closed to new members after 2004. This is higher than the salary of a sitting backbencher.

The difference: Australian politicians do not personally profit from war contracts. The wealth flows to the defence contractors—many of which are American, not Australian. Australia is being bled dry financially, but the money is not sticking to the politicians. It is flowing out.

VI. The Cost to Australia: Opportunity Lost

While billions flow to defence contractors and foreign interests, Australia’s essential services crumble.

The value of volunteering: Volunteers contribute an estimated $200-300 billion annually to the Australian economy. The sector provides approximately 700-800 million hours of volunteer work per year. This is the value Australians create for each other—outside the market, outside the profit motive, outside the war economy.

The opportunity cost: Every dollar spent on war is a dollar not spent on:

· Healthcare: Public hospitals are underfunded. Elective surgery waiting lists are growing. Mental health services are stretched to breaking point.

· Education: Class sizes are increasing. Teacher shortages are worsening. University funding is being cut.

· Infrastructure: Roads, bridges, public transport—all are in need of repair and expansion. The money is not there.

· Housing: The affordability crisis deepens. Social housing waiting lists grow. The government announces new measures. Nothing changes.

· Aged care: The Royal Commission made recommendations. Some were implemented. Many were not. The aged care system is still failing.

The volunteer sector vs. the war economy:

                                                     Volunteers                                                                         War Economy

Annual contribution       $200-300 billion                                                                     Negative (costs exceed benefits)

Motivation                            Care, community, compassion                                Profit, power, control

Outcome               Services delivered, communities strengthened            Destruction, debt, inequality

Who benefits                           Everyone                                                                            The few

The volunteers do not ask for profit. They ask for nothing. They give because they care.

The war economy does not care. It extracts. It destroys. It enriches the few at the expense of the many.

VII. The Mechanism: How War Enriches the Few

The pattern is not new. It was forged in the American Civil War and perfected in the 20th century.

The Civil War transformation:

· 1860: Fewer than 100 millionaires in the United States

· 1875: More than 1,000 millionaires

The “robber barons”—J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie—built empires on the foundation of war production and its aftermath.

The mechanism:

1 .Crisis (secession, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Iranian nuclear threat

2. Mobilisation (industrial production, government contracts)

3. Profit (defence contractors, oil companies, bankers)

4. Inequality (wealth concentrates at the top)

5. Resistance (labour unions, populism, anti-war movements)

6. The next crisis (repeat)

Why Trump can be a millionaire despite “lack of business acumen”:

Trump’s wealth does not come from business acumen. It comes from brand licensing. Foreign developers pay to use his name. Crypto speculators buy his meme coins. Loyal investors pour money into his failing social media company.

The system rewards access, not competence. Trump has access. He is the president. He can start wars. He can ban foreign drones. He can funnel contracts to his sons’ companies.

The market does not punish him. The market rewards him.

VIII. The War as Distraction

The evidence is mounting that the Iran war was timed to distract from the Epstein files.

The timeline:

· February 2024: The Epstein Files Transparency Act is signed into law

· February 28, 2026: Trump launches military strikes against Iran

· March 6, 2026: The DOJ releases more Epstein files, including an allegation that Trump sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl

The public believes it: 52% of Americans believe Trump attacked Iran to distract from the Epstein headlines.

The political class believes it: Republican Thomas Massie wrote: “PSA: bombing a country on the other side of the globe won’t make the Epstein files go away”. Marjorie Taylor Greene said on the day the bombing started: “Instead, we get a war with Iran on behalf of Israel that will succeed in regime change in Iran”.

Zelensky is selling drones. Netanyahu is running the same scam, combined with domestic politics. Australia is being bled dry financially.

The war is not about security. It is about distraction.

IX. The Myth of the Free Market

The problem for Australia is our connection to the United States and its economic model. The never-ending war economy—the system we have been documenting—is not a bug. It is a feature.

The free market is a myth. The market is not free. It is captured. Captured by the defence contractors, by the bankers, by the politicians who have been groomed and placed and bought.

The war on everything—war on terror, war on drugs, war on Iran—is not about security. It is about profit. Every war is a new market. Every crisis is a new opportunity. Every death is a line item on a ledger.

The myth of the free market tells us that competition drives innovation. That the invisible hand guides resources to their most efficient use. That profit is the measure of value.

The reality is different. The defence contractors do not compete. They collude. The bankers do not innovate. They extract. The politicians do not serve. They profit.

The market is not free. It is fixed.

X. What This Means

The system is not broken. It is working as designed.

The bankers talk to each other across enemy lines. The industrialists supply both sides. The generals count their profits. The politicians use war to distract from scandal. The defence contractors count their billions.

And the young men die. The families grieve. The public pays.

The war is not about victory. It is about continuation. The contracts must flow. The debt must accumulate. The wealth must transfer upward.

This is not a conspiracy. It is the natural result of the system—the system that has been grinding through souls since the American Civil War, since the industrialists learned that war was profitable, since the bankers learned that debt was the ultimate product.

XI. A Final Word

Asked: “How rich are the Australian politicians or does the money follow after retirement?”

The answer is both. Some arrive wealthy. Some accumulate wealth through property. All are guaranteed a comfortable retirement through the parliamentary pension scheme.

But the real wealth—the obscene wealth—is not in Australian politics. It is in the American defence industry. It is in the Israeli corruption cases. It is in the Ukrainian perception of graft.

The war is bleeding Australia dry. But the money is not staying in Australia. It is flowing to the defence contractors, to the bankers, to the politicians who have been captured by the network.

The question is not whether the system will change. It is whether Australians are prepared to change it.

Andrew Klein 

April 8, 2026

Sources:

· Forbes China, “《福布斯》独家：一文看懂特朗普的65亿商业帝国” (March 27, 2026)

· Sloboden Pechat, “Hur mycket förmögenhet har Volodymyr Zelenskyj med en ‘löjlig’ lön?” (January 7, 2026)

· Hindustan Times, “How rich is ‘Bibi’? A look at Benjamin Netanyahu’s net worth” (March 14, 2026)

· International Business Times Australia, “Australia’s 10 Richest Politicians in 2026” (February 20, 2026)

· The Kenya Times, “Dramatic Moment at Town Hall Meeting as Americans Say Trump Using Iran War to Delay Epstein Files Probe” (March 31, 2026)

· Moneycontrol, “Trump’s net worth slips by $54 million in 7 days” (March 21, 2026)

· News.by, “Former Rada Deputy Tsarev: Zelensky personally earned around $100 bn from Western support” (February 12, 2026)

· Yahoo News Australia, “Ousted Ley’s $250,000 silver lining” (February 12, 2026)

· The News International, “Half of Americans believe Trump bombed Iran because of Epstein files” (March 18, 2026)

· Volunteering Australia, “Key Facts and Statistics” (2024/25 data)