Diplomacy Shattered, War Inevitable: Tehran’s Warning Echoes Global Scheme
When Professor Mohammad Marandi warned that a U.S.–Iran war is “all but certain” in the wake of the strikes on Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, he wasn't merely reacting—he was laying bare a geopolitical trigger that was never about nukes but about seismic power realignment. According to Marandi’s interview, the sentiment in the Global South has shifted—irreversibly pro-Iranian—and he argues Iran won’t stand alone in what he describes as a likely U.S.–Israel campaign. In this narrative, Washington has already played its hand.
War as the Catalyst: The Realignment That Was Always Meant to Happen
When Professor Mohammad Marandi declared that a U.S.–Iran war was “all but certain,” he wasn’t just forecasting conflict—he was revealing a deeper motive behind the recent airstrikes: a planned geopolitical realignment that has little to do with nuclear weapons and everything to do with shifting global power. The bombing of Iran’s key nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan—wasn’t an act of preemptive defense; it was a trigger, deliberately pulled to force the collapse of an already fragile diplomatic structure, thereby accelerating the fragmentation of the current world order.
The rhetoric around nonproliferation and international security masks a more strategic goal: to bait Iran into open retaliation, create a justifiable escalation, and solidify new blocs of influence. Iran, increasingly aligned with Russia, China, and discontented powers in the Global South, has become a symbol of resistance against Western-controlled financial, military, and diplomatic systems. Marandi’s assessment that much of the Global South is now “irreversibly pro-Iranian” isn’t just an observation—it’s a warning. These nations see in Iran not a rogue actor, but a rallying point for multipolar sovereignty.
The United States, having already lost leverage in key regions and facing domestic discontent, is arguably using conflict to reassert control—not just abroad, but at home. War provides justification for economic restructuring, digital oversight, and emergency governance. With the Global North's influence waning, the strike on Iran appears less about eliminating a threat and more about freezing time—locking in the current balance of power before it tips further.
Meanwhile, Iran’s alliances—formal and informal—are not built on ideology alone but on shared opposition to Western hegemony. The countries backing Tehran may not march under a single flag, but their interests are converging. By attacking Iran now, the West may have ignited a long-anticipated shift—forcing neutral actors to choose sides and triggering a chain reaction that reshapes the 21st century battlefield, economically and ideologically.
In this context, Marandi’s warning isn’t merely about bombs—it’s about the end of one global era and the violent birth of another.
Here’s how some analysts frame it:
1. Calculated Provocation for Global Realignment
This strike was less about halting uranium enrichment and more about forcing Iran’s hand—provoking it to retaliate and rally Global South nations (like Russia, China, and even Gulf monarchies) into deeper resistance. The real target isn’t Iran’s bombs—it’s U.S. dominance in a fracturing multipolar world youtube.com+6trendsinthenews.substack.com+6whatreallyhappened.com+6.
2. Strait of Hormuz as a Geopolitical Tripwire
Marandi and others stress how Iran’s recent GPS disruptions and threats to close the Hormuz Strait would cripple oil exports and tank Western economies—turning economic sabotage into strategic warfare .
3. Militarization of Diplomacy
Iran’s declaration that “all options are on the table” signals a shift from talk to action. Marandi sees this as a test: if U.S. and Gulf bases are hit, the backlash will be seismic—potentially igniting proxy wars and pulling in Iran’s allies across Eurasia trendsinthenews.substack.com+1youtube.com+1.
4. Pretext for Domestic Crackdowns
From the U.S. side, the strike provides a justification to bypass Congress and mobilize public opinion behind a narrative of existential threat. Meanwhile, Iran uses it to tighten internal control, rally nationalistic fervor, and cast dissenters as “agents of imperialism.”
5. A Power Reset in the Making
This isn’t just escalation—it’s a signal that the rules are changing. Alliances are shifting: Gulf states hedging, China and Russia deepening military ties with Tehran, and global fault lines hardening into a new Cold War order.
The Core Claim
This wasn’t a strike to disable bombmaking—it was a strategic cascade, designed to force Iran into a fight, fracture Western unity, and accelerate the transition to a multipolar, militarized global order. Marandi’s warning that “war is all but certain” isn’t prophecy—it’s a reading of the geopolitical playbook that began unfolding years ago.
Key global reactions & analysis
The Brutal Truth June 2025
The Brutal Truth Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976: Allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.
Comments
Post a Comment