Has Iran Won? Why Did We Not See It Happen?

Has Iran Won? Why Did We Not See It Happen?

                                                                                   Saeed Naqvi

Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and his comrades, martyred or killed, must be laughing their heads off at the ponderous pundits puzzling over the outcome of US and Israel war with Iran. “Its over” they must have whispered to each other.

Their audacious, grizzly by some definitions, attack on October 7, 2023, killing 1,200 Israelis excluding the 251 taken hostage, was not the clarion call for war or victory. It was a trap to invite Israeli retaliation on a scale which would make them pariahs globally.

Ironically, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s support base, indeed Israelis, were the last to get a whiff of this revulsion wafting in the air. Netanyahu fell back on the chant “they are amaleks (sub humans)”. It is a Judaic duty to destroy their animal’s homes, women and children “who will otherwise grow up to be our permanent enemies.”

In the US Bible belt where the Judeo-Christian belief in Armageddon or the “Second Coming” has not yet amalgamated with this maniacal hatred, it was possible for Trump, Jarred Kushner and neo-cons like Marco Rubio to play footsie with the triumvirate – US Israeli lobby (in conjunction with 52 Israeli billionaires, Netanyahu and the Trump entourage.

The war with Iran has strained relations between the three entities in this triangle to a point of rupture. Netanyahu’s pressure on the Israeli lobby and the lobby’s on Trump may have weakened. This is a hugely important development.

What is cracking up is Trump’s Make-America-Great-Again (MAGA) base. Let me give you examples of rupture, earthshaking in the midst of a war which is reshaping world order like never before.

On September 10, 2025 Charlie Kirk, 31, founder of Turning Point America, an activist close to Trump was shot dead by a sniper while given a talk at the Utah, valley university. Kirk was a prominent figure and his murder would have made news in any case. But a major controversy got attached to the murder because he had become a vocal opponent of “America fighting Israel’s war with Iran.” Suddenly the ranks of Kirk’s supporters swelled. The needle of suspicion began to point at Israeli intelligence.

One Tyler Robinson, 22, was arrested because he had been heard ranting that “Kirk was spreading too much hatred.”

An hourlong Tucker Carlson interview with Joe Kent has poured more oil on the flaming cauldron. Kent, Chief of the National Counter terrorism, a slot at the highest level of US intelligence, resigned from his job for reasons which impinge on Trump’s Iran policy. Kent had seen no confidential reports which would tally with Washington’s case for supporting the war on Iran. No case for regime change in Tehran and there was no shred of evidence that Iran was embarked on a nuclear weapons programme.

Worse, Kent as an intelligence man, was blocked by authorities from pursuing important leads in the Kirk murder case. These leads implicated a “foreign” hand.

The break up in the MAGA base had manifested itself most dramatically in December, 2025 in Phoenix Arizona. The mainstream US media, hand in glove with Israel lobby, did not play up the growing isolation of Trump from his own base because of his insistence on dancing to Netanyahu’s tune 24/7.

The headline in The Guardian, London summed up the story.

“Gripes and Infighting on Display as MAGA stars gather at the Turning Point USA conference” in Phoenix, Arizona. Turning point USA was a successful movement with 83 chapters nationwide, started by Charlie Kirk. The deck line to the Guardian article furnishes revealing details:

“figures at event include Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon and Trump Jr.: cohesion of political right shows signs of stress.” The headline does not mention far right but pro Israel activist and journalist, Ben Shapiro who in fact started the fire works by attacking Tucker Carlson. He poured vitriol on Carlson for having interviewed anti Israel icon Nick Fuentes. That Fuentes is a top rank racist does not incur Shapiro’s wrath. In fact on that count the two are soul mates.

Fuentes has a reputation for being a supremacist ofcourse but is additionally a notorious anti semite and a holocaust denier. That Carlson promoting him on his podcast was reason enough for Ben Shapiro to unfurl his pro Israel leanings, Genocide in Gaza notwithstanding.

In fact he persistently leans towards Israel in his publication The Wire. Shapiro was biting in his criticism. “Building up Fuentes is moral imbecility on Carlson’s part.” Shapiro boomed. This rupture is for real and places Trump’s friendship with Netanyahu delicately in the balance.

The tone and tenor of the Phoenix event shows how the Genocide of Gaza has damaged the conservative right’s ability to be seen with Israel. Let us now revert to the war.

In a sense, keeping Iran under pressure and isolated has cost the US-Israel dear. Armed to the teeth with the latest military technology and an impressive array of lethal weapons, the combine has forced Iran to be inventive and thrifty.

The homespun nature of Iranian drones and missiles has caught the combine flat footed. Now comparisons are being made. US action in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen and Lebanon are all very telegenic: plumes of smoke, mountains of debris, the homeless on the march.

The Military Industrial Complex has in its inventory enough to destroy cities. But that was achieved even in Dresden 80 years ago. How does America break its duck and learn to win wars or better still refrain from them if only to recover prestige?

No war resembles a boxing ring where pugilists knock each other out. The remarkable thing about this war is that folks are waiting for victory which has happened but outside their definition of winning and losing.

Yahya Sinwar and his gang must be smiling at the outcome.

Who had ever imagined the war will lay the foundation for Israel to be a country on its own, not America’s unsinkable aircraft carrier as Ronald Reagan’s Defence Secretary Caspar Weinberger had famously said. And then, enters Palestine, centre stage as never before.

#          #          #          #

MAGA Ideologue Calls Trump “Moses Leading His People To Promised Land”

MAGA Ideologue Calls Trump “Moses Leading His People To Promised Land”

                                                                                          Saeed Naqvi

There are identifiable reasons why international affair are difficult to comprehend in the age of Trump. One is, ofcourse, Trump himself, the miasmal mist he sprays around his pronouncement, a bewildering mix of unpredictability and unreliability.

Another reason for consistent puzzlement is the habitual reliance by a large body of opinion makers on sources of information set up to serve the Sole super power moment which lasted from the end of the Cold War to the collapse of the Lehman Brothers in 2008.

The stance struck in the euphoria of the superpower moment needed change but making readjustments was resisted because alternations would be an acceptance of decline. Some of the difficulty in comprehending world affairs at this precise moment is also because initiatives and plans set into motion three decades ago, for another time, are being tried today when the times are out of joint.

To cope with western decline, the US chose to wrench itself away from Europe rather than be one, at the head of the western alliance in decline. The US chose to go solo, thereby becoming more equal than others in a triangular world order, China and Russia being the other two poles. Rather than acquiesce in the emerging multipolar world order as one among others, Trump and his cohorts in MAGA are projecting a world order in which the US, unencumbered by alliances, would be economically and militarily more equal than others. MAGA planners have dreamt up an exclusive area of influence which would be named Donroe Doctrine, a more muscular version of the Monroe doctrine.

Enunciated in 1823 by President James Monroe, the doctrine kept European powers out of the Caribbean and Latin America. Which powers does Trump intend to keep out of this “backyard”? China and Russia. Surely Trump knows that both are very heavily invested not just in Venezuela but in all of Latin America. Indeed, 22 Latin American and Caribbean countries have signed up with China’s Belt and Road initiative.

How will Trump cope? Heaven knows what ideas may be in the offing.

Henry Kissinger’s triangular world order sought to widen the breach which had surfaced between Moscow and Beijing. He succeeded. Trump’s sketch of three super powers US, China and Russia has no apparent breach he can widen. He has to first create a hairline fracture between them. He is much more of a sledge hammer man than one who can handle with delicacy fine knives and needles.

The collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008, a milestone in the West’s downward slide, coincided with NATO’s Bucharest summit where Georgia and Ukraine were listed for membership. Even as Putin, present for the NATO-Russia Council meeting put his foot down quite firmly. NATO at Russia’s border was an existential threat for Russia, he emphasized.

Francis Fukiyama impatiently wrote a book: End of History. His thesis fell miles on the wrong side of history. But there were others like media magnate Rupert Murdoch whose triumphalism at Soviet fall led him to expand tabloids as a means of thwarting authoritarian regimes. But authoritarianism was not being replaced by a liberal order. Populist Nationalism was the unintended consequence.

Murdoch sought to block authoritarian regime but it also ended up placing road blocks in the way of anything progressive like Bernie Sanders in the US and Jeremy Corbyn in UK. I wrote in 2017: “if you make Sanders and Corbyn impossible, you end up making Trump and Nigel Farage inevitable.” In his interview to the Economist, MAGA ideologue Steve Bannon was confident that Nigel Farage would be the Prime Minister of the UK after the next elections. Bannon’s political projection may be flawed but his utterance does clarify his political inclinations.

European leaders already in power or knocking at the gates whose ascent would please Bannon and Trump are Victor Orban (Hungary), Giorgia Meloni and Matteo Salvini (Italy), Marine Le Pen (France), Geert Wilders (Netherland), Santiago Abascal (Spain) and Herbert Kickl (Austria). All these leaders have been cultivated by Bannon during his trips to Europe.

The earliest lucid enunciation of the Trump establishment’s appraisal of Europe was spelt out by Vice President J.D. Vance. His speech exactly a year ago, February 14, 2025 at the European Security Conference at Munich left the European Grandees, the top military representatives gasping.

“The threat to European security is not from Russia or China or any other external actor.” The danger Vance said, “was within”. Vance explained, giving examples. In December 2024, a Romanian Constitutional Court took the unprecedented step of annulling the Presidential election on the eve of the final run off. Russian interference was allegedly the cause for the annulment which was applauded by the EU.

Bannon and Vance have not left Europe in any doubt. European liberalism is not their meat. For Europe Victor Orban of Hungary is their role model. Europe had to shuffle itself out of its liberal coil to be coherent with Trump’s US. The “erasure” of European civilization by an open door policy towards migrants was anathema to MAGA ideologues.

I have been intrigued by two back to back podcasts with Bannon interviewed by Zany Minton Beddoes, Editor-in-Chief of the Economist. She described it is a “terrifying” experience but which was also important because it drive an important section of opinion in the US.

Bannon counts Trump as one among the three great US Presidents who gave the nation a certain direction – George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and, yes, Donald Trump.

Bannon placing Trump by the side of history’s most iconic Presidents is exaggeration, ofcourse, but what does one make of Bannon giving him a seat with Prophet Moses “leading his people into the promised land.”

The huge agenda Bannon has set for Trump cannot be completed in the three years left for his term.

With a wave of the hand, Bannon puts that question aside.

“The American people will give Trump another term. Yes, they will upturn the constitution to give him a third term.”

#          #          #          #

Mark Tully and the BBC radio were synonymous all over the subcontinent

Mark Tully and the BBC radio were synonymous all over the subcontinent

                                                                                                      Saeed Naqvi

In the front seat, with the driver, was Mark Fineman of Los Angeles Times, when their car was stopped at an improvised toll barrier outside Lord Krishnan’s town, Mathura.

“Mark” an Indian reporter in the rear seat shouted. “Tell him you are a journalist and he will let you go.” The toll keeper had heard the name, Mark. His eyes lit up. He waved to his friends smoking bidis on a cot by the roadside. They leapt to their feet and surrounded the car. ‘Mark Tully! Mark Tully!’ Before the impersonation travelled, an infuriated Mark Fineman pulled out a ten rupee note and threw at the toll keeper.

“Here’s your f…..ing toll and let me go.” 

Fineman was probably scarred for good. In the ranks of foreign correspondents, there would always be one above them—Sir Mark Tully. And he was on a higher pedestal for good, professional reasons—balance, dependability, diligence and a distinct personal charm which attracted all shades of people, intellectually lively in most cases, to his Salon, first in Jorbagh, facing Safdarjung Tomb and later Number 1 Nizamuddin East.

The character of his salon changed over the years. His Wife, Margaret, from whom he had two sons and two daughters, was a lively Victorian lady of the style his father would have approved of. The senior Tully whom Mark always referred to as ‘Burra Saheb’ of Gillanders Arbuthnot, headquartered in Calcutta, which is where Mark was born. Quite predictably, he attended St Paul School in Darjeeling as a boy, before he was transferred to Marlborough College which experience he was more proud of than the next station, Trinity Hall, Cambridge where he studied theology. His career as priest was grounded partly by himself and more by his tutor at trinity hall, Robert Runcie, who later became Archbishop of Canterbury.

“Master Tully,” Runcie told him, “You appeared to be more suited to the public house(pub) than to the pulpit.” Although this was said in ample good humour, Mark spotted in Runcie’s observation a grain of truth.

Yes, Mark did enjoy his beer. Since his favourite, flat, bitter beer was not available in India, he even run through a spell of trying to brew at home. Eventually, he made compromises with Lager which he had in his range of pewter and in sundry China mugs. All of his life, Mark remained torn between his early Christian training and his real life which was seldom free of fun, frolic, mischief and a personal morality which he found hovering on what his faith had told him was sin. For instance, in the second half of his innings in Delhi, he fell in love with Gillian Wright, writer who, translated classical novel like Raga Darbari and Adha Gaon. Mark, even though he lives with Gillian, he was always afflicted by a certain guilt. He never divorced Margaret, with whom he reinvented a life of laughter and affection which I was witness to in their house in Hampstead, not far from the Washington pub, which became our rendezvous. 

I can put a date when Mark’s romance with Gillian burgeon—April, 1979. I was to accompany Atal Bihari Vajpayee to Peking, China. Since the visit was coinciding with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Z.A. Bhutto’s case reaching a crescendo, I decided to pick up another story in Islamabad on my way to Peking. To my delight, I found myself in the Flashman’s hotel, in Rawalpindi where Mark was also staying in the adjacent room. In those days, Gillian used to write letters in Urdu but in the Roman script. In this fashion ‘Gilli’ became something of a bridge between the Englishman, who was keen to deepen his understanding of the country he had made his home. On this count also, Mark was torn: he remained an Englishman who loved India. There is poetic justice in the fact that he received Padma Shri, Padma Bhushan as well as a Knighthood.

My room at Flashman’s had a clear view of the procession of contacts visiting Mark. Many of them belonging to orthodox sects of Islam. I felt secure that even though I had no connections in Pakistan, I will nevertheless be able to pick up the story from Mark on whether or not Bhutto is to be hanged.

At the crack of dawn, one morning, a cousin of mine in Karachi called me up.

“Bhaiyya, I am sure you have got the story of Bhutto having been hanged since you are staying in the same hotel as Mark Tully.” I was hurt. Mark had filed what was clearly one of his many international scoops and yet I had the foolish expectation that he would tip me off. When I complained, Mark was blunt with me.

“I am a professional, Saeed and my loyalty on that count is with the BBC.”

An Indian’s loyalty is to his village. My friendship with Mark and Gillian acquired a new dimension when they accompanied me, for Moharram observances, to Mustafabad, my village past Lucknow, Raebareli and Unchahar railway station. Since the extended families of the Naqvis, a total of about 50, scattered all over northern India, congregated in Mustafabad for Moharram, Mark and Gilli endeared themselves to the whole Qasba which is, after all, a network of cousins. All of Mustafabad was flattered that the two visited the Qasba several times. Gillian even became a fixture reciting passages from Anis’s Marsiya on the Mimbar, the pulpit.

The fact that he was expelled from India during the Emergency interfered with his balance when he returned to cast his eye on a somewhat altered India. He began to see Nehruvian secularism as inimical to India’s ethos which was primarily religious. That this was the thin edge of wedge of Hindutva was something Mark needed to clarify.

The reach and credibility of BBC radio in the subcontinent and across the globe is owed to Mark and Mark alone. During an election survey, Mark, Waqar Ahmad, and Mark’s trusted deputy Satish Jacob travelled to a village near Mahmudabad. We approached an old man lying on a cot. We tried to engage him.

“We are trying to find out which candidate would you and most of this village vote for?”

The man got up, frowned.

“I will tell you nothing until I have heard the BBC.” He said pointing to the transistor kept neatly near his pillow.

It would be a surprise if there is no response in Kashmir to Mark's departure. In their perception, the BBC was only reliable outlet. 

 #          #          #          #