Jim Lobe

Personal tweets from Jim Lobe, Contributing Editor @RStatecraft, director @LobeLog.com (2007-19), DC bureau chief, Inter Press Service (1980-85, 1989-2016).

[Responsible Statecraft @RStatecraft]

NEW @LobeLog : it takes the prospect of ending the war on Iran to get the blood running hot in aging and otherwise reclusive neoconservatives like 'Scooter' Libby and Doug Feith, and Wapo is too happy to indulge them.
https://t.co/nqW3zs75AM

[Mairav Zonszein מרב זונשיין @MairavZ]

Even Netanyahu himself isn’t calling it an end to aid but rather a shift to partnership.

Read my explainer from August https://t.co/6fpaCCuLfu

[Patrick Gaspard @patrickgaspard]

I can’t stop the tears right now.
Mississippi. Mississippi.

It is breathtaking.
Emmett Till, Medgar Evers, Goodman, Schwerner and Chaney, Fannie Lou Hamer.
Lift Every Voice and Sing!
Mississippi

[Sina Toossi @SinaToossi]

Funny: In June 2025, Axios quoted a "US official" citing intelligence that Iran had "significantly increased" missile production to 50/month.

Now, 2 wars & 20,000+ US/Israeli airstrikes later, "western intelligence" says it's...50/month.

Something tells me they have no idea.

[Sina Toossi @SinaToossi]

Rubio's long been an ardent neocon. He was Sheldon Adelson's pick in 2015 before he pivoted to Trump.

Yet now he's 1 of 3 seeming rival camps on Iran: Hegseth wants more war, Vance a deal, and Rubio the status quo/blockade to continue.

The 2028 GOP primaries loom over all this.

[Mairav Zonszein מרב זונשיין @MairavZ]

Absolutely Unhinged https://t.co/w3397bYowo

[Dr. Annelle Rodriguez Sheline @AnnelleSheline]

"This would enable the Israel lobby to protect the money the US sends to Israel each year from the collapse in public support"

I told @lfrayer for @npratc @NPR on the effort to move US tax $ for Israel from "aid" to the Pentagon

➕@MairavZ & @mattduss
https://t.co/ZxIVWrKwna

[Sina Toossi @SinaToossi]

👇 The sheer cynicism and destructiveness of Israel's military leadership. (Full English translation of the Israeli TV report below.)

Israel's Channel 16 reports that military intelligence assesses another war is highly unlikely to topple Iran's government or end its nuclear program, while damage to its missile capabilities would be temporary.

Yet senior Israeli commanders are reportedly pushing for another war, this time explicitly targeting Iran's national infrastructure, including gas and energy facilities.

They acknowledge the futility of their stated objectives, yet want to escalate the destruction inflicted on Iran and its people.

And after all this, they still have the gall to claim they care about the Iranian people. The sheer contempt for Iranians’ lives and intelligence is staggering!

*Full transcript:

"A document from the Military Intelligence Research Division of the military, recently prepared as part of preparations for a potential war with Iran, shows that the probability of the collapse of the Iranian government in the short term and medium term is extremely low. Additionally, the probability of removing enriched uranium from Iran and stopping the nuclear program is assessed as low, and damage to missile capabilities and ballistic missiles will also be short-term, similar to previous wars."

"Despite this assessment, Eyal Zamir, the Chief of General Staff, Tischler, the Air Force Commander, and two other senior commanders are pushing to start a renewed war. They believe another round of war could achieve the desired objectives, especially if this time Iran's national infrastructure, including gas and energy facilities, is targeted; an action that, according to their belief, they were prevented from carrying out in the previous war. The military also remains in a very high state of readiness despite the end of the war."

[Lara Friedman @LaraFriedmanDC]

👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻

[Brett Erickson @BrettErickson28]

Looking for more information?
https://t.co/Ef33TQ3YOL

[Jim Lobe @LobeLog]

It’s Roy Cohn All Over Again https://t.co/cMsxRieBb4 via @NYTOpinion

[Danny (Dennis) Citrinowicz ,داني سيترينوفيتش @citrinowicz]

The Gulf’s New Iran Strategy: Engagement Without Illusions

Anwar Gargash is effectively outlining what could become the foundation of the Gulf states’ future approach toward Iran.

At the heart of this approach is a recognition of two realities that may appear contradictory but are actually complementary.

First, Iran is not going anywhere. It will remain a major regional power, and no realistic strategy can be based on isolating it indefinitely, ignoring its interests, or assuming that military pressure will fundamentally change its behavior.

The Gulf states understand that maintaining constructive relations with Tehran is a strategic necessity, not a favor to the Iranian leadership. Pushing Iran into a corner without offering a diplomatic way forward could ultimately undermine their own security.

But there is another side to this equation.

Engagement cannot mean accepting Iranian interference, intimidation, or violations of Gulf sovereignty. Tehran will be expected to respect the independence, security, and legitimate interests of its neighbors. The Gulf states are not prepared to accept a regional order in which Iran dictates the rules simply because it possesses the ability to disrupt regional stability.

What makes Gargash's message particularly significant is that it comes from the UAE, a country that has taken a firm position toward Iran during the confrontation.

This reflects an important strategic recognition: Iran cannot be eliminated from the regional equation, and therefore it must be engaged. But engagement does not mean trust.

The Gulf states are unlikely to build their future Iran policy on diplomacy alone. Alongside efforts to maintain dialogue and reduce tensions, they will continue strengthening their military capabilities, air and missile defenses, intelligence cooperation, and security partnerships, particularly with the United States.

But perhaps the most important lesson of the war is that the Gulf states can no longer afford to leave their security and their relationship with Iran entirely in the hands of Washington or Jerusalem.

The war exposed the limitations of American security guarantees and demonstrated how decisions taken outside the Gulf can impose enormous economic and security costs on countries that have little influence over those decisions.

This does not mean the Gulf states will abandon their strategic partnerships with the United States. Quite the opposite. They will continue investing in these relationships while seeking greater independence in shaping their regional policies.

The implications for Israel are equally significant. The Gulf states do not want their relations with Iran to be dictated by the Israeli-Iranian confrontation. They may continue developing security cooperation with Israel where their interests align, while opposing Israeli military initiatives that could expose their economies, energy infrastructure, and populations to another regional war.

In other words, the Gulf states will increasingly seek to take ownership of their own strategic future, including the management of their relationship with Tehran. Neither Washington nor Jerusalem should assume that Gulf policy toward Iran will automatically follow their preferences.

This approach must also produce practical results. Dialogue with Tehran cannot remain limited to diplomatic statements and symbolic visits. It must eventually address concrete security concerns, including the protection of energy infrastructure, freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, respect for national sovereignty, noninterference in domestic affairs, and mechanisms to prevent military incidents from escalating into broader conflicts.

None of this suggests that the Gulf states have suddenly become optimistic about Iran's intentions. Their concerns regarding Tehran's missile capabilities, regional ambitions, and support for armed groups remain substantial.

Nor does it mean that all Gulf countries will adopt an identical strategy. Their interests and relationships with Iran differ, but the broader strategic lesson is increasingly difficult to ignore.

The Gulf states have learned that they cannot eliminate the Iranian threat, but they also cannot afford another war intended to do so.

Their future approach will therefore combine engagement, deterrence, military preparedness, and a growing determination to shape regional security arrangements themselves.

The message to Tehran is clear: We recognize your place in the region, but you must respect our sovereignty, security, and independence. We are prepared to engage, but we will also prepare for the possibility that engagement fails.

And the message to Washington and Jerusalem is no less important: The Gulf states will not simply accept being drawn into another devastating confrontation with Iran. They intend to have a much greater say in how their region's future is shaped.

#Iran
#IranWar‌
#GCC

[Esfandyar Batmanghelidj @yarbatman]

Trump was at a dead end and kept driving into a wall.

The Qataris, to their great credit, have reminded him that he can put the car in reverse and turn around.

[Jim Lobe @LobeLog]

Doesn’t suggest a lot of confidence in the US intelligence community.

[CBS News @CBSNews]

The U.S. military's Central Command announced Friday it is offering up to $20 million and possible relocation in exchange for information about Iran's nuclear program, its facilities, equipment or personnel. https://t.co/VhlnNaGYab

[Lara Friedman @LaraFriedmanDC]

Analysis of the 2026 midterms that does not include significant focus/discussion of how Israel, Iran and AIPAC played as factors is unserious & conclusions drawn from it will be flawed.

[Patrick Gaspard @patrickgaspard]

We’ve arrived at the inevitable Führerbunker phase of the MAGA debacle.

[Jacob Heilbrunn @JacobHeilbrunn]

https://t.co/mtlXkP0MVr

[Esfandyar Batmanghelidj @yarbatman]

Considering the message and the messenger, we have a strong contender for the most "forever war" post of all time.

[Ali Vaez @AliVaez]

.@FDD delivered Mohsen Rezaei his first electoral win ever 🤣

[Barak Ravid @BarakRavid]

George W. Bush White House Press Secretary responds to Vance