US strikes on Iran would set off a political tsunami

If erratic Trump strikes Iran it would unleash ‘volcano’ of war

Donald Trump’s aircraft carrier strike group looks poised to strike Iran. But this would be no butcher-and-bolt Venezuelan kidnap operation. The balance of power in the region is delicate and complicated. And an attack could set the region and the world alight.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah is a staunch Iranian ally. On January 28, a Hezbollah official delivered a warning that strikes could “trigger a volcano in the region”. Nawaf al Moussawi said:

what holds the United States back is its inability to predict the aftermath of the strike.

The story in Iran in recent months is one of rebellion and repression as protests over the costs of living were met with brutal state violence. A media and internet black-out makes verification perilously difficult, but estimates of the death toll range from 6,000 to 30,000.

Lofty (and, again, unverified) claims from Israeli and US actors that their intelligence agencies are among the protestors have further confused matters. Yet Iran is not a weak power in the region. And her allies in Lebanon and Iraq may yet influence the outcome of any attack.

Al Moussawi said:

Washington has been seeking to topple the political system in Iran ever since the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Asked how Hezbollah could respond, Moussawi said:

We will cross that bridge when we get to it.

Israeli press carried comments from Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem:

when Trump threatens Imam Khamenei, he threatens tens of millions who follow his leadership, and it’s our duty to confront this threat by any means.

Credible force

The presence of a credible military force, the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, tells its own story. The Lincoln – with her gigantic airpower and accompanying warships — was rerouted on short notice from the Indo-Pacific to the Arabian sea for whatever task Trump envisions.

Trump insists on referring to the fleet as his “beautiful armada” and has pulled US troops out of Qatar. He has talked about protecting protestors as part of his rationale, but also about forcing Iran into submission over a nuclear deal.

Even insiders are unsure what Trump will do. Ex-Pentagon and US Special Forces official Seth Jones told the Financial Times:

This looks like the US is planning to use military force. What is less clear [are] the objectives.

There is nothing simple about an operation against Iran. As former US defence official Dana Stroul told the paper:

There’s nothing about the Venezuela playbook that could be applied to Iran.

And there are other powerful regional actors who could shape events.

Iraq, Trump, and Maliki

Former Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki — whose premiership is mired in allegations of despotism, sectarian violence, and corruption — has been put forward by the governing coalition of Shia-parties (known as the Coordination Framework) as their nominee to become prime minister.

Inside Iraq, Maliki is widely viewed as an Iranian lackey and by Washington as Iran’s right hand man. Maliki previously served as PM from 2006 to 2014 during a period of intense violence under US occupation.

Trump is not enamoured with the idea. He said the US would stop supporting Iraq if Maliki returned to power:

The US president wrote on Truth Social that Maliki would be a “very bad choice”, adding: “Last time Maliki was in power, the Country descended into poverty and total chaos.”

It appears that Iran, behind closed doors, is desperately reshuffling the political deck in Baghdad — a country which for years provided it with illicit access to liquid dollars.

Maliki responded bluntly, according to the BBC:

Maliki rejected US interference in Iraq’s internal affairs and said he considered the comments a “violation” of the country’s sovereignty and its democratic order.

But Maliki has been a strong proponent of Iranian interference in Iraq. But Iraq may not be a strong card for Iran to play.

Next steps

Trump has taken a belligerent posture in 2026.

His attack on Venezuela and threats against Greenland, Mexico, Colombia, Cuba and other states suggest he is increasingly inclined to threaten and cajole his way through international affairs.

He faces internal crises too in the wake of a series of apparent street executions of US citizens by federal officers in Minneapolis.

It’s unclear whether he will strike Iran, but could that pave the way for imminent negotiations to forge a new nuclear deal?

What is clear is that the US president is increasingly unpredictable on both the world and domestic stages.

Featured image via the Canary

Tags: Iran militarism US

Comments 1

Dave Hansell says:

5 months ago

When self-identifying ‘left-wing’ sites promote Official Narratives in the evidenced based known context of evolving strategies by Establishment Corporate State agencies to manipulate and control discourse and activism to generate desired outcomes, questions need to be raised.

https://davehansell.substack.com/p/cuckoos-in-the-nest

Fortunately, we have Journalists like Caitlin Johnstone to cut through such obvious shoddy misleading analysis:

https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2026/01/30/only-idiots-believe-the-war-propaganda-about-iran/

“It is not okay to be a grown adult in the year 2026 and still believe US regime change interventionism in the middle east will lead to positive outcomes. ……

……It is not okay to live in a post-Iraq invasion world and still not understand that we are being lied to about Iran.”

Like for example the misleading Guardian/BBC level lies of omission in this piece, which ignores:

– the smuggling of some 4,000 of Musk’s Starlink terminals into Iran which were initially used to pass instructions onto Western/Israeli trained agitators attempting another Colour Revolution, which were jammed with the assistance of China and the Russian Federation, enabling Western Agent Provocateurs to be caught, saving many civilian lives ;

– the warning passed on to Iran by Turkey (who have their own axe to grind) of Western trained Kurds crossing the border into Iran as part of the Regime Change Operation;

– Steve Beseant’s public acknowledgement at Davos that the USA deliberately targeted the Iranian Currency at the back end of 2025 to undermine the Iranian Economy and foment street protests as part of the Colour Revolution/Regime Change operation;

– the murders of many Iranian civilians and police and the destruction of Mosques, public buildings, police stations, etc at the hands of Western/Israeli backed and trained agitators ;

– the coming together of all parts of Iranian society onto the streets to protest against this Western inspired Regime Change which resulted in the deaths of many innocent Iranians.

Not forgetting the adoption of the Imperial Narrative which blames all these deaths as deliberate acts of the Iranian Government.

As Johnstone goes on to observe:

“It is not okay to have lived through what these monsters did to Libya and still believe forcibly toppling the Iranian government is a moral and just cause to get behind.

It is not okay to have just watched these freaks turn Gaza into a gravel parking lot pervaded by the smell of rotting corpses and believe they have noble intentions for the people of Iran.

I don’t care if you are making your pro-regime change arguments from a right wing anti-Islam perspective, from a liberal humanitarian pro-democracy perspective, from a left-wing “solidarity with our Persian comrades” perspective, or from an “oppose all tyranny equally” anarchist perspective. Your arguments are shit, and your position is wrong.

The agenda to oust the Iranian government is about dominating the planet in general and the Middle East in particular. You might think it’s about something else, but you are wrong. It’s about power and control, and all your fanciful notions about freedom and democracy for the Iranian people will be instantly subordinated to those goals. If this isn’t obvious to you, you’re an idiot.

The goal is not to bring freedom and democracy to the Iranian people. The US and Israel do not permit democracy to thrive in the Middle East unless they can control its outcomes, as they are working to do right now in Iraq. The US and Israel are not popular enough in the Middle East for the people to be allowed to control their own government.

The goal is to either install a puppet regime in Tehran, or to Balkanize the nation into multiple independent states which can be easily controlled, or to plunge the entire state into unmanageable chaos like they did in Libya. None of these plans advance the interests of the Iranian people.

If you support Trump’s regime change agendas in Iran, then you support inflicting this upon the Iranian people. That’s what you get under the best-case scenario. Under the worst-case scenario, you get a hot war between the US and Iran which unleashes horrors you cannot possibly imagine.”

Ignoring this contextual reality is infantile. Amplifying Imperial Narratives sends out a message which reads “Controlled Opposition.

The more I read on this site the more convinced I am that Skwawkbox made an error of judgement throwing in his lot with the Canary.