June 15, 2025 05:06 EDT
Check out our comment feature!
|
||
|
||
|
||
| Dear FO° Reader, Greetings from Geneva and France’s Southwest! In Geneva, one of us has an eerie feeling in a flowery garden. Working in an idyllic peaceful part of the world while hearing analysis of Israel’s attack on Iran on the radio is a strange experience. In the Charente-Maritime countryside, the other half of our tandem this week is grappling with a sense that world leaders—especially in Europe—are losing their bearings, just as spring gives way to summer and nature bursts into lush abundance. As dawn broke on Friday morning, the world’s press was scrambling to make sense of Thursday night’s unprecedented Israeli strike on Iran — an escalation that risks tipping an already volatile region into wider war. This Sunday, I do my favorite exercise: cut through the noise to make sense of what is going on through the prism of various outlets around the world. What is India’s English press saying? The Times of India (TOI), India’s iconic newspaper, published a story on the risks of radiation arising from Israel’s attack on Iran’s Natanz nuclear site. Per TOI, Rafael Grossi, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has said that nuclear facilities "must never be attacked" and called the incident deeply concerning. "Any military action that jeopardizes the safety of nuclear facilities risks grave consequences for Iran, the region, and beyond." India’s business and economics publications are worrying about the negative consequences of the Israel-Iran clash on the Indian economy. Oil prices have shot to more than $70 per barrel. India imports over 80% of its oil. A rise in oil prices increases India’s import bill, spikes the current account deficit and causes inflation in the economy. Indian refiners pay for oil in dollars, increasing demand for the US currency and depreciating the rupee. This further inflates the oil import bill, creating a feedback loop that increases the current account deficit further. French Press Rings Diplomatic Alarm Bells Le Monde: "Israël franchit la ligne rouge : l’Europe face au risque d’embrasement" ("Israel Crosses the Red Line: Europe Faces the Risk of Escalation") Macron’s government privately warned Israel against unilateral action but now faces pressure to take a harder stance. Comparisons to George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003 loom large. Mediapart: "En bombardant l’Iran, Benyamin Netanyahou choisit l’escalade" ("By Bombing Iran, Netanyahu Chooses Escalation") Through an investigative angle, Mediapart argues that Netanyahu’s strike is a "strategic diversion" from failures in Gaza and domestic crises. "This is not about security—it’s about a leader clinging to power by manufacturing perpetual war." What’s interesting and on point? Mediapart’s left-wing, anti-establishment lens exposes what mainstream outlets often soften: Netanyahu’s political calculus.Le Figaro: "Frappe israélienne en Iran : Netanyahu joue avec le feu" ("Israeli Strike on Iran: Netanyahu Plays With Fire") As usual, Le Figaro expresses the French establishment’s view and focuses on divisions within the EU as well as French President Emmanuel Macron’s balancing act between condemning Israel and avoiding US backlash. France Inter (Radio): "L’Iran va-t-il riposter ? Les scénarios qui inquiètent les chancelleries" ("Will Iran Retaliate? Scenarios Worrying Capitals") France Inter offers an expert analysis by interviewing French intelligence sources warning of Hezbollah’s next move. Note that most French people rely on television for their news. France’s most popular channel, TF1, presented a narrative that went along with Israel’s claim that it had to act to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The Israel-Iran clash was only the third story of the TV channel. A bus crash and a murder of a school hall monitor a few days earlier were the top two stories.” Why It Matters: France’s debate mirrors Europe’s existential dilemma: uphold international law or follow US-Israeli security diktats?  German Press: "Europe’s Nightmare Scenario" Der Spiegel: "Israels Angriff auf Iran: Der gefährliche Poker des Netanyahu" ("Israel’s Attack on Iran: Netanyahu’s Dangerous Gamble") It quoted Germany’s former chancellor Olaf Scholz who warned of "regional war” even as European arms exports to Israel face new legal challenges. "This is not self-defense—it’s a calculated provocation." Die Welt: "Iran muss endlich eingeschüchtert werden" ("Iran Must Finally Be Intimidated")Die Welt is known to express a conservative voice and supports the strike as overdue deterrence against Tehran’s proxies. While in another article Die Welt reminds its government of the presence of Iranian activists on its soil who must be protected. Chinese Press: "US Puppet Sparks Chaos" Global Times: "以色列袭击伊朗暴露美国‘以乱治世’阴谋" ("Israel’s Attack on Iran Exposes US‘ Chaos Strategy’") From China’s perspective, Israel appears as a US tool to destabilize Eurasia and distract from Ukraine. Let’s remember that China positions itself as a "neutral" broker for the Global South. Iranian Press: "The Zionist Regime’s Desperation" Tasnim News: "پاسخ سخت و حساب شده به تجاوز رژیم صهیونیستی خواهد شد" ("A Calculated and Severe Response to the Zionist Regime’s Aggression") This Iranian publication downplays damage, and vows retaliation "at the right time." Tasnim News also calls for domestic unity amidst a military and economic crisis. Fars News: "Iran's strikes against Israel will continue… IRNA quotes Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi "Israeli attacks are tantamount to declaration of war against Iran.”. In a formal and legalistic argument, Araghchi claimed Israeli attacks to be a “declaration of war” and demanded UN action. As Iran’s official state news agency, IRNA closely mirrors government policy. Russian Press: "Western Hypocrisy Exposed" RT: "Израиль нарушил все нормы суверенитета. Где же возмущение Запада?" ("Israel Violated All Sovereignty Norms. Where’s Western Outrage?") Russian media complain about Western whataboutism, contrasting tepid EU reaction to Israeli attacks and European fury with Russia for attacking Ukraine. Brazilian Press: "Global South Pays the Price" Folha de S.Paulo: "Ataque de Israel ao Irã ameaça economias emergentes" ("Israel’s Attack on Iran Threatens Emerging Economies") Spiking oil prices, shipping disruptions, and UN paralysis hurt developing nations most. US Press Is Divided NYT: "Israel’s Strike on Iran: Deterrence or Dangerous Escalation?" Apparently, the Trump administration was given "minutes’ notice” and is angered by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recklessness. Fox News: "Finally! Israel Takes the Gloves Off Against Iran", celebrates the strike as a "long-overdue lesson" for a terror-exporting autocratic regime. UK Press: Realpolitik, Admiration and Outrage BBC: "Shadow War Turns Hot: What Next?" The “establishment’s” media organization, judiciously notes that Mossad’s "symbolic" strike avoids nuclear sites but tests Iran’s red lines. The Telegraph: "Iran’s Weakness Laid Bare by Israeli Precision Strike" This conservative publication argues that Tehran’s muted response to Israeli attacks proves deterrence works. The Guardian claims that Israel’s “unilateral strikes indicated a collapse of US President Donald Trump’s efforts to restrain Netanyahu. They have also almost certainly scuttled Trump’s efforts “to negotiate a deal with Iran that would prevent the country from seeking a nuclear weapon.” What Next? Both sides are now striking each other to cause significant damage. Israeli strikes have taken out many of Iran’s top military leaders, damaged nuclear and missile launch sites and hit oil depots. Iranian missiles are damaging Israeli cities and causing casualties. Note that both Israeli and Iranian governments are unpopular. Netanyahu is relying on far-right politicians Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. The UK government has sanctioned both of them. Iran’s government of aging mullahs is unpopular with the young, especially women. Conflict papers over the cracks in both societies and secures two regimes for now.   Why Are Young People Protesting in Iran?
Israel fears an Islamic nation that it claims has vowed to destroy the Jewish nation and aims to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Iran understands that nuclear weapons are the ultimate guarantee of sovereignty and would give it the ultimate insurance against Israeli or American threats. Israel sees a once in a lifetime opportunity to strike Iran with a weakened Hezbollah and a shattered Syria. Iran has to walk a fine line. On the one hand, it has to respond robustly to deter Israel from continued attacks. On the other hand, Iran cannot hit Israel too hard and draw the US directly into the conflict. At the same time, Trump does not want to be drawn in, but to some degree has already been forced to follow Netanyahu. Both Israel and Iran are facing severe strains. Israel is already stretched with ongoing operations in Gaza, continued monitoring of Hezbollah that remains strong in Lebanon just north of the border and constant involvement in Syria where Turkey is increasingly ascendant. Iran has major internal problems in restive regions and an economy in crisis. While aggressive elements of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the praetorian guard of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, want to hit Israel hard, the older mullahs want to avoid all-out war. For the moment, conflict will continue. Both Israel and Iran are determined to achieve their ends. The Mossad has been working for over 20 years to infiltrate Iran and has shown that it can kill anyone anywhere anytime. Netanyahu has put that preparation to use and acted on his obsession to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. Iran aims to deter Israel and save face. Let’s remind them that with great power comes even greater responsibility, and sometimes even accountability. Iran has plenty of missiles, a population of over 90 million people and enough talented military as well as intelligence professionals to cause damage to Israel. Increasingly, Iran also has the support of the Muslim world, including the Arab street. Financial markets are understandably jittery and the G7 summit in Canada this week will try to contain the latest conflict in the Middle East, while at the same time struggling with the quandary of NATO’s war in Ukraine that Trump had promised to end within 24 hours. World leaders will, however, have their task cut out for them because no quick resolution to either conflict seems to be in sight. Time for both of us to tend our gardens in Switzerland and France, which are at least temporarily peaceful and beautiful even as conflict rages not too far away. Wishing you clarity in chaotic times, Roberta Campani and Peter Isackson Communications and Outreach and Chief Strategy Officer |
||
|
We are an independent nonprofit organization. We do not have a paywall or ads. We believe news
must
be free for everyone from Detroit to Dakar. Yet servers, images, newsletters, web developers and
editors cost money.
So, please become a recurring donor to keep Fair Observer free, fair and independent. 
|
||
|
||
| About Publish with FO° FAQ Privacy Policy Terms of Use Contact |
Support Fair Observer
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs
on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This
doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost
money.
Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a
sustaining member.
Will you support FO’s journalism?
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
Comment