Wednesday, July 9, 2025
The Nordic Times

Polaris of Enlightenment

Wednesday, July 9, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Breaking News

https://nordictimes.com/analysis/the-myth-of-irans-nuclear-weapons/

Analysis

The myth of Iran’s nuclear weapons

The escalation in the Middle East

For over 40 years, Israeli and US leaders have repeatedly sounded the alarm about an imminent Iranian nuclear threat, without ever producing a single piece of credible evidence. These lies have not only misled the public, they have also paved the way for repressive sanctions, assassinations, and a military intervention that is now very close to escalating into a catastrophic major war.

Published 19 June 2025
– By Editorial Staff
For more than 40 years, the world has been threatened by Iranian nuclear weapons – at least if Benjamin Netanyahu and his allies are to be believed.
10 minute read

The Bush administration’s lies about Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons of mass destruction were used as a pretext to invade Iraq – a war project estimated to have cost between 500,000 and one million lives. In hindsight, it turned out that no such weapons existed – they were simply lies to force through a desired regime change and assert power over the region.

Today, the invasion of Iraq is considered one of the worst betrayals by Western leaders in modern times and is often cited as a textbook example of how those in power will not shy away from manipulating their own citizens or the rest of the world to get their way. Although the case of Iraq is extreme in terms of suffering and scale, the approach is by no means unique.

Forty-one years ago, during the Cold War, the British defense magazine Jane’s Defense Weekly sounded the alarm with an unexpected report. “Iran is engaged in the production of an atomic bomb, likely to be ready within two years”, it claimed. The same claims were trumpeted by the Israeli media and US Senator Alan Cranston, who insisted that Iran was about seven years away from being able to manufacture its own nuclear weapons.

However, there was never any real basis for these claims, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also dismissed the alarm as unfounded. In retrospect, it was also clear that the statements were politically motivated scare tactics rather than serious predictions. Iran did not acquire nuclear weapons, either in the 1980s or later.

The fact that the alarms about Iran’s supposedly imminent nuclear threat had no grounding in reality mattered little. The steady stream of similar pronouncements continued to pour out from high-ranking Israeli and American officials.

For more than 40 years, Israeli and American leaders have profited from alarmist claims about an imminent Iranian nuclear threat. Photo: facsimile/X

All predictions were wrong

Israel’s current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared in the early and mid-1990s, when he was a member of parliament, that Iran could be only a few years away from acquiring nuclear weapons and demanded decisive action. During the same period, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres claimed that Iran would have a nuclear warhead by 1999, and in the US, a report by the House of Representatives’ Republican Research Committee claimed that Iran was “98 percent certain” to already have all the components needed to build “two or three operational nuclear weapons”.

At around the same time, under President George H.W. Bush, the CIA assessed that Iran had all the components needed for a couple of bombs, and predicted that Iran would have nuclear weapons by 2000 – a forecast that was later postponed to 2003.

These forecasts were also completely divorced from reality. The key was to portray the Iranian regime as a global threat that must be fought – and crushed with military force if necessary. This has continued, with constant alarmist and propagandistic warnings rather than serious and objective analysis. In 1995, for example, the New York Times reported that high-ranking US and Israeli officials warned that Iran would acquire a nuclear bomb by 2000.

“Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than previously thought”, the newspaper trumpeted, citing information from US and Israeli officials, and it was claimed that Iran’s atomic bomb was “at the top of the list” of dangers for the coming decade.

The warnings about Iranian nuclear bombs year after year after year have been likened to climate alarmists’ recurring warnings about global warming. Photo: facsimile/New York Times

Not yet – but soon?

When these deadlines passed without anything actually happening, the timeframes were pushed forward. In 1997, new estimates suggested that the Iranian bomb would not be ready until around 2007–2009.

During the 2000s, the warning signals and doomsday messages continued to echo. In 2005, Israel’s defense minister (Shaul Mofaz) stated that Iran would pass a “point of no return” in its nuclear weapons program within two years – which placed the critical date around 2007. In 2007, the Israeli intelligence service Mossad claimed that Iran could achieve nuclear weapons capability by 2009.

A 2009 forecast was even more alarming, claiming that Iran would be “nuclear armed” within a year. At the same time, more and more analysts began to question the credibility of the timelines and question why the forecasts were constantly being pushed forward, and why the new estimates should be more credible than the incorrect ones that had been made previously.

Despite the 2015 international nuclear agreement, leaders in Israel and the US continued to warn of Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions. In September 2012, Netanyahu made a high-profile appearance at the UN General Assembly: he held up a sketch of a bomb and drew a red line with a red pen at 90 percent enrichment, warning that Iran would reach this final stage toward a bomb by spring or summer 2013 unless it was stopped.

In 2015, Netanyahu addressed the US Congress and criticized the new nuclear agreement, saying: “It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb, it paves Iran’s path to the bomb”.

In August 2021, it was time once again for Israel’s Defense Minister Benny Gantz to sound the alarm that Iran was only “about 10 weeks away” from obtaining enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear warhead.

Powerful interests want to see Iran burn

This, it should be emphasized, is only a small selection of all the statements and warnings about alleged threats that have never materialized. Over the past four decades, both American and Israeli leaders have had an even stronger incentive to portray Iran’s nuclear program as an urgent, global threat. First, the threat creates a political and strategic basis for justifying massive military support for Israel and permanent US military operations in the region.

Every warning about “imminent” nuclear weapons provides justification for congressional decisions on increased defense spending, arms exports, and a military presence in the Gulf region, which benefits arms manufacturers and maintains a powerful US presence in the oil-rich region.

Furthermore, the threatening rhetoric also strengthens Israel’s demands for international support against Tehran, which consolidates the country’s position of power in the region and legitimizes “preventive” military operations against Iran. By constantly repeating that “we only have weeks or months left”, it has been possible to maintain a permanent high-risk situation that facilitates quick decisions on sanctions or military threats whenever political leaders want to take a harder line against Iran.

At the same time, political financing in the US has also played a decisive role. Many members of Congress receive large contributions from pro-Israel lobby groups such as AIPAC, which consistently advocate a tough line against Iran to protect Israel’s security and interests. The Israel lobby’s ads in US election campaigns often portray any negotiations with Tehran as a moral failure, which has pushed US foreign policy in an extremely pro-Israel and neoconservative direction.

Similarly, Christian groups in the US, especially evangelicals, have long viewed Israel’s continued existence as a religious duty, whereby “those who bless Israel shall be blessed themselves” – and constitute a significant voter base that demands a tough confrontation with Iran. For these groups, a potential major war is not only a geopolitical possibility but also a step in prophetic eschatological patterns.

All in all, there are several influential groups that, for economic, geopolitical, or religious reasons, have an interest in keeping Iran’s “imminent” nuclear threat alive – even though none of the predictions have ever come true and there is no indication that they have ever been close to doing so.

What is Trump basing his decisions on?

Many had hoped that things would be different with Donald Trump, given his claims that he would be the one to “end all wars”.

– My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier, he has confidently declared.

In reality, however, a different picture emerges, with Trump choosing to completely ignore the assessment of his own intelligence chief when the latter states that there is no indication that Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons.

– Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003, DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard recently stated, referring to the intelligence community’s collective assessment.

– I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one (nuclear weapon), Trump stated, when journalists asked him why he was ignoring the assessments of his own experts and advisors.

The fact that IAEA chief Rafel Grossi also confirms that there is no evidence “of a systematic effort (by Iran) to move toward a nuclear weapon” does not seem to matter to the US’s top leaders either. Trump has, by all accounts, decided to follow Netanyahu’s war line – despite the fact that it has been proven false for decades.

A betrayal of the movement

Trump’s popularity has been largely built on promises to end expensive, protracted, and globalist wars. Now, the capricious president is dismissing his promises with vague neoconservative arguments that the US cannot become “great” as long as Iran has or could obtain nuclear weapons, and that this should therefore be the top priority for all American patriots.

During his previous term, Trump was heavily criticized for failing to deliver on his campaign promises. Many analysts explained this by saying that they were blocked by political opponents, but other critics also pointed out early on that he chose to surround himself with advisors with questionable agendas that were directly harmful to the US, such as his ultra-Zionist son-in-law Jared Kushner and the neoconservative hawk John Bolton.

This time, it would be different. Now, the administration would be made up of reliable and stable people who put the US first and prioritized what was good for the American people –not powerful special interests or foreign regimes.

That does not seem to have been the case. When it comes to Iran and the Middle East, the Americans and the world have, on the contrary, got a president in Trump who in practice may be even more belligerent than several of his despised predecessors. In recent days, his feed has been filled with warmongering neoconservative rhetoric and demands for Iranian submission.

“UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” he thunders in a post on Truth Social, among other things.

“We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there – We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin”, he threatens in another.

“AMERICA FIRST means many GREAT things, including the fact that, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!”, he proclaims in a third.

Trump rants about Iranian nuclear weapons. Photo: facsimile/Truth Social

Who makes the decisions?

Trump has certainly long had an eccentric public persona, but even many of his own supporters on social media are wondering what is really going on. Wasn’t Joe Biden the crazy president who was dragging the US into war and misery – not Trump?

Others cannot understand why the US president continues to shout about Iranian nuclear weapons when all relevant experts have already stated that there is no evidence whatsoever that such a threat is imminent. Where did he actually get his information from, how does he make his assessments, and why are they so irrational? These are the questions being asked. No answers seem to be forthcoming, except that the US is sticking to its line that Israel’s wishes take precedence over everything else.

Therefore, it does not matter to Trump that it is Israel – not Iran – that has illegally and in the utmost secrecy acquired a large number of nuclear weapons and used them to press for US military support or deter hostile neighbors in conflicts.

There is widespread concern among Trump’s voter base that, despite all his promises of peace, Trump once again appears to be throwing the US into a major war based on lies and disinformation – exactly as was the case with the invasion following the fabricated chemical weapons allegations in Iraq in 2003. Many Americans are resigned to the fact that this is not at all what they voted for.

Opponents of US involvement in Israel’s war against Iran also point out that those who are most vocal in calling for another US war are power brokers who do not actually support Trump or the MAGA movement, but see the war as an opportunity to split or crush the movement that has built up around him.

The coming days and weeks will not only define Trump’s political legacy, but the future of the entire Middle East. Perhaps even the world’s.

A selection of warnings about an imminent Iranian nuclear threat:

1984 – Jane’s Defense Weekly: Iran may have nuclear weapons within two years.
1992 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran close to having a bomb by 1999.
1993 – Yitzhak Rabin: Iran is building nuclear weapons, the world must act.
1995 – US government: Iran's nuclear weapons plans must be stopped
1998 – Madeleine Albright: Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
2000 – Bill Clinton: Law against support for Iran's weapons program.
2002 – George W. Bush: Iran threatens with nuclear weapons plans.
2004 – U.S. National Intelligence Estimate: Iran probably moving toward nuclear weapons.
2005 – Ariel Sharon: Iran close to technical solution for bomb.
2006 – George W. Bush: Iran's nuclear plans threaten peace.
2007 – US intelligence: Iran paused its weapons program in 2003 but is rebuilding capacity.
2008 – Ehud Olmert: Iran close to irreversible nuclear weapons point.
2009 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran three to five years from bomb.
2010 – Barack Obama: Iran's nuclear program a major threat.
2011 – Leon Panetta: Iran could have a bomb within a year.
2012 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran close to the “red line” for nuclear weapons.
2013 – Moshe Ya’alon: Iran very close to the nuclear threshold.
2014 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran on its way to becoming a nuclear power.
2015 – Benjamin Netanyahu: JCPOA (nuclear agreement with Iran) paves the way for Iran's bomb.
2017 – Donald Trump: Iran could quickly obtain nuclear weapons.
2018 – Mike Pompeo: Iran is seeking nuclear weapons despite JCPOA.
2019 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran close to manufacturing an atomic bomb.
2020 – Donald Trump: Iran economically weak but nuclear threat remains.
2021 – Joe Biden: Iran must comply with JCPOA to stop nuclear weapons.
2023 – Yoav Gallant: Iran closer to the bomb than ever.
2024 – US intelligence: Iran months away from nuclear weapons.
2025 – Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran could build nine nuclear weapons.
2025 – Donald Trump: US could bomb Iran if nuclear program is not stopped.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

https://nordictimes.com/world/irans-president-we-have-never-wanted-nuclear-weapons/

World

Iran’s president: “We have never wanted nuclear weapons”

The escalation in the Middle East

Published 7 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
4 minute read
Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian denies that the country is developing nuclear weapons and claims that Israel has tried to kill him, in a new interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson. The 70-year-old heart surgeon who leads the country says he is ready to resume diplomacy with the US, but accuses Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of having destroyed the peace process.

The interview, which was published on Tucker Carlson’s X channel, was conducted through an interpreter following recent weeks of escalation between the US and Iran. Carlson explains the reason for the interview by saying that American citizens have the right to all information that affects them, especially when their country is involved in conflicts.

— We did this interview because we were at war with Iran 10 days ago and maybe will be again, Carlson explains in his introduction. He emphasizes that the goal is not to reach “absolute truth” but to — contribute to the knowledge base from which Americans can form their own opinion.

Denies nuclear weapons ambitions

President Pezeshkian categorically denies that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and refers to religious prescriptions that prohibit this.

— The truth is that we have never sought to develop a nuclear bomb, not before, not now, or in the future, because this is wrong and goes against the religious decree or fatwa that has been issued by his excellency, the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, says Pezeshkian.

He accuses Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of having created “this false mentality that Iran is seeking a nuclear bomb” since 1984 and of having instilled this perception in every American president since then.

Criticizes IAEA after bombings

Regarding the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Pezeshkian explains that Iran was “somewhat pessimistically inclined” because they realized that Israel could obtain information from IAEA inspections. Despite this, Iran allowed full access for monitoring.

— As a result of the US’s illegal attacks on our nuclear centers and installations, much of the equipment and facilities there have been seriously damaged. Therefore, we have no access to them. We cannot see, and if this access does not come back again, we must wait, says the president.

Claims Israel tried to kill him

When asked if Israel has tried to kill him, Pezeshkian responds affirmatively:

— They tried, yes. And they acted accordingly, but they failed. As a true believer, I believe that it is in God the Almighty’s hands to decide when a person should die or not die.

He describes how he was at a meeting when Israel tried to bomb the area, but explains that he is not afraid to sacrifice his life for his country:

— I am willing to give my life, to bleed for it. No one here, I mean, none of the government officials are afraid to lose their lives in the line of defense.

“Death to America” – explains the meaning

Regarding the expression “death to America” heard from Iranians, Pezeshkian explains that this is misunderstood:

— When they say death to the US, it doesn’t mean death to – they don’t mean death to the people of the US or even to the officials of the US – they mean death to crime, death to killing and bloodshed, death to supporting the killing of others, death to insecurity and instability, he says.

The president emphasizes that Iran has never invaded another country in 200 years and asks rhetorically:

— Have you ever heard of an Iranian killing an American? Have you ever heard that? Or a terrorist who was Iranian and he carried out a terrorist attack against Americans?

Ready for new negotiations – with conditions

Pezeshkian expresses that Iran is open to resuming negotiations with the US, but sets conditions following recent attacks:

— We see no problems with resuming negotiations. But before that, I must remind you that due to the atrocities committed by the Zionist regime, by Israel, not only against my country but throughout the region, we now face a crisis.

He describes how Iranian commanders were killed when they were off duty at home with their families, which he claims are war crimes under international law. The president also poses the question of how Iran can trust the US again:

— How can we trust the US again? We resume negotiations. How can we then know for sure that right in the middle of the talks, the Israeli regime won’t get permission again to attack us?

Economic cooperation possible

Despite tensions, Pezeshkian says there are no restrictions on American investments in Iran from Iran’s side:

— His excellency emphasized that there is no limitation and there is nothing preventing American investors from coming to Iran and making investments in Iran even currently, he says, referring to the country’s supreme leader.

He adds that any restrictions are caused by American sanctions, not by Iran.

Sees Trump as key figure

Pezeshkian expresses hope that President Donald Trump can lead the region toward peace:

— I believe that the US president can very well lead the region and the world to peace and calm or, on the other hand, lead it to eternal wars, he says.

He urges Trump not to let himself be drawn into “Netanyahu’s war” and describes the Israeli prime minister as someone with “an inhuman agenda” who wants “eternal wars, wars that continue and continue and continue”.

The interview concludes with Pezeshkian’s emphasis that Iran relies on itself:

— We have always put our trust in God and on God we rely. And we are capable of defending ourselves and standing on our own feet to defend our country, our territorial integrity to the last drop of our blood.

Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

https://nordictimes.com/world/trumps-top-diplomat-compares-syrias-jihadist-leader-to-george-washington/

World

Trump’s top diplomat compares Syria’s jihadist leader to George Washington

The escalation in the Middle East

Published 2 July 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Ahmed al-Sharaa and America's first president George Washington (1732-1799).
3 minute read
Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

The US government is considering removing Syria’s new leader Ahmed al-Sharaa – a former jihadist leader within the terrorist group al-Qaeda – from its global terrorist list. Meanwhile, American top diplomats are comparing him to America’s first president George Washington.

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order dismantling major parts of the comprehensive sanctions program against Syria. Simultaneously, he has ordered a review of the terrorist classification of Ahmed al-Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani, the Islamist terrorist leader who now governs the country after Bashar al-Assad’s secular government was overthrown by Islamist groups.

According to the order, which was made public on Monday, broad financial restrictions against Syria are lifted, while targeted sanctions against Assad and his former government remain. HTS – Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – and other militant groups involved in Assad’s fall are not directly affected, but the order opens the door for changes.

Trump instructs Secretary of State Marco Rubio to review both HTS’s status as a foreign terrorist organization and al-Sharaa’s designation as a “specially designated global terrorist”. Syria’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, implemented in 1979, will also be reconsidered.

Historical parallels

The decision comes in the wake of Trump’s notable meeting with Ahmed al-Sharaa in Riyadh in May. The focus then was on Syria’s reconstruction and a possible normalization of relations with Israel. Trump described the new leadership in Damascus as deserving “a chance at greatness”.

To lead contacts with Damascus, Trump has appointed Thomas Barrack as Special Envoy for Syria. Barrack is a former ambassador to Turkey and longtime confidant of the president.

On Monday, Barrack commented to reporters about the “controversy here, of somebody who had been al-Nusrah and had been considered a bad guy who all of a sudden becomes the leader” – and drew a historical parallel between Syria’s political transformation and the early years of U.S. independence.

“And in thinking through it, if you remember, we had a revolutionary war that lasted 14 months.  And we had brutality.  We had the Battles of Concord, the Battle of Lexington.  And from 1776 when we declared independence, it was 12 years until we got a president.  And who was the president?  The president was a general.  Who was the general?  It was George Washington”.

The American Revolutionary War actually lasted over eight years, between 1775 and 1783.

“And in those 12 years, we were defining everything.  We were defining a constitution, we were defining the framework, we were defining a judiciary – trying to figure out where we’re going before we ever had the election”, Barrack continued.

Trump: “Young attractive guy”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has previously warned that Syria has become “a playground for jihadist groups, including ISIS and others”. He also admitted that the new leadership in Damascus “didn’t pass their background check with the FBI”, but emphasized that the US must still support the development to counter greater regional instability.

“The US is taking further actions to support a Syria that is stable, unified, and at peace with itself and its neighbors”, Rubio wrote in a post on X on Monday.

Donald Trump has previously caused some controversy when he described the Syrian Islamist leader and terrorist as a “young, attractive guy, very strong past” and a “fighter”.

The Nordic Times has in several previous articles highlighted al-Sharaa’s/al-Julani’s background as an Islamist terrorist and how, after Assad’s overthrow, he was suddenly being promoted by Western powers as a legitimate political leader.

Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

https://nordictimes.com/world/israeli-settlers-attacked-their-own-military-base/

World

Israeli settlers attacked their own military base

The escalation in the Middle East

Published 30 June 2025
– By Editorial Staff
The extreme settler movement advocates for ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and aims to take over the areas where they live.
3 minute read
Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

A large number of extreme Jewish settlers attacked an Israeli military base in the occupied West Bank on Sunday evening. According to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces), vehicles were vandalized, property was set on fire, graffiti was sprayed, and soldiers were attacked.

The attack is described as one of the most serious incidents where settlers have turned against their own country’s security forces. The violence follows several similar attacks targeting Palestinian villages and communities, and growing anger over Israeli authorities arresting several of those responsible.

On Wednesday, over 100 settlers invaded the town of Kfar Malik, set fire to property and opened fire on Palestinians trying to defend their homes, according to Najeb Rostom, head of the local council. Three Palestinians were killed after Israeli military intervention. Five settlers were arrested in connection with the attacks.

– No civilized country can tolerate violent and anarchic acts of burning a military facility, damaging IDF property and attacking security personnel by citizens of the country, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

Images in Israeli media show young, religious men associated with “hilltop youth”, a militant settler movement long accused of systematically attacking Palestinians and their property. The movement often establishes illegal outposts in the West Bank and has become a symbol of the most violent branch of the settler movement.

“Jewish extremists”

Security forces used stun grenades to disperse the crowd at the military base north of Ramallah, and the military published images of damaged infrastructure, which was reportedly used to prevent attacks and maintain security.

Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (Jewish Power party) – himself previously convicted of racist incitement and supporting terror groups – unusually condemned the attack:

– Attacking security forces, security facilities, and IDF soldiers who are our brothers, our protectors, is a red line, and must be dealt with in full severity. We are brothers, he wrote on X.

Opposition leader and centrist Yair Lapid was much more direct:

– These are Jewish terrorists, gangs of criminals, who feel backed by the (governing) coalition, he said on Israel Army Radio.

Settlers attack West Bank’s last Christian village

Ben-Gvir has long defended settler violence, and his influence has grown under Netanyahu’s leadership. Critics argue this has legitimized increasingly extreme violence – even directed at the country’s own authorities.

Defense Minister Israel Katz promised to crack down on the violence and urged settlers to immediately start respecting their own country’s soldiers.

Israel occupied the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem during the Six-Day War in 1967. Palestinians claim these areas for a future state. Today, about three million Palestinians and 500,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, but the international community considers the settlements illegal under international law.

Recently, The Nordic Times reported how residents in the last entirely Christian village in the West Bank warned about constant shooting from militant settlers. The newspaper has also highlighted how settlers openly advocate for complete ethnic cleansing in Gaza and consider even Palestinian children to be terrorists.

Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

https://nordictimes.com/the-nordics/sweden/sweden-democrats-leader-supports-continued-strikes-on-iran/

Sweden

Sweden Democrats leader supports continued strikes on Iran

The escalation in the Middle East

Published 27 June 2025
– By Editorial Staff
According to the leader of the Sweden Democrats it is fundamentally positive if the bombings continue - and escalate - so that the Iranian regime falls.
3 minute read
Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

Jimmie Åkesson, leader of the Sweden Democrats party, supports the US and Israeli attacks against Iran – and would like to see more of the regime’s leaders eliminated through continued bombing.

– I believe this is the only way to achieve political change within any reasonable time frame, he claims.

During an appearance at Almedalen Week (an annual Swedish political forum) in Visby, he commented to Swedish news agency TT about the American bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities.

– It has both positive and negative aspects. And we’ll have to see what happens. But fundamentally, I think it’s good.

According to the Sweden Democrats leader, “evil must be fought with harsh measures”, and he assesses that the Iranian regime has been significantly weakened by the attacks.

His hope is that the bombings will continue – but with a focus on eliminating leading representatives of the Iranian state – the same approach advocated by Netanyahu’s government and Israel’s military.

– The best outcome would be to follow through with this to achieve change in Iran after almost 50 years of oppression.

– Now they have primarily destroyed these nuclear facilities, which is of course very good. But certainly, continued bombing, continuing to eliminate leaders of this Islamist regime, that’s a very effective way to bring about change.

“Israel is defending itself”

Regarding the ongoing genocide in Gaza, Åkesson also gives his support to Netanyahu and Israel’s actions, claiming that the Israeli regime is acting in a way that is directly necessary and “doing what needs to be done”.

– Of course, this should be done within the framework of international law. Israel isn’t perfect, they’ve surely made mistakes in various contexts, but overall, the right to self-defense is completely reasonable, he says and continues:

– They’re defending themselves in a war not against a state but against a terrorist organization that doesn’t follow any international laws of war.

“Seems more loyal to Israel than to Sweden”

However, not everyone is impressed by Åkesson’s nearly unlimited support for Israel, and Gustav Kasselstrand, leader of the nationalist party Alternative for Sweden, writes on X that “Åkesson seems more loyal to Israel than to Sweden”.

“Now he wants to see a new globalist war in the Middle East, this time against a sovereign state like Iran – which hasn’t attacked another country throughout its existence. But the regime must be changed as it disturbs American-Israeli interests in the region, and it should preferably be done with bombs; as if we don’t have enough horrific examples when this was done in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya”, he notes.

Kasselstrand, who has a background as chairman of the Sweden Democrats’ youth organization, also points out that the wars and regime change operations in the Middle East have almost without exception resulted in massive refugee flows and Muslim mass immigration to Europe – phenomena that the Sweden Democrats themselves claim they want to stop.

“How can it be ‘fighting Islamism’ to start a new devastating war with gigantic refugee flows of Muslims entering Europe?” he asks.

Editorial Staff
editorial@nordictimes.com

N

Polaris of Enlightenment

News

Other

Subscribe to our newsletter!

Follow TNT socials!

X-twitter Facebook Telegram Instagram

© 2022-2025 The Nordic Times TNT.
All rights reserved.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Donate

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Donate
Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.