🇺🇸/🇮🇷 : Following the mutual attacks, Negotiation talks in Switzerland between the U.S. and Iran have been canceled (Wall Street Journal).

🇪🇺/🇪🇸: The Decay of European Democracy

Spanish left-wing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has just announced that he has given the green light to the regularization of one million immigrants in Spain, the overwhelming majority of whom are Arabs or Muslims. Spain has essentially decided to commit cultural suicide—not out of despair, but as a deliberate policy. It is a deliberate move by the Spanish government to erase Western culture and allow the Muslim Brotherhood and Islam to gain a stronger foothold in Spain. Six hundred years after the Reconquista, Islam is regaining a stronghold in Europe. But this time, I’m not sure most Spaniards and Europeans are willing to put up a fight.

Where did all of this start?

The Great Replacement, if you look it up on Wikipedia, is defined as a “far-right conspiracy theory.” Laughable, isn’t it? All one needs to do is look at the figures to see the harsh reality behind this so-called theory. Across Europe, the number of Muslims has steadily grown. From making up less than 2–3% of the population in the 1970s, Muslims now account for roughly 10% of France’s population, 8% in Germany, 8% in Sweden, 8% in Belgium, and so on. And those numbers continue to grow—rapidly.

Yet this is the first time a European prime minister has openly admitted his willingness to facilitate this replacement. Pedro Sánchez, who has led the charge against Israel in Europe, has effectively given the Muslim Brotherhood a stronger foothold on the continent. It’s not difficult to see the connection for anyone willing to look.

Pedro Sánchez’s wife and several people close to him are facing corruption investigations. I wouldn’t be surprised if Qatar and its affiliates end up being implicated at some point. The support Sánchez offered Iran during this war was, in my view, more outspoken than that of many Muslim countries. That speaks volumes. But it is not surprising. Sánchez and his left-wing allies have always had this replacement project in the back of their minds; they simply lacked the credibility and political support to implement it.

So how do you get people to support you? You find a scapegoat—namely, Israel. Israel is a gift for politicians. You can secure a large share of the Muslim vote simply by taking a stance against Israel. There is no need for economic promises, social reforms, or policies in any other field. Just say “Free Palestine,” and you automatically gain support from many voters.

Now Sánchez and those left-wing ideologues have found the political base they needed to pursue their Great Replacement agenda. And the opposition, though it exists, is scattered and struggling. Most Spaniards reject this plan, but they are incapable of uniting. Why? The answer is simple. Too many Spaniards and Europeans refuse to see this cultural conflict as an existential one. They still naively believe that what happened in the Middle East, where Islam largely replaced Christianity in many areas, cannot happen in Europe. God knows why they refuse to see it.

The war has already started. And the Islamo-left is winning it—not because it is stronger than the other side, but because the other side refuses to admit that it is in a war.

🇴🇲/🇮🇷/🇺🇸: Oman recently sent an official proposal to the United States and Western countries that shipping companies would pay service fees for passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Oman’s proposal is partly based on arrangements in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, where a private foundation collects voluntary donations to fund navigation safety. In theory, payments in the Strait of Hormuz should also be voluntary, but an Iranian source claimed that from Tehran’s perspective these payments would be mandatory. (NYT)

🇮🇷/🌍: Why Iran is extremely unlikely to impose transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz.

Calls for Iran to start charging every ship crossing the Strait of Hormuz resurface whenever tensions rise. In reality, such a move is highly unlikely—not only for economic reasons, but also because it would run contrary to the long-standing legal regime governing one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints.

The Strait of Hormuz is an international strait used for navigation between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Under the rules reflected in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), ships and aircraft enjoy a right of transit passage through such straits. That regime is designed to ensure continuous and unimpeded international navigation and does not provide a basis for a coastal state to unilaterally impose transit tolls on vessels simply for passing through.

Even though Iran has not ratified UNCLOS, it has signed the convention, and many of its navigation provisions are widely regarded as reflecting customary international law. More importantly, the overwhelming majority of the world’s maritime trading nations rely on freedom of navigation and would strongly oppose any attempt to establish unilateral passage fees.

Such a measure would likely trigger diplomatic protests, legal disputes, and potentially freedom of navigation operations by affected states. Countries importing Gulf oil—from China and India to Japan, South Korea, and European states—have little incentive to accept a precedent that would allow a coastal state to tax international transit through one of the world’s busiest maritime routes.

In other words, while Iran can periodically threaten to disrupt shipping or close the strait as a form of political pressure, permanently imposing transit fees on international shipping would face major legal, diplomatic, and practical obstacles. That is why the proposal remains far more plausible as political messaging than as a realistic long-term policy.

It’s not only the US-iran deal this time but rather Iran Vs the rest of the world. Highly unlikely to see the world agreeing to Iran piracy.

🇮🇷/🇺🇸: The United States has informed Iran that some frozen assets will be released if it lifts the Strait of Hormuz transit fees. Tehran has currently rejected this offer. (WSJ)

🇮🇱/🇱🇧: Ongoing fighting in southern Lebanon between Israeli troops and Hezbollah operatives. Preliminary reports talk about one Israeli soldier in critical condition

🇺🇸/🇴🇲/🇰🇼/🇸🇦/🇶🇦/🇧🇭/🇾🇪 : The US Central Command (CENTCOM) held a conference in Bahrain, bringing together twelve military commanders from the region. Admiral Brad Cooper, CENTCOM Commander, presided over the event, which was attended by representatives from Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

🇱🇧/ 🇮🇱BREAKING ❗️: For the first time since the brokered ceasefire sirens sounded in Northern Israel

False alarm

🇮🇱/ 🇵🇸 : A Palestinian police force will begin training in the coming weeks to take over law enforcement duties in the experimental areas in Rafah.
- Members of the police force will be equipped with electric stun guns and their non-affiliation with Hamas will be confirmed.
- Two security circles will be established around the experimental areas under the responsibility of the international stabilization force.
- The Israeli army will deploy in the outer circle to separate Hamas and the stabilization force in the experimental areas.
Source : Israel Hayom

🇮🇷 : The Iranian opposition compares attendance at Freddie Mercury’s concert at Wembley in London (July 1985) with 72,000 people, and attendance at Ali Khamenei’s prayers and funeral at the Tehran mosque (July 2026).

The Future of Iran’s Proxy Strategy After the 2024–2026 Regional Conflicts

Iran and its proxies have suffered tremendous losses over the past three years. Most of them still exist, but not all of them carry the same strategic value for Tehran. The question now is not whether the Axis of Resistance survives, but how Iran will choose to rebuild it.

Iran remains indispensable to its proxies for two primary reasons: money and diplomacy.

Since the fall of the Assad regime, Iran has become the only sovereign state within the so-called Axis of Resistance. Unlike Hezbollah, Hamas, or the Houthis, it possesses diplomatic legitimacy, embassies, and representation at international institutions. It is therefore the political and diplomatic voice of the Axis, defending its allies’ interests and narratives on the international stage.

Yet diplomacy alone does not sustain proxy organizations.

Money does.

Over the past three years, Iran and nearly all of its regional allies have suffered significant military and economic losses. Regardless of the exact figures, the reconstruction costs facing the Axis are enormous. Every major proxy now requires substantial financial assistance to recover.

Hezbollah illustrates this challenge particularly well.

For decades, Hezbollah has maintained its legitimacy among Lebanon’s Shiite population by providing welfare, healthcare, education, and financial support where the Lebanese state has often failed. Today, however, the organization faces unprecedented financial pressure. Thousands of families expect compensation, wounded fighters require long-term care, and rebuilding damaged infrastructure demands vast resources.

At the same time, the collapse of the Assad regime has disrupted the regional networks that reportedly generated significant revenue for Hezbollah, including the Captagon trade. Iran increasingly appears to be Hezbollah’s principal remaining financial backer.

Hamas faces a different—but equally difficult—reality.

Its military capabilities have been severely degraded, and while many expected Arab states to finance Gaza’s reconstruction, substantial reconstruction funding linked to Hamas has yet to materialize. Moreover, several regional actors have made clear that they do not envision Hamas governing Gaza in the future. Iran therefore remains one of the few states openly committed to maintaining Hamas as a military and political actor.

The Houthis are arguably in a stronger position militarily, but they too remain dependent on Iranian assistance. Although the U.S.-led bombing campaign achieved limited military results, it imposed additional economic costs on an already impoverished territory. Sustaining prolonged military operations requires continued external financing, and Iran remains their principal sponsor.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has seen one of its most important long-term strategic investments collapse. After more than a decade of political, military, and financial involvement in Syria, the fall of the Assad regime represents a major setback for Tehran’s regional strategy.

Iran itself has also suffered severe economic damage. While estimates vary considerably, analysts broadly agree that recent conflicts have imposed substantial costs on the Iranian economy, further reducing Tehran’s financial flexibility.

In short, every major actor within the Axis of Resistance now needs the same thing: money.

⸻

A Competition for Limited Resources

This is where Tehran faces its greatest strategic dilemma.

despite the temporary suspension of the sanctions, it became clear to them that no bank in the West is willing to do business with them for two months. They are offering steep discounts, but have not sold even one barrel of oil. In addition, no asset was unfrozen. The Gulf states have no desire to lift a finger for them.

Consequently, Iran must now prioritize.

For over four decades, the Islamic Republic has built its regional strategy around exporting the Islamic Revolution through a network of proxy organizations.

Today, however, that strategy faces an unprecedented financial constraint.

The Axis needs more money than Iran may realistically be able to provide.

There are already indications that Hamas no longer occupies the highest position in Tehran’s hierarchy of priorities. The events of October 7 fundamentally altered regional dynamics, and Iran may increasingly view Hezbollah and the Houthis as more strategically valuable assets.

Even Hezbollah, however, cannot assume unlimited Iranian support.

This raises an important strategic question.

Will Tehran continue to prioritize financing its regional proxy network despite mounting domestic economic pressures, or will it redirect greater resources toward stabilizing its own economy?

History offers an important clue.

Since 1979, the Islamic Republic has repeatedly demonstrated its willingness to endure significant domestic economic hardship in pursuit of its regional and ideological objectives. While public dissatisfaction has grown considerably, successive Iranian governments have continued investing heavily in regional allies despite persistent internal crises.

Khomenei had long emphasized the primacy of Islamic identity over nationalism. As he once argued:

“Those who think in terms of nationalism are against Islam. Islam came to end nationalism… I am not an Iranian first; I am a Muslim.”

Whether one agrees with this worldview or not, it reflects a fundamental principle of the Islamic Republic’s strategic thinking: the preservation of the Revolution has consistently taken precedence over short-term economic considerations.

If that principle continues to guide Tehran’s decision-making, Iranian citizens may once again bear much of the economic burden of sustaining Iran’s regional ambitions.

Iran’s policy toward its proxy network is unlikely to change fundamentally, particularly with regard to Hezbollah, which Tehran continues to view as a cornerstone of the IRGC’s regional strategy. The more pressing question is not whether Iran intends to support its proxies, but whether it will have the financial means to do so. Over the years, Tehran has made extensive political and financial commitments to its regional allies. Fulfilling those commitments, however, may prove increasingly difficult. Mounting domestic economic pressures, the costs of recent conflicts, continued sanctions, and the financial needs of multiple proxy organizations are placing unprecedented strain on Iran’s resources. As a result, Tehran may soon face difficult choices about how to allocate increasingly limited funds. Whether it can continue financing its proxy network at previous levels remains one of the central strategic questions for the coming years.

Iranian propaganda at its best. Let’s try to portray a renowned western newspaper affirming a number while it only quoted Iranian officials.

So far it’s basically Fars news, Al Jazeera and Al Mayadeen who accepted the number. All quoting the same source being obviously the Iranian regime officials.

🇻🇦: For many Catholics, the recent excommunications announced by Rome represent a tragic but necessary defense of ecclesiastical authority. For those attached to the Society of Saint Pius X, however, they represent something entirely different: the punishment of priests and bishops who chose fidelity to the Catholic faith over institutional conformity.

The SSPX has always maintained that it was not founded to create a parallel Church. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre repeatedly insisted that his struggle was not against the papacy but against what he believed were dangerous theological and liturgical innovations introduced after the Second Vatican Council. The Society argues that obedience has limits. Catholic tradition has always taught that authority exists to safeguard the Deposit of Faith—not to alter

the recent episcopal consecrations were not acts of rebellion but acts of necessity.

the Church is experiencing one of the gravest crises in its history: collapsing Mass attendance, empty seminaries, widespread doctrinal confusion, moral scandals, and a dramatic decline in religious practice throughout much of the Western world. If the fruits of the post-conciliar reforms have been so devastating, they argue, should Catholics not have the right—even the duty—to preserve what the Church taught and practiced for centuries?

Critics answer that no bishop may be consecrated without a papal mandate. The SSPX does not deny this general principle. Rather, it invokes the principle of necessity: when the salvation of souls is at stake, extraordinary circumstances may justify extraordinary measures. In its view, the consecrations were intended to ensure that future generations would continue to have bishops capable of ordaining priests, confirming the faithful, and preserving the traditional Roman liturgy.

To many outside observers, this argument is unconvincing. To many within the Society, however, it is precisely what history demands. They point to countless moments in Church history when saints resisted ecclesiastical authorities whom they believed to be acting imprudently or allowing error to spread. They insist that fidelity to Tradition has always been the highest form of obedience because Tradition itself is not the property of any pope or council—it belongs to the entire Church.

The recent excommunications therefore raise a profound question that extends beyond canon law. Is unity simply institutional, or is it also doctrinal? If Catholics sincerely believe that essential elements of the faith are endangered, does obedience require silence, or can fidelity require resistance?

the Society believes the answer is clear. They do not see themselves as founding a new Church or rejecting the papacy. Rather, they are preserving what they believe the Catholic Church has always taught until Rome itself returns to that continuity.

Whether history vindicates or condemns that decision remains to be seen. But for those attached to the Society of Saint Pius X, the issue has never been about disobedience. It has always been about conscience, Tradition, and what they believe to be their duty before God.

God damn he is really trying very hard isn’t he ? Trust me fellas you saw my pictures we are millions Wallahi. But in January nothing happened it was just a few CIA /mossad agents. Given how hard they are trying that should be obvious to you that this loud minority doesn’t represent the Iranian people.

🇮🇷/🇺🇸 : A decisive step following the incidents in the Strait of Hormuz: the United States is reinstating sanctions on Iranian oil.

Iran’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz were completely unacceptable to the US and will have consequences.

🇺🇸/ 🇮🇷: Powerful US strikes reported on southern Iran. So far Bandar Abbas is confirmed to have been targeted

🇺🇸/🇮🇷: Widespread destruction reported on Bandar Abbas