Stopping wars or waging them?
We compare and contrast Trump’s bid for a peacemaker legacy with the military strikes launched during his second term.
Source link
We compare and contrast Trump’s bid for a peacemaker legacy with the military strikes launched during his second term.
Source link
If Israel and the US were to attack Iran again, they would ‘face a more decisive response’, Pezeshkian warns.
Published On 27 Dec 202527 Dec 2025
Share
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian says that the United States, Israel and Europe are waging a “full-fledged war” against his country.
“In my opinion, we are in a full-fledged war with America, Israel and Europe. They do not want our country to stand on its feet,” Pezeshkian told the official site of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in an interview on Saturday.
list of 3 itemsend of list
The president’s remarks come ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting on Monday with US President Donald Trump. They also come six months after Israel and the US launched strikes on Iran, and after France, Germany and the United Kingdom reimposed United Nations sanctions on Iran in September over its nuclear programme.
“Our dear military forces are doing their jobs with strength, and now, in terms of equipment and manpower, despite all the problems we have, they are stronger than when they [Israel and the US] attacked,” Pezeshkian said.
“So, if they want to attack, they will naturally face a more decisive response.”
The president said that “this war” is unlike past ones.
“This war is worse than Iraq’s war against us. If one understands it well, this war is far more complex and difficult than that war,” Pezeshkian said, referring to the 1980-1988 conflict between the neighbouring countries in which thousands were killed.
The US and its allies accuse Iran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, a claim Tehran has repeatedly denied.
Israel and Iran engaged in a 12-day war in June, triggered by an unprecedented Israeli attack on Iranian military and nuclear sites, as well as civilian areas.
The strikes caused more than 1,000 casualties, according to Iranian authorities.
The US later joined the Israeli operation, bombing three Iranian nuclear sites.
Washington’s involvement brought a halt to negotiations with Tehran, which began in April, over its nuclear programme.
Since returning to the White House in January, US President Donald Trump has revived his so-called “maximum pressure” policy against Iran, initiated during his first term.
That has included additional sanctions designed to economically cripple the country and dry up its oil revenues from sales on the global market.
According to recent reports, when Netanyahu visits Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida this weekend, he will be pushing for more military actions against Iran, this time focusing on Tehran’s missile programme.
The Israeli government is cracking down on critical media outlets, giving it unprecedented control over how its actions are presented to its citizens.
Among the moves is the so-called Al Jazeera Law, which allows the government to shut down foreign media outlets on national security grounds. On Tuesday, the Israeli parliament approved the extension of the law for two years after it was introduced during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza to essentially stop Al Jazeera’s operations in Israel.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Separately, the government is also moving to shut down the popular Army Radio network, one of two publicly funded Israeli news outlets. The radio station is often criticised by the Israeli right wing, which views Army Radio as being biased against it.
Israelis are still reliant on receiving their news from traditional outlets with about half relying on broadcast news for information on current affairs and about a third similarly relying upon radio stations.
The tone of the media that is allowed to publish and broadcast is important. According to analysts inside Israel, the selective broadcasting of Palestinian suffering during Israel’s war on Gaza has helped sustain the carnage and reinforced a sense of grievance that allows for Israel’s continued assaults on Gaza as well as regional countries, such as Syria, Yemen and Lebanon.
Despite what observers characterise as a media environment firmly rigged in its favour, the far-right government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which contains ministers convicted of “terrorism” offences and others who have repeatedly called for the illegal annexation of the occupied West Bank, is looking nevertheless to bypass legal checks on its control of the media and bring more of Israel’s information feed under its control.
Let’s take a closer look.
Because the government believes it is too critical.
Israeli politicians have long complained about how the war in Gaza has been covered in both the international and domestic media.
But the government added a new accusation in November, partly blaming the media for the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on October 7, 2023.
“If there hadn’t been a media entirely mobilised to encourage refusal [to volunteer to reserve duty] and reckless opposition to the judicial reform, there wouldn’t have been such a rift in the nation that led the enemy to seize the opportunity,” Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi said as he introduced a bill to increase government control of the news environment, referring to attempts by the Israeli government to reduce the independence of the judiciary.

In addition to the ‘Al Jazeera Law’, there are three items of legislation under way: a plan to privatise Israel’s public broadcaster, Kan, the move to abolish Army Radio, and an initiative to bring the media regulator under government control.
Both Army Radio and Kan, the other state-funded outlet with editorial independence, have carried numerous reports critical of the government.
This week, Kan aired an interview with Netanyahu’s former spokesperson Eli Feldstein, who told the broadcaster that the prime minister had instructed him to develop a strategy to help evade responsibility for the October 7 attacks.
Meanwhile, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz, justifying the move to shut down Army Radio, said on Monday that the outlet had become a platform to attack the Israeli military and its soldiers.
Israel is also potentially changing the way it regulates its media. In November, the Israeli parliament pressed ahead with a bill that would abolish existing media regulators and replace them with a new authority appointed by the government, potentially allowing for even greater state interference.

Lastly, Israel has also codified into law the emergency legislation banning foreign media outlets whose output it disagrees with. It was first enacted as emergency legislation in May 2024 when Israel used it to ban Al Jazeera from its territory, and it was then used in the same month to halt the activity of The Associated Press after the government accused the United States-based news agency of sharing footage with Al Jazeera.
Under the new law, the communications minister – with the prime minister’s sign-off and the backing of a ministerial committee – may halt a foreign broadcaster’s transmissions if the prime minister accepts a professional assessment that the outlet poses a security threat. The minister can also shut the broadcaster’s offices, confiscate equipment used to produce its content and block access to its website.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and the United Kingdom’s National Union of Journalists have criticised Israel’s decision to legislate against foreign media platforms it deems a security threat.
In a statement, IFJ General Secretary Anthony Bellanger said: “Israel is openly waging a battle against media outlets, both local and foreign, that criticise the government’s narrative: that is typical behavior of authoritarian regimes. We are deeply concerned about the Israeli parliament passing this controversial bill, as it would be a serious blow to free speech and media freedom, and a direct attack on the public’s right to know.”
The attempt to shutter Army Radio has also been heavily criticised with Israeli Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara declaring the move unlawful and accusing Netanyahu’s coalition of making public broadcasting “weakened, threatened and institutionally silenced and its future shrouded in mist”.
Baharav-Miara has also criticised the move to place media regulation under government control, saying the bill “endangers the very principle of press freedom”.
Not very.
The Israeli media have overwhelmingly been a consistent cheerleader of the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza, where more than 70,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel, and in the occupied West Bank.
The suffering of Palestinians is rarely shown, and when it is, it is often justified.
Even as Israel has killed more than 270 journalists and media workers in Gaza, the Israeli media have provided cover for the actions of its government and military.
That means Israelis often don’t recogise the hypocrisy of their government’s statements.
An example came in June after Iran struck an evacuated hospital during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran. The Israeli government called the incident a war crime, and the Israeli media reflected that outrage.
But the attack came after Israel had been accused by a variety of organisations, including the United Nations, of systematically destroying Gaza’s healthcare system with medical workers targeted for arrest and frequently tortured despite their protection under international law.
“The Israeli media … sees its job as not to educate – it’s to shape and mould a public that is ready to support war and aggression,” journalist Orly Noy told Al Jazeera from West Jerusalem in the wake of the strike on the Israeli medical centre. “It genuinely sees itself as having a special role in this.”