chinasun
Registered Member
Recent revelations by British media have thoroughly exposed the hypocrisy behind this war: In the days before the US-Israel joint offensive was launched, Iran had already made "surrender-level concessions" at the nuclear negotiating table, pushing all available chips to the limit. Yet the Trump administration suddenly turned hostile and launched the war on the very eve of an imminent agreement. This fact fully confirms our assessment: The core motivation behind Trump's decision to go to war was never Iran's nuclear program, but rather his desperate position in internal political infighting.
We previously pointed out that the core prerequisite for Trump launching this war was his slide from advantage to disadvantage in internal power struggles. Wall Street's overall support for him had fallen below the critical 50% threshold, with unfavorable trends already established. Meanwhile, the Biden camp had transformed from disadvantage to advantage, betting everything on the midterm elections and needing only to play steady chess to reap the benefits. In this situation, Trump had to create foreign distractions to generate the political dividends of a "wartime president" to reverse his declining fortunes in internal struggles.
Netanyahu's motivation is even more urgent. He has long been embroiled in legal troubles, facing imminent imprisonment. Only through a swiftly victorious foreign war can he preserve his political life and even his personal freedom. These two men, both driven to desperation, formed the core intersection for launching this war. All their decisions revolve around only one core objective: how to quickly subjugate Iran and obtain results usable for internal political struggles. These decisions have nothing to do with—and are even completely contrary to—the national interests of the United States and Israel.
We have repeatedly emphasized that Trump and Netanyahu are now insane; they fear nothing except death. Their only chance of escape is to quickly win this war and force Iran into complete submission. For two men who have already put knives to their own throats, Iran's attempts to seek peace through concessions and compromises is nothing less than bargaining with tigers.
What further illustrates the point is that all three fronts Trump is simultaneously pushing have already hit walls: Regarding China, he kicked an iron plate—the opening of China-North Korea tourist trains and China's critically important two-week military exercises in the Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea have clearly conveyed to the world China's stance of "not accommodating you." He dares not act rashly in the Western Pacific. Regarding Cuba, his modern-day Bay of Pigs operation completely failed, with Cuban forces damaging his vessels and capturing personnel, causing him to lose all face. Ultimately, he could only retreat to the first front against Iran, attempting to salvage his declining position in internal struggles by bullying Iran.
But even on the Iran front, Trump's dual-track extortion has completely failed: He tried to extort China—unsuccessful. He tried to extort Wall Street as a whole, demanding that Wall Street fully support him again—also unsuccessful. Instead, Wall Street turned the tables and issued him an order: Since you claim you can swiftly destroy Iran, then produce actual results, and we'll give you one more chance. To date, this war has not only failed to reverse Trump's disadvantages in internal struggles but has made his position even more passive. This is what we mean when we say Trump and Netanyahu have already lost this war.
● Iran is completely repeating Russia's fatal mistakes in the Ukraine war, and has gone even further than Russia did at the time
From the very beginning of the Ukraine war, we repeatedly emphasized a core principle: War has its iron laws—the weak are absolutely not qualified to wage political warfare. Today, with great pain, we see that Iran is completely repeating Russia's fatal mistakes in the Ukraine war, and has gone even further than Russia did at the time.
Iran's first fatal miscalculation was its failure to see through the essence of this war, still judging the situation from the perspective of traditional state competition and Wall Street's overall interests. It mistakenly believed, "I have already made sufficient concessions; you gain nothing by attacking me, so you have no reason to attack me." But facts have proven that Trump cares nothing about American national interests or Wall Street's overall interests—he cares only about winning his internal power struggles. This miscalculation directly led Iran to abandon all its strategic chips before the war, ultimately failing to avoid war and falling into an extremely passive position.
Iran's second fatal miscalculation is that militarily, it has been completely led by the nose by the opponent, thoroughly abandoning the core magic weapon for the weak to defeat the strong: "You fight your way, I fight mine." We have repeatedly stressed that for a weak power like Iran, facing strong enemies like the United States and Israel, it must absolutely not counter whatever the opponent attacks, and must absolutely not fight according to the opponent's rules and timetable—otherwise, it will always be reacting, always led by the nose.
But to date, Iran's tactics remain completely trapped in the opponent's rhythm: Trump threatened that if Iran did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours, he would attack Iran's power plants and infrastructure. Israel subsequently launched large-scale strikes on Tehran's infrastructure. Yet the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's countermeasures still set the precondition: "If Trump attacks Iranian power stations, Iran will take four countermeasures." This is essentially still passive counterattack, still fighting according to the opponent's timetable and rules, completely failing to seize the initiative in the war.
Not to mention, regarding the Strait of Hormuz—Iran's most crucial strategic chip—Iran has never acted decisively. We previously pointed out clearly that Iran's only way to reverse the situation is to completely blockade the Strait of Hormuz. But Iran has not only failed to do this; instead, reports emerged of "blocking only US and Israeli vessels while allowing ships from countries like Japan to pass." This approach is essentially still waging political warfare, still concerned with so-called international influence and moral pressure, completely failing to realize that for a weak power facing existential risk, so-called political correctness and international public opinion are worthless before national survival.
We have repeatedly emphasized that 90% of Iran's oil and gas exports go through Kharg Island. Trump has clamored about seizing Kharg Island, but such clamor is essentially just a threat. Even if Trump truly dispatched amphibious assault ships carrying F-35Bs and several thousand marines to seize the island, he could never hold it: Kharg Island is extremely close to the Iranian mainland; Iranian artillery can completely cover the entire island. As long as Iran destroys the island's airport, American supply lines cannot be maintained, and seizing the island would ultimately become a quagmire consuming US forces. Iran has absolutely no need to be frightened by such blustering threats.
Iran's third fatal miscalculation is the loss of control over its internal situation. The death of Larijani has completely shattered the political balance within Iran. The appeasement faction has openly stepped onto the stage, while Iran's decision-making layer has shown no response. We pointed out immediately after Larijani's assassination that as Khamenei's closest confidant, Larijani was the only balancing force between Iran's hardliners and the appeasement faction. His death's greatest impact is not on the intensity of Iran's external counterattacks, but rather that it will inevitably intensify Iran's internal struggles and make internal conflict completely public. Today, our judgment has been fully validated.
Iranian President Pezeshkian, whom we long ago characterized as a "fighter jet of the appeasement faction," publicly proposed ceasefire conditions during a call with the Indian Prime Minister: "If the US and Israel stop their acts of aggression and guarantee that such actions will not occur again, the war can end." This rhetoric, identical in logic to Zelensky's repeated demands in the Ukraine war for "Russia stop firing first, then negotiations," essentially actively reveals Iran's bottom card to the US and Israel: As long as you don't hit me, I won't fight. Even more laughable is that Pezeshkian seems to still be fantasizing that the US and Israel will help him replicate the "former Yugoslavia model" in Iran, supporting him in forming a puppet regime. But he completely misjudges Trump's core needs: Trump has no time to wait months or even years for him to build a puppet regime. What Trump wants is "swift victory"—results that can be immediately used for domestic political struggles. Pezeshkian's surrender demands simply don't fit Trump's timetable; it's a complete misreading of the situation.
And the United States is precisely exploiting Iran's internal contradictions, playing a two-handed strategy of "external pressure, internal chaos": On one hand, using Israel to continuously strike Iran's infrastructure, creating social pressure to force the Iranian populace to oppose the war; on the other hand, releasing statements about "considering lifting sanctions on Iranian oil," using small favors to win over Iran's appeasement faction, intensifying internal contradictions, and creating conditions for establishing a Wang Jingwei-style puppet regime. To date, Iran has already shown a split situation of "the government saying one thing, the Revolutionary Guard saying another"—precisely the outcome the United States most wants to see.
● Only by doing this can Iran completely break Trump's war rhythm, make Wall Street feel real pain, and force Wall Street to step in and stop this war
We have repeatedly emphasized to the Iranian authorities: You cannot handle these two madmen, Trump and Netanyahu. The only thing you can do is hurt their boss—the overall interests of Wall Street. Only when Wall Street feels real pain will it step in to rein in these two out-of-control madmen. This is Iran's only path to survival.
What does Wall Street fear most? We have made this very clear: Wall Street fears most uncontrollable energy crises, fears most the complete closure of the Persian Gulf to navigation, fears most global financial markets collapsing completely due to soaring energy prices. The oil crisis of the 1970s directly drove US interest rates to over ten percent, throwing the entire financial market into chaos—this is the fear etched into Wall Street's bones. For Iran, what you must do is directly place on the table the scenario that Wall Street fears most, rather than waiting for the opponent to act first and then passively counterattacking.
We must once again warn the Iranian resistance faction: harbor no illusions about the United States or Trump; do not be deceived by empty promises of "sanctions relief," and do not be misled by the appeasers' rhetoric of a "circuitous path to national salvation." Surrender offers no way out. The conciliatory approach championed by Pezeshkian and his ilk will not reduce Iran's losses; on the contrary, it will bring even more catastrophic disaster upon the Iranian nation and its people. Trump and Netanyahu will only interpret compromises from the appeasers as confirmation that "the approach is correct but the pressure insufficient—as long as we increase the pressure, Iran will kneel faster." They may even take the desperate step of resorting to nuclear weapons, for they are already cornered and there is nothing they dare not do.
For Iran's resistance faction, the only thing that must be done—and indeed, the only thing that can be done—is to completely blockade the Strait of Hormuz without any preconditions, without any selective distinctions, and directly turn the energy crisis that Wall Street fears most into reality. Only through this can Trump's war agenda be fundamentally disrupted; only then can Wall Street feel the pain acutely; only then can Wall Street be compelled to intervene and halt this war; and only then can the European jackals and Japanese militarists—waiting with knives and forks to carve up the spoils—be deterred from rash action.
We note that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has already proposed four countermeasures: the complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz, strikes against Israeli energy facilities, the destruction of American-owned companies in the Middle East, and attacks on power plants in Middle Eastern countries hosting US military bases. This is the right direction, but the key lies in implementation—in imposing no preconditions on these measures, in actively seizing the initiative in warfare, and in practicing the core principle of "You fight your way, I fight my way," rather than waiting for the opponent to strike first before mounting a passive counterattack.
We must also warn Iran: Britain has dispatched the Astute-class nuclear-powered attack submarine HMS Anson to the Arabian Sea, while France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and others are already watching from the sidelines with knives and forks in hand. Should Iran falter, they will swarm to attack and carve up Iran's national interests. These jackals do not fear Iran's passive counterattacks; what they fear is Iran completely upending the table—completely blockading the Strait of Hormuz and plunging their economies into the quagmire of an energy crisis. Only when Iran demonstrates the resolve to completely overturn the table will these jackals dare not advance, and will they keep their distance from Trump and Netanyahu.
Under what circumstances would China alter its approach to intervention? We believe that only when the conflict escalates to a level affecting China's core interests, or when Iran demonstrates a clear and unequivocal determination to resist, will China adopt a more proactive stance. The most typical scenario would be a comprehensive Iranian blockade of the Persian Gulf—once such action threatens the navigational safety of Chinese oil tankers and commercial vessels, China would have sufficient justification for intervention.
At that point, China might assemble a special escort fleet to provide navigational security for countries not participating in the aggression against Iran, while Iran would be expected to provide "pilotage" services to this fleet, guiding it through waters where it has laid mines. This approach would allow China to avoid direct military involvement in the war while effectively curbing US-Israeli aggression, all while safeguarding its own interests—a scenario that would leave the United States gnashing its teeth yet helpless. Additionally, if the US and Israel were to attack Chinese-invested energy facilities within Iran, damaging China's core interests, this could also serve as a defining event triggering China's direct intervention.
Excerpts from Chinese think tank articles
We previously pointed out that the core prerequisite for Trump launching this war was his slide from advantage to disadvantage in internal power struggles. Wall Street's overall support for him had fallen below the critical 50% threshold, with unfavorable trends already established. Meanwhile, the Biden camp had transformed from disadvantage to advantage, betting everything on the midterm elections and needing only to play steady chess to reap the benefits. In this situation, Trump had to create foreign distractions to generate the political dividends of a "wartime president" to reverse his declining fortunes in internal struggles.
Netanyahu's motivation is even more urgent. He has long been embroiled in legal troubles, facing imminent imprisonment. Only through a swiftly victorious foreign war can he preserve his political life and even his personal freedom. These two men, both driven to desperation, formed the core intersection for launching this war. All their decisions revolve around only one core objective: how to quickly subjugate Iran and obtain results usable for internal political struggles. These decisions have nothing to do with—and are even completely contrary to—the national interests of the United States and Israel.
We have repeatedly emphasized that Trump and Netanyahu are now insane; they fear nothing except death. Their only chance of escape is to quickly win this war and force Iran into complete submission. For two men who have already put knives to their own throats, Iran's attempts to seek peace through concessions and compromises is nothing less than bargaining with tigers.
What further illustrates the point is that all three fronts Trump is simultaneously pushing have already hit walls: Regarding China, he kicked an iron plate—the opening of China-North Korea tourist trains and China's critically important two-week military exercises in the Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea have clearly conveyed to the world China's stance of "not accommodating you." He dares not act rashly in the Western Pacific. Regarding Cuba, his modern-day Bay of Pigs operation completely failed, with Cuban forces damaging his vessels and capturing personnel, causing him to lose all face. Ultimately, he could only retreat to the first front against Iran, attempting to salvage his declining position in internal struggles by bullying Iran.
But even on the Iran front, Trump's dual-track extortion has completely failed: He tried to extort China—unsuccessful. He tried to extort Wall Street as a whole, demanding that Wall Street fully support him again—also unsuccessful. Instead, Wall Street turned the tables and issued him an order: Since you claim you can swiftly destroy Iran, then produce actual results, and we'll give you one more chance. To date, this war has not only failed to reverse Trump's disadvantages in internal struggles but has made his position even more passive. This is what we mean when we say Trump and Netanyahu have already lost this war.
● Iran is completely repeating Russia's fatal mistakes in the Ukraine war, and has gone even further than Russia did at the time
From the very beginning of the Ukraine war, we repeatedly emphasized a core principle: War has its iron laws—the weak are absolutely not qualified to wage political warfare. Today, with great pain, we see that Iran is completely repeating Russia's fatal mistakes in the Ukraine war, and has gone even further than Russia did at the time.
Iran's first fatal miscalculation was its failure to see through the essence of this war, still judging the situation from the perspective of traditional state competition and Wall Street's overall interests. It mistakenly believed, "I have already made sufficient concessions; you gain nothing by attacking me, so you have no reason to attack me." But facts have proven that Trump cares nothing about American national interests or Wall Street's overall interests—he cares only about winning his internal power struggles. This miscalculation directly led Iran to abandon all its strategic chips before the war, ultimately failing to avoid war and falling into an extremely passive position.
Iran's second fatal miscalculation is that militarily, it has been completely led by the nose by the opponent, thoroughly abandoning the core magic weapon for the weak to defeat the strong: "You fight your way, I fight mine." We have repeatedly stressed that for a weak power like Iran, facing strong enemies like the United States and Israel, it must absolutely not counter whatever the opponent attacks, and must absolutely not fight according to the opponent's rules and timetable—otherwise, it will always be reacting, always led by the nose.
But to date, Iran's tactics remain completely trapped in the opponent's rhythm: Trump threatened that if Iran did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours, he would attack Iran's power plants and infrastructure. Israel subsequently launched large-scale strikes on Tehran's infrastructure. Yet the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's countermeasures still set the precondition: "If Trump attacks Iranian power stations, Iran will take four countermeasures." This is essentially still passive counterattack, still fighting according to the opponent's timetable and rules, completely failing to seize the initiative in the war.
Not to mention, regarding the Strait of Hormuz—Iran's most crucial strategic chip—Iran has never acted decisively. We previously pointed out clearly that Iran's only way to reverse the situation is to completely blockade the Strait of Hormuz. But Iran has not only failed to do this; instead, reports emerged of "blocking only US and Israeli vessels while allowing ships from countries like Japan to pass." This approach is essentially still waging political warfare, still concerned with so-called international influence and moral pressure, completely failing to realize that for a weak power facing existential risk, so-called political correctness and international public opinion are worthless before national survival.
We have repeatedly emphasized that 90% of Iran's oil and gas exports go through Kharg Island. Trump has clamored about seizing Kharg Island, but such clamor is essentially just a threat. Even if Trump truly dispatched amphibious assault ships carrying F-35Bs and several thousand marines to seize the island, he could never hold it: Kharg Island is extremely close to the Iranian mainland; Iranian artillery can completely cover the entire island. As long as Iran destroys the island's airport, American supply lines cannot be maintained, and seizing the island would ultimately become a quagmire consuming US forces. Iran has absolutely no need to be frightened by such blustering threats.
Iran's third fatal miscalculation is the loss of control over its internal situation. The death of Larijani has completely shattered the political balance within Iran. The appeasement faction has openly stepped onto the stage, while Iran's decision-making layer has shown no response. We pointed out immediately after Larijani's assassination that as Khamenei's closest confidant, Larijani was the only balancing force between Iran's hardliners and the appeasement faction. His death's greatest impact is not on the intensity of Iran's external counterattacks, but rather that it will inevitably intensify Iran's internal struggles and make internal conflict completely public. Today, our judgment has been fully validated.
Iranian President Pezeshkian, whom we long ago characterized as a "fighter jet of the appeasement faction," publicly proposed ceasefire conditions during a call with the Indian Prime Minister: "If the US and Israel stop their acts of aggression and guarantee that such actions will not occur again, the war can end." This rhetoric, identical in logic to Zelensky's repeated demands in the Ukraine war for "Russia stop firing first, then negotiations," essentially actively reveals Iran's bottom card to the US and Israel: As long as you don't hit me, I won't fight. Even more laughable is that Pezeshkian seems to still be fantasizing that the US and Israel will help him replicate the "former Yugoslavia model" in Iran, supporting him in forming a puppet regime. But he completely misjudges Trump's core needs: Trump has no time to wait months or even years for him to build a puppet regime. What Trump wants is "swift victory"—results that can be immediately used for domestic political struggles. Pezeshkian's surrender demands simply don't fit Trump's timetable; it's a complete misreading of the situation.
And the United States is precisely exploiting Iran's internal contradictions, playing a two-handed strategy of "external pressure, internal chaos": On one hand, using Israel to continuously strike Iran's infrastructure, creating social pressure to force the Iranian populace to oppose the war; on the other hand, releasing statements about "considering lifting sanctions on Iranian oil," using small favors to win over Iran's appeasement faction, intensifying internal contradictions, and creating conditions for establishing a Wang Jingwei-style puppet regime. To date, Iran has already shown a split situation of "the government saying one thing, the Revolutionary Guard saying another"—precisely the outcome the United States most wants to see.
● Only by doing this can Iran completely break Trump's war rhythm, make Wall Street feel real pain, and force Wall Street to step in and stop this war
We have repeatedly emphasized to the Iranian authorities: You cannot handle these two madmen, Trump and Netanyahu. The only thing you can do is hurt their boss—the overall interests of Wall Street. Only when Wall Street feels real pain will it step in to rein in these two out-of-control madmen. This is Iran's only path to survival.
What does Wall Street fear most? We have made this very clear: Wall Street fears most uncontrollable energy crises, fears most the complete closure of the Persian Gulf to navigation, fears most global financial markets collapsing completely due to soaring energy prices. The oil crisis of the 1970s directly drove US interest rates to over ten percent, throwing the entire financial market into chaos—this is the fear etched into Wall Street's bones. For Iran, what you must do is directly place on the table the scenario that Wall Street fears most, rather than waiting for the opponent to act first and then passively counterattacking.
We must once again warn the Iranian resistance faction: harbor no illusions about the United States or Trump; do not be deceived by empty promises of "sanctions relief," and do not be misled by the appeasers' rhetoric of a "circuitous path to national salvation." Surrender offers no way out. The conciliatory approach championed by Pezeshkian and his ilk will not reduce Iran's losses; on the contrary, it will bring even more catastrophic disaster upon the Iranian nation and its people. Trump and Netanyahu will only interpret compromises from the appeasers as confirmation that "the approach is correct but the pressure insufficient—as long as we increase the pressure, Iran will kneel faster." They may even take the desperate step of resorting to nuclear weapons, for they are already cornered and there is nothing they dare not do.
For Iran's resistance faction, the only thing that must be done—and indeed, the only thing that can be done—is to completely blockade the Strait of Hormuz without any preconditions, without any selective distinctions, and directly turn the energy crisis that Wall Street fears most into reality. Only through this can Trump's war agenda be fundamentally disrupted; only then can Wall Street feel the pain acutely; only then can Wall Street be compelled to intervene and halt this war; and only then can the European jackals and Japanese militarists—waiting with knives and forks to carve up the spoils—be deterred from rash action.
We note that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has already proposed four countermeasures: the complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz, strikes against Israeli energy facilities, the destruction of American-owned companies in the Middle East, and attacks on power plants in Middle Eastern countries hosting US military bases. This is the right direction, but the key lies in implementation—in imposing no preconditions on these measures, in actively seizing the initiative in warfare, and in practicing the core principle of "You fight your way, I fight my way," rather than waiting for the opponent to strike first before mounting a passive counterattack.
We must also warn Iran: Britain has dispatched the Astute-class nuclear-powered attack submarine HMS Anson to the Arabian Sea, while France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and others are already watching from the sidelines with knives and forks in hand. Should Iran falter, they will swarm to attack and carve up Iran's national interests. These jackals do not fear Iran's passive counterattacks; what they fear is Iran completely upending the table—completely blockading the Strait of Hormuz and plunging their economies into the quagmire of an energy crisis. Only when Iran demonstrates the resolve to completely overturn the table will these jackals dare not advance, and will they keep their distance from Trump and Netanyahu.
Under what circumstances would China alter its approach to intervention? We believe that only when the conflict escalates to a level affecting China's core interests, or when Iran demonstrates a clear and unequivocal determination to resist, will China adopt a more proactive stance. The most typical scenario would be a comprehensive Iranian blockade of the Persian Gulf—once such action threatens the navigational safety of Chinese oil tankers and commercial vessels, China would have sufficient justification for intervention.
At that point, China might assemble a special escort fleet to provide navigational security for countries not participating in the aggression against Iran, while Iran would be expected to provide "pilotage" services to this fleet, guiding it through waters where it has laid mines. This approach would allow China to avoid direct military involvement in the war while effectively curbing US-Israeli aggression, all while safeguarding its own interests—a scenario that would leave the United States gnashing its teeth yet helpless. Additionally, if the US and Israel were to attack Chinese-invested energy facilities within Iran, damaging China's core interests, this could also serve as a defining event triggering China's direct intervention.
Excerpts from Chinese think tank articles
Last edited:
