Alexander Dugin, "Today Iran, Tomorrow Russia". Stop the civilization of Baal. In Geopolitika.ru

                                                        

We share an  important reflexion of Alexander Dugin, the valuable philosopher and geo-estrategist - father of the martyr Daria Dugina -, under the title of  Today Iran, Tomorrow Russia, in which he speaks on Iran, the Katechon, and the war that could transform, destroy or reshape the world. 
Conversation with Alexander Dugin on the Sputnik TV program Escalation. [I add the photos, less the first one, underlined the most important ideas, and add some little comentaries within [...]. Good lectures, and fruits].
«Host: Dear friends, today we are addressing a large and serious topic. Everyone is talking about it right now, and understandably so, because a historic event is unfolding. Let me remind our listeners: on February 28, 2026, a joint operation was launched by the armed forces of the United States of America and Israel. Strikes were carried out against Iran, as a result of which Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed. In addition, many other high-ranking figures were eliminated in the attack. Iran has begun responding with strikes against both Israel and American bases, and as we speak, military clashes are taking place. There are many questions about what the consequences will be, who will suffer most from these developments, and whether Iran will be able to withstand the pressure. But the first thing one wants to understand is: where is all of this leading?
Alexander Dugin: This is indeed an extremely important event. It is entirely possible that it could become the beginning of the Third World War, because forces of enormous scale are now involved. The actions of the Americans—Trump together with Netanyahu—directed against the political leadership of Iran were extraordinarily abrupt.
This is already the second such case. First, the United States abducted Maduro, establishing direct control over Venezuela and effectively occupying that country. Now they have destroyed the entire military-political and religious leadership of Iran. In significance, this is comparable to destroying the Pope or an Orthodox Patriarch, because the spiritual leader of the Shiites—the Rahbar, Ayatollah Khamenei—was revered not only in Iran. He was effectively the head of the entire Shiite world, which includes hundreds of millions of people across the globe. Before this, Israel eliminated the leadership of Hamas—a more limited case—and then the leadership of Hezbollah, which was already more serious.
Now the leadership of Iran has been directly and openly destroyed. This means that there are no longer any international norms, no rules, and the United Nations effectively no longer exists. That organization now belongs to the past, like a phantom limb from a vanished world. Trump himself essentially said as much: there is no international law; whatever he does is moral. This changes everything. The previous world order has collapsed. We had been gradually moving in this direction, but now the point of no return has been crossed. If a country can destroy the military-political and religious leadership of a sovereign state without any grounds whatsoever, then we are living in a completely different world—a world where everything is permitted, where law is replaced by force, where the principle operates: “If I can do it, I will.”
Trump’s behavior is particularly striking. All of this happened during negotiations involving Kushner and Witkoff, and according to available information Iran had agreed to almost all American demands—literally to almost everything. Despite this, such a strike followed directly against the leadership of the country. First of all, we must understand that in this situation we are next. Venezuela, Iran, and before that Syria and Hezbollah—these are all regimes or political systems currently targeted by the United States, and they are our allies.
In effect, if such actions can be taken against our allies, if all of this goes unpunished, if Trump succeeds in everything he attempts, then at the next stage—perhaps even during negotiations between Kirill Dmitriev and Kushner and Witkoff—a similar operation aimed at regime change in our country could occur.
And what protects us from such a scenario? Nuclear weapons? Even here the question remains whether we would actually use them. In an extreme situation, the West has serious doubts that we would be prepared to take that step—we issue threats too often and fail to follow through. At the same time, efforts are underway to surround and isolate our president. Our president, beyond any doubt, is the figure upon whom everything rests. In our country, and perhaps even in the world, everything depends on him. He is the one who restrains—the Katechon [the entity or force restritive or ordering, according to 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, and Karl Schmidt theories] as our Orthodox tradition describes it. Today this is simply a fact of geopolitics, a fact of the global order.
But if the Americans—Trump himself—become convinced that other Russian leaders who might, God forbid, replace our president would be more accommodating towards the West—and this was precisely the calculation in Iran, when the sovereign leaders of that country were physically eliminated because they pursued policies that did not align with American interests—then what would prevent them from attempting to implement the same scenario here?
Trump is conducting a completely consistent neoconservative geopolitical strategy of attack. The states that were targeted by globalists under Biden, under Obama, and under Clinton are exactly the same states being targeted now. Nothing fundamentally new has appeared. Despite the scandals and disputes with European NATO allies, in the end those allies align themselves behind the United States and adopt the same position. For us, therefore, this is extremely serious. It is the final warning.
Host: Let me return to the question of the Third World War. I remember that last year we discussed the situation around Iran—there was the so-called “twelve-day war”—and at that time we also said it might lead to a global crisis. Yet that did not happen. Could it be that this time as well everything will last perhaps twelve or thirteen days and then come to an end? Or are we now dealing with a completely different scale of events?
Alexander Dugin: Theoretically, no one knows whether this will become the Third World War or not. The problem is that when we say too often—and I have experienced this personally—“this is the Third World War,” or “that is the Third World War,” and then it turns out not to be the case, and later again we say, “now the Third World War has begun,” an opposite feeling eventually arises: the impression that a Third World War simply cannot begin at all, that it will never begin, that everything is under control. And this is precisely where the danger lies. When you say it too early once, say it too early twice, then when it actually begins you may even become afraid to say openly what is unfolding before your own eyes.
Therefore we must be cautious in assessing what is happening. What we are seeing resembles the beginning of the Third World War, but it may not turn out to be one; perhaps this crisis will pass. You formulated the question correctly. At this moment almost everything depends—and indeed even our own fate, if you like—on how long Iran can resist. Because if the American-Israeli coalition manages to suppress Iranian resistance quickly during the operation the Americans call “Epic Fury”… although many people now add the phrase “Epstein’s Epic Fury.” In fact, it is quite obvious that Trump launched this operation partly to divert attention from the Epstein files, where he undoubtedly appears in an extremely compromising light. Many observers believe Israeli pressure and blackmail also play a role in this situation.
The Israelis themselves are operating along an entirely different ideological line. Here we are dealing with an eschatological project: the construction of a “Greater Israel,” the expectation of the last days, and the coming of the Messiah. This is a very serious motivation within the war that Israel calls “The Shield of Judah.” And the Iranians—the Iranians have now entered what they see as the final battle. It was already clear during the previous stage, during the twelve-day war, that it was not a fully developed war; it resembled preparation. Iran did not fully engage at that time. Perhaps even now Iran would not have fully entered the conflict if the Americans themselves had not taken such radical steps. Now Iran has no choice but to fight to the very end: to attack every possible target, to close the Strait of Hormuz to American or Western vessels and to ships belonging to countries that have acted against it, to strike military bases and any other targets it can reach, to ignite Shiite uprisings across the Middle East and wherever else influence can reach, and to wage this struggle—the final battle—all the way to the end. 

The twelve Imam of Shia tradition, beginning with Ali, married with Fatimah.

Iran had previously been willing to avoid such a confrontation, but that possibility has now been taken away. The Iranians have named their operation—and this is important to note—they have named it “The End of the Flood.” Recall that the Hamas operation from which everything began—the events in Gaza, the genocide in Gaza, and before that the Hamas attack on Israel—was called “The Flood,” or “Al-Aqsa Flood.” Al-Aqsa is the second most sacred site in the Muslim world. It is the mosque located in Jerusalem on the Temple Mount. The Palestinians launched their uprising in order to defend this sacred site. Why did they believe it needed defending? Because Netanyahu and his closest associates—Ben-Gvir and Smotrich—have openly discussed plans to demolish the Al-Aqsa Mosque in order to clear space for the construction of the Third Temple, an event that would mark the beginning of the messianic era. In fact, all preparations for the project of “Greater Israel” ultimately point towards this goal. The Palestinian movement Hamas therefore sought to defend the Al-Aqsa Mosque, which Ben-Gvir has personally and repeatedly promised to blow up and level to the ground. What followed instead was the devastation and destruction of Gaza.
Now the Iranian operation called “The End of the Flood” represents what they see as the final battle. In Iranian Shiite philosophy—and in Islamic eschatology more broadly—the end of times will bring a final confrontation between the forces of Islam, led by the Mahdi (the Hidden Imam whom Shiites believe will return), and the Dajjal, the figure often described as the Islamic Antichrist. The battle between the Mahdi and the Dajjal is understood as the central drama of the end times. According to these traditions, it will take place in Syria and the Holy Land. In Islamic theological interpretations, both Shiite and Sunni scholars commonly identify the forces associated with the Dajjal with the United States—seen as the “Great Satan”—and Israel. For that reason the stakes are perceived as absolute.
However, speaking in more strategic and analytical terms, the central question remains how long Iran will be able to resist. With every day that Iran continues to resist and defend its sovereignty, the strategic situation may begin to change. Trump clearly expected a very short war. He assumed that after the destruction of Iran’s military-religious and military-political leadership, the situation inside Iran would collapse quickly. In other words, he was counting on a “fifth column.”
                                                 
Host: Let us turn to the question of the possibility of maintaining stability in Iran. After events like these—the destruction of the supreme leader and a significant part of the elite—has it been possible to quickly restore the hierarchy and appoint new leaders, or is there a risk that the system could “break,” that at some point there could be a sharp reversal, for example if missiles suddenly end up aimed at Tehran
Alexander Dugin: You know, history is open-ended. We do not fully know what is happening in Iran right now: the internet has been completely shut down there. According to my sources, there are currently no protests whatsoever against the regime. Even those who were previously opposed to the regime of Velayat-e Faqih—after the brutal killing of about two hundred innocent schoolgirls by an Israeli missile—the opinion of the Iranian opposition has become radically directed against the United States and against Israel. Accordingly, there are absolutely no grounds, in my view, to expect that power will simply be handed to Trump.
In other words, Iran is probably more united now than at any time after the death of its entire leadership and after this brutal strike on the school. This has changed the consciousness of many people. The Iranian people are very proud and very strong, and perhaps some people did not like the regime of Velayat-e Faqih—although this too was exaggerated in the West by Israeli services—but nevertheless now everyone will rally around Iran under the national idea. Moreover, I think the current leaders will understand the need to move somewhat towards the secular circles of Iranian society, among whom there are practically no liberals. There are Iranian nationalists there who are not quite as strictly religious as the political regime, but they are still nationalists, they are patriots of Iran. If their energy and their will are directed towards resisting Zionist-American aggression, then resistance may last quite a long time, because even Gaza resisted for a long time, and Iran is not Gaza—it is an enormous country. [The resistance will be for ever, we should say...]
Shiites constitute a significant part of the population of the Middle East. The elites of these pro-American, pro-Arab regimes are thoroughly corrupt; it is simply an extension of “Epstein Island”: all these Qatars, Dubais, and Bahrains. In Bahrain, for example, the population itself is largely Shiite. I think that Shiite uprisings and revolutions could now erupt everywhere. In principle, if Iran holds out, it is completely unknown who will emerge victorious in this war. Especially since we see that the Afghan–Pakistani conflict is escalating. And it is still unclear who—Pakistan or Afghanistan—might come out in support of Tehran. Israel, by the way, does not like either of them, neither Pakistanis nor Afghans. As a result, all of this could ultimately end in catastrophe for Trump, for the United States, and for Israel. The vast Muslim world could simply wipe it from the face of the earth. The “Iron Dome” has already been penetrated, Tel Aviv is in flames, and some of the images already resemble Gaza. People are fleeing from there, and many are saying that this is how it will end: Iran will certainly win.
For now it is still unclear. But Iran did not surrender on the first day; it did not surrender after this most terrible strike—precisely what Trump had been counting on. Now Trump is speaking about several weeks, perhaps a month. Legally speaking, he has the possibility to conduct a war for roughly three months without congressional approval, and Congress might also support him. But if this war becomes prolonged, if Iran resists desperately [no, with lucidity, equipoise and power] and has sufficient strength, internal energy, potential, and power, then the outcome of this battle is far from predetermined. Especially because, if you look closely, the wager on the operation “Shield of Judah” may be the weakest and most vulnerable point for the American–Israeli coalition. What kind of shield is this, when they attacked and killed the leadership of a country that, in fact, was not even at war with them? This is an attack—it is the attack of Judas, a treacherous attack carried out during negotiations. There is a great deal of Judas here, but very little shield. If events continue in a certain way, the changes in the world could in fact be extremely radical.
Therefore the question now is perhaps not so much who will win. The first days have been endured, the first blow has been survived—at least by the Iranians. Their political leadership, which has now stepped forward to replace Rahbar Khamenei and his family—who were also killed, incidentally… A monstrous thing: a granddaughter, a little girl, fourteen months old—just one year and two months. Children, grandchildren… everyone.
As usual, we saw this in Gaza: the cruelty of American–Israeli aggression and hegemony is so monstrous, their lies and treachery so immense, that humanity should in fact have recoiled in horror at what we are dealing with. But it did not recoil, because instead people will be told other stories; they will say that Iran itself is to blame, that it killed itself. As for lies coming from the American regime, from the West in general, from the Zionists—we are already accustomed to that; we have heard it all before. Therefore Iran cannot count on the indignation of world public opinion. Iran can rely only on itself and on those forces that might support it.
If Iran now regroups and manages to conduct this war for a sufficiently long time, at any cost, then of course Israel will attempt to turn Iran into Gaza. In fact, it has already begun doing so. But Iran is still a very large country. Moreover, Iranian missiles are reaching Israeli territory and striking important strategic targets. After some time of this kind of bombardment and missile exchange, I think Israel will begin to feel somewhat uncomfortable.
And accordingly the Americans will feel it, and the Europeans will feel it as well. To sink those battleships now—we know this ourselves, because we suffered heavy losses in the Black Sea during the war with the Kiev Nazi regime: sinking a warship today is incredibly easy. With modern drones—underwater and surface—it is a very simple technological task to send this much-praised fleet to the bottom. We are already living in a completely different technological age of warfare. All that carrier power is, in reality, something inflated; it is simply pretty pictures.
Helicopters—given the speed at which they flew into Venezuela—could survive perhaps thirty seconds if they faced normal people with rifles, or proper drones, or the kinds of weapons our ordinary units have along the front line in Ukraine. Under such conditions a helicopter would not last long—thirty seconds. In reality they still do not know what war is. Neither the Americans nor the Israelis know. Now they will find out.
If Iran holds out, anything is possible. I am not saying they are destined to win. I am not saying that victory is guaranteed for anyone. But if victory is not guaranteed, and if it is not quick in the case of Trump and Israel, that alone would already represent a colossal victory for all supporters of a multipolar world. In fact, this war is directed against us as well. We must understand that we are next. Iran right now is what? A shield. The shield of the Katechon. That is what Iran is. In a sense, they have taken upon themselves a blow that was ultimately intended for all of us. If they hold out, it will be an enormous success, including for us.

 Host: Let us talk about cooperation—particularly from the Russian side. Moscow is issuing statements right now: Dmitry Peskov says that Moscow is in constant contact with the leadership of Iran. Russia remains committed to a political and diplomatic settlement even after the U.S. attack on Iran. Vladimir Putin today held international telephone conversations connected with the situation around Iran. The president will also meet today with the governor of the Amur region, although that is another matter. What do you think: what actions should we take now—should we move towards harsher measures, or should we take a wait-and-see position? But frankly, it is unclear what exactly we would be waiting for.
Alexander Dugin: If we simply adopt a wait-and-see position, that means waiting for Iran to collapse—and then the next strikes will be directed against our own military and political leadership. [Dugin, always strongly a Kshatryia]
Host: In what way?
Alexander Dugin: A war is being waged against us in Ukraine, and it is quite intense. But after Trump came to power—with what initially seemed to be a fairly rational strategy and policy—an impression arose in our country, within our leadership, that Trump might withdraw from this confrontation and that it was therefore necessary to negotiate with him through figures like Witkoff and Kushner, or others, in order to reduce the escalation, at least with America. The thinking was that we are fighting Ukraine, we are confronting the European Union, but Trump might step away from this because he holds a different position. Indeed, he did have a different position up to a certain point. Yet after only a couple of months in the White House as president, he suddenly changed course and became an even more radical neoconservative, pursuing the same globalist and hegemonic policies but now more openly, more brutally, and more bluntly.
This moment of Trump’s transformation—from the MAGA position, which in fact made the Anchorage meeting possible, to a radical hegemonic dictate, especially when it appears to be producing results quite quickly in other operations—is perhaps something we did not fully register in time. [Mea culpa, of Dugin as he was deluded by Trump promises and bluffs] Trump changed. He turned out to be a conduit for a will that is not his own. He has completely abandoned his core electorate. He has effectively become a hostage of the very same forces that launched the war against us in Ukraine.
In this situation, in my view, the attack on Iran puts a final end to the idea that Trump could still be seen as a bearer of the MAGA ideology—the idea that the United States would focus on its own domestic problems, stop interfering in international affairs, and deal with its own enormous failures in politics, the economy, and culture, which was in fact Trump’s original program. None of that will happen. Trump will continue to pursue the policies of the neoconservatives. For us this is an extremely important moment.
He is attacking our allies. In fact, if Iran falls—or rather, if Iran does fall and when Iran falls—we will find ourselves facing forces far stronger than those we already confront today. Trump, like a bull charging towards its target, intoxicated by blood and convinced that everything is working for him and that everything comes easily, may interpret our rationality and restraint, our consistency and our adherence to principles simply as weakness. And then he will have no other terms or concepts with which to interpret our policy. 

 Host: How, then, should we act right now?
Alexander Dugin: I think we must act very decisively—but that decision belongs to the president. You know, there are many advisers now, and all of us [or, may be, many are still cautious] —from taxi drivers to experts, both military and civilian—are telling him with one voice that a strike is necessary. First of all, it is clear that international law no longer exists; we can do whatever we want, because victory will justify it all. Undoubtedly, the military-political leadership of Ukraine must be eliminated. That is absolutely certain. They did this to our ally, and by the rules of the great game we are simply obliged to do the same to their proxy, to those structures that are waging war against us.
I believe it is extremely important to use very serious types of weapons—ones so powerful that they cannot be ignored or overlooked. I also do not rule out that it may be necessary to bring certain countries into line—countries that are supporting the war in Ukraine while feeling completely immune from consequences and interpreting our politeness and consistency as weakness. Russia can no longer afford to appear weak. We are not weak, but that is how we appear. They see us as weak, indecisive, hesitant, uncertain of ourselves, lacking sufficient potential. The aggression of any hegemon can be resisted if there is will and strength—and a nuclear power is certainly capable of that. Great Russia is capable of it. But they believe we lack the will.
That, I think, is a mistake: we do have the will; we have simply been carefully concealing it, packaging it neatly within the negotiation process. Now that approach is beginning to work strictly against us, and very quickly. But everyone is advising the president in this direction—that is my impression, although perhaps some think differently. [Putin and the Kremlin higher minds will surely act on the best ways for the maximum people, of Russia and Mankind. Patience]
A consensus has now formed that Russia must fundamentally reconsider its strategy for conducting the war against Ukraine. We need to take decisive and unconditional actions that cannot be interpreted in any other way. In other words—a strike, and Bankova Street is gone, the leadership is gone, Zelensky is gone, no one is left, and it becomes unclear with whom negotiations should continue. We can then propose that they themselves appoint people with whom we would be prepared to conduct dialogue. This simply suggests itself. [A bit forced...]
Host: Alexander Gelyevich, on the other hand, it could happen that after their leadership is eliminated they will choose new leaders, perhaps even more radical ones—as essentially happened in Iran, where the leadership was replaced almost instantly.
And here your view of the Iranian scenario is interesting: what if we take harsh measures in its support? Suppose Russia, together with China, sends its fleet to the Persian Gulf. What do you think that would lead to?
Alexander Dugin: We would be respected. And we would be feared. That is what would happen, if we speak honestly. That is all. [ Who knows what would happen?]
Host: Would that not lead to direct confrontation?
Alexander Dugin: Direct confrontation is already underway. They simply believe that they control and direct us, while we still think we are conducting partner negotiations. There is a fundamental divergence in perspectives—a difference in how we read the very fabric of what is happening. However, I do not advise our president to do anything; he understands everything perfectly well himself.
As for the concern that eliminating the leadership in Kiev would bring even more radical forces to power: there are no more radical ones left there. They may bring in similar figures. But if they also do not suit us, we must do the same to them, and to the next ones, and the next ones—removing them layer by layer. Especially since Ukraine is not Iran. If we truly enter this confrontation now, we will gain not only a chance for victory but also the opportunity to stop escalation and prevent the Third World War. Trump is demonstrating that the politics of force has begun, and force does not recognize words. It stops only where it encounters countervailing power. That power must be demonstrated. We constantly speak about our nuclear potential and about the “Oreshnik,” but the time has come not merely to speak but to show this strength. This is what is expected from us. Only then will Trump understand that the Russians are truly angry and that he has gone too far.
What is needed now is a massive strike that cannot be ignored or dismissed as boasting or as attacks on secondary targets. Where and how this will occur is not for us to decide, but the course of history and the mood of our soldiers at the front—who have been somewhat demoralized by peace negotiations—demand decisiveness. When every day the message is broadcast that “everything will end soon,” it becomes psychologically impossible to fight; a false feeling arises that it is enough simply to wait a little longer. We must honestly acknowledge that the war will not end until we achieve all the goals of the special military operation. We must steel our will and do what has long been necessary. Earlier it was possible to postpone it, but now there is nowhere left to wait.
It is important to understand that words carry enormous significance. Look at the name of the operation “Epic Fury”—even Americans who opposed the attack on Iran are inspired by that slogan. “My country is furious, and I will stand for it”—that works. Meanwhile we have the bureaucratic term “SMO,” which cannot inspire anyone; it carries no deeper meaning. “Epic Fury,” “Shield of Judah” for the Israelis, “End of the Flood” for the Shiite world—these are powerful codes of meaning. I believe we must rename the special military operation “The Sword of the Katechon”: we are the restrainers; this is our mission, our Russian role, our Orthodox identity. Muslims will support us in this as well, because they understand the unity of the struggle perfectly well. We must mobilize society, give the war renewed momentum, rename it. At the beginning there were the symbols “Z,” “V,” “O”—that was a public-relations approach without depth. Now we must emphasize what we are fighting for, without concealing the scale of the victory. We must be honest with those who give their lives for the Fatherland, for the state, for authority, and for the people. We are fighting for something shared, and people must feel that meaning.
Today enormous forces are in motion—military, political, religious. We are not observers or arbiters here; we are participants in a Great War. Perhaps the last one. There is no need to rush ahead speculating about when the end will come—Orthodox Christians know that no one knows it; even Christ said that only the Father knows. But we know that there will be an end, because God created this world and God will judge it. This is part of our faith and our traditions—an essential part. Therefore there is no reason for panic.
We live in the last times—look at the West, at the Epstein list. What details we are learning about the elites that govern the West: this is truly a civilization of Baal. It is a cult of Satan—a cult. What do the elites do? They corrupt minors, eat people, hunt African Americans. The Epstein files contain direct indications: they rape children, they organize orgies. And that is on the other side. That is the civilization we are fighting. It is no coincidence that in Iran a statue of Baal was burned on the eve of this invasion, and in response missiles began to fly. In the consciousness of the Islamic world these things are connected: the Epstein list, Baal—and those who burn his idols. The war is acquiring a profound religious character. American dispensationalists, interpreting the Scofield Bible, are convinced that at the moment of the clash between Iran and Israel Russia will inevitably enter the war on Iran’s side. For them, “today Iran, tomorrow Russia” is already a settled fact. In their minds we are already there.
It is important to understand the psychology of the enemy: it does not coincide with facts or with our rational perceptions. Combined with Trump’s furious energy and the eschatological exaltation of the Israeli leadership—which believes that it is now or never, that the Messiah must come now and that “Greater Israel” must be created now—this reality leaves us no chance to concern ourselves with ordinary affairs. History, geography, religion, and politics deprive us of the possibility of being outside observers. We stand at the very center of events, and we have our own role.

The dispensationalists, or pseudo-evangelicals zionized, energising the President already in widespread decomposition. In red, the frantic Paula White, the advisor on religious affairs.You can see her in her performance of political religious magic, on Youtube

Host: How would the geopolitical alignment change if Europe truly decided to participate directly in the bombings? For example, reports have come from an Israeli radio station that Germany is discussing with the United States the possibility of its direct participation in the operation. In other words, they may begin carrying out their own attacks rather than limiting themselves to supplying weapons. How would the situation change in that case?
Alexander Dugin: That is exactly where things are heading. The problems between Trump and the European Union have now either been resolved or pushed aside, because in essence Trump has shifted to a policy fully aligned with the interests of the globalists and neoconservatives. Earlier Trump’s conflict with Europe was driven by the MAGA movement, by his rejection of globalism and of the “deep state.” But if Trump is now drawing closer to these structures, then disagreements with Europe naturally move into the background. The West should be viewed as a single whole—the collective West. In effect we have returned to the situation that existed before Trump. That historical moment when other ideas and other plans for the United States were proclaimed has unfortunately passed. Now we are dealing less with Trump himself and more with the same “deep state” that stood behind Nuland, Blinken, or Kamala Harris—essentially the same forces.
Accordingly, all [or some] contradictions between the United States and the European Union have been leveled in the face of radical confrontation with forces that are ideological and geopolitical opponents of the collective West—above all the supporters of a multipolar world, among whom are ourselves and China.
As for your question about our direct participation: let the president decide. Personally, I believe participation is necessary. The more actively, boldly, and decisively we behave in every respect, the better. Otherwise any other action will be interpreted by them as weakness, and weakness is a direct provocation—a call to do to us what they did to the Iranian leadership. After all, our president met with Rahbar [the guide] Khamenei, and before that with President Raisi and other political leaders, just as he met with Maduro.
Host: Developing this theme further: should we act alone, or within a coalition with China? What should our strategy be?
Alexander Dugin: Of course it would be better to act in a coalition with China. But China will wait. Look: if, God forbid, Iran falls, direct confrontation with us will inevitably follow, and after that—China, because that is their ultimate target. Anyone who thinks they can sit this out—whether us, China, or Iran itself, which did not enter the war after the IDF’s ground operation against Gaza began (Hezbollah kept waiting and waiting until they were all destroyed)—is making a mistake. The longer we wait, the later we enter a full confrontation with the collective West, the greater the chance that it will defeat us one by one. [The great question of the preparations...]
We have been deceived again—Lavrov spoke about this: Israel passed along information that it intended to attack Iran. Once again they lead us by the nose: “You stay aside for now, do not enter the conflict under any circumstances,” and in the end there will be no one left who could support us. Therefore I am convinced that we must respond as harshly as possible, on all fronts. It is not necessary to enter this specific conflict immediately, but we must deal with our direct enemies—the Nazi regime in Kiev—with the utmost decisiveness. There is no doubt about that. And we must do it in such a way that no one will have any illusions left: if the Russians want to—they can. And if we cannot, then we will be in a very bad situation.
Our response must be symmetrical and maximally harsh. Ideally in a coalition. But if not in a coalition, then alone. If we act now, we will not be alone. If we wait, we will remain alone. Or China will wait and remain alone. We must stop evil, stop the civilization of Baal. That is our sacred mission.»

Alexandre Dugin, A Guerra do Irão pelo Mundo.Tradução com breves comentários, por Pedro Teixeira da Mota.

    Perante o actual confronto dos Estados Unidos da América e Israel com  o Irão, desencadeado pela hubris imensa dos dois psicopatas que os dirigem e manipulam, devemos levantar a alma e a voz contra tal agressão, ainda por cima realizando-se pela segunda vez no meio de negociações, e portanto contra todas as convenções milenárias do direito natural e internacional, podendo por isso considerar-se unanimemente traiçoeira e condenável, tanto mais que as razões aduzidas para o ataque eram falsas, uma delas repetida há quarenta anos  por Benjamin Netanyahu e os seus sequazes: o Irão estaria a uns dias de possuir uma bomba atómica, quando eles têm mais de cem e o Irão estava sob um decreto religioso, uma fatwa, do ayatollah Ali Khamenei que as proibia. 

A violência assassina do ataque nas primeiras horas foi grande mas evidentemente a grande alma xiita soube aguentar e responder e está agora a vencer aos pontos os exércitos considerados dos mais poderosos do mundo, e expondo as suas fraquezas já não só éticas mas até nos meios de protecção que alardeavam e vendiam como impenetráveis e invencíveis, nomeadamente aos países árabes da região que se vêm agora desprotegidos pelas bases norte-americanas face a reacção justa e muito cirurgicamente precisa dos iranianos.
Que outros factores haverá além da ganância de se apoderarem dos recursos do Irão, em especial do óleo e gás, como os diabólicos Lindsey Graham e outros confessaram, e da inveja pela qualidade da sua civilização e beleza de povo, odiada pelos dirigentes sionistas de Israel, que estão completamente a leste do que fora a paz mediterrânica entre as religiões do Livro?
Oiçamos o valioso sociólogo e geoestratega Alexander Dugin, sempre muito informado, lúcido e forte nas suas ideias e análises, embora aqui e acolá exagerando um pouco e aceitando ainda demasiado as narrativas religiosas milenárias como verdadeiras. O título que deu às suas reflexões é excelente e bem verdadeiro: o Irão está a lutar contra a hidra opressiva da oligarquia sionista e globalista e pode desmascará-la e fazê-la perder muita da sua força. Assim seja.

             A Guerra do Irão pelo Mundo, por Alexandre Dugin.

Rádio Sputnik, apresentador do programa Escalada: Os violentos confrontos no Oriente Médio continuam. Inicialmente, houve relatos de que Steve Witkoff e Jared Kushner estavam a  preparar-se para visitar Israel, mas depois veio a notícia inesperada de que a viagem planeada havia sido cancelada. As razões para essa mudança não foram oficialmente divulgadas, mas o facto em si é bastante revelador. Nesse sentido, a questão das perspectivas quanto ao fim do conflito é particularmente interessante. Donald Trump enfatizou nos seus comentários recentes que a decisão de cessar-fogo será tomada apenas com o consentimento de Benjamin Netanyahu. Isto levanta a pergunta lógica: quando chegará o fim? Parece que Israel e o próprio Netanyahu estão determinados a destruir o inimigo sem compromisso, o que significa que um fim rápido para o conflito é improvável.

                                   
 Alexander Dugin: Acho que é necessário perguntar ao outro lado, pois  opinião dele é absolutamente determinante. Ele é o heroico povo iraniano, que perdeu  a sua liderança e sofreu enormes perdas. Eles suportaram a dor e a trágica morte de muitas pessoas. Meninas, crianças pequenas, filhas de comandantes da IRGC [um dado que não se ouve em geral], foram mortas, e os ataques foram deliberadamente direcionados a elas. Isso não é nada menos do que o assassinato de bebés.
Netanyahu declarou que esta guerra, do seu ponto de vista, no sentido religioso e sionista, está sendo travada contra Amalek [povo adversário dos Hebreus na Torah, tornando-se depois sinónimo do grande inimigo]. Amaleque é o inimigo de Israel, e Netanyahu afirmou diretamente no seu discurso que eles destruirão bebés e crianças, que ninguém deve ficar vivo nesta guerra. Este é o estado  psíquico do [sociopata] Netanyahu: a guerra deve terminar com o Irão, quando Amalek for destruído. Este é o projeto religioso-político de Israel. O primeiro golpe contra os inimigos de Israel, Amalek e Irão, tornou-se muito doloroso.
A liderança religiosa foi destruída — é aproximadamente equivalente a destruir o Papa ou o Patriarca Ortodoxo. O golpe foi desferido na liderança religiosa do mundo xiita, nos círculos militares, científicos e políticos. O ataque da América e de Israel visava decapitar o Irão e provocar uma operação de mudança de regime, incitando uma revolta. E, para intimidar o povo, eles aniquilaram crianças de forma cínica com um ataque direcionado. No entanto, isso não teve o efeito que esses monstros americano-israelitas esperavam.
O povo iraniano  uniu-se em torno da sua liderança: um novo Rahbar, [guia, o que mostra o Caminho] um novo chefe da estrutura político-religiosa de Wilayat al-Faqih  [faqih, jurisprudente, wilayat comunidade], foi eleito, o filho de Ali Khamenei, que perdeu não só o seu pai e líder, mas também os seus familiares [mãe, mulher e filha] mais próximos no ataque. O povo iraniano e a liderança  estão agora determinados a concluir esta guerra apenas após Israel tiver sido apagado da face da terra[um certo exagero, pois será mais  infligir-lhe uma boa lição e fazê-los perderem os meios de exercerem o diabolismo que os tem caracterizado impunemente nas últimas décadas.]
Agora a machadada caiu: do ponto de vista de Israel, este é Amaleque, que deve ser destruído. Do ponto de vista [de alguns do povo] iraniano, Israel, assim como todo o Ocidente liderado pelos EUA, é Dajjal, uma espécie de anticristo [na tradição judaico-persa de uma minoria] que deveria tornar-se o rei que governa sobre toda a terra.
Trump e Netanyahu podem ter seus próprios planos para acabar com esta guerra. Ninguém leva Kushner e Witkoff a sério; eles são simplesmente indivíduos estranhos. Eles estavam a negociar com o Irão no exacto momento em que os americanos e israelitas estavam a atacar a sua liderança militar. Ninguém em Israel ou em qualquer outro lugar do mundo vai mais conversar com essas pessoas. Eles foram completamente desacreditados e comprometidos.[Não é bem assim, pois contam com as aparências e os jornalistas vendidos.]
Muito depende do Irão agora. O Irão não vai acabar com esta guerra; ele vai alcançar seus objetivos — destruir Israel como tal — e tem todas as razões para fazê-lo, depois do que Israel fez à sua liderança militar, religiosa e política. Agora é impossível argumentar que o Irão vai acabar com a guerra sob a pressão de alguém. O Irão está a tornar-se uma força brutal. Estamos a dizer que não haverá negociações de paz até que um lado perca — até que se renda completamente ou seja destruído.
Anfitrião: Não sabemos como a situação se vai desenrolar, mas quero enfatizar que Trump certamente tem alguma influência nesta guerra, mas não toda. Ele mesmo afirma que o resultado está nas mãos de Benjamin Netanyahu, mas isso é apenas parte da verdade. Na realidade, tudo se resume a quem sairá vitorioso e quem será o primeiro a admitir a derrota. Se, hipoteticamente falando, Israel, Irão ou os EUA capitulassem agora e declarassem sua retirada do conflito, isso mudaria radicalmente o curso dos acontecimentos. Nesse caso, devemos esperar uma repetição do cenário da "guerra de 12 dias", onde não houve um vencedor claro, ou há algo mais reservado para nós?
Alexander Dugin: Claro que não. Na verdade, não esperamos uma repetição desse cenário. Primeiro, o Irão não conseguiu realmente romper a "abóbada de ferro" naquela época. Não houve ataques maciços e toda a  liderança política do Irão não foi morta.
Tal oportunidade existia, e o relativamente benevolente Rahbar Ali Khamenei estava no poder. Agora seu filho está no poder, agora a IRGC está no poder, agora todos os iranianos — até mesmo aqueles que tinham algo contra o regime — estão mobilizados para o extermínio completo [algo exagerado...] dos israelitas.
Já não se trata de quem está certo e quem está errado: a população iraniana acredita que Israel deve ser destruído [vencido, controaldo, civilizado, educado.] E este é um país de quase 100 milhões de pessoas. Se adicionarmos a isso os xiitas [no estrangeiro], as forças de resistência e os muçulmanos que estão gradualmente a despertar, acho que isso é um factor bastante sério.
É difícil dizer quão determinada está a América em defender Netanyahu até ao fim, até que ponto  Trump se  tenha comprometido totalmente com esta aventura. Ele está a perder pontos em casa nesta guerra. A economia global está sob séria ameaça, e não apenas no Oriente Médio. Todos que podiam deixar Dubai já partiram, e aqueles que não podem estão fazendo as malas. O que aconteceu na última semana marca o fim de uma era.
Até agora, Trump tem apoiado fortemente Netanyahu e até ameaçado com uma invasão terrestre do Irão, mas isso levaria pelo menos seis meses de preparação e mobilização de meio milhão a 2 milhões de tropas para ser bem-sucedido[o que é impossível]. É difícil dizer quão sério isso é [mais um bluff ou fanfarroada de Trump], mas o apoio a Trump nos EUA está a cair rapidamente. E em algum momento, precisamente por causa do colapso provocado por essas ações agressivas dos EUA e de Israel, que foram completamente não provocadas pelo próprio Irão, tudo dependerá de quão rapidamente esse colapso do sistema mundial — o poder financeiro e político de Trump — se desenvolve. Em algum momento, ele pode declarar "Eu venci." Mas isso só será evidente nas suas redes sociais, porque é óbvio que, na situação actual, é simplesmente impossível sair e declarar vitória.
Apresentador: Podemos dizer quem está a vencer agora?
Alexander Dugin: O Irão está a vencer agora. O Irão está a vencer porque não está a perder, porque manteve a sua posição e porque rompeu a "cúpula de ferro" sobre Israel. Ben-Gvir, um ministro [dos mais sanguinários e extremistas] no governo de Netanyahu que prometeu explodir a Mesquita de Al-Aqsa, o grande santuário muçulmano [no centro de Jerusalém, e onde Maomé se teria elevado aos céus], teve a sua casa destruída. Não se sabe se ele está vivo ou não: os iranianos dizem que não, mas  vi um vídeo onde o homem diz: "A minha casa foi demolida."
Os iranianos estão a atingir alvos em Israel, e alvos muito importantes, por sinal. Não só isso, eles desactivaram efectivamente a maioria das bases americanas no Oriente Médio, incluindo as de alta tecnologia; atacaram todas as bases militares dos EUA na região — às vezes com sucesso, às vezes não. O número exato de baixas de ambos os lados é desconhecido: Trump diz que três militares foram mortas, enquanto os iranianos afirmam que dezenas de milhares de soldados americanos foram mortos [não tantos...]. Analistas objetivos dizem que as baixas dos EUA variam de 1.000 a 2.000, mas para os americanos, que não estão acostumados a tais baixas, esses ainda são números colossais.[Certo exagero nos números...]
O Irão não quebrou; escolheu um novo líder, apesar de os americanos e israelitas terem prometido matá-lo imediatamente. Trump declarou que o novo líder no Irão seria escolhido apenas com o seu consentimento [que hubris desmedida, que megalómano e palhaço..] e que todo o petróleo iraniano agora pertence aos EUA, mas isso não é mais a destruição final de toda a ordem internacional: agora quem é forte está certo. E agora [claro] o Irão está mostrando sua força. Chegou a Israel, desferiu um golpe decisivo e ousado na infraestrutura americana, selecionou alvos com precisão nos países do Golfo e minou efetivamente o pulso da economia global, incluindo o bloqueio do Estreito de Ormuz.

Desta vez, em comparação com a guerra que ocorreu há pouco menos de um ano, o Irão está a comportar-se de maneira completamente diferente: decididamente, com confiança, está atacando, estabelecendo metas sérias e não tem intenção de negociar com o agressor. E está certo. Em geral, o Irão está a vencer agora.
Notei nas redes sociais que muitos influentes opositores do imperialismo americano, da hegemonia e da unipolaridade, com audiências que somam milhões, em dado momento começaram a criticar a Rússia pela sua lentidão e não-intervenção — alguns até apresentaram teorias absurdas sobre a influência de redes israelitas sobre nós. Estas foram declarações muito duras de nossos amigos. Mas, ao mesmo tempo, não houve uma única palavra de descontentamento por parte das contas [nas redes sociais] iranianas, nem dos participantes oficiais nem dos não oficiais do processo. Pelo contrário, eles expressam apoio à Rússia. Por quê? Eles não dizem, e talvez não precisemos saber. Estou simplesmente fazendo uma observação: os opositores da hegemonia americana estão nervosos, todos estão à espera que a Rússia entre na guerra. Estamos agindo com muito cuidado por enquanto, compensando a situação e apoiando incondicionalmente o nosso aliado Irão. A extensão do nosso apoio está oculta; ambos os lados preferem não divulgá-la. A julgar pela análise das próprias fontes iranianas, que promovem uma agenda política coordenada com a Rússia, os comentários mais positivos são ouvidos lá.

                                                                   
Os EUA estão a exigir que paremos de fornecer inteligência ao Irão. Isso significa que estamos a fornecer. Ao mesmo tempo, eles têm fornecido inteligência ao nosso inimigo na Ucrânia há quatro anos e continuam a fazê-lo agora — essas guerras estão entrelaçadas. Além disso, estas são duas frentes da mesma batalha com um inimigo comum e valores comuns. Nós e o Irão estamos a lutar por um mundo multipolar, enquanto o Ocidente e Israel estão a lutar para preservar um mundo unipolar agonizante e em colapso. [Muito bem resumido]. Objectivamente, estamos do lado do Irão. Quanto a como estão a China e a Rússia  a ajudar o Irão, prefiro seguir fontes abertas, OSINT [Open Source Inteligence, fontes de informação publicas ou abertas]. Não dormi muito na última semana, monitorando constantemente o que está a acontecer — estes são processos muito importantes que estão a mudar tudo. Provavelmente estamos na primeira fase preparatória da Terceira Guerra Mundial. [Não creio tanto que seja necessária, pois a desistência do regime sionista não deve demorar muito]. Foi anunciada repetidamente que começou [a III], e depois que terminou, então pode acontecer novamente agora. Ninguém pode ter certeza, mas a situação é muito grave — mais grave do que há um ano. A gravidade do que estamos vendo no Oriente Médio é incalculável.

Quatro ideias sobre o fim do mundo colidiram lá. Na América, os apoiantes de seitas protestantes radicais, o chamado sionismo cristão ou dispensacionalismo, tomaram completamente o poder. Eles acreditam que esta é a batalha final entre as forças do "bem" (às quais pertencem os EUA, Netanyahu e os sionistas) e o "mal" (que nos inclui a nós e ao Irão).
No modelo deles, somos um inimigo mais importante do que as forças islâmicas do Irão. Na Casa Branca, eles estão a realizar rituais e a orar por Trump; lá está a chefe da secretaria de assuntos religiosos de Trump, uma pastora que grita palavras sem sentido (isso é chamado de "glossolalia" entre os evangelistas carismáticos), profere maldições e exige dinheiro [Paula White, assim se chama a nova excitada profetiza fundamentalista pseudo-evangélico-sionista, de vermelho na fotografia.]
                                   
Isto não tem nada a ver com o cristianismo; são mulheres rosnando que adoram alguma entidade claramente diferente, espiritual ou anti-espiritual. Isto é muito sério. Estes Sionistas Cristãos estão determinados porque, do ponto de vista deles, os acontecimentos em Israel precedem a segunda vinda de Cristo e a aparição de "objetos voadores não identificados", nos quais os verdadeiros protestantes [ou crentes evangélico-sionistas] serão arrebatados para o céu — isto é chamado da teoria do arrebatamento [ou rapto ou abdução].
O Ministro da Defesa [Pete] Hegseth, chefe do Departamento de Guerra, pertence a esta seita, e eles estabeleceram controle total sobre Trump. Netanyahu considera-se o último primeiro-ministro antes da vinda do Messias — o salvador que se tornará o rei dos judeus e governará o mundo. Este é um ponto de vista absolutamente radical. Netanyahu afirma que é necessário construir o "Grande Israel" e destruir Amaleque. É difícil derrotar pessoas que não só pensam dessa maneira, mas também agem de forma tão radical.
Os iranianos respondem que os EUA e Israel são eles mesmos o denominado Dajjal, o anticristo, o usurpador, o mal do mundo, os filhos das trevas que devem ser destruídos na batalha final. A nossa posição é menos focada escatologicamente, mas também existe, e paradoxalmente, está mais próxima da compreensão iraniana do que o Ocidente moderno e o moderno Israel sionista ultra-religioso representam.
Isso não afeta o judaísmo ou os judeus — isso afeta apenas as forças extremistas radicais que estão no comando de Israel.
Apresentador: Deixe-me esclarecer a nossa posição. No contexto da escalada, a Rússia preparou um projeto de resolução do Conselho de Segurança da ONU pedindo um cessar-fogo imediato na região. Mas se temos relações diplomáticas próximas com o Irão, por que deveríamos exigir uma trégua se Teerão claramente tem outros objetivos e está determinado a continuar a luta?
Alexander Dugin: Primeiro, há dois pontos aqui. A primeira é o desejo de ser consistente. Este documento, uma vez que qualquer membro do Conselho de Segurança tem o direito de apresentá-lo, será simplesmente jogado no lixo.[Até faz rir, no seu realismo sincero]. Estamos fazendo isso por questões de aparência. Não terá efeito. Em segundo lugar, queremos mostrar que somos contra a guerra, que queremos dizer: "Bem-aventurados os pacificadores, porque eles serão chamados filhos de Deus." Isso está, em geral, em conformidade com os mandamentos do Evangelho.
Mas, ao mesmo tempo, acredito que há um ponto fraco nessa posição: a Rússia está se agarrando desesperadamente à ordem mundial que surgiu após o fim da Segunda Guerra Mundial — a chamada ordem de Yalta, o sistema da ONU — que já não existe. É como a dor fantasma. Não está lá. Precisamos construir um novo mundo multipolar, praticamente do zero, e alcançar os nossos próprios resultados nele. A ideia de retornar a uma ordem mundial que já não existe — sobre a qual, aliás, Peskov falou recentemente — é, se me permite, um pouco tardia. Propomos: que a ONU funcione, mas ela não funciona. Vamos fazer o Conselho de Segurança decidir algo, mas ele não decidirá nada, porque os norte-americanos ocupam uma posição polar nele. Dizemos: vamos respeitar a soberania, mas ninguém a respeita; no mundo contemporâneo, só a força é respeitada.
Tenho uma proposta: vamos simplesmente aceitar a realidade da situação — que esta ordem internacional não existe e é inútil referir-se a ela. Qualquer acção nesse sentido será ou sem sentido ou ineficaz. Vamos propor um modelo para a futura ordem mundial. Vamos alcançar os nossos interesses, que são condições necessárias para nos tornarmos participantes activos na construção dessa ordem, em vez de apenas assistirmos passivamente a outros a imporem os deles sobre nós. Vamos alcançar esses objetivos, apoiar nossos aliados, pôr fim ao agonizante mundo unipolar e, então, tendo dividido as esferas de influência e reconhecido diferentes estados como civilizações, construiremos uma ordem internacional completamente nova com novas regras. Mas precisamente uma com regras.
Neste momento, este é um tempo sem regras. E neste tempo sem regras, podemos sonhar com o futuro, o que é inútil, ou aceitar o presente e simplesmente lutar da forma mais eficaz possível em todas as frentes onde somos atacados, às vezes realizando operações preventivas. Devemos construir o nosso mundo, no qual a Rússia terá um lugar digno, onde seremos soberanos, onde seremos actores, onde seremos sujeitos, não objetos. Isso deve ser feito agora. Na minha opinião, podemos nos despedir educadamente do velho mundo. Já não existe. Não existe um mundo bipolar. Não há ONU. O sistema de Vestfália acabou. O mundo de Yalta se foi. Entramos numa era diferente; tudo isso está no passado, além do horizonte. Vamos avançar para o futuro, vamos viver no presente, inclusive em relação à situação internacional. E para isso, precisamos vencer. E ajudar nossos aliados, amigos e parceiros estratégicos a vencer.

                                                                
Apresentador: Já mencionamos várias vezes Mojtaba Khamenei, que se tornou o novo líder supremo do Irão. Gostaria de aprofundar este tema com mais detalhes. Quão significativamente você acha que a política do Irão mudará no futuro, e qual é o significado da eleição do novo Rahbar para a sociedade iraniana neste momento crítico?
Alexander Dugin: Primeiro, ele é o chefe de todo o sistema, não apenas do sistema político e do estado, mas também o líder religioso. O sistema Wilayat al-Faqih prevalente no Irão transfere o poder supremo ao Rahbar, ou seja, à pessoa que agora foi eleita para este cargo. Ele é o terceiro líder após o aiatolá Khomeini. Ayatollah Khomeini foi o criador deste sistema, o seu sucessor foi o Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, que governou até o último momento, e agora é seu filho. Isso é raro, porque tal posição especial geralmente não é herdada, mas o Conselho, o Conselho Supremo do Irão, provavelmente tomou uma decisão excepcional [e muito bem, pelo martírio que toda a família sofreu e pela sua qualidade psico-espiritual e ética.]
O que isto significa? Primeiro, é uma mudança geracional. É uma mudança da geração de pessoas que, com excepção da guerra Irão-Iraque, viveram por várias décadas sob sanções, mas ainda assim num estado de paz. Ayatollah Khamenei, ao contrário de seu predecessor, o fundador da República Iraniana e do sistema Wilayat al-Faqih, era mais moderado, mais inclinado ao compromisso e mais pacífico. Seu filho não é assim, especialmente após as perdas pessoais sofridas pelo Irão como um todo, após os ataques às instalações de armazenamento de petróleo — a “chuva negra.” [no 9º dia da luta, com o bombardeamento de um depósito gigante de petróleo em Teerão]. Estes são os tempos do fim. [Ou tempos de grande batalha e transição vitoriosa].
O atual Rahbar está muito mais próximo do Corpo da Guarda Revolucionária Islâmica, e ele certamente exclui — na minha opinião, pelo menos sob condições que possam ser ditadas de fora — qualquer conversa de paz com o agressor. [Ainda que certamente nestes dias os hipócritas enviados de Trump voltarão à carga, para fazerem findar o caos e a desilusão de muita da sociedade civil israelita e dos colonos, que tanto começaram já a fugir aos milhares, como começarão a criticar Netanyahu.]
O Irão lutará até ao fim, o povo lutará até oa fim, e os excessos que se acumularam na sociedade iraniana nas últimas décadas estavam precisamente ligados a algo muito subtil: o Corpo da Guarda Revolucionária Islâmica está fundamentalmente voltado para a "guerra dos tempos finais," para o confronto com o inimigo, para a batalha com o Dajjal, com o Anticristo. E quando, ano após ano, década após década, esses guerreiros, que na verdade foram treinados e preparados para a batalha final, se envolveram na vida pacífica, então, é claro, um guerreiro nessas condições deteriora-se. Começa a envolver-se em economia, negócios, corrupção. Quando um guerreiro não luta, é algo perigoso; ele torna-se um recurso tóxico. [Alexander Dugin, na linha da Trdição perene, que Dumézil Guénon e  Evola bem desenvolveram, alude aqui ao estatuto do kshatriya, o guerreiro, na tripartição social tradicional dos indo-europeus. Talvez devesse mais ter falado e dentro da tradição Xiia do 12º Imam, o Madhi, aquele que vem, e que cada iraniano incarna ou avatariza agora bem mais poderosamente].
                                                 
Um guerreiro deve lutar. E agora este véu da chamada vida pacífica, onde tudo perdia o seu significado para muitos iranianos, onde tudo se tornava fonte de tédio, onde ninguém entendia porque é que essas sanções tinham sido impostas [pelos USA e os chihuahuas da União Europeia], porque é que o Ocidente deveria ser odiado — tudo isso foi dissipado. Agora eles veem porque é que isso deve ser feito. [Muito bem visto por Dugin]
Se eles não destruírem o Ocidente [algo exagerado, mas é ao estilo absoluto de Dugin], se não cumprirem o seu destino, então o seu regime, o seu sistema, a sua cultura e o seu grande país — que existe há muito mais tempo do que os Estados Unidos ou o Israel moderno — estarão sob ataque. Afinal, todos esses elementos de identidade — o grande império iraniano, o mundo islâmico que dominou metade da humanidade — estão vivos e agora despertos na sociedade iraniana.»

 Oremos com confiança, o Irão e o mundo multipolar vencerão,  livres da opressão norte-americana.

Alexander Dugin: Iran's War for the World. 10/3. Portuguese translation will be available tomorrw.

                                Iran's War for the World

Radio Sputnik, Escalation Show Host: The violent clashes in the Middle East are ongoing. Initially, there were reports that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were preparing to visit Israel, but then came the unexpected news that the planned trip had been canceled. The reasons for this move have not been officially disclosed, but the fact itself is quite telling. In this regard, the question of the prospects for ending the conflict is particularly interesting. Donald Trump emphasized in his recent comments that the decision to cease fire will be made only with the consent of Benjamin Netanyahu. This raises the logical question: when will the end come? It seems that Israel and Netanyahu himself are determined to destroy the enemy without compromise, which means that a quick end to the conflict is unlikely.

 Alexander Dugin: I think it is necessary to ask another side, whose opinion is absolutely important. This is the heroic Iranian people, who have lost their leadership and suffered enormous losses. They have endured grief and the unfortunate death of many people. Girls, small children, daughters of IRGC commanders, have been killed, and the strikes were deliberately aimed at them. This is nothing less than the murder of infants.
Netanyahu has declared that this war, from his point of view, in the religious and Zionist sense, is being waged against Amalek. Amalek is the enemy of Israel, and Netanyahu stated directly in his speech that they will destroy babies and children, that no one should be left alive in this war. This is Netanyahu’s mood: the war must end with Iran, when Amalek is destroyed. This is Israel’s religious-political project. The first strike against Israel’s enemies, Amalek and Iran, turned out to be very painful.
The religious leadership was destroyed — it is roughly equivalent to destroying the Pope or the Orthodox Patriarch. The blow was dealt to the religious leadership of the Shiite world, to military, scientific, and political circles. The attack by America and Israel was aimed at decapitating Iran and provoking a regime change operation, sparking an uprising. And in order to intimidate the people, they cynically annihilated children with a targeted strike. However, this did not have the effect that these American-Israeli monsters had hoped for.
The Iranian people rallied around their leadership: a new Rahbar, a new head of the political-religious structure of Wilayat al-Faqih, was elected, the son of Khamenei, who lost not only his father but also his closest relatives in the strike. The Iranian people and leadership are now determined to conclude this war only after Israel has been wiped off the face of the earth.
Now the axe has fallen: from Israel’s point of view, this is Amalek, who must be destroyed. From the Iranian point of view, Israel, like the entire West led by the US, is Dajjal, a kind of antichrist who is supposed to become the king ruling over the whole earth.
Trump and Netanyahu may have their own plans for ending this war. No one takes Kushner and Witkoff seriously; they are simply odd individuals. They were negotiating with Iran at the very moment when the Americans and Israelis were striking the military leadership. No one in Israel or anywhere else in the world will talk to these people anymore. They have been completely discredited and compromised.
A lot depends on Iran now. Iran is not going to end this war; it is going to achieve its goals — to destroy Israel as such — and it has every reason to do so after what Israel has done to its military, religious, and political leadership. It is now impossible to make any arguments that Iran will end the war under anyone’s pressure. Iran is becoming a brute force. We are saying that there will be no peace talks until one side loses — until it completely surrenders or is destroyed.
Host: We don’t know how the situation will unfold, but I want to emphasize that Trump certainly has some influence in this war, but not everything. He himself claims that the outcome is in the hands of Benjamin Netanyahu, but that is only part of the truth. In reality, everything boils down to who will emerge victorious and who will be the first to admit defeat. If, hypothetically speaking, Israel, Iran, or the US were to capitulate now and declare their withdrawal from the conflict, it would radically change the course of events. In that case, should we expect a repeat of the “12-day war” scenario, where there was no clear winner, or is something else in store for us?
Alexander Dugin: Of course not. In fact, we do not expect a repeat of that scenario. First, Iran did not really manage to break through the “iron dome” at that time. There were no massive strikes and Iran’s entire political leadership wasn’t killed.
Such an opportunity existed, and the relatively benevolent Rahbar Khamenei was in power. Now his son is in power, now the IRGC is in power, now all Iranians — even those who had something against the regime — are mobilized for the complete extermination of the Israelis.
It is no longer a question of who is right and who is wrong: the Iranian population believes that Israel must be destroyed. And this is a country of nearly 100 million people. If we add to this the Shiites, the resistance forces, and the Muslims who are gradually waking up, I think this is a rather serious factor.
It is difficult to say how determined America is to defend Netanyahu to the end until Trump has fully committed himself to this adventure. He is losing points at home in this war. The global economy is under serious threat, and not only in the Middle East. Everyone who could leave Dubai has already left, and those who cannot are packing up. What has happened over the past week marks the end of an era.
So far, Trump has been strongly backing Netanyahu and even threatening a ground invasion of Iran, but that would take at least six months of preparation and mobilizing between half a million and 2 million troops to be successful. It’s hard to tell how serious this is, but Trump’s support in the US is dropping fast. And at some point, precisely because of the collapse provoked by these aggressive actions by the US and Israel, which were completely unprovoked by Iran itself, everything will depend on how quickly this collapse of the world system — Trump’s financial and political power — develops. At some point, he may declare “I’ve won.” But this will only be evident on his social media, because it is obvious that, in the current situation, it is simply impossible to come out and declare victory.
Host: Can we say who is winning now?
Alexander Dugin: Iran is winning now. Iran is winning because it is not losing, because it has stood its ground, and because it has broken through the “iron dome” over Israel. Ben-Gvir, a minister in Netanyahu’s government who promised to blow up the Al-Aqsa Mosque, a great Muslim shrine, has had his house destroyed. It is not known whether he is alive or not: the Iranians say he is not, but I saw a video where the man says, “My house has been demolished.”
The Iranians are hitting targets in Israel, and very important ones at that. Not only that, they have effectively disabled most of the American hubs in the Middle East, including high-tech ones; they have attacked all US military bases in the region — sometimes successfully, sometimes not. The exact number of casualties on both sides is unknown: Trump says three people were killed, while the Iranians say tens of thousands of American soldiers. Objective analysts say US casualties range from 1,000 to 2,000, but for the Americans, who are not used to such casualties, these are still colossal numbers.
Iran did not break; it chose a new leader, despite the fact that the Americans and Israelis promised to kill him immediately. Trump declared that the new leader in Iran would be chosen only with his consent and that all Iranian oil now belongs to the US, but this is no more the final destruction of the entire international order: now the one who is strong is right. And now Iran is showing its strength. It has gotten to Israel, dealt a decisive and bold blow to American infrastructure, very accurately selected targets in the Gulf countries, and effectively undermined the pulse of the global economy, including by blocking the Strait of Hormuz.
This time, compared to the war that took place just under a year ago, Iran is behaving completely differently: decisively, confidently, it is attacking, setting serious goals and has no intention of negotiating with the aggressor. And it is right. By and large, Iran is winning now.
I noticed on social media that many influential opponents of American imperialism, hegemony, and unipolarity, with audiences numbering in the millions, at some point began to criticize Russia for its slowness and non-intervention — some even put forward absurd theories about the influence of Israeli networks on us. These were very harsh statements from our friends. But at the same time, there was not a single word of discontent from Iranian accounts, neither from official nor unofficial participants in the process. On the contrary, they express support for Russia. Why? They don’t say, and perhaps we don’t need to know. I am simply making an observation: the opponents of American hegemony are on edge, everyone is waiting for Russia to enter the war. We are acting very cautiously for now, compensating for the situation and unconditionally supporting our ally Iran. The extent of our support is hidden; both sides prefer not to disclose it. Judging by the analytics of Iranian sources themselves, which promote a coordinated political agenda with Russia, the most positive comments are heard there.
The US is demanding that we stop supplying intelligence to Iran. That means that we are supplying it. At the same time, they have been supplying intelligence to our enemy in Ukraine for four years and continue to do so now — these wars are intertwined. Moreover, these are two fronts of the same battle with a common enemy and common values. We and Iran are fighting for a multipolar world, while the West and Israel are fighting to preserve an agonizing, collapsing unipolar world. Objectively, we are on Iran’s side. As for how China and Russia are helping Iran, I prefer to follow open sources, OSINT [Open Source Inteligence]. I haven’t slept much this past week, constantly monitoring what is happening — these are very important processes that are changing everything. We are probably in the first preparatory phase of World War III. It has been announced repeatedly that it has begun, and then it has ended, so it may happen again now. No one can be sure, but the situation is very serious — more serious than a year ago. The gravity of what we are seeing in the Middle East is beyond measure.
Four ideas about the end of the world have collided there. In America, supporters of radical Protestant sects, so-called Christian Zionism or dispensationalism, have seized complete power. They believe that this is the final battle between the forces of “good” (to which the US, Netanyahu, and the Zionists belong) and “evil” (which includes us and Iran).
In their model, we are a more important enemy than the Islamic forces of Iran. In the White House, they are performing rituals and praying for Trump; there is the head of Trump’s religious affairs office, a female pastor who shouts meaningless words (this is called “glossolalia” among charismatic evangelists), utters curses, and demands money. This has nothing to do with Christianity; these are snarling women who worship some clearly different spiritual or anti-spiritual entity. This is very serious. These Christian Zionists are determined because, from their point of view, the events in Israel precede the second coming of Christ and the appearance of “unidentified flying objects” on which true Protestants will be raptured into heaven — this is called the rapture theory.
Defense Minister Hegseth, head of the War Department, belongs to this sect, and they have established complete control over Trump. Netanyahu considers himself the last prime minister before the coming of the Messiah — the savior who is to become the king of the Jews and rule the world. This is an absolutely radical point of view. Netanyahu asserts that it is necessary to build “Greater Israel” and destroy Amalek. It is difficult to defeat people who not only think this way, but also act so radically.

The Iranians respond that the US and Israel themselves are the so-called Dajjal, the antichrist, the usurper, the evil of the world, the children of darkness who must be destroyed in the final battle. Our position is less eschatologically focused, but it also exists, and paradoxically, it is closer to the Iranian understanding of what the modern West and modern ultra-religious Zionist Israel represent.
This does not affect Judaism or Jews — it only affects the radical extremist forces that are at the helm of Israel.
Host: Let me clarify our position. Against the backdrop of escalation, Russia has prepared a draft UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in the region. But if we are in close diplomatic relations with Iran, why should we demand a truce if Tehran clearly has other goals and is determined to continue the fight?

Alexander Dugin: First, there are two points here. The first is the desire to be consistent. This paper, since any member of the Security Council has the right to submit it, will simply be thrown into the trash. We are doing this for appearances’ sake. It will have no effect. Secondly, we want to show that we are against war, the we want to say: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” This is, in general, in compliance with the commandments of the Gospel.
But, at the same time, I believe that there is a weak side to this position: Russia is desperately clinging to the world order that emerged after the end of World War II — the so-called Yalta order, the UN system — which no longer exists. It is like phantom pain. It is not there. We need to build a new multipolar world, practically from scratch, and achieve our own results in it. The idea of turning to a world order that no longer exists — which, incidentally, Peskov recently spoke about — is, if you will, a little belated. We propose: let the UN work, but it does not work. Let’s have the Security Council decide something, but it won’t decide anything, because the Americans occupy a polar position in it. We say: let’s respect sovereignty, but no one respects it; in the contemporary world, only force is respected.

I have a proposal: let’s just accept the reality of the situation — that this international order does not exist and it is useless to refer to it. Any action in this regard will be either meaningless or ineffective. Let’s propose a model for the future world order. Let’s achieve our interests, which are necessary conditions for us to become active participants in building this order, rather than just passively watching others impose theirs on us. Let’s achieve these goals, support our allies, put an end to the agonizing unipolar world, and then, having divided the spheres of influence and recognized different states as civilizations, we will build a completely new international order with new rules. But precisely one with rules.
Right now, this is a time without rules. And in this time without rules, we can either dream about the future, which is useless, or accept the present and simply fight as effectively as possible on all fronts where we are attacked, sometimes carrying out preventive operations. We must build our world, in which Russia will be given a worthy place, where we will be sovereign, where we will be actors, where we will be subjects, not objects. This must be done now. In my opinion, we can politely say goodbye to the old world. It no longer exists. There is no bipolar world. There is no UN. The Westphalian system is gone. The Yalta world is gone. We have entered a different era; all of that is in the past, behind the horizon. Let’s move into the future, let’s live in the present, including with regard to the international situation. And to do that, we need to win. And help our allies, friends, and strategic partners win.

Host: We have already mentioned Mojtaba Khamenei, who has become the new supreme leader of Iran, several times. I would like to delve into this topic in more detail. How significantly do you think Iran’s policy will change in the future, and what significance does the election of the new Rahbar have for Iranian society at this critical moment?
Alexander Dugin: First, he is the head of the entire system, not only the political system and the state, but also the religious leader. The Wilayat al-Faqih system prevailing in Iran transfers supreme power to the Rahbar, that is, to the person who has now been elected to this post. He is the third leader after Ayatollah Khomeini. Ayatollah Khomeini was the creator of this system, his successor was Ayatollah Khamenei, who ruled until the last moment, and now it is his son. This is rare, because such a special position is not usually inherited, but the Council, the Supreme Council of Iran, probably made an exceptional decision.
What does this mean? First, it is a generational change. It is a change from the generation of people who, with the exception of the Iran-Iraq war, lived for several decades under sanctions, but still in a state of peace. Ayatollah Khamenei, unlike his predecessor, the founder of the Iranian Republic and the Wilayat al-Faqih system, was more moderate, more inclined to compromise, and more peace-loving. His son is not like that, especially after the personal losses suffered by Iran as a whole, after the strikes on oil storage facilities — the “black rain.” These are the end times.
The current Rahbar is much closer to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and he certainly rules out — in my opinion, at least under conditions that may be dictated from outside — any peace talks with the aggressor.
He will fight to the end, the people will fight to the end, and the excesses that have accumulated in Iranian society over the past decades were linked precisely to something very subtle: the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is fundamentally geared toward the “war of the end times,” toward confrontation with the enemy, toward battle with the Dajjal, with the Antichrist. And when, year after year, decade after decade, these warriors, who were in fact trained and prepared for the final battle, were engaged in peaceful life, then, of course, a warrior in such conditions decays. He begins to engage in economics, business, corruption. When a warrior does not fight, it is a dangerous thing; he becomes a toxic resource. A warrior must fight. And now this veil of so-called peaceful life, where everything has lost its meaning for many Iranians, where everything has become boring, where no one understood why these sanctions were imposed, why the West should be hated — all this has been dispelled. Now they see why it must be done. If they do not destroy the West, if they do not fulfill their destiny, then their regime, their system, their culture, and their great country — which has existed much longer than the United States or modern Israel — will be under attack. After all, all these elements of identity — the great Iranian empire, the Islamic world that has taken over half of humanity — are alive and now awakened in Iranian society.»