Israel, meanwhile, is openly talking about expanding operations: the occupation of southern Lebanon (the ground phase appears to have

В ответ на пост

Israel, meanwhile, is openly talking about expanding operations: the occupation of southern Lebanon (the ground phase appears to have begun), strikes on Damascus, and the construction of a “Greater Israel.” This extends even to actions on the Temple Mount. Recently, footage circulated showing missile debris near the Al-Aqsa Mosque—precisely where radicals seek to build the Third Temple. Whether this is real or AI-generated remains unclear. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre has been closed and may not reopen even for Easter. There are threats of an explosion at Al-Aqsa. At the same time, Iran is clearly escalating and shows no intention of negotiating.

Israeli politicians today openly call for killing the children of political leaders—specifically Iranian leaders. Meanwhile, the Gulf monarchies keep sending contradictory signals: “Let us join the U.S.-Israel coalition against Iran,” then “leave us out of this.” They seem to be asking the Americans: “Why have you exposed us? We hosted your bases to ensure security, not to create danger. You were supposed to protect us, yet you protect only Israel. We want out of this alliance.” And moments later, the opposite message appears: “Let us attack Iran together.” The same sheikh may issue mutually contradictory statements within minutes or hours.

Since Trump himself constantly shifts his position, we begin to assume that everyone else can do the same. More importantly, we cannot even be sure whether the sheikh actually said any of this, whether it is the same person, or whether he exists at all. Yet once such statements circulate, millions—including governments—begin making real decisions based on them. The virtual dimension of this Third World War has proven its importance.

An insightful analyst, Kees van der Pijl, recently observed that modern capitalism is no longer based primarily on money, demand, or resources, but on a triad: intelligence services, mass media, and information technology. This is where everything is decided. The media create images, the IT sector distributes and embeds them across networks, and intelligence services—tasked with concealing truth and uncovering secrets—add their own layer of control. We are witnessing a new form of capitalist warfare, where this “trinity” determines outcomes, narratives, and conditions.

Now everyone is discussing Douglas Macgregor’s statement in a conversation with Mario Nawfal on X. He claimed that the Russian president had warned Israel that Russia would use nuclear weapons if Israel used them first against Iran.

Incidentally, thanks to Trump, it has now been openly acknowledged that Israel possesses nuclear weapons—previous presidents avoided saying this outright, whereas Trump simply states: “they have them, and they won’t use them.” When such words come from a U.S. president, they carry weight. At the same time, Macgregor’s claim does not match the usual style of our president, who would not speak so directly. And we do not know where Macgregor obtained this information.

My central point, however, is this: this is not merely the “fog of war” or traditional propaganda. This is an entirely new mode of warfare—one that is conducted, and perhaps even decided, largely in the virtual realm.

That is what I want to emphasize.

This makes it extremely difficult to assess Trump’s ultimatums or the actual actions of the various actors. The same applies to the European Union: we see completely contradictory reports. Some claim the EU has joined Trump and is sending troops against Iran; others claim the opposite—that Europe criticizes Trump and Israel and refuses to support them. From some of Trump’s posts, one conclusion follows; from others, the exact opposite.

Is our ship heading to assist Cuba’s energy sector, or has it been turned back by U.S. forces? Even this remains unclear. Maps are circulated, positions are reported—but are we actually helping Cuba or not? Are we assisting Iran, or simply waiting? What is China doing—fully backing Tehran or holding back? In truth, we know nothing.