The Middle East is once again engulfed in the familiar chaos of war, but this time there's a particularly bitter irony at play. Israel's surprise strikes on Iran, taking out two top military brass and a bunch of nuclear scientists, followed by Iran's predictable missile retaliation, has left Tehran in a pretty dire spot. Meanwhile, Trump's sitting on the fence, probably enjoying the drama while deciding whether to let loose those massive B-2 bombers with their bunker-busting toys on Iran's underground nuclear facilities.
But here's the thing that's really grinding my gears about this whole mess – Iran's current predicament isn't just bad luck or superior Israeli firepower. It's the direct result of decades of misguided pro-American thinking that's left them vulnerable when it matters most.
Missing the Chinese Fighter Jet Express
Let's start with the most glaring military blunder. Iran's air force is still flying around in American F-14A Tomcats from the Shah's era – we're talking about jets that are pushing 50 years old. With US sanctions making spare parts rarer than hen's teeth, these aging birds are supposed to face off against Israel's shiny new F-35I stealth fighters. It's like bringing a musket to a gunfight.
Now, here's where it gets interesting. Remember when Pakistan's Chinese J-10CE fighters made headlines by downing Indian Rafales with those nifty PL-15 missiles? That same J-10 fighter was on offer to Iran way back in 2008 at the Zhuhai Airshow. Pakistan grabbed the opportunity, but Iran? They turned their noses up at it.
The Western media back then was having a field day dismissing Chinese military tech. The Wall Street Journal was busy calling China's air show a "public performance" and claiming their jets had "over 50 problems". Guess what? Those same Western "experts" who said China wasn't a real military superpower are now watching Chinese sixth-generation fighters take to the skies while America's still stuck with PowerPoint presentations.
The Pro-American Trap That Never Pays Off
But the military hardware is just part of the story. Iran's real problem runs deeper – it's got a chronic case of wanting to please America, despite getting nothing but hostility in return. The country's political scene has been this endless ping-pong match between hardliners and pro-American moderates, with the latter constantly promising that if they just bow low enough, Uncle Sam might throw them a bone.
Take the current president, Pezeshkian, who's firmly in the pro-American camp. The guy probably thought he could sweet-talk his way into better relations with Washington. But as I've been saying for years, it doesn't matter how pro-American you are if America doesn't want you to be pro-American – especially when Israel's got a say in the matter.
The suspicious helicopter crash that took out hardliner President Raisi in 2024? That timing was awfully convenient for those who wanted a more pliable leader in Tehran. But being pliable hasn't exactly worked out, has it?
When Weakness Invites Aggression
Here's the brutal reality that pro-American Iranian politicians refuse to acknowledge: the more you signal weakness and desperation for American approval, the more you paint a target on your back. Netanyahu didn't accidentally time his airstrikes for when US-Iran talks were heating up – he did it because he knew Iran's divided house would struggle to respond effectively.
The fact that Israeli intelligence could pinpoint those two generals suggests Iran's got serious internal security problems. When you've got that many people internally hoping for American approval, some of them are bound to be sharing more than just political opinions with foreign intelligence services.
As Xia Baolong brilliantly put it during Hong Kong's National Security Education Day: "America cannot stand to see Hong Kong prosper... If anyone thinks they can beg America for mercy in exchange for peace, this is extremely naive. Betraying the motherland will not lead to a good outcome."
Iran's tragedy is a perfect case study in this dynamic. They've spent decades trying to prove they're worthy of American friendship, only to find themselves more isolated and vulnerable than ever. The cruel irony is that their attempts to appear reasonable and moderate have only made them look weak to their enemies and unreliable to potential allies.
The lesson here isn't just for Iran – it's for any country that thinks kowtowing to Washington is a viable long-term strategy. Sometimes the best way to earn respect is to stop begging for it.
Lo Wing-hung
Bastille Commentary
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.
Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".
Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.
Trump's Colonial Playbook
On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.
Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."
Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.
America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.
The British Double Standard
Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.
The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.
Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.
Silence on Venezuela
After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.
Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."
The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.
Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.
The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.
Lo Wing-hung
