Israel's right welcomes Trump in face of Iran threats

Reported by the Washington Free Beacon, it points to growing tensions over transparency in the handling of Malley’s case amid an ongoing FBI investigation into his alleged mishandling of classified information.

Malley, suspended in 2023, is under FBI investigation for mishandling classified information. CASA claims the State Department has ignored Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for related documents.

“The State Department has blocked CASA's investigation for nearly seven months, ignoring a series of Freedom of Information Act requests aimed at unearthing details about the circumstances surrounding Malley's suspension and subsequent efforts to hide his misdeeds from Congress,” The Washington Free Beacon reported on Tuesday.

CASA’s lawsuit seeks to obtain internal communications detailing Malley’s suspension, his security clearance revocation, and potential breaches. The group also requested documents from the National Archives related to Malley’s previous government roles, which it says could reveal longstanding interactions with Iranian officials.

Malley was placed on unpaid leave, and his security clearance was suspended in April 2023. Iran International first reported the incident in June, but the State Department has since obstructed all efforts to obtain further information on Malley’s case.

In May, two influential congressmen suggested that Malley’s security clearance was revoked due to his transfer of classified documents to his personal email and cell phone, which were then stolen by a hostile cyber actor.

In September, a Wall Street Journal report stated that “Malley had clicked on a phishing link, compromising a personal email account.” Citing sources familiar with the matter, the report also revealed that investigators found evidence suggesting “Malley had potentially moved classified material, including meeting notes, to a personal account.”

CASA’s director, James Fitzpatrick, said the public "has a right to know" about potential security risks tied to Malley’s alleged actions.

State-controlled media interpreted Khamenei’s response as a positive answer to the young man's question. However, within hours, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, who had previously stated, “The nature of the Islamic Republic is peaceful, but we will be armed with anything needed to defend Iran,” backtracked, clarifying, “We rule out weapons of mass destruction, but we will be armed with whatever is necessary.”

Iran’s military and regional influence has recently weakened, as Israel has significantly degraded Hamas and Hezbollah’s capabilities and launched an offensive strike on Iran on October 26 with dozens of warplanes. In response, Islamic ruling establishment's officials and commentators in Tehran have hinted at possible shifts in military doctrine, including the potential pursuit of nuclear weapons.

On November 1, Iran’s former foreign minister and currently an advisor to Khamenei, Kamal Kharrazi said in an interview that "If the Islamic Republic of Iran faces an existential threat, we would have no choice but to adjust our military doctrine.”

Subsequently, political observers from various insider factions came up with their own justifications and denials about the Islamic Republic's plans to make nuclear bombs.

Hardline commentator Abbas Salimi-Namin stated, “We are not bluffing about making nuclear weapons, but we do not believe in it!” He continued, “We have conventional weapons to defend ourselves with dignity. At the same time, we are on course to end the Zionist regime at the lowest possible cost.”

Salimi-Namin clarified that Kamal Kharrazi was not suggesting a shift in Iran’s nuclear doctrine. Instead, he indicated that Iran does not intend to address the issue of Israel through military force. “Although we have the [nuclear] capability, we adhere to our previously declared position of not using nuclear weapons,” he stated.

This reflects a retreat by both an official close to Khamenei and a hardline commentator from earlier bold statements about potentially going nuclear.

Salimi-Namin also reiterated that Iran’s solution for the Palestinian issue remains a referendum. “We believe in this approach and do not need nuclear weapons,” he emphasized.

He added that Iran has only acted in response to aggression and argued that it is in the West’s interest to control Israel, as global condemnation of Israel also implicates the United States.

Centrist politician Ezzatollah Yousefian-Molla emphasized in an interview with Nameh News that “nuclear weapons are meant to boost a country’s deterrence power; they are not necessarily intended for use.”

However, he added, “If we find our weapons inadequate compared to those of our enemy, the fatwa [religious decree by Khamenei] prohibiting nuclear bomb development might be reconsidered.”

Discussing potential shifts in Iran’s nuclear doctrine, Yousefian-Molla explained that religious decrees are often adaptable. He cited the 19th-century fatwa banning tobacco, which was later revised by Muslim scholars when the political context changed. He reiterated that religious rulings can be modified to protect the regime, while noting, “We will never strike first; we respond only if attacked.”

Meanwhile, hardline lawmaker Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani remarked, “A shift in our nuclear doctrine will enhance our deterrence power,” clarifying that the goal is not to produce nuclear weapons but to strengthen Iran’s defense capabilities.

“We have already paid the price,” he stated referring to years of economic sanction, “and now we need to take the final step. The Supreme Leader has said our response to Israel will be proportionate to their attack. But what will we do if Israel uses nuclear weapons?”

"The outcome of the US presidential election will not bring about significant change and all necessary preparations and forecasts have been proactively planned. The livelihood of the people will remain unaffected," government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani told domestic media.

Iranian state media has remained largely silent on the election, while many Iranians turned to social media to share celebratory messages.

Some major American news outlets have yet to call the election definitively for Trump, although Fox News declared his victory after he secured Pennsylvania early Wednesday.

Several world leaders, including those from Israel, France, and Australia, have swiftly extended their congratulations to Donald Trump on his election victory.

“There isn’t much difference between Trump and Harris,” Mohajerani said, adding that Iranian government policy has been “pre-planned to account for the outcome, and there will be no change in the livelihood of the people.”

“We are not worried about Trump’s election victory,” she added.

The head of the country's Atomic Energy Organization, Mohammad Eslami, also commented on Trump’s victory, saying that the state pursues its own interests in strategic goals and the nuclear industry.

“Our program is not influenced by any changes in the US and will not change,” he said on Wednesday.

Trump told reporters on Tuesday that Tehran "can't have nuclear weapons."

"My terms are very easy," Trump said in Florida after casting his vote. "I'd like them to be a very successful country."

The latest comments by Iranian officials are in line with Iranian state-media narratives in recent days, with domestic experts that the election result will not have a significant impact on the country.

In contrast, Iranians on social media have been vocal, expressing jubilation and humor over Trump’s win, with some jokingly dubbing him the "Chef of the Cutlet."

The term refers to Qasem Soleimani, the former IRGC Quds Force commander killed by a US drone strike ordered by Trump in 2020. Iranians opposed to the Islamic Republic mockingly call the day of his death "Cutlet Day," likening Soleimani's fate to a popular ground meat dish in Iran.

Adding to the reactions, both prominent users and ordinary citizens shared images of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appearing tearful, hinting at his potential dismay over the prospect of Trump’s return to office.

Others, including the user Parinaz Etesam, hypothesized about the impact of Trump’s re-election and the future of Iran.

"Is it possible that in a year when Ismail Haniyeh, Yahya Sinwar, and Hassan Nasrallah are killed and Trump is re-elected, we could witness the downfall of the Islamic Republic?” Etesam wrote, reflecting some of the sentiments shared by other opponents of the state.

As global news coverage centered on Trump’s continued gains, the Iranian currency, the rial, sharply declined, with the dollar reaching a record high of 720,000 rials on Wednesday.

The spike in the dollar’s exchange rate has raised concerns among some Iranians that Trump’s victory could bring intensified economic hardship for the country.

On social media, some Iranian users commented that while a weakened rial could worsen poverty, that economic pressure could also be a catalyst to eventually see the end of the Islamic Republic.

Despite these reactions and market anxieties, Iranian officials had previously downplayed Trump’s projected win. Today, possibly in anticipation of further sanctions, government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani stated, "Previous sanctions significantly strengthened our domestic resilience, and today’s economy is sufficiently capable of handling this."

Iranian government critics were also quick to respond, pointing to leadership promises of reform. Some users referenced recent statements by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who had pledged to lift economic sanctions, questioning whether his assurances could withstand a Trump administration.

Another tweet said, “Trump’s presidency means the end of the Islamic Republic’s four-year reprieve with America.” It suggested that Trump’s return could bring “difficult days ahead” for Khamenei and the IRGC, whom he described as facing repercussions for efforts to eliminate Trump.

While Iranian media remains silent on Trump’s election, social media activity and market reactions reflect the unease and anticipation many Iranians feel as they brace for what a second Trump term could mean for the nation.

Shahin Milani is also an Iranian-American and traditionally voted Democrat but this year he’s not voting at all, saying he’s disappointed in both candidates.

In a special election interview on Eye for Iran, with Iran International, both Milani and Namdar—despite their differing views—agree on one thing: disappointment with the Biden-Harris administration’s policies on Iran.

Milani said he would have voted Democrat had they taken a tougher stance on the Islamic Republic. He cited a lack of creativity of going beyond the Iran Nuclear Deal and gave examples where he felt the current administration downplayed human rights abuses in Iran.

But when it comes to Trump, he said he just can’t vote for him.

“Voting for Donald Trump was also not an option because he did not accept the results of the last election and for me the peaceful transfer of power is the most important thing. It's the bedrock of Western liberal democracy,” said Milani.

He said he doesn’t feel like either party belongs to him, describing himself as being politically homeless.

Not voting, he believes is his only course of action.

Namdar made a shift away from the Democrats, and once a never-Trumper, she has now turned into one of an advocate of the former US president. For her, it was a grieving process to get her to that point.

“I've been historically anti-Trump,” said Namdar.

But the October 7, 2023, Hamas invasion of Israel changed everything for her.

She lost friends over disagreements after the attacks and what she described as a lack of sympathy from her friends.

“I don't agree with Trump on everything, but the fact that the biggest issue here is the Islamic Republic of Iran. That's the most important thing.”

In 2024, she's a single-issue voter, focused squarely on the traditional Republican “maximum pressure” approach to Iran versus what she sees as the Democrats' policy of appeasement.

The US intelligence community warned on Monday that American adversaries like Iran are intensifying disinformation efforts around the elections by promoting false narratives. In the summer, US authorities announced that Iran was funneling money to influence anti-Israel college campus protests. That for Namdar and experiencing antisemitism was a redline.

While the Iranian vote is not going to make a difference in the outcome of the US elections, this year’s candidates had a huge impact on the Iranian-American electorate and has been life changing for some like Namdar and Milani.

For more on the discussion, you can watch the full interview on YouTube or listen on Spotify, Apple, Castbox, or Amazon.

A few days after a university student in Iran was bundled into an unmarked car by security forces for removing her clothes in an apparent protest at hijab-enforcers on campus, her identity and fate remain unknown.

She was filmed by other students from afar as she was forcibly bundled into an unmarked car. Then came the questions. Who was she? What happened?

Little is known about her. Some users on social media have identified her as Ahou Daryaei, a senior student in French Literature. But nothing is confirmed. For now, most people call her "the girl from Science and Research,” after her school. Now, she’s become a nameless household name.

“I’ve been there many times, just that one step away from losing it,” says Fatemeh, 29, who runs a small business from home. “Life is hard for many of us. We’re squeezed enough already, financially, politically and socially. And then some moron stops you to tell you how to dress. It’s crossed my mind many times to just remove all my clothes and go ‘there!’ but I’ve never been brave enough.”

This is a sentiment shared by many Iranian women on social media. If Ahou is crazy, we are all mad, is a widely shared theme.

Witness reports, including even one carried by IRGC-linked Fars News, say that campus security confronted her about her outfit. In protest, she stripped to her underwear and walked around the campus. The rest, and her eventual detention was captured on mobile phones.

“After being handed over to the police by university security, she is now hospitalized in a psychiatric facility," wrote the daily Farheekhtegan, affiliated with the parent university of the college she attended. The report denied any altercation between her and the campus security.

“The authorities call dissenters crazy and their treatment is torture,” says Bahram, 32, a charity worker and activist. “They bank on the social stigma associated with mental illness. But it’s no longer effective."

"They said Vida Movahed was mentally ill, and look what happened: women and girls followed her steps and turned her act of solidarity into a widespread movement against the mandatory hijab,” he said.

Vida Movahed was the woman who in December 2017 climbed up a utility box in central Tehran, put her white scarf on a stick, and waved it in complete silence. This was four years before the widespread protests that followed the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, sparking the movement now known as the Woman, Life, Freedom.

Soraya, a 36-year old nurse, sees the Girl from Science and Research as yet another link in the chain of events that is transforming Iran’s society. “I remember the day the video of Vida on that box went viral,” she says. “It was hard to believe. And it’s hard to believe it was only seven years ago. Stroll in the same street today and a girl with no headcover walks by you every other minute.”

Public attitudes toward the hijab - and religion, in general - has shifted dramatically in the last decade. In a state-sponsored nationwide survey conducted after the 2022 protests, 72% of respondents had said they favored a secular government .The findings were supposed to be classified but were leaked. So those in power know. They can see, but refuse to believe, let alone concede. They’d rather twist reality.

“Of course they say Ahou has mental issues. They said it about Vida too,” Soraya adds. “In their minds a sane woman is an obedient woman. You’re crazy if you rebel. Homa Darabi was dubbed crazy many years before Vida."

Darabi was a child psychiatrist and a university professor in Tehran. She was banished from academia for her views on the hijab and she set herself on fire in protest in 1994.

“You can only truly understand Homa, Vida or Ahou if you live this madness that pushes us women to the brink everyday,” Soraya says.

The Islamic Republic doubled down on the hijab after the 2022 protests. Women are routinely cautioned and detained if their outfit is deemed inappropriate. Cars are impounded if spotted with hijab-free passengers.

A female student wandering around campus in her underwear is not a scene you see everyday in the West. In Iran, where patriarchy is codified, it’s an even greater shocker. Not everybody is supportive. Some - especially older people - see the act as excessive and provocative.

“Whatever the circumstances, one should not give the government an excuse for more repression,” Sara says her mother told her. She’s a university student herself. “My mum, bless her, does not have to pass by those beasts' booth every morning to attend a class.”

“What disappointed me was the lack of support for her,” Sara adds. “In the mobile footage, you can see dozens of bystanders, students supposedly. They could have at least attempted to protect her and prevent her arrest.”

The reaction - or lack thereof - of those seen in the footage has sparked mixed reactions among Iranians. Some say men have become mature enough to avoid staring at a half-naked woman, while others attribute it to fear or indifference.

“I don’t know what I would have done if I had been there at that moment. I’d like to think I wouldn't stand by, but who knows,” said Masoud, 48, who co-owns a mechanic shop .“During the 2022 protests, everybody would rush to help those who were being taken by the thugs. But that was a unique moment maybe. A student witnessing Ahou being taken away knows that getting involved could ruin the future they’re toiling to build. Life here is hard enough as it is.”

Everybody here is anxious. It’s either money, health, or war. You might expect the government to give people a break on their looks. But you’d be wrong. They fear defiant women more than they fear Israel. Perhaps they should.