Don’t Let Sudan Go Back to Being an Iran-Dominated Hub for Terrorists

The regional struggle between Iran (backed by Russia) and pro-Western powers stretches beyond what we normally think of as the Middle East to places like Sudan. In 2020, following the ouster of the murderous dictator Omar al-Bahsir, Khartoum took steps toward joining the Abraham Accords. But just three years later, the country again devolved into a civil war far bloodier than anything happening in Gaza (albeit much less interesting to Western protesters). And that is when the African country abandoned any hope of diplomatic relations with Israel for a different kind of normalization, as Oved Lobel explains:

On October 9, while Israel was still fighting to clear its own territory of more than a thousand terrorists . . . who had invaded the country and carried out mass atrocities and kidnapping two days before, Sudan and Iran suddenly announced they were normalizing relations. This normalization of relations, ruptured in 2016 at the behest of the Gulf Arab states, follows a broader normalization between those states and Iran since 2022.

Up until 2016, and particularly during the 1990s, Sudan served the same purpose to the south of Israel as Syria did in the north: a command-and-control, training, financing, and logistics hub for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Palestinian and Lebanese [allies]—Hizballah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)—as well as al-Qaeda and other terrorist clients. Missiles and other weapons were transferred by the IRGC to Sudan and then smuggled into Gaza, necessitating multiple Israeli airstrikes inside Sudan.

The IRGC already has a substantial presence in the Red Sea, including on islands off Eritrea as well as in Somalia, where it arms al-Qaeda’s al-Shabaab—the current leader of al-Qaeda, Saif al-Adel, has been based in Iran since 2003—as well as, in the other direction, the IRGC’s branch in Yemen, Ansar Allah, widely known as the Houthis.

The upshot? If Sudan once again becomes a terrorist hub, and Iran obtains footholds on either side of the Red Sea, Lobel goes on to explain, Tehran will have almost unrestricted routes for smuggling arms to Gaza.

Read more at Fresh Air

More about: Iran, Israeli Security, Palestinian terror, Russia, Sudan


Israel Just Sent Iran a Clear Message

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.

Read more at Jewish Chronicle

More about: Iran, Israeli Security