TEHRAN – Karen U. Kwiatkowski, the retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel and former Pentagon analyst, believes the recent U.S.-Israeli war against Iran has accelerated the decline of American global dominance while strengthening the emergence of a multipolar regional order.
In an interview with the Tehran Times, she argues that Washington failed to achieve its strategic objectives, discusses the evolving security architecture of West Asia, examines the political calculations behind the conflict, and assesses the prospects for a lasting understanding between Tehran and Washington.
Below is the full text of the interview:
Some believe that Netanyahu, by promoting the idea of regime change, drew Trump into a war with Iran. To what extent do you agree with this view?
Yes, on the first part. Netanyahu and his political agents in Congress have been advocating for a hot war with Iran for several decades, and when Trump ordered the bombing in June 2025 and initiated the war on February 28th of this year, it was at the behest and advocacy of Netanyahu. There is evidence for this from many sources, but specifically in the actual statements made by the State Department, the Pentagon, and the President himself.
However, the rationale of regime change is simply a popular catchphrase, used by the U.S. and Israel, and others, in order to justify the expansion of empire. The U.S. and some countries in Europe, as well as Israel, work very hard to “change” any leadership not conducive to U.S., European, or Israeli interests through candidate support and opposition efforts, CIA-driven color revolutions, assassination, and election manipulation. When this does not work, war or military conflict is initiated. I doubt that those in Tel Aviv or Washington actually believe that military assault delivers effective regime change often it is simply a gamble that from the chaos a more useful leader will emerge, or can be temporarily installed, usually accompanied by pallets of dollars. War, of course, is a profitable business for both the U.S. and Israeli state-aligned oligarchies.
“Regime change” is a well-used narrative, but the fundamental reason for the war on Iran was, for both Trump and Netanyahu, a land and resource grab, and an attempt by the U.S. to solidify control over the (Persian) Gulf states and expand the Abraham Accords investment opportunities. In this, they underestimated both Iran and most of the (Persian) Gulf States.
In your view, what impact will the war have on the future geopolitical landscape?
First, the geopolitical landscape has been shifting and evolving towards this moment for at least the last 15 years, as the U.S. military has become more fragile and expensive, and the Military Industrial Complex at home seeks to expand and profit rather than to contract in the absence of wars and customers. A key driver of this recent change is technology and the exceptional domestic progress of major nations of the world to innovate more rapidly and more cheaply than the U.S. and Europe can innovate. Other drivers are the aging demographic in the West, a decline in educational standards, and the suffocating domestic intervention by Western governments in their own shrinking productive and engineering base. What I am trying to say is that the U.S. and most of the West are no longer a place of human freedom and creativity the locus for human opportunity and liberty appears to be shifting eastward.
This war on Iran has demonstrated that all these pre-existing weaknesses of the U.S., most of Europe, and Israel (a European socialist model transplanted in Palestine) are impossible to fix. All nations of the world, and their governments, have been watching the U.S. empire’s decline carefully, and this war confirmed and solidified their tentative expectations. The political leadership in both the U.S. and its Middle Eastern proxy is divided and degenerate, the U.S. and Israeli economy is highly vulnerable to trade disruptions and global trends, and the U.S. military specifically is poorly led, unable to conduct lengthy expeditionary wars abroad, too expensive, and disconnected from the political leadership and from the population.
This knowledge compounded with the inflated dollar and a massive unpayable U.S. federal debt has already shifted the attention of the world’s investors, suppliers, and consumers away from the U.S. and towards regions and countries where relationships pay far more dividends, lead to fewer wars, and more peace. A new security architecture for the Middle East is already evolving, one that does not include useless U.S. bases and empty U.S. promises.
This war is of critical importance because it militarily and politically illustrated the current weakness of the U.S. imperial project. It also demonstrated the role of asymmetrical and high-tech/low-cost multi-faceted warfare in defeating a geriatric U.S. regime and its expensive yet sclerotic military strategies and systems. New and strengthened global relationships that do not include the U.S., and are oriented in a somewhat defensive manner against U.S. power and influence, have been evolving and will now take a more public shape. These new models for security and regional relationships will now more confidently innovate, as the U.S. empire in decline is better understood today than it was just 100 days ago.
The U.S. and Israel have committed numerous war crimes during this conflict, and international bodies have taken no action. What do you see as the reason for this inaction?
Israel’s war and defensive approach starts with identifying the enemy as a population, rather than an army, and a civilization rather than a particular government in a global community of equal and equivalent governments. Israel is already well integrated into U.S. warfighting and AI design, and these attitudes are embraced by the U.S. government and the Pentagon with no Constitutional pushback from Congress or the larger American population.
Thus, Israeli crimes are U.S. crimes, and vice versa. Both countries have spent billions of dollars over many years bribing and funding friendly politicians, including those and their friends who serve them on the international oversight organizations, both the UN and non-governmental. Both categories of oversight organizations are financially dependent and, in many cases, personally or organizationally compromised by decades of U.S. funding. Unlike the economic and military shift away from the dollar across the globe, the UN and the major NGOs are wholly supported and invested in the Western system, and the old promises of the new world order led by the U.S. The U.S. complains about the UN for domestic political purposes, but funds it in order to control it and ensure that the archaic UNSC system prevails to ensure no actions are ever taken against the U.S. or its proxy. Israeli assassination projects and the ideology of assassination inspire the U.S. to target individuals, organizations, and media that seek to hold the U.S. and Israel accountable for extensive war crimes, for defunding, debanking, blacklisting, and deplatforming.
The solution is similar to the new security architectures that are evolving, and that is the evolution of more oversight and accountability centers around the world that are not dependent on U.S. dollars, and not vulnerable to U.S. retaliation for attempting to hold it accountable for its war crimes and other misdeeds.
Trump, both during the intense 40-day phase of the war and throughout the ceasefire, repeatedly issued ultimatums only to back down from them. What is your assessment of this tactic by the U.S. president?
My personal opinion is that Trump is largely uneducated on the real capabilities and current status of the U.S. empire and its military. This ignorance of reality combines with his personality, which thrives on trash talk, empty threats, and lashing out at perceived competitors or enemies, and his narcissism that ensures, like many emperors and kings of the past, that he is surrounded by yes men and women who fear to tell the truth or the whole story, knowing that Trump reacts poorly to inconvenient facts.
Because the President has continued to write checks that the U.S. military can’t cash, increasingly he has become a laughingstock, an old man with stories that are not true that we tolerate because it is easier than trying to get him to stop lying. I do believe Trump thinks that many of his social media statements and threat cycles are making money for himself and his personal financial empire, and in his mind, this may be worth losing, over time, his personal and presidential credibility.
On the other hand, we have heard that his rage includes demanding to know if he can drop a nuclear bomb on Iran, and again, his handlers so far seem capable of handling these outbursts. His many threats have a low probability of being implemented; however, they are dangerous in the context of the U.S.-Israeli incest in Washington, as Trump’s fear-mongering at home and abroad does set the stage for any number of false flag or other incidents, conducted by neocon and Zionist elements in the U.S. and Israel.
Do you think the Arab states of the Persian Gulf will revise their security doctrines in the aftermath of this war?
I think they are already doing so, and they will continue to explore and institutionalize agreements and security arrangements with each other, across Sunni-Shia and cultural divisions, in light of the inability of the U.S. to assist or secure Arab and North/East African states. Iran’s resistance and defense strategies in the past several months are paradigm-breaking, and have accelerated global planning for a post-U.S. unipolar world, and a new serious and liberated multipolar world.
The Middle East as a region will need to proceed carefully and thoughtfully as new relationships and alliances evolve, because the U.S. and Israel, and European influences, and more importantly arms and money, continue to be useful to many countries in the region. Many countries that the U.S. targeted for regime change on behalf of Greater Israel, or those who have allied with the U.S. in those regime changes, remain politically, economically, and militarily vulnerable and compromised. Iran has demonstrated a model of serious and respectful diplomatic consultation with regional neighbors as well as other major powers like China and Russia, and this larger neighborhood can be instrumental in improving both security institutions and capacity. A wounded, fearful, and cornered animal, even if small, can be at its most dangerous, and although Israel’s rhetoric would not admit this, this is the reality for the region.
Some believe that the Israelis’ expressions of anger and frustration over the Iran-U.S. understanding are a form of “good cop, bad cop” routine. What is your view on this?
I think the Israelis are angry at the existence and military supremacy of Iran, and they are panicked at the decline of the U.S. empire, which has served them very well and enabled every Israeli war and every Israeli war crime for 70 years at least.
Trump himself is too poorly disciplined to play good cop, bad cop with anyone, and he is frustrated with Netanyahu for perceived slights and insults. Trump may also feel that he has already earned every penny of Zionist money that helped get him elected in 2024. He also understands that Netanyahu is likely on his way out, and Trump only supports winners, as is his political habit. We have seen the rapid mobilization of every Zionist media and political tool in the U.S. against Trump’s signed MOU, ridiculing it as a bad deal and Trump himself is frustrated because he cannot admit the truth of the strategic and military loss due to his own mistakes and his misplaced trust in those who flatter him. I think something seriously has changed in the U.S. both in the sustenance of our failing empire, and among Americans who overwhelmingly despise both hypocrisy in general, and Zionism specifically.
If the Israelis genuinely view this understanding as negative, what measures do you think they would take to undermine it?
Unfortunately, I think the Israelis, in and out of government, and Zionists in the U.S. and Israel, will do everything in their power to continue their war against all their neighbors, and especially Iran, and we should expect to see targeted assassinations, false flags, and the use of unconventional means of war, including nuclear and bioterrorism. For many in Israel, Zionism has replaced Judaism as a religion, as a faith, and Zionism is at risk with enemies under every stone. The Greater Israel land scheme is at risk, and Israeli society as a supremacist ethno-state is at risk. Just as it is important to understand the White House and the U.S. Congress, it is even more important to understand Israel and listen to what its leaders say when they strategize among themselves. Religions that embrace the concept of an afterlife, or heaven and hell, or even karma, I personally believe, help believers to do the right thing even when it hurts. But Zionism is a political ideology, not a religion, and there is no future benefit for Israeli politicians for doing the right thing if it hurts.
How would you rate the chances of Iran and the U.S. reaching a lasting agreement, and what do you consider to be the most significant obstacles to it?
I am an optimist, and I believe the wishes of the region and much of the world are for these frameworks and eventual agreements to succeed. I think Trump also would like to see the war ended, even if it is just a claim that overstates the reality, for purposes of his legacy. The MOU outlines the best deal that the U.S. will get, and it matches Trump’s intention to invest, make money “for the U.S.,” and bring troops home, a long-forgotten campaign promise that is still popular in the U.S. Israel itself, beyond a possible spasm of nuclear violence that will in fact accelerate its own decline, is not powerful enough by itself to continue a war that cannot be won, and as the world becomes less dollar-dependent and more energy-independent, Israel will be left out of the coming century.
If, somehow, the U.S. and Israel merge as a political and military entity, as is being attempted through modifications offered to the upcoming National Defense Authorization legislation, even that will seal the fate of both empires, a fate of increasing irrelevance.
I give the next 60 days of talks an 80% chance of completion, and beyond that, I think the new shift in security architecture and the efficient management of the Strait (of Hormuz) through the PGSA will continue to progress, with global support for regional peace, and justice for Gaza, South Lebanon, and the West Bank creating new pressure on Israel and the U.S. Trump will, by then, be focused on saving the Republican majority in the House and Senate, and trying to re-address his domestic agenda, and he will (use) every possible deal with the next Israeli PM in a more formal and sovereign way than he has been with a Netanyahu who has boasted in Hebrew for 25 years that he “controls” the White House and Congress.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: tehrantimes.com
