The Power Behind the Iran War: Saudi Arabia

 Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is reported to have provided quiet political backing for the U.S. and Israel’s military escalation against Iran, according to Western media reports citing officials and sources familiar with internal discussions.

According to The Washington Post, MBS privately urged U.S. President Donald Trump to take stronger military action against Iran during the early stages of the conflict. The report suggests multiple private communications in which the Saudi leader encouraged decisive strikes aimed at weakening Iran’s military infrastructure.

While Saudi Arabia has publicly called for restraint, the reporting indicates a more assertive private position aligned with hardline regional security objectives.

Separate reporting from Reuters suggests that Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, have signaled to Washington that ending hostilities is not enough, and that Iran’s missile and drone capabilities must be significantly degraded.

This reflects broader regional concerns over Iran’s long-range strike capacity and influence across multiple fronts in the Middle East.

While official Saudi statements continue to emphasize diplomatic solutions and de-escalation, reports indicate a divergence between public messaging and private strategic discussions.

U.S. President Donald Trump has described Saudi Arabia’s leadership in strongly supportive terms.

When asked whether Mohammed bin Salman was encouraging specific actions regarding Iran, Trump responded:
“He does—he is a warrior. He is fighting with us, by the way.”

Trump also emphasized ongoing defense cooperation, noting that the U.S. has agreed to sell advanced F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, describing them as highly restricted military assets.

On broader alliances in the region, Trump said:
“MAGA likes us protecting certain allies, whether it’s Israel or Saudi Arabia or Qatar or the UAE.”

He further expressed appreciation for Riyadh’s cooperation, stating that Saudi Arabia has been “very helpful” in contrast to other traditional Western alliances.

Unverified claims attributed to The Wall Street Journal sources also suggest discussions within regional leadership circles about strengthening deterrence against Iran, though no official confirmation has been made.

https://clashreport.com/focus/articles/the-power-behind-the-iran-war-saudi-arabia-t0m4mwjna5

Sources:

The Washington Post,The Guardian,The Wall Street Journal

UAE Moves Toward Iran War Coalition in Secret Shift

 The United Arab Emirates is emerging as a key Gulf actor in the rapidly evolving regional security landscape, as the Iran conflict expands across multiple fronts. According to the Financial Times, Abu Dhabi has informed Western allies that it is prepared to participate in a multinational maritime force aimed at securing the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical energy routes.

The reported initiative comes at a time when Gulf states are reassessing their security posture amid growing instability linked to Iran’s regional military activities.

The UAE is said to be actively lobbying for a broader international naval coalition to ensure the safety of commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. The proposal includes coordination with Western powers and could involve direct naval participation from Abu Dhabi, according to sources cited in diplomatic reporting.

This marks a notable escalation in Gulf maritime security discussions, as regional actors seek to stabilize shipping lanes affected by ongoing Iran-related tensions.

Separate diplomatic reporting suggests that Gulf countries, including the UAE, have communicated to Washington that ending hostilities alone is not sufficient. Instead, they are reportedly emphasizing the need to reduce Iran’s missile and drone capabilities as a long-term security priority.

U.S. President Donald Trump has also commented on America’s role in regional security, stating that “MAGA likes us protecting certain allies, whether it’s Israel or Saudi Arabia or Qatar or the UAE.”

The remarks reflect ongoing U.S. political framing of Gulf security partnerships as part of broader Middle East strategy debates.

While not a formal declaration of war involvement, analysts interpret this stance as a deeper alignment with U.S. strategic objectives in the region.

Observers note that the UAE’s diplomatic activity reflects a broader Gulf recalibration in response to rising regional threats. While Abu Dhabi maintains official neutrality regarding direct involvement in the conflict, its increasing coordination with Western partners highlights a shift toward a more active security posture.

https://clashreport.com/focus/articles/uae-moves-toward-iran-war-coalition-in-secret-shift-q7m9uenne

French Police Foil Terror Plot: Suspect Caught Trying To Ignite Bomb Outside BofA HQ In Paris

 French anti-terrorism authorities thwarted an attempted attack early Saturday morning when police arrested a suspect as he tried to ignite an explosive device directly in front of the Bank of America headquarters in Paris. 

The incident unfolded around 3:25-3:30 a.m. when officers from the Paris police's BAC (Brigade Anti-Criminalité) unit, already on heightened patrol near the building due to prior threats, spotted the individual attempting to set fire to the device with a lighter. The device consisted of a 5-liter transparent jerrycan filled with an unidentified flammable liquid (reportedly a hydrocarbon such as gasoline) attached to a mortar-style tube or large firecracker containing approximately 650 grams of explosive powder. No detonation occurred, and there were no injuries or damage.

A second individual, believed to have been acting as a lookout, fled the scene on foot. The arrested suspect, a 17-year-old minor born in Senegal and residing in a Paris suburb, was taken into custody. During initial questioning, he reportedly claimed he had been dropped off at the location by a driver and was recruited via the social media app Snapchat for a payment of €600 to carry out the act.

BofA Paris HQ, April 2019

According to Le Monde, France’s Parquet National Antiterroriste (PNAT), the national anti-terrorism prosecutor’s office, immediately opened a formal investigation. The probe is being conducted in flagrante delicto on charges including:

• Attempted degradation by fire or dangerous means in connection with a terrorist undertaking
• Manufacturing, possession, and transport of an incendiary or explosive device in a terrorist context
• Participation in a terrorist criminal association

The Paris judicial police’s anti-terrorism section and France’s domestic intelligence agency, the DGSI, are leading the inquiry alongside judicial police units. The device was secured and sent for analysis by the Paris police prefecture’s central laboratory.

Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez praised the officers’ swift action on social media, stating: “Bravo to the rapid intervention of a Paris prefecture crew that allowed thwarting a violent action of a terrorist nature this night in Paris. Vigilance remains more than ever at a high level.”

A spokeswoman for Bank of America confirmed the company was “aware of the situation” and is cooperating with French authorities. The building had reportedly been under increased surveillance due to previous threats, including a recent video from a pro-Iran group that singled out the bank as a target linked to “Zionist and Israeli interests.”

This foiled plot occurs against a backdrop of heightened terrorist threat levels in France and Europe, with authorities maintaining elevated vigilance amid ongoing international tensions. The investigation continues, with efforts focused on identifying any broader network or accomplices. No further arrests have been reported as of Saturday afternoon.

The suspect remains in police custody, and authorities have not yet released additional details about his background or possible motives. Updates are expected as the probe advances.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/french-police-foil-terror-plot-suspect-caught-trying-ignite-bomb-outside-bofa

Mamdani Office of Community Safety leaves NYPD on hook for most dangerous mental-health calls

Late last week, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced the creation of a new Office of Community Safety.

The news was presented as the fulfillment of a key campaign promise: the creation of a full Department of Community Safety, which would, among other things, civilianize mental-health crisis response by replacing police responders with trained mental-health professionals.

On the campaign trail, Mamdani framed this move as a way to provide relief to an overburdened NYPD. But mental-health calls have not constituted a significant share of the department’s workload — fewer than 150,000 of the several million calls for service assigned to the police last year were related to mental health. All Mamdani has really done is create a new office within City Hall that will oversee, and presumably expand, already-existing programs.

4

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced the creation of a new Office of Community Safety to civilianize mental-health crisis response by replacing police responders with trained mental-health professionals. In reality, it will do little to curb the real demands on the sworn officers of the NYPD.Helayne Seidman for the NY Post

This is hardly a revolutionary development, and it will do little to curb the real demands on New York City’s sworn officers.

Nevertheless, the mayor’s allies are doing their best to play up the announcement, focusing in particular on the mental-health response component.

“We believe any new approach must recognize that mental health professionals and peer advocates are best positioned to respond to mental health crises,” New York Civil Liberties Union executive director Donna Lieberman said. “We have seen the dangers of police responses to mental health crises too many times.”

Such assertions are a reminder that Mamdani’s community safety plan was always based in a critical view of the NYPD. The plan’s purpose was to sideline a department that, until recently, Mamdani wanted to defund and dismantle.

Advocates of crisis response argue that police often use force unnecessarily during mental-health incidents — which, in their view, reveals the inadequacies of responding officers, as opposed to the inherent dangers of such calls. Thus, the city would be better off sending trained mental-health professionals to handle mental-health crises.

The Legal Aid Society, for example, asserted in a statement that “thousands of New Yorkers experiencing the crises of homelessness, mental health challenges, and substance misuse … are met with force from New York City Police Department officers that oftentimes leads to avoidable arrests or, in dire cases, injury or death.”

Replacing cops with mental-health professionals is easier said than done, however.

Where does the mayor plan to find a workforce of trained, credentialed mental-health professionals willing to respond 24/7, including holidays, for a municipal salary? Just what does the mayor mean by “mental-health professionals,” anyway? Social workers? Psychologists? Will the city be training them? If so, what will that training look like? How much will it cost? And how will the city evaluate their performance?

4

B-HEARD responders will not respond to calls with a possibility of danger. So unless the mayor’s new office upends this policy, the NYPD will continue to field a large number of 911 mental-health calls.Matthew McDermott

Perhaps the answers lie in the programs Mamdani has held up as examples. One is a small pilot program called B-HEARD, which the new Office for Community Safety will oversee.

But without a massive expansion and meaningful changes to the policies governing that program, New Yorkers should not expect the NYPD to be out of the mental-health response game any time soon. B-HEARD operates in just a few of the city’s many neighborhoods, and even in those areas has managed to respond to only about a quarter of the mental health-related 911 calls received.

Why so few? One reason is that B-HEARD responders will not — as a matter of policy — respond to calls with a possibility of danger. They will not respond to calls involving subjects with access to weapons, who have expressed or exhibited suicidal ideation, or whom the caller has suggested may be violent. Such calls are left to the NYPD.

Unless the mayor’s new office upends this policy, the NYPD will continue to field a large number of 911 mental-health calls.

The most New Yorkers can hope for from the mayor’s initiative is a modest expansion in the capacity of B-HEARD (assuming he can secure a budget increase to fund it). That may be a positive development, but it’s worlds away from the radical change Mamdani promised.

Despite the fanfare from the mayor’s allies, last week’s announcement is another reminder that ideology always runs up against reality.

Reality eventually wins.

Reprinted with permission from City Journal. Rafael A. Mangual is the Nick Ohnell fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a contributing editor of City Journal, and author of the 2022 book Criminal (In)Justice.

https://nypost.com/2026/03/28/opinion/mamdanis-office-of-community-safety-leaves-nypd-on-the-hook/

The whole world laughs at Democrats’ lame voter-ID claims

 Senate Democrats are fighting tooth and nail against the SAVE Act, arguing that requiring Americans to prove their identity with a photo ID when they go to the polls to vote — even when the ID itself is given away for free — prevents eligible voters from casting ballots.

They contend proving citizenship would make voting harder for millions who lack ready access to birth certificates or passports, supposedly disenfranchising black and Hispanic Americans. 

Yet democracies all over the globe, both in the wealthy West and in the developing world, enforce similar rules.

Every country in Africa, for example, requires government-issued identification to vote, and 51 out of 54 African nations demand that would-be voters actively submit proof of citizenship to register.

Mexico and all 12 South American countries mandate government-issued photo IDs to vote, and verify the citizenship of each registered voter.

Mexico’s rules, similar to those proposed in the SAVE Act, require voters to prove their citizenship with an original birth certificate issued by a civil registry, a naturalization certificate or a Mexican passport.  

Our southern neighbor even requires a thumb stain when casting a ballot, to prevent double voting.

All 47 European countries require government-issued photo identification at the polls.

Virtually all of them check voters’ citizenship against national databases, though France requires them to submit documentation, too — and the United Kingdom, Cyprus and Ireland reserve the right to demand documents when citizenship is in doubt.

Why the tight security? To combat widespread vote fraud.

Mexico enacted major reforms in 1991 after election fraud became endemic there.

The government required biometric photo voter IDs, banned absentee ballots and mandated in-person registration.

And despite the tighter rules, turnout rose.

In the next three presidential elections, average participation reached 68% of eligible voters, up from 59% in the prior three.

As confidence in the system increased, so did participation.

Similarly, in Northern Ireland, decades of intense sectarian conflict fueled aggressive electoral tactics, and observers described voter fraud as “widespread and systemic.”

Both Conservative and Labour governments acted.

In 1985, under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, the United Kingdom began requiring voters to show identification at the polls, but that failed to solve the problem: Investigators found that individuals could easily forge medical cards — the accepted ID — or obtain them fraudulently to cast illegitimate votes.

IRA Belfast commanders subsequently admitted to complex scams that had volunteers donning disguises — wigs, different clothes, glasses — to vote multiple times, and running taxis to transport fraudulent voters between polling stations.

By 2002, a UK Electoral Commission survey found that 64% of voters believed fraud in some areas was significant enough to change election outcomes. Only 10% disagreed.

That year, the Labour government strengthened ID requirements, introduced harder-to-forge identification and implemented rules to prevent multiple registrations — and voter confidence rose.

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), the only House Democrat supporting the SAVE Act, says he does so “because I believe in a fundamental principle: American citizens should decide American elections.”

Seven states already require proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate, passport, tribal documentation, or naturalization papers, to register to vote — similar to the SAVE Act’s proposed rules.

And polls show strong support for voter ID requirements among all voters, both Democrats (71%) and Republicans (95%).

Even though Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) damn the legislation by claiming it “would impose Jim Crow-style restrictions on voting,” minority voters don’t seem to see any danger: Significant majorities of black Americans (76%) and Hispanic Americans (82%) favor voter ID.

“The bottom line is this: Voter ID is not controversial in this country,” CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten recently noted.

Nor does it spark controversy virtually anywhere else.

Yet despite voters’ own preferences, only one Democratic House member and one possible Senate Democrat, Pennsylvania’s John Fetterman, support the SAVE Act.

Unless seven more of the Senate’s 47 Democrats step forward, their filibuster will kill the bill.

But if voter ID and proof of citizenship destroy democracy, Democrats would have to label virtually every other democracy in the world undemocratic.

John R. Lott Jr. is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center.

https://nypost.com/2026/03/27/opinion/democrats-lame-voter-id-claims-fail-against-global-reality/