Iran's strikes undermined Israel's long-standing military superiority: John Helmer

A $60B Vote of Confidence

Iran's strikes on Israel have been widely reported, but the implications of these strikes are far more significant than initially meets the eye. According to John Helmer, a veteran journalist and geopolitical analyst, Tehran's ability to penetrate Israeli air defenses has strategic significance, despite efforts to downplay its impact.

Helmer argues that the war against Iran is about strengthening the U.S. protectorate over the Middle East by destroying the main sources of resistance. To reinforce that protectorate, Trump has adopted the same approach he has pursued in Europe: supporting the war while expecting America's allies to pay for it by purchasing U.S. weapons. His objective is to make regional conflicts financially beneficial to the United States.

The war has cost the United States roughly $38 billion in military expenditures, and Helmer believes that this is just the beginning. He notes that the financial and electoral pressures shaping Washington's approach to the war are significant, and that Trump's handling of Netanyahu is a key factor in this equation.

Netanyahu's visit to Washington was an effort to secure Trump's endorsement for both the Likud Party and his own reelection campaign. However, Trump publicly put Netanyahu in his place, but not so severely that a meeting became impossible. According to Axios, an Israeli publication in Washington, Netanyahu had wanted to visit Washington a week earlier but was turned down. Instead, he received a meeting only after Volodymyr Zelensky's visit, squeezed into Trump's schedule between that meeting and the funeral of Lindsey Graham.

In effect, Netanyahu received a consolation prize. That arrangement suited Trump's ego, preserved his political and financial interests, and appealed to Republican voters. Fundamentally, however, Netanyahu came away with very little. He received neither Trump's personal endorsement for reelection nor an opportunity for a joint press appearance. Instead, Trump offered only a brief acknowledgment on social media.

Interestingly, there were more photographs of the Oval Office meeting in the Israeli press than in the American media. The official photograph also reveals the meeting's priorities. On Trump's side were General Dan Caine of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Chief of Staff Susan Wiles, while Vice President J.D. Vance was absent. The composition of the meeting suggests that its focus was also on military affairs and financial support for Israel.

You think the meeting was primarily about Israel's domestic political concerns and Netanyahu's election prospects, rather than pressing Trump on Iran? Broadly speaking, yes—you have identified the priorities correctly. But, of course, the two issues are connected. All politicians, particularly during wartime, must pay close attention to domestic political considerations. That appears to have been Netanyahu's main priority. However, this should be viewed in a broader context. For Trump, the war against Iran, much like the war against Russia in Europe, is about strengthening the U.S. protectorate over the Middle East by destroying the main sources of resistance—primarily Iran, but also Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, and the Houthis in Yemen.

To reinforce that protectorate, Trump has adopted the same approach he has pursued in Europe: supporting the war while expecting America's allies to pay for it by purchasing U.S. weapons. His objective is to make regional conflicts financially beneficial to the United States. He appears to envision the same model for the Middle East. So far, the war has cost the United States roughly $38 billion in military expenditures.