A Lack Of Vigilance Before The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

Faults Underlying Exercise Vigilant Guard

Story by: (Author NameStaff Sgt. Raymond Drumsta – 138th Public Affairs Detachment

Dated: Thu, Nov 5, 2009

This map illustrates the earthquake fault lines in Western New York. An earthquake in the region is a likely event, says University of Buffalo Professor Dr. Robert Jacobi.

TONAWANDA, NY — An earthquake in western New York, the scenario that Exercise Vigilant Guard is built around, is not that far-fetched, according to University of Buffalo geology professor Dr. Robert Jacobi.

When asked about earthquakes in the area, Jacobi pulls out a computer-generated state map, cross-hatched with diagonal lines representing geological faults.

The faults show that past earthquakes in the state were not random, and could occur again on the same fault systems, he said.

“In western New York, 6.5 magnitude earthquakes are possible,” he said.

This possibility underlies Exercise Vigilant Guard, a joint training opportunity for National Guard and emergency response organizations to build relationships with local, state, regional and federal partners against a variety of different homeland security threats including natural disasters and potential terrorist attacks.

The exercise was based on an earthquake scenario, and a rubble pile at the Spaulding Fibre site here was used to simulate a collapsed building. The scenario was chosen as a result of extensive consultations with the earthquake experts at the University of Buffalo’s Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER), said Brig. Gen. Mike Swezey, commander of 53rd Troop Command, who visited the site on Monday.

Earthquakes of up to 7 magnitude have occurred in the Northeastern part of the continent, and this scenario was calibrated on the magnitude 5.9 earthquake which occurred in Saguenay, Quebec in 1988, said Jacobi and Professor Andre Filiatrault, MCEER director.

“A 5.9 magnitude earthquake in this area is not an unrealistic scenario,” said Filiatrault.

Closer to home, a 1.9 magnitude earthquake occurred about 2.5 miles from the Spaulding Fibre site within the last decade, Jacobi said. He and other earthquake experts impaneled by the Atomic Energy Control Board of Canada in 1997 found that there’s a 40 percent chance of 6.5 magnitude earthquake occurring along the Clareden-Linden fault system, which lies about halfway between Buffalo and Rochester, Jacobi added.

Jacobi and Filiatrault said the soft soil of western New York, especially in part of downtown Buffalo, would amplify tremors, causing more damage.

“It’s like jello in a bowl,” said Jacobi.

The area’s old infrastructure is vulnerable because it was built without reinforcing steel, said Filiatrault. Damage to industrial areas could release hazardous materials, he added.

“You’ll have significant damage,” Filiatrault said.

Exercise Vigilant Guard involved an earthquake’s aftermath, including infrastructure damage, injuries, deaths, displaced citizens and hazardous material incidents. All this week, more than 1,300 National Guard troops and hundreds of local and regional emergency response professionals have been training at several sites in western New York to respond these types of incidents.

Jacobi called Exercise Vigilant Guard “important and illuminating.”

“I’m proud of the National Guard for organizing and carrying out such an excellent exercise,” he said.

Training concluded Thursday.

Feds again reject concerns about the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

NRC to hold webinar Tuesday on Indian Point decommissioning

NRC says gas pipeline no threat to Indian Point, dashing hopes for shutdown by groups





Terms of Service

Your California Privacy Rights/Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy

Site Map


Our Ethical Principles

Cookies Settings

© Copyright Gannett 2020

Theresa Knickerbocker, the mayor of the Village of Buchanan, talks about the Indian Point Energy Center closing and what lies ahead for the village.


The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the Indian Point nuclear power plant would remain safe even if a natural gas pipeline nearby ruptured, disappointing environmental groups pushing to shut down the pipeline. 

Following a February inspector general’s report issued critical of the NRC, the commission agreed to revisit its 2014 finding that an expansion of the Algonquin Incremental Market Pipeline would not pose a safety risk to the Buchanan plant.

The NRC’s latest analysis, conducted by a team of experts inside and outside the agency, came to a similar conclusion, but criticized the NRC and Indian Point’s owner, Entergy, for their “optimistic assumptions” in assessing the potential for a gas line rupture.

PIPELINE: Report criticizes federal nuke agency over approving gas pipeline near Indian Point

FEDS: No plans to reconsider approval of controversial AIM pipeline near Indian Point

GUILTY: Algonquin pipeline protesters guilty of trespassing, but judge spares them punishment

“A rupture of the newly installed 42-inch natural gas transmission pipeline that runs near Indian Point is unlikely,” last week’s report found. “This pipeline was installed using modern techniques, stringent quality standards, and construction precautions that limit the likelihood of later pipeline damage.”

Environmental groups were hoping the inspector general’s report, which came in response to a public complaint about the NRC’s analysis, would lead to a shutdown.

“I’m am not at all surprised that the NRC continues to ignore the safety risks generated by their own failures,” said Courtney Williams of Peekskill, who leads a group opposed to the expansion. “This is par for the course. They routinely ignore anything that does not maintain the status quo allowing plant owners to do as they please.”

She added: “It doesn’t take an engineer to know that having multiple, high-pressure gas pipelines criss-crossing the nuclear power plant is unsafe.”

The pipeline courses north from Pennsylvania and covers seven miles in Rockland County, before crossing the Hudson River into Westchester County just south of Indian Point before heading into New England. It is operated by Enbridge Energy Partners.

In recent years, the project has become a flash point for natural gas opponents. In 2016, several clean energy advocates were arrested in Verplanck after locking themselves inside a section of pipeline being readied to cross under the Hudson River.

A protest of the Algonquin pipeline expansion project that was held in June in Peekskill.


The February inspector general’s report prompted a stern response from state, federal and county lawmakers. Westchester County Executive George Latimer called the 2014 NRC report “a gross failing.”

Rep. Nita Lowey said she was pleased the latest analysis found the pipeline not to be a threat to the communities around Indian Point, but voiced concerns with how the 2014 report was done.

“This report cannot be the end of the story,” Lowey said. “The NRC must implement the recommendations outlined in the report and, if necessary, take regulatory action to ensure that Entergy does the same. I am particularly concerned that federal agencies such as the NRC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission need to work much more closely on important safety and health issues regarding nuclear reactors and natural gas pipelines.”

FERC relied on the NRC analysis when it approved the pipeline expansion in 2015.

The NRC will hold a public hearing on the matter after COVID-19 restrictions are lifted.

Among the concerns highlighted by the inspector general’s report was that the NRC failed to confirm Entergy’s claim that if there was a rupture, pipeline operators would be able to shut down gas flow in three minutes.

“OIG contacted the pipeline operator who estimated it would take at least 6 minutes after detection of a leak to close the valves,” the inspector general wrote.

The latest report by the NRC said Entergy should re-do its own analysis, which the NRC relied on in its 2014 decision.

“Entergy should be asked to revisit the assumptions it made regarding the consequences of a postulated rupture of the 42-inch pipeline,” the report notes.

And it said the NRC will need to improve its own technical reviews and inspections.

Entergy spokesman Jerry Nappi said the plant’s safety systems are located a safe distance from the pipeline and are protected by “robust concrete structures.”

“Per the NRC’s request, Entergy will review the assumptions that were provided by the pipeline owner,” Nappi said. “We are confident that a review of all information will again conclude that the plant would be safely protected in the unlikely event of a pipeline failure.”

The plant will shut down in 2021. One of its two reactors, Unit 2, will power down on April 30.

Entergy has a deal pending to sell the plant to Holtec International after the shutdown. That deal is awaiting the approval of the NRC.

On Tuesday, the NRC will hold a webinar to discuss the details of how the plant will be decommissioned after the shutdown

Reactor 2 Shutdown Before the Sixth Seal (Rev 6:12)

The Indian Point nuclear plant will shut down Reactor 2 by April 30 as the plant's owner, Entergy, continues preparations for Indian Point’s full decommissioning next year.

1st Shutdown Imminent At Indian Point

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffers held a webinar attended by about 300 people Tuesday afternoon.

By Lanning Taliaferro, Patch Staff 

CORTLANDT, NY — The Indian Point nuclear plant will shut down Reactor 2 by April 30 as the plant’s owner, Entergy, continues preparations for Indian Point’s full decommissioning next year. The plant’s closure agreement was signed between Entergy, New York State and Riverkeeper after years of lawsuits.

There are three reactors at Indian Point. The Unit 1 reactor was permanently shut down in 1974 and has been in long-term storage since then, awaiting decommissioning. Unit 3 is scheduled to be shut down in 2021.

“Decommissioning a nuclear power plant is more akin to a marathon than a sprint,” said NRC staffer Ted Carter during a public webinar Tuesday on the process attended by about 300 people.

Federal regulations give plant owners 60 years to decommission a plant, which can include stabilizing it to spend years un-demolished. However, the NRC is currently reviewing an application to transfer the license for the plant from current owner Entergy to Holtec International, which has proposed decommissioning and demolishing the facility by 2033.

Holtec has already submitted a decommissioning report, which NRC is not reviewing while the agency is reviewing the application to transfer the license. Bruce Watson said a financial and technical review of the company’s capabilities will be done as the NRC reviews the application.

There is litigation ongoing about Holtec, including a coalition of 12 states supporting Massachusetts’s challenge to the NRC’s approval for the transfer of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station’s license to Holtec. In addition to leading that coalition, New York Attorney General Letitia James also filed a petition to intervene in the transfer of Indian Point to Holtec.

Requests for an NRC hearing about Holtec’s plan are still under review.

Holtec proposes to do it all by 2033 at a projected cost of $2.3 billion. Decommissioning promptly would use less of the trust funds to pay for years of stabilization, NRC officials said.

There is currently $1.85 billion in the trust funds.

During the webinar, NRC officials talked about the decommissioning process as well as questions they’ve received about Indian Point specifically.

Once a plant is decommissioned, emergency protocols change, said Anthony Dimitriadis. After the fuel has cooled to the point that it couldn’t melt enough to affect the surrounding community, the licensee can apply to modify the emergency plan. For example, the 10-mile zone would no longer be in effect but local governments would be notified in emergencies.

The spent fuel from Unit 1 is already in dry cask storage and the spent fuel from units 2 and 3 is either in dry cask storage or in spent fuel pools, said Katherine Warner, physicist with the NRC. She said spent fuel pools are designed to withstand “all credible severe natural events” such as floods, earthquakes and hurricanes.

NRC inspectors are in place when spent fuel is moved around during decommissioning and demolition.

At the end of decommissioning, when the radiological surveys show the site is suitable for other uses, the NRC terminates the license.

Site restoration is not an NRC requirement, but is determined by the state and the owner.

In the 10 power plants that have been decommissioned across the nation, about a third are parks, a third await redevelopment and a third have new power plants, NRC officials said.

Questions from the public during the webinar demonstrated deep skepticism about Holtec and distrust of the NRC regulators themselves. They also expressed concerns that federal regulations aren’t sufficient to protect the community from a crisis with the spent fuel; about clean up of spent fuel pool leakage; that federal funding for NRC inspections could dry up; about earthquakes and natural gas pipeline ruptures; and when the site would be safe for other uses.

One of the commenters was Cortlandt Town Supervisor Linda Puglisi, who said she objected to any change in the 10-mile zone and emergency protocols. NRC officials responded that once the nuclear fuel has cooled down it is inherently safer.

Municipal and school officials are scrambling to deal with the loss of the plant, which is half of the village of Buchanan’s tax base, one-third of the Hendrick Hudson school district’s annual tax base, pays $1 million a year to the town of Cortlandt and pays Westchester $4.5 million a year in lieu of taxes. It employs close to 1,000 people.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is keeping an eye on the new coronavirus outbreak as it continues in constant contact with Entergy, NRC staffers said during the webinar.

When the hard-hit region has sufficiently recovered from the COVID-19 crisis, NRC officials intend to hold a public meeting near the plant about the problems with a public stakeholder’s petitions for enforcement action over problems in the NRC’s analysis of potential hazards from the AIM pipeline. SEE: Feds Lied About Pipeline Near NY Power Plant.

More Fighting Before the First Nuclear War (Revelation 8 )

India, Pakistan Open Another Round of Shelling, FirefightsDelhi (Sputnik)

As per Indian Army officials, ever since the COVID-19 outbreak began, ceasefire violations by Pakistan across the border have decreased.But over the last three weeks, there have been several instances of cross border clashes.


The Indian Army on Tuesday stated that an unprovoked ceasefire violation by firing with small arms and shells with mortars had been initiated from Pakistan along the Line of Control (LoC) in the Poonch district of Jammu and Kashmir.

According to the statement issued by the Indian Army, the ceasefire violation was initiated by the Pakistani side at around 11:20 a.m. and the army is retaliating.

As of now, cross-border shelling between the two sides is underway, but there are no reports of any casualties.

According to the officials, shelling and firefights have been taking place on a daily basis over the last 15 days along the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir.

“Several military personnel and militants have lost their lives in these firing. While fear has stuck the minds of people living near the border area since three civilians were killed last week in shelling by Pakistan”, an Indian Army official said.

According to the Defence Ministry, there were a total of 646 incidents of ceasefire violations along the International border and LoC between 1 January and 23 February this year.

Kashmir has been a bone of contention between the two nuclear-armed nations since independence from British rule in 1947.

The two countries have fought three wars since then over the territory, which is currently divided by the line of control (de-facto border). Bilateral relations between the two neighbours dipped to a fresh low when India revoked Kashmir’s special status in August 2019.

The Indian Pakistan Nuclear War (Revelation 8 )

If Pakistan nukes India... - Cover Story News - Issue Date: Jun 10 ...

Indo-Pakistan rivalry

by Editorial , (Last Updated 1 day ago)

• A bad time

Pakistan and India keep up the sniping against each other, symbolized by firing against each other on the Line of Control between the two nuclear-armed countries. There have been exchanges of fire on both sides for the last week, and the only attention paid to the greatest challenge both countries, along with all others face, is Indian COAS Gen M.N. Naravane, who said during a visit to Srinagar that Pakistan was busy spreading terrorism during the Covid-19 pandemic.

It is a pity that faced with a common enemy, and faced with such common difficulties as inadequate healthcare systems and poverty, neither country has an establishment willing to put aside differences and cooperate in what is probably the worst crisis that either has faced in its existence. Both countries have been victims of whatever pandemics have come to the world, especially the region, but this is the first pandemic after Independence. Neither country’s establishment has come off particularly well, and neither has been able to manage the lockdown needed to stop the spread. That the Indian government has used the pandemic to foment hate against Muslims has neither helped soften Pakistani opinion, nor helped it counter the disease. Both countries have been signally unsuccessful at one of the key components of a successful lockdown, keeping people at home.

For these two countries at least, as well as other countries in the region, this was an opportunity to build bridges of, if not friendship, at least of a shared experience of a common danger met. Instead, the characteristic experience has been of establishments of both countries risking going up the ladder of nuclear escalation, thus putting the whole world at risk. The risk of nuclear winter is not something the world needs at any time, but now is a particularly trying time for the world to be saddled with a fresh global issue. The establishments also need to be aware that the powers which usually intervene have now got pressing problems of their own, and cannot be relied on to keep the peace. That is something the two establishments must work on. There will be time enough for wrangling when the pandemic is past. It should be put off until then.

Hamas Wants Endless War Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

Hamas arrests Gaza peace activist, wants endless war with Israel – Business Insider

Anthony L. Fisher Apr 18, 2020, 8:39 AM

Masked Palestinian members of the Islamist Hamas movement march during a demonstration in Gaza Strip.

Abid Katib/Getty Images

• A Gazan peace activist set up a Zoom chat between Israelis and Palestinians. Hamas arrested him for it, and now his family doesn’t know where he is.

• Hamas has for years imprisoned, tortured, and murdered so-called “collaborators” with Israel, as well as critics of their abuse and corruption.

• To be very clear, Israel has a moral imperative as a democracy to work toward ending its more than a half-century-long occupation of the Palestinian people.

• But any honest analysis of the tragedy that is the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians needs to always take into account what Hamas is: a fascist theocracy that exists to be at war.

Even in the midst of a pandemic,Hamas will do anything to ensure the Palestinian people never make peace with Israel. 

The Sunni Islamist militant group that controls the Gaza Strip and is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, has for years imprisoned, tortured, and murdered so-called “collaborators” with Israel, as well as critics of their abuse and corruption, according to Amnesty International.

None of this has changed during the coronavirus pandemic, as Hamas continues to use brute force to snuff out any dissent or rapprochement with Israelis by its own citizens.

Hamas considers Zoom chats between Gazans and Israelis “treason”

The Gaza Youth Committee is a pro-peace activist group and member of the Alliance for Middle East Peace. The Committee has undertaken activities to try and unite Israelis and Palestinians, including previously-staged bicycle “Rides for Peace” with people on either side of the Gaza border.

They’ve also initiated video chats between Palestinians and Israelis called “Skype with Your Enemy.” Last week over 200 people on both sides of the Israel-Gaza divide participated in an English-language Zoom chat initiated by the Gaza Youth Committee.

But a Palestinian journalist took to Facebook to object to the outreach effort and tagged several Hamas officials in a post. In short order, the Youth Committee’s leader, Rami Aman, as well as several other Palestinian participants, were arrested by Hamas.

In a statement, Hamas said Aman had been charged with the crime of “normalization” with Israel, which it also reportedly likened to “espionage” and “treason.”

Human Rights Watch reported Tuesday that Aman’s family has not heard from him since his arrest.

It’s important to remember in the context of the failure of Middle East peace efforts, that this is who Hamas is.

Israel’s expansion of settlements and annexation of land is an impediment to peace, but Hamas won’t make peace under any circumstances

Since 2007, the people of the Gaza Strip have lived under an Egypt/Israel-imposed blockade, after Hamas took control of the region in a bloody civil war with Fatah, the political party that dominates the Palestinian Authority and presides over the West Bank.

Hamas is primarily funded by the government of Iran, does not recognize Israel, and only in 2017 removed from its charter a call for the destruction of Israel (the charter still pledges “armed struggle” against Israel).

When the horrific semi-regular wars between Israel and Hamas break out, the brutality visited upon civilians is a moral failing of both parties.

Hamas’ tactics include indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel, and the use of civilian population centers as launching areas.

To be very clear, Israel has a moral imperative as a democracy to work toward ending its more than a half-century long occupation of the Palestinian people. And over the past decade, it has failed to take legitimate efforts to do so.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has in recent years demonstrated an inclination to do the exact opposite of working for peace. His government continues to build settlements, partners with Israel’s equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan, and takes steps toward permanent annexation of land that had been long considered a starting point in negotiations for an Israeli disengagement with the Palestinians.

This is not to make any direct equivalence, or to weigh the sins of one side against the other. But peace can’t be imposed, it requires painful sacrifice between both parties, and the support of its citizenry.

Last year, Hamas staged a brutal crackdown on civilian protesters and journalists, detaining over 1,000 people in the process. These stories don’t get a tremendous amount of play in the US, and part of the reason for that is how tightly Hamas controls the messaging out of Gaza.

And now, in the middle of a pandemic, Hamas is trying to stamp out any embers that might spark an interest among Gazan citizens to make peace with Israel.

That’s why any honest analysis of the human rights tragedy that is the status quo between Israel and the Palestinians needs to always take into account what Hamas is: a fascist theocracy that exists to be at war.

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author(s).

The Endgame on the Iran Nuclear Issue (Revelation16)

Approaching the endgame on the Iran nuclear issue | The Strategist

Connor Dilleen

Approaching the endgame on the Iran nuclear issue

As policymakers globally are preoccupied with managing the devasting impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, a perfect storm of events appears to be coalescing around the Iran nuclear issue. Although both the US and Iran stepped back from the precipice of direct military conflict in early 2020, following the killing of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Qassem Soleimani, a number of developments since then—including Covid-19 itself—have arguably increased the prospect of Washington launching a strike against Iranian targets at some point before the US presidential election in November.

Over the first quarter of 2020, Tehran has taken several decisive steps that perceivably move it further away from full compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Actionon its nuclear program, potentially providing Washington with the justification it is seeking for action against Iran.

Tehran has continued to expand its stockpile of low-enriched uranium—up from 373 kilograms in November 2019 to around 1,050 kilograms by March 2020. This is significantly more than what is allowed under the JCPOA and, if enriched to weapons grade, would be sufficient for a nuclear weapon. Tehran has also increased the number of advanced centrifuges in operation in test environments and has increased its enrichment capacity by around 20% since November 2019.

In early 2020, Tehran not only failed to respond to requests from the International Atomic Energy Agency for information on three undeclared facilities, but also denied requests from the IAEA, under the additional protocol to the JCPOA, for complementary inspections of two of these facilities.

And in early April 2020, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organisation noted that work had commenced on two new nuclear reactors in Bushehr and claimed that ‘[Iran’s] nuclear activities, as well as research and development on the nuclear fuel cycle, uranium conversion, and enrichment (including production and storage), are being carried out without any restrictions.’

Many of these developments are likely designed to be provocative and to pressure the remaining parties to the JCPOA to resolve ongoing sanctions. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif noted in early 2020, ‘Everything we are doing is reversible. We have always said we are not interested in building nuclear weapons.’ Zarif also indicated that ‘Tehran would be willing to move back to full compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal if Europe provides “meaningful” economic benefits’.

The unfolding tragedy for Iran is that this strategy may ultimately backfire because it plays into the White House’s narrative that Iran cannot be trusted on the question of its nuclear ambitions.

Tehran’s trustworthiness has also taken a battering from new revelations about Iran’s pre-2004 nuclear weapons research contained in the Iranian nuclear archives stolen by Israeli intelligence agents in 2018.

The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) and affiliated researchers have published a series of reports drawing on this archive, includingtwo reports in February and April 2020 on production facilities designed for manufacturing uranium metal components for nuclear weapons. They concluded that not only does the new information confirm that Iran deceived the IAEA and JCPOA parties on critical details of its pre-2004 nuclear weapons research, it also ‘reinforces the view that Iran is capable of building nuclear weapons more quickly than previously thought’.

While these revelations need to be placed firmly in their historical context—they relate to activities undertaken (and likely discontinued) by Iran prior to 2004—ISIS’s concern about their impact on current calculations on timelines for Iran to develop a nuclear weapons capability is justified. Critically, the revelations also further undermine the prospect of a US return to the JCPOA by feeding the White House’s scepticism about Iran’s ultimate nuclear intentions.

ISIS’s conclusions—when considered in the context of Tehran’s rapid improvements in its uranium enrichment capabilities and its growing stockpile of low-enriched uranium—are also giving a new sense of urgency to the Iran nuclear question. As noted by ISIS President David Albright in response to the March 2020 IAEA report on Iran, ‘We didn’t expect Iran to be at the 1,000-kilogram mark. I think people are a little surprised at the magnitude of the number. I’m sure it sent a shiver through the international community.’

Another problem for Iran is that there’s a narrative developing in Washington that is assessing recent developments in Iranian politics and its nuclear program through a lens coloured by the impact of Covid-19. A recent opinion piece on the influential website The Hill contended that Covid-19 is weakening the Iranian regime and that a diplomatic approach to the Iran nuclear issue will only strengthen the regime’s hand at a time of internal crisis. Other analysts have argued that Tehran will seek to exploit the pandemic to pursue clandestine nuclear activities. And the head of the US Central Command observed in mid-March that Covid-19 ‘probably makes [Iran]—in terms of decision-making—more dangerous, rather than less dangerous’. If anything, the pandemic has strengthened the grip of the hardliners in the Iranian government who had already been effectively empowered by the White House’s self-defeating ‘maximum pressure’ campaign, and who are now likely opposed to negotiating a new nuclear agreement with the US.

Finally, there’s likely to be a sense of urgency on the part ofIran hawks within the current US establishment to definitively deal with the Iran nuclear issue before the election in November, given that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is closely associated with the JCPOA and likely to take steps to revive it if elected.

When considered collectively, these issues increase the likelihood that the White House will move decisively against Iran at some point before November.

And, of further concern to Tehran, it’s possible that the Covid-19 pandemic may also influence how this issue plays out in Washington. President Donald Trump’s prospects for re-election have been significantly weakened by his disastrously inept handling of the US’s Covid-19 crisis. In this context, come election time, Trump will clearly be looking for an external distraction and a way to demonstrate his credentials to lead the US for another term. Iran will surely look like an irresistible target.

Connor Dilleen has worked for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Office of National Assessments. He currently works for Australia’s privacy regulator. This article represents the author’s personal views and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian government. Image: Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images.