Pak, Turkey, Egypt Ready To Mediate, Iran Defiant
Although US President Donald John Trump has sent a 15-point Peace Plan to Iran through Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey, Tehran is yet to budge. Talking to Reuters, a senior Iranian official has confirmed that it is Pakistan that conveyed the US’ proposal to Tehran. At the same time, he has made it clear that Iran would not accept President Trump’s proposal for a truce.
Interestingly, political analysts have claimed that Iran has shown its interest in diplomatic talks by accepting Pakistan’s mediation bid. However, Tehran wants Turkey to host the meeting. The Iranian official, who wished to remain anonymous, has further claimed that top Turkish officials recently contacted their Iranian counterparts multiple times, and the Islamic Republic appreciates Ankara’s efforts to halt the war.
Also, the senior official did not clarify exactly what sort of proposal they received from Islamabad. Hence, it remains unclear whether Iran received the 15-point proposal of President Trump from Pakistan.
On March 25, 2026, Harun Armagan, the Vice Chair (Foreign Affairs) of the Turkish ruling party, told Reuters that Ankara “is playing a role passing messages” between Iran and the US to encourage de-escalation and direct negotiations. As expected, Tehran has made no comments on this issue. Instead, the Islamic Republic has claimed that it is not interested in any settlement with the US.
In an exclusive interview with India Today on March 25, senior spokesperson of the Iranian Foreign Ministry Esmail Baghaei stressed that there were no talks or negotiations between Tehran and Washington DC, as “no one can trust US diplomacy“. He recalled that the two countries “were deep in a structured diplomatic process, with technical talks on a possible nuclear agreement scheduled for Vienna, when American strikes hit Iranian soil on February 28, 2026“. According to Baghaei, it was not an isolated incident, as US forces had attacked Iran in June 2025, a couple of days before the beginning of the sixth round of negotiations. “This was a betrayal of diplomacy,” he stated, claiming that the phrase recently entered the common lexicon in Iran. According to Baghaei, the Iranian Armed Forces are currently focussed on defending their national territory and sovereignty.
From the very beginning of the armed conflict, President Trump remained adamant about reaching an agreement with Iran. He reportedly said that he wanted “unconditional surrender” from Iran, warning there would not be a deal without it. The US President also claimed that he would decide the next leader of Iran. In such a scenario, it remains to be seen how fruitful mediation efforts prove to be.
Israel: The Parasite Sabotaging Peace
by Marcus Alexander
(Channel Media Network, March 20, 2026) In a stunning resignation that has sent shockwaves through Washington DC, former Director of National Counterterrorism Centre Joseph ‘Joe’ Clay Kent has exposed what many have long suspected but few have dared to state publicly: Israel is systematically undermining peace in the Middle East to serve its own expansionist agenda.
Kent, a 20-year Army Special Forces veteran and Gold Star husband who lost his first wife in a Syria suicide bombing, did not mince words. His accusation is simple yet devastating: Israel is intentionally sabotaging diplomatic solutions because peace threatens its strategic objectives.
The Assassination of Peace Itself
The most compelling evidence supporting Kent’s claim is the targeted killing of Ali Ardashir Larijani, Iran’s National Security Adviser and chief nuclear negotiator. According to Kent, Larijani was not just another Iranian official, he was actively engaged in negotiations that could have de-escalated regional tensions. “Larijani was eager to get us a deal,” Kent revealed in an interview with Tucker Carlson. However, instead of pursuing diplomacy, US-Israeli strikes eliminated him, along with his son and several staff members. The message couldn’t be clearer: Anyone willing to negotiate for peace becomes a target.
This was not just another military operation. Larijani represented the pragmatic wing of the Iranian establishment, someone capable of conducting the sorts of talks needed to end conflicts. By eliminating him, Israel ensured that the path to negotiation was closed, leaving only the path of escalation.
Energy Warfare Masquerading as Security
Kent’s second explosive claim involves energy infrastructure. He argues that strategic opportunities, particularly Qatar’s gas potential to stabilise global markets, have been deliberately targeted to increase tensions rather than reduce them. The facts support him. On March 18, 2026, Israel launched a significant aerial assault on Iran’s South Pars gas field, which provides nearly 70% of the West Asian nation’s domestic gas. Prime Minister Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu admitted that Israel “acted alone” in this attack.
The result? Iran retaliated by striking Qatar’s Ras Laffan Industrial City, the world’s premier LNG hub, damaging approximately 17% of Qatar’s export capacity. Global gas prices surged toward UD 117 per barrel. The UK benchmark peaked at almost 183p per therm. Markets destabilised. And for what?
Here is the inconvenient truth, a stable energy market benefiting from Qatari and Iranian gas would reduce conflict incentives. By attacking this infrastructure, Israel ensured that economic interdependence, often the foundation of lasting peace, remains impossible.
Even President Trump distanced himself from the attack, stating that the US “knew nothing about this particular strike” and describing it as Israel “violently lashing out“. When a US President feels compelled to publicly disavow his closest regional ally’s actions, something is fundamentally broken.
The Clean Break Strategy: 30 Years of Sabotage
Kent’s accusations did not emerge from nowhere. They reflect a consistent pattern dating back to 1996, when a group of neoconservatives, including figures who would later serve in the Bush Administration, produced a policy paper, titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.
This document, prepared for Netanyahu, explicitly rejected the “land for peace” formula and proposed reordering the Middle East through Military Confrontations and Regime Change. It identified Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya and Iran as targets. It called for “removing Saddam Hussein from power” and “weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria“.
Three decades later, we are living the consequences. The Iraq War cost thousands of American lives. Syria descended into a catastrophic Civil War. And now, Iran faces sustained attacks. All while Israel’s security, not the US’, remained the central objective.
Kent’s resignation letter directly connected these dots: “It is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby… This is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq War.“
The Human Cost
Perhaps the most damning aspect of Kent’s accusation is personal. His wife, Navy cryptologist Shannon Kent, was killed in Syria in a suicide bombing. Kent now describes that conflict as “a war manufactured by Israel“.
Think about that. A Gold Star husband, someone who paid the ultimate price for US foreign policy, is telling us that his wife died in a war that served Israeli, and not American, interests. If that does not demand scrutiny, what does?
Why This Matters Now
Critics dismiss Kent as antisemitic or claim he is leaking classified information. But ad hominem attacks do not address the substance: Did Israel target a negotiator actively seeking peace? Yes. Did Israel attack energy infrastructure knowing it would destabilise global markets? Yes. Does Israel have a documented 30-year strategy of military confrontation over diplomacy? Yes.
The situation in Gaza further illustrates the pattern. As one analysis noted, Netanyahu’s “ceasefire” effectively granted Israel breathing space to consolidate political control while evading accountability. Within days, the Israeli Parliament passed a bill, paving the way for West Bank annexation. This is not peace, but a pause for rearmament.
The Parasite Metaphor
A parasite feeds on its host, weakening it while appearing inseparable from it. Israel’s relationship with US foreign policy fits this description uncomfortably well. American blood and treasure fund Israeli objectives. American credibility suffers when allies act unilaterally. American interests in stable energy markets get sacrificed for Israeli security concerns.
Kent’s accusations deserve more than reflexive dismissal. They deserve investigation. Because if a Gold Star husband and former counterterrorism chief is correct and if Israel is indeed sabotaging peace for its own ends, then Americans have a right to know why their soldiers are dying and their markets are destabilised for another nation’s strategic objectives.
The title of this piece may be harsh. But sometimes harsh truths are the only ones that break through comfortable lies. Israel has positioned itself as the US’ indispensable ally. Kent’s resignation suggests that it may actually be the parasite draining American power while sabotaging any chance of Middle Eastern peace.
Meanwhile,
Boundless Ocean of Politics on Facebook
Boundless Ocean of Politics on Twitter
Boundless Ocean of Politics on Linkedin
Contact us: kousdas@gmail.com
ISMC
Boundless Ocean Of Politics 