How Trump and Netanyahu Deceived Iran —and the World

The Strategic Deception — Trump, Netanyahu, and the False Rift

Jun 15, 2025

Extremely thought-provoking - and probably true. In its consequences: From now on no one will trust the West including Israel. Deception IS war... Jan Oberg, TFF -

TFF Transnational Foundation

In the weeks before Israel’s brazen June 13, 2025 strike on Iran, a well-oiled theater production was underway. Its co-directors? Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Its stage? Global media. Its goal? Trick Tehran into believing the unthinkable: that Israel had been politically declawed, diplomatically abandoned, and militarily boxed in.

Of course, none of that was true. But deception doesn’t need to be true—it just needs to be believed.

The opening act began with a calculated leak: Trump, it was whispered, had “warned” Netanyahu not to attack Iran. The message? Israel was on its own. Serious fallout with Washington was allegedly on the table. This storyline didn’t just circulate—it roared. CNN and Haaretz Hebrew ran with it like it had dropped from Mount Sinai. The language was curiously synchronized across outlets, right down to the phrasing. A savvy observer might’ve raised an eyebrow. But most didn’t.

While the press was chewing on the supposed rift, Tel Aviv launched Act Two. Israeli officials floated reports of secret negotiations with Hamas over hostage releases—an emotional, humanitarian distraction served just in time. At the same time, word spread of indirect talks with Iran through mediators in Qatar and Oman. All smoke. All mirrors. All carefully backed up by off-the-record nods from “senior sources” in the Israeli government—seasoned diplomats who knew exactly how to bait the international commentariat.

Then came the pièce de résistance: Netanyahu’s vacation. No crisis, no tension, just family time. The Prime Minister of a country allegedly on the brink of war carried on with wedding plans for his son, grinning for photo ops as if he were prepping for a gala, not a bombing run. Israeli and international media dutifully amplified the charade—every staged moment crafted to lull Iran into thinking everything was under control.

But beneath that calm exterior, a different game was in play. Mossad and the CIA were neck-deep in coordination. The deception wasn’t just diplomatic—it was psychological warfare at its finest. OSINT outfits like Bellingcat and Aurora Intel later uncovered intercepted Telegram threads and satellite-linked chatter confirming that intelligence operatives were scripting false narratives in real-time, feeding Iran a steady diet of misinformation calibrated to induce paralysis.

The mainstream press—whether naïve, complicit, or just outmatched—played its part. A forensic review of coverage from the days before the strike shows something eerie: independent outlets echoing one another, detail for detail, line for line. It wasn’t journalism—it was an information echo chamber. The so-called “rift” between Trump and Netanyahu wasn’t reported. It was repeated.

And it worked. Iran stood still. Israeli jets didn’t just cross airspace—they crossed expectations. The deception was so airtight, so convincing, that when the bombs fell, Tehran was still clinging to the illusion of normalcy.

What we witnessed wasn’t just a military strike—it was a masterclass in 21st-century warfare, where perception is a battlefield and truth is whatever your enemy believes long enough to get hit.

Targeted Assassinations — Tricking the IRGC Command Structure

June 13, 2025 wasn’t just a strike—it was a surgical purge. Israel didn’t merely hit Iran; it decapitated its military brain trust. Over 20 senior commanders of the IRGC were vaporized in a single, coordinated blow. Among them: General Hossein Salami, the IRGC’s top dog; General Mohammad Bagheri, Chief of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces; and General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the IRGC Aerospace Forces. For Iran’s military establishment, this wasn’t a setback—it was a lobotomy.

But the real story isn’t just who died. It’s how.

This wasn’t luck. It was orchestration.

The strike was timed to “coincide”—down to the hour—with a covert IRGC leadership meeting. The kind of gathering that would normally trigger every security protocol in the book. But not this time. Why? Because Israel made sure Iran never saw it coming.

Months earlier, Mossad had embedded itself deep inside Iran’s digital arteries. Internal comms, encrypted schedules, the very architecture of IRGC decision-making—it was all compromised. Every movement of every commander was tracked, cross-referenced, and mapped. Satellite feeds. Signal intercepts. Human assets. And behind the curtain? Western intelligence, particularly the CIA, playing its usual role: silent partner, plausible deniability intact.

And yet, Iran sat still.

Despite receiving credible threat warnings—warnings that were confirmed, logged, and reportedly seen by top brass—the IRGC leadership stayed put. They stayed together. No dispersal. No relocation. No defensive posturing. Just... still.

Why?

Because the Israelis didn’t just watch Iran. They fed it lies. And Tehran swallowed them whole.

Thanks to the earlier disinformation campaign—Trump and Netanyahu playing the part of bickering allies, staged hostage talks, fake diplomacy, Netanyahu’s choreographed vacation—Tehran believed the moment wasn’t ripe for war. It was a brilliant psychological operation. The IRGC wasn’t outmaneuvered militarily. It was outplayed cognitively.

Inside Iran, the signals were all misread. Military analysts dismissed warning signs as Zionist bluster. Opposition outlets like Iran International reported on IRGC complacency. Telegram channels buzzed with speculation, but no one pushed the panic button. Iran’s state media, meanwhile, parroted a fantasy—Netanyahu was cornered, isolated, desperate. The same tired story they’d been telling themselves for years.

Then the missiles landed.

Forensic analysis since has revealed the truth in high resolution. Satellite images showed the IRGC’s top command clustered in one location—like a target drawn in red ink. And what’s more shocking: the site had virtually no elevated defenses. No air shields. No contingency dispersal. It wasn’t just a failure of tactics—it was a total breakdown of threat perception. A nation outfoxed by its own false assumptions.

This was assassination disguised as deterrence. And it worked not because of Israeli firepower—but because of Israeli narrative control, Western intelligence collusion, and Iranian blind spots.

The strike marked a new threshold in modern warfare. Not just bombs and satellites—but fake headlines, fake feuds, and photo-ops used as bait.

Drone Infiltration Parallels — Ukraine and Iran as Case Studies

Before a single Israeli missile hit Iranian soil, the sky had already been primed for slaughter. What looked like a surgical airstrike on June 13 was, in reality, the final act of a well-rehearsed cybernetic symphony. The opening notes? Drones—silent, stealthy, and devastating—unleashed in waves to blind and cripple Iran’s air defenses.

This wasn’t just a military operation. It was a case study in modern war-by-algorithm, the kind of cross-border, cross-platform warfare that now comes factory-standard with Western backing.

The drones didn’t just appear. They were guided in—some launched from shadowy bases in neighboring states, others possibly smuggled in piecemeal by proxy agents and assembled behind Iranian lines. However they got there, they slipped past Iran’s radar with uncanny precision. Not by chance, but by design.

Satellite forensics and cyber-intel pulled from NATO-linked outfits—like the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab—point to the use of advanced stealth routing and timed intrusions that choreographed perfectly with concurrent cyberattacks. Iran’s eyes were open—and then suddenly they weren’t.

In the hours before the drone wave, cyber units hit Iran’s radar command systems with pinpoint strikes. Comms went dark. Coordination collapsed. And into that artificial blindness flew a drone armada with one mission: pave the way for the real blow.

And here’s the thing: this wasn’t just Israel showing off.

Compare this with Ukraine’s deep strikes inside Russian territory—at Engels airbase, even near Putin’s own backyard. The drone tactics were eerily similar: satellite-guided, shock-focused, and surgically timed to psychological breaking points. Western intelligence fingerprints are all over both campaigns—right down to the targeting data and real-time telemetry relayed from eyes in the sky to operators on the ground.

Leaks from Five Eyes networks, NATO briefings, and open-source platforms like Bellingcat and Jane’s Defence tell the same story in different accents: Israel and Ukraine weren’t operating in parallel—they were operating in sync. Sharing tools, tactics, and telemetry. A quiet alliance of battlefield data scientists and digital assassins.

What’s emerging isn’t just a pattern. It’s a doctrine.

We’re watching the birth of an integrated drone war strategy—one that spans continents and plugs straight into the core of Western military-industrial intelligence. These are not isolated proxy wars anymore. They are symphonic offensives, digitally linked and ideologically aligned, built to undermine adversaries without ever formally declaring war.

The precision isn’t just technological—it’s psychological. These strikes aren’t only about damage. They’re about humiliation, disruption, and narrative collapse. They make state actors look incompetent. Vulnerable. Fragile.

And maybe that’s the point.

The launch data, flight paths, electronic jamming frequencies—it’s all been mapped, logged, and shared across borders. What this reveals is a Western architecture of coordinated aggression, cloaked in silence, operating across theaters like Iran and Russia with the same playbook, the same drones, and increasingly, the same goals.

We’re not witnessing a series of wars. We’re watching a system at work.

Geopolitical Fallout — Trust, Talks, and the Erosion of Deterrence

The June 13, 2025 Israeli strike on Iran didn’t just shatter buildings—it shattered assumptions. This wasn’t just a military success. It was a seismic event in international relations. A masterclass in manipulation that left the global diplomatic order staring into the abyss of its own illusions.

The campaign’s brilliance—its coordination, its precision, its flawless choreography of drones, disinformation, and digital sabotage—came at a cost that’s only now becoming fully visible: trust. And once that’s gone, everything else follows.

The world watched a Western-backed ally stage an elaborate charade—Trump and Netanyahu feuding, peace overtures floated, weddings flaunted—all while crosshairs were locking in on Iran’s top military minds. That level of deception, played out in public and across allied intelligence networks, sent a clear message: diplomacy is now just another battlefield. Smile for the cameras, strike behind the curtain.

And the global response? Strategic paranoia.

China and Russia—already allergic to Western moral posturing—now assume duplicity as a baseline. Chatham House and INSS analysts speak of “reputational degradation.” That’s a polite way of saying: no one believes the West anymore. Every summit, every handshake, every backchannel is now read through the lens of potential betrayal. The result? An arms race of anticipation. Not just tanks and jets—cyber firewalls, counterintel sweeps, and preemptive doctrines aimed not at retaliation, but preemption of deception itself.

Iran’s response is just the beginning. Intelligence intercepts suggest Beijing and Moscow have launched sweeping audits of their internal defense postures and digital infrastructure. Telegram channels tied to PLA-linked analysts talk openly about “deception readiness.” Russia’s military academies are already incorporating psychological ops and cognitive warfare modules into their strategic curricula.

Meanwhile, non-Western blocs like BRICS+ and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization aren’t just watching—they’re pivoting. Think tanks in India, China, and Brazil are calling for autonomous intelligence-sharing frameworks immune to Five Eyes penetration. SCO policy drafts reference “narrative sovereignty” and the “weaponization of diplomacy.” These aren’t just buzzwords—they’re the early contours of a post-Western security doctrine.

Ironically, even among Israel’s closest partners, there’s unease. NATO’s inner circles are grumbling—off-record, of course—about the long-term viability of trust inside the alliance. When deception becomes normalized strategy, it doesn’t just trick your enemies. It corrodes your friendships. Some allies fear they might be next to be kept in the dark, cut out of the loop, or manipulated for strategic optics.

There’s a growing sense in Western intelligence circles that the cost of this operation may outstrip its benefits. Yes, the IRGC was decapitated. Yes, the strike was clean, swift, and operationally flawless. But at what price?

We’ve now entered a geopolitical phase where deception isn’t the exception—it’s the doctrine. Psychological operations no longer support war—they are the war. And unlike missiles, the damage they cause can’t be measured in craters, only in the slow collapse of confidence between states.

The future of diplomacy—if it still exists—will now be negotiated through side-eyes, encrypted backchannels, and plausible deniability. Welcome to the post-truth battlefield, where trust isn’t broken. It’s obsolete.

Key Sources