Gordon Duff: US Sovereignty Crisis, Military Aggression Against Iran and Continued Occupation of Palestine Are Rooted in Western Power Structures

Gordon Duff, an American combat veteran, prominent writer and editor of the US-based publication Veterans Today, has said that the ongoing crises in the West Asia and the United States cannot be understood in isolation, arguing that the concentration of political and economic power, the influence of private interests over government institutions and the continuation of militaristic policies are among the main factors shaping the current international situation.

In an interview with Qods News Agency (Qodsna), Duff examined developments surrounding the Israeli elections, the US-Israeli confrontation with Iran, the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and the political and economic situation in the United States.

He argued that changes in governments and political parties in Israel have failed to bring about any fundamental change in the occupation of Palestine, while Washington's military, financial and diplomatic support has enabled the continuation of Israeli policies.

Israel's political changes will not bring an end to the occupation of Palestine

Addressing the Israeli elections and the political position of Benjamin Netanyahu, Duff said the central issue was not simply parliamentary competition, coalition negotiations or Netanyahu's political survival.

"The essential question is whether the institutions of the Israeli government, regardless of which party controls them, are capable of abandoning the occupation of Palestine, ending the destruction of Gaza and relinquishing the regional military supremacy upon which Israeli policy has depended for generations," he said.

Duff gave a negative assessment of the possibility of such a change, arguing that the Israeli political establishment had made the permanent subordination of Palestinians a fundamental principle of its policies.

He added that Washington had helped sustain this situation by providing weapons, diplomatic protection, financial support and international immunity.

According to the American analyst, successive Israeli governments, whether identified with the political left or right, have maintained military occupation, supported settlement expansion and denied Palestinians their sovereign equality.

Although political language and methods have changed over the years, he said, the underlying structure of occupation has remained intact.

Duff emphasized that Netanyahu's political vulnerability should not be mistaken for a fundamental transformation in Israel's strategic objectives.

Iran cannot be forced into submission through military power

In another part of the interview, Duff addressed the military confrontation involving the United States, Israel and Iran, arguing that superior military technology and aerial capabilities do not necessarily translate into strategic victory.

"The United States and Israel possess formidable capabilities for aerial bombardment, surveillance, electronic warfare and precision attack. None of those capabilities automatically translates into strategic victory," he said.

He noted that Iran presents a fundamentally different military and geographical challenge from the countries previously targeted by American military campaigns.

According to Duff, Iran is a large country with substantial strategic depth, an established military-industrial infrastructure, dispersed facilities, missile capabilities and a population whose response to foreign military aggression cannot be predicted simply by measuring the destruction of individual targets.

He stressed that the failure to achieve regime change in previous rounds of fighting is central to assessing the outcome of military operations against Iran.

Duff argued that military campaigns must be evaluated according to their political objectives rather than the number of targets destroyed or the amount of expensive weaponry deployed.

Referring to his personal experience as a combat Marine in the Vietnam War, he said that American military superiority had repeatedly failed to guarantee political success.

"American forces could win engagements and still lose the war. They could dominate territory temporarily without establishing political control. They could inflict casualties on a scale their opponents could not match and still fail to achieve the purpose for which the war was fought," he explained.

He cited Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq as examples of the limitations of military power, noting that decades of occupation and enormous military expenditures had failed to produce the political outcomes Washington had promised.

Duff added that the destruction of a government does not necessarily create a legitimate political replacement, as demonstrated by the experience in Iraq.

He warned that the assumption that another escalation against Iran would succeed simply because previous operations had failed was not a military strategy, but a refusal to distinguish between military coercion and genuine political achievement.

Ukraine war exposes weaknesses in Western military assumptions

The editor of Veterans Today also discussed the lessons of the war in Ukraine, saying that the conflict had exposed significant weaknesses in Western military assumptions.

Referring to the American M1 Abrams tank, Duff said that although the platform remained powerful, its survivability had become increasingly difficult to guarantee in a battlefield environment dominated by drones, mines, precision artillery and continuous surveillance.

"The battlefield has changed faster than many procurement doctrines," he said.

He explained that expensive military platforms alone could not compensate for shortcomings in integrated air defense, electronic warfare, logistics, tactical adaptation and industrial production.

Duff also pointed to the growing dependence of American industrial infrastructure on complex international supply chains, arguing that a prolonged war against a capable state would require sustained manufacturing, ammunition replacement, transportation protection and the ability to repair damaged equipment.

He stressed that these requirements could not be met simply by maintaining the world's largest defense budget.

According to Duff, Iran has spent decades studying the vulnerabilities of Western military systems.

He said Iran's emphasis on missiles, drones, dispersed facilities and asymmetric retaliation reflects an understanding that it does not need to defeat American military platforms individually. Instead, it seeks to make the political and economic costs of military aggression unacceptable.

Duff warned that another war would put the entire American military structure in the region to the test, including military bases, logistical networks, shipping routes, allied infrastructure and the cohesion of the coalition supporting military operations.

He added that such a conflict could also cause enormous disruption to Gulf economies and international energy markets.

Epstein scandal raises questions about intelligence networks and political power

In another part of the interview, Duff addressed the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, arguing that the case should not be treated merely as the criminal conduct of one wealthy individual.

He said Epstein's activities had exposed a world in which extraordinary wealth, political access, sexual exploitation and institutional protection had intersected over many years.

According to Duff, Epstein's connections with influential political, financial and social figures raise serious questions about the possible use of sexual exploitation for intelligence gathering, blackmail and the acquisition of compromising information for political purposes.

Addressing allegations concerning possible links between Epstein and Israeli intelligence, including Mossad, Duff emphasized that such claims require direct examination of financial records, communications, intelligence relationships and the testimony of those involved.

He also acknowledged that publicly available material does not, by itself, establish that Mossad directed Epstein's operation.

Duff said that this distinction does not diminish the importance of the investigation but identifies the evidence that investigators must establish.

He raised questions about who protected Epstein, which institutions possessed information about his activities, why opportunities to investigate him were lost and whether recordings or other compromising materials were collected and used to influence political decisions.

The American analyst called for the preservation and lawful disclosure of relevant records, independent investigations and criminal accountability for perpetrators and accomplices, while emphasizing that the identities of victims must remain protected.

He described the issue as one of national security rather than merely a celebrity scandal, arguing that compromising information about senior officials could potentially be used to influence political appointments, investigations, legislation, intelligence cooperation and foreign policy.

AIPAC, political financing and the influence of the arms industry on US policy

Duff also examined the relationship between American political power and Israeli government policies, arguing that campaign financing, lobbying, defense procurement and wealthy political donors must be considered when analyzing Washington's support for Israel.

Referring to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and associated political organizations, he said financial resources could exert enormous influence over electoral competition in the United States.

He noted that candidates are aware of the political consequences of opposing powerful lobbying interests, as financial support can be redirected toward their challengers and political careers can be damaged.

"These mechanisms do not require clandestine intelligence operations to be effective. They are built into the structure of American electoral politics," Duff said.

He also pointed to the interests of the defense industry, explaining that regional conflicts sustain demand for weapons, replenishment contracts, military assistance and long-term procurement programs.

According to Duff, energy interests and financial institutions also participate in this wider system through sanctions, market control, access to resources, lending, investment and the movement of capital.

He argued that the convergence of these interests can produce policies that benefit concentrated private power while imposing enormous costs on the public.

Duff stressed that a serious investigation should examine the actual relationships among political donors, lobbying organizations, weapons manufacturers, intelligence institutions and financial interests.

He added that the continuity of fundamental American policies toward Israel, military assistance and regional confrontation, despite changes in political parties and administrations, raises serious questions about democratic accountability.

September 11 attacks and the expansion of the American security state

In another section of the interview, Duff discussed the consequences of the September 11, 2001 attacks and the subsequent expansion of America's national security apparatus.

He said the attacks had fundamentally transformed the relationship between the American government and its population.

According to Duff, the expansion of surveillance, detention powers, intelligence authorities and national security secrecy created institutions capable of exercising powers that would previously have provoked extraordinary constitutional objections.

He noted that the Patriot Act and the broader security framework established after September 11 normalized forms of government intrusion that had once been considered exceptional.

Duff also addressed the consequences of subsequent American military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya, saying these wars had devastated societies, displaced populations and contributed to migration pressures extending into Europe.

He argued that European governments subsequently faced refugee movements, political polarization and the growth of nationalist movements exploiting public concerns about immigration and security.

According to Duff, the relationship between military intervention and political destabilization deserves far greater attention.

He said the United States had helped create conditions of regional instability and subsequently treated many of their consequences as separate security emergencies.

While emphasizing that claims that the September 11 attacks were deliberately engineered to produce these outcomes require evidence beyond the subsequent exploitation of the attacks, Duff said the political and institutional exploitation of the crisis was a matter of historical record.

He added that an emergency had become the justification for permanent changes to the American national security structure, allowing the executive branch to exercise greater powers beyond ordinary public scrutiny.

Trump and the erosion of constitutional restraints in the United States

The editor of Veterans Today also criticized developments in American political institutions under President Donald Trump, arguing that the erosion of the American republic should not be measured merely by partisan disputes or administrative dysfunction.

Instead, he said, the central issue was the use of public authority to protect private interests and punish political opponents.

Duff identified the politicization of criminal justice, the misuse of presidential pardons, intimidation of independent journalism, retaliation against political opponents and interference with electoral institutions as major threats to the constitutional system.

He explained that presidential clemency was designed as a constitutional instrument of mercy and correction, but warned that when pardons become rewards for political loyalty or tools for protecting political associates, their original purpose is undermined.

He also stressed the importance of maintaining the independence of the US Justice Department.

According to Duff, the department cannot function as an institution of law if prosecutorial decisions become instruments of personal revenge.

He warned that a president who treats political opposition as criminal disloyalty is undermining the distinction between the state and the individual temporarily occupying the executive office.

Duff emphasized that constitutional government depends on the rule of law, independent institutions and the protection of citizens' rights.

He added that elections alone cannot guarantee democracy when these restraints are systematically weakened.

Economic pressures are undermining public confidence in the American government

Addressing the economic situation in the United States, Duff said the country's constitutional crisis had developed alongside a prolonged deterioration in the economic security of substantial portions of the American population.

He identified deindustrialization, rising housing and healthcare costs, household debt and the concentration of wealth as factors weakening the material foundations of democratic participation.

Duff also criticized the use of tariffs and economic sanctions as instruments of political pressure.

He explained that tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods, with their costs distributed among importers, businesses and consumers depending on market conditions.

According to him, tariffs do not automatically restore lost manufacturing capacity or reverse decades of industrial restructuring.

He also warned that sanctions can disrupt international trade, increase prices, encourage alternative financial arrangements and weaken relationships with longstanding commercial partners.

The American analyst argued that a country cannot indefinitely replace industrial competitiveness with economic coercion.

He further criticized the contrast between enormous American military expenditures overseas and the economic difficulties faced by ordinary citizens.

"The United States can finance enormous overseas commitments while millions struggle with housing, healthcare and basic financial stability," he said.

Duff argued that the central question was ultimately whom the American state serves and whether its institutions protect the public interest or concentrated private wealth.

National sovereignty is at the heart of the current international crisis

Concluding the interview, Duff brought together the three main issues raised by Qods News Agency: the Israeli political system and the occupation of Palestine, the military confrontation involving Iran, and the constitutional crisis in the United States.

He argued that Israel's elections cannot resolve the occupation because the competing political institutions have not offered a credible alternative to the structures sustaining it.

Similarly, he said, another American-Israeli war against Iran would not resolve the strategic contradictions exposed by previous military operations, but would instead magnify them.

Duff added that the United States cannot effectively address either issue while its political institutions remain vulnerable to concentrated financial influence, abuses of executive authority and failures of public accountability.

He also called for an independent investigation into the Epstein scandal, emphasizing that any investigation should be capable of examining intelligence agencies, financial institutions, political donors and elected officials, regardless of their nationality or position.

According to Duff, the United States must also confront the consequences of its foreign policy, including the destruction of societies, displacement of populations, normalization of military intervention and diversion of national resources toward conflicts that have repeatedly failed to achieve their declared objectives.

Emphasizing the importance of sovereignty, Duff said Iran could not be expected to surrender its independent strategic position simply because Washington possessed superior aircraft, just as Palestinians could not be expected to abandon their national rights because Israeli political parties were unable to agree on a coalition.

He then raised several fundamental questions: Who determines American foreign policy? Who controls the exercise of executive power? Who benefits from war? Who is protected from prosecution? And who ultimately pays the economic price?

Duff argued that the recovery of the American republic would begin only when the law applied equally to the powerful, political authority could be investigated without obstruction, foreign policy decisions served the public interest and American citizens regained meaningful control over their government.

He warned that until these conditions were restored, the political crisis in Washington would continue to shape conflicts in the Middle East, Europe's political future and the prospects for peace in Palestine.