Beyond Nuclear: What Israel REALLY Attacked in Iran
Iran's BRICS Power: Vast energy/mineral wealth and nuclear facilities under attack, sparking global concern and regional instability.
1On June 13, 2025, the world watched as news broke of Israeli military strikes on Iranian territory. The immediate headlines, often fueled by Western narratives, pointed to one primary objective: Iran's nuclear program. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi himself expressed "deep concern" that "nuclear facilities must never be attacked". Indeed, the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant was hit, with the above-ground Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant destroyed and electrical infrastructure severely damaged, potentially impacting centrifuges in the underground cascade hall. Iran confirmed the Natanz attack and stated other facilities like Fordow and Esfahan were also targeted.
However, to simply view these strikes through the narrow lens of nuclear non-proliferation is to miss a far more complex and perhaps more critical geopolitical objective. What if the real target wasn't just Iran's nuclear ambitions, but its burgeoning role as a strategic economic powerhouse within a rapidly expanding non-Western global order, specifically the BRICS bloc? This article will delve into compelling evidence from the sources that suggests the attacks were a pre-emptive strike against Iran's growing energy and mineral influence, its push for de-dollarization, and its crucial position in solidifying Eurasian economic integration.
The Geopolitical Chessboard: Iran, BRICS, and the "Pre-emptive War"
The most striking insight from the sources is the assertion that the recent military strikes were part of a broader, more aggressive strategy targeting Iran's emerging geopolitical standing. In a recent article, journalist Pepe Escobar explicitly frames the attack as "above all a pre-emptive attack on the BRICS energy core," directly implicating it in an "imperial war against BRICS, especially Russia-China". This narrative challenges the conventional explanation, suggesting the motivations extend far beyond just nuclear facilities.
Iran officially became a full member of BRICS on January 1, 2024, a move described as a "significant milestone in its international relations" and a strategic shift "from isolation to forming alliances as an attempt to counterbalance Western powers." This membership bolsters Iran's efforts to push against US sanctions, as the collective economic weight of BRICS countries (which represent more than half of the global population) makes sanctions significantly harder for Washington to enforce.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which Iran is a Member State, also condemned the June 13, 2025, strikes with striking clarity, articulating a perspective that resonates with the "pre-emptive war" theory. The SCO statement did not just focus on nuclear sites but strongly condemned "aggressive actions against civilian targets, including energy and transport infrastructure". This official condemnation from a major international body directly supports the idea that the attacks were designed to cripple Iran's economic and infrastructural backbone, which is deeply intertwined with its strategic role in BRICS. The SCO further emphasized that such actions are a "gross violation of international law and the United Nations Charter," an "infringement on Iran’s sovereignty," and a threat to "regional and international security". The SCO's guiding principles, which include mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, and common development, and its external stance of non-alignment, underscore its view of the attack as a violation of a developing alternative global order.
Iran, for its part, views its BRICS membership not merely as an economic opportunity but as a platform to launch a "new thinking perspective," considering BRICS not only as a platform for dialogue but as an alternative to Western organizations such as G7. This ambition, coupled with Iran's declaration of itself as a "successfully developing regional center of power," focusing on energy, transport, and logistics projects with partners like Russia, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan, indicates a deliberate strategy to build a non-Western-centric economic sphere. A devastating war, particularly one targeting Iran's core economic infrastructure, would undeniably represent a "killer blow to increased Eurasia integration".
Iran's Undeniable Resource Power: The True Prize
To understand why Iran’s economic infrastructure might be a target, one must first grasp the sheer scale of its energy and mineral wealth. Iran is not merely a regional player; it is a global titan in resource endowments.
Consider these staggering figures:
Oil Reserves: Iran holds the world's fourth-largest oil reserves, accounting for approximately 9.5% of the global total, with 163 billion barrels of proven reserves. This positions Iran as a top regional country in exploration volume, surpassing even Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, and Qatar. Remarkably, despite Western financial and economic sanctions, Iran has managed to increase its oil production by 60% over the past two years, demonstrating its resilience in circumventing these restrictions. Its primary oil export market is private oil refineries in China, with Syria (before the coup d'Etat) and Venezuela also dominating its oil-purchasing countries (Venezuela imports Iranian oil despite its own substantial reserves due to quality differences, international sanctions, and refining capacity challenges).
Natural Gas Resources: Beyond oil, Iran possesses some of the world's largest natural gas reserves, amounting to 12% of the global total, placing it among the top three natural gas holders worldwide. Iran plans to significantly expand its gas infrastructure, including implementing swap gas supplies with Russia through Turkmenistan and creating a gas hub on the Makran coast for exporting Iranian and Russian energy to South and Southeast Asian countries.
Renewable Energy Potential: While often overshadowed by its fossil fuel wealth, Iran has high wind, solar, and geothermal energy potential that remains largely untapped, representing a significant future growth area, especially with BRICS investment.
Installed Energy Capacity: Iran's energy sector boasts the largest installed capacity among Persian Gulf countries, representing 40% of the region's total at approximately 85 GW, with over 80% coming from thermal power plants.
Mineral Wealth: The riches don't stop at energy. Iran possesses 68 different minerals with reserves totaling 43 billion tons, estimated to be worth $700 billion. Key minerals include gold, copper, steel, zinc, and iron ore, which position Iran as a "significant player in global supply chains". Historically, rigid economic sanctions have hampered investment in Iran's mining sector, but BRICS membership is expected to facilitate new investment flows, particularly for copper, zinc, and lithium.
With the addition of Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Iran, the expanded BRICS group now controls a staggering 42% of global oil supply, significantly enhancing its influence in global energy markets. This concentration of energy power, combined with BRICS countries' willingness to support de-dollarization initiatives to conduct trade in their own currencies, poses a direct challenge to the established Western-dominated financial system.
The "Resource Nationalism" Angle and Strategic Infrastructure
The sources highlight that BRICS countries, including Iran, adopt a strategy of "resource nationalism," where governments exercise high levels of state control over their mining and energy sectors. This approach allows them to leverage resource wealth for both domestic economic development and international diplomatic objectives. For example, Russia uses its energy as a diplomatic tool, sometimes as a "weapon" and other times as an inducement. China and India employ "Going Out" programs, encouraging state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to invest in foreign resource projects to enhance national resource security.
Iran's efforts to develop key strategic infrastructure align perfectly with this BRICS-wide "resource nationalism" strategy. The attention given to developing the Makran Free Economic Zone and the Kish Island FEZ, alongside the geostrategic seaports of Chahbehar and Jask, clearly demonstrates Iran's intent to become a critical hub for energy communications between the Middle East and South and Southeast Asia. These projects are not merely about local development; they are vital components of the broader vision for Eurasian economic connectivity, particularly linking Iran, Russia, and India through initiatives like the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC).
Therefore, any attack on Iran's energy or transport infrastructure can be interpreted as a direct blow to this burgeoning non-Western economic network. The SCO's specific mention of "energy and transport infrastructure" as targets, alongside Grossi's confirmation of attacks on the Natanz electrical infrastructure, lends credence to the idea that disabling these capabilities was a key objective, potentially to hinder Iran’s ability to fully integrate its vast resources into the BRICS-led global economic architecture.
Beyond Inspections: The IAEA and Intelligence Gathering Allegations
While the nuclear dimension remains a stated concern for Israel, the sources also introduce a provocative claim regarding the role of international oversight. The IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi reported that the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant's above-ground Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant and its electricity infrastructure were destroyed. He also noted that while there was no indication of a physical attack on the underground cascade hall, "the loss of power to the cascade hall may have damaged the centrifuges there". Iran has also reported attacks on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant and the Esfahan site.
However, Pepe Escobar suggests a more sinister aspect to international cooperation. It claims that Iranians were "naïve enough to let the IAEA visit their strategic sites, when proverbial spies collected all the info they needed to facilitate Israeli strikes," going so far as to say that "The DPRK would have never fall into such a trap". This serious allegation implies that the transparency and information exchange facilitated by the IAEA, an ostensibly neutral agency, were allegedly exploited for military intelligence. While the IAEA's stated mandate is to monitor nuclear activities to prevent proliferation, this source posits a dark undercurrent to its inspections.
In response to both the attacks and a preceding IAEA board resolution, Iran declared it would limit its nuclear cooperation with the IAEA and would not provide further notifications about its program activities. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi stated, "Iran will not be able to cooperate with IAEA as before". Furthermore, Iran announced plans to establish a new uranium enrichment facility in a "secure location" and replace first-generation centrifuges at Fordow with more advanced sixth-generation machines. These actions, while presented as a response to perceived aggression, could be seen as further isolating Iran from international oversight, regardless of the motivations behind the strikes.
It is crucial to highlight that this claim about the IAEA facilitating intelligence is not supported by the IAEA itself or the other sources provided, which focus on the factual reporting of the attacks and the IAEA's mandate. The "Strategic Culture" source presents this as an analysis from its perspective.
The Broader BRICS Vision: Reshaping Global Energy Governance
The attacks on Iran, viewed through the lens of its BRICS membership and resource wealth, underscore the ambition of the BRICS bloc to reshape global energy governance. The BRICS countries, collectively accounting for 36.4% of the world’s primary energy supply and projected to rise to 40%-50% by 2040, are increasingly assertive in promoting a "new democratic, fair and rational international political and economic international order".
The sources highlight significant challenges BRICS faces in the existing global energy governance structure:
Fragmentation: Current institutions like the IEA and OPEC lack coordination, each focusing on specific aspects, and sometimes even undermining each other's policies.
Lack of Adaptation: Western-dominated mechanisms, such as the IEA (established in 1974 by major oil consumers like the US, Japan, and European countries), have failed to adapt to the changing energy market, as they exclude top energy consumers like BRICS countries from membership.
Divergent Agendas: BRICS countries prioritize energy security and national autonomy, differing from the market-oriented policies promoted by Western institutions.
Carbon Emission Disputes: Long-running disagreements persist with developed countries over the "common but differentiated responsibilities" principle, technology transfer, and financial support for emission reduction. Developed countries are also considering Border Tax Adjustments (BTAs) to prevent "carbon leakage," which BRICS countries view as protectionist measures.
Financial Risks: BRICS countries face rising financial risks in carbon trading mechanisms and renewable energy investment, with concerns about speculation and reliance on foreign capital.
In response, the BRICS countries are pursuing a multilateral strategic cooperation, aiming to move from "rule takers" to "rule makers" in global energy governance. Their strategies involve:
Energy Security: Fostering mutual trust and long-term interests, with energy-rich members like Russia and Brazil providing stable supplies to importers like China and India.
Scientific and Technological Cooperation: Leveraging diverse natural resources and expertise to promote innovation in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and nuclear energy.
Financing: The New Development Bank (NDB), established in 2014, plays a crucial role in providing sustainable investments for renewable energy and infrastructure, helping BRICS countries meet their energy targets.
Legal Framework: Working towards a strong legal framework for energy cooperation, though this involves complex issues of national sovereignty.
Iran's strategic shift to prioritize economic transactions in non-dollar currencies is a direct manifestation of this broader BRICS vision to reduce dependence on Western financial systems. The attack, therefore, could be interpreted as an attempt to disrupt Iran's capacity to contribute to and benefit from this alternative economic architecture, thereby weakening the BRICS bloc's overall challenge to the existing global order.
Conclusion
The Israeli military strikes on Iran on June 13, 2025, while framed primarily as a response to Iran's nuclear program, appear to be far more nuanced upon deeper examination of the available information. While the destruction of enrichment facilities and associated infrastructure is undeniable, the consistent emphasis in multiple sources on Iran's vast energy and mineral wealth, its recent integration into the BRICS bloc, and the explicit condemnation of attacks on "energy and transport infrastructure" by the SCO paints a picture of a broader strategic objective.
The "pre-emptive war against the BRICS energy core" narrative, coupled with Iran's ambition to be a regional power center and its efforts to promote de-dollarization and Eurasian integration, suggests that the real target extends "beyond nuclear." It was, arguably, an attempt to cripple Iran's economic influence and its role in forging a non-Western-centric global order. The allegations that international oversight bodies were exploited for intelligence gathering, though presented by a single source, further highlight the deep mistrust and complex geopolitical maneuverings at play.
As Iran responds by limiting cooperation with the IAEA and accelerating its enrichment capabilities, and as the BRICS bloc continues its determined path to reshape global energy governance, the world stands at a critical juncture. The attacks on Iran are not just about nuclear centrifuges; they are a stark reflection of the intensifying struggle for influence in a multipolar world.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
So it's really about continuing the dominance of western colonialist powers. Makes sense.