CENTCOM recently claimed it had seized the largest shipment of Iranian weapons—allegedly including cruise missiles, anti-ship systems, and drone engines—from Yemeni forces. This accusation, frequently repeated in the past, was once again amplified by Western and Israeli media outlets. The main objective is to portray Iran as a central player in regional conflicts and paint Tehran as a threat. However, Iran has not confirmed any such shipment, and the current situation in Yemen makes the logistics of such a large-scale transfer highly improbable. The storyline appears less rooted in facts and more like an effort to cover up Israel’s inability to counter the Yemeni resistance and the broader Axis of Resistance.

Twisting the Law to Justify Aggression

Western powers, in making their accusations, deliberately ignore key legal realities. First, under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, Iran has the right to buy and sell arms. These activities cannot be legally defined as violations. Second, the defensive actions taken by Yemenis and Palestinians against the Israeli regime fall squarely within the framework of international law and the principle of legitimate self-defense. Any potential support for this right is not only legal but also morally justified in the face of war crimes. Meanwhile, Western countries, by arming Israel and using famine as a weapon in Gaza and Yemen, have effectively become complicit in war crimes. Iran, for its part, has shown that it has the capability to strike Israel directly and does not need proxies to act on its behalf.

Media Spin to Mask Military Failure

As Yemeni forces increase their attacks on strategic Israeli targets—including a recent strike on Ben Gurion Airport—Washington and Tel Aviv have been scrambling to shift the spotlight away from these losses. Recycled narratives about Iranian weapons are little more than a smokescreen, meant to obscure the fact that the resistance’s capabilities have exceeded expectations. Tehran has repeatedly stated that the resistance front operates independently and is not under the command of the Islamic Republic. Efforts to force Iran into reining in regional resistance forces reflect a strategic failure on the part of both Tel Aviv and Washington.

A Pressure Scenario: From Sanctions to Humiliating Diplomacy

CENTCOM’s recent accusations also coincide with a broader Western pressure campaign against Iran. This includes the revival of old cases like Robert Levinson, the resurfacing of unfounded allegations in the AMIA case, sanctions on Iranian diplomats, threats to trigger the snapback mechanism, and condescending statements from American officials about possible talks with Tehran. Taken together, these moves point to a deliberate strategy by Washington to drag Iran into negotiations under pressure and humiliation. Former President Trump’s remark—“I’m in no rush to negotiate, but they need it”—captures the essence of this approach. However, the Islamic Republic has consistently declared it will never negotiate under threats or pressure, and that it will prevail in any arena, whether diplomatic or on the battlefield.