Israel Strikes Iran Again—But This Time, There's a Twist

Right, so when most people think of the clash between Israel and Iran, especially if you’re a regular viewer of this channel you might think of missile trails lighting up the night sky, Mossad performing nefarious deeds as they infiltrate Iran or cyberattacks to fry digital infrastructure—not a dusty legal document declaring a bank a terrorist. But in the latest twist of geopolitical theatre, Israel has swapped bombs for bureaucracy and declared war by spreadsheet.
In a move as surreal as it is pathetic, Israel has now designated the Central Bank of Iran—along with two other banks and an oil company—as terrorist organizations. Yeah, an entire national financial system is now being treated like a militant cell. Defence Minister Israel Katz has signed the order apparently at the behest of Mossad and something called the National Bureau for Economic Warfare—because of course Israel has an office for weaponizing the economy, in order to seemingly ramp up tensions with iran all over again.
It’s lawfare over warfare. It’s symbolic chest-thumping disguised as counterterrorism. And it’s a worrying precedent that has implications not just for Iran, but for activists, dissidents, and even protest groups in the UK and beyond. Because if Israel can label a bank a terrorist, and UK politicians are eyeing protest groups like Palestine Action with the same logic, where does this end?
Right, so Israel it seems hasn’t ended its conflict with Iran, more overseen a shift in tactics from violence, to petulance, moving from warfare to lawfare. You see, Israel has launched an all new unprecedented and unprovoked attack—not through missiles or airstrikes, but via legal instruments. This time, the target is not Iran's nuclear infrastructure, but its financial and economic core. Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz, following recommendations from Mossad and Israel’s shadowy "National Bureau for Economic Warfare," has formally designated the Central Bank of Iran, Bank Mellat, Bank Shahr, and the Sepehr Energy Jahan company as terrorist entities. The rationale for this is that all of them have allegedly served as conduits for financing terror organisations, therefore they should be designated terrorists themselves. What convenient timing that they do this right after getting their arse handed to them on a plate? Why did you not try this non violent approach before launching missiles? Thought you’d win? This move is less about counterterrorism and more about weaponising international law to achieve strategic goals Israel has failed to reach through military means and we’re seeing signs of this same tactic, possibly at Israel’s behest as well, happening elsewhere too, so could this be the start of a trend? More on that in a moment.
This calculated shift from warfare to lawfare does nonetheless represent an escalation in Israel’s clearly ongoing campaign against Iran. But more troubling is what this means for international norms, the misuse of terrorism designations, and the potential for global replication of such legal abuses. It reveals a state that, having faced repeated strategic and intelligence failures in Iran—including the recent exposure and elimination of Mossad spy networks—is now resorting to economic sabotage dressed up in the language of security and protecting themselves from terror, nevermind them starting it.
Israel’s declaration is framed as a legitimate counterterrorism measure. The Central Bank of Iran and the others allegedly provide the financial arteries that feed Organisations Israel regard as terror groups. But are they?
First, the Israeli claim ignores the broader truth about terrorist financing. Most such funding occurs in cash, outside the formal banking system, because that can be readily interrupted at a flick of a switch or the press of a button. The designation of a central bank—especially one with no direct economic ties to Israel whatsoever—as a terrorist organisation is not only symbolically absurd, it is functionally ineffective. It doesn’t really do anything, so it just comes across as petulant, as the Israeli baby tosses its toys out the pram after Iran gave it a spanking. As even some Israeli analysts quietly admit, it’s a tantrum masquerading as policy, a reaction to mounting frustration over Iran’s resilience and Israel’s failure to deter it, or cause any meaningful damage to it.
Moreover, this move isn't happening in a vacuum. Israel’s action comes after Iran’s intelligence services recently dismantled a number of Mossad spy rings operating on its soil. This move, then, is retaliation. And it’s strategic. By branding financial institutions as terrorist bodies, Israel seeks to pressure allies and neutral countries into freezing Iranian assets, cutting off banking relationships, and drying up Iran’s access to global finance—all without firing a shot.
But there’s more beneath the surface. The real danger is not merely economic: it is legal precedent.
This is not the first time Israel or its supporters have sought to stretch anti-terror legislation to serve political ends. In the UK, there’s a troubling parallel going on right now. The grassroots direct-action network Palestine Action—known for its protests targeting Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer—has recently been the subject of a campaign for proscription, again as a terror group. Throwing red paint over planes is terrorism now apparently according to our ridiculous pro Israel government. The campaign is being pushed by We Believe in Israel, a lobby group that a month ago began pressuring the UK government to classify Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. The group’s former director, Luke Akehurst, is now a Labour MP—all a coincidence I am sure.
The Zionist proclivities and influencers of the Labour Party under Keir Starmer raises serious questions. Is the proscription of Palestine Action an example of domestic law being bent to serve the interests of a foreign state? The UK has a long tradition of protecting protest and political expression, even when controversial. To criminalize activism—particularly nonviolent civil disobedience—sets a dangerous precedent, one Israel may be actively cultivating abroad.
Just as Israel’s economic war against Iran risks delegitimising the entire concept of terrorism designations, so too does the attempt to criminalise Palestine Action threaten the integrity of democratic protest and the inner on both counts happens to be Israel.
This legal onslaught was initiated by Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz, Katz signing a special directive following intelligence provided by Mossad and the National Bureau for Economic Warfare. The very existence of such a bureau speaks volumes. Not only has Israel acknowledged economic sabotage as a legitimate strategy—it has institutionalised it, because of course they have and others doing similar as the UK government appears to be doing, should raise eyebrows about this.
The stated purpose of this designation is to "stop the funding of terrorism" and "cut off the financial oxygen" to terror groups in Israel’s view. Yet the entities targeted—especially the banks—are instruments of state finance, not slush funds for militias. These banks facilitate pensions, public wages, infrastructure investment—basic services, so to label them as terrorist organizations conflates the activities of a nation-state with those of a clandestine militia and it is therefore an assault on the ordinary people of Iran if it takes hold.
If this logic is accepted, what’s to stop other nations from retaliating in kind? What prevents Iran, or any country at odds with Israel, from declaring Israeli institutions—perhaps even the Israeli Defence Ministry itself—a terrorist entity in response? Well, it’d be more accurate certainly wouldn’t it, but a slipperier slope would be other pro Israel leaderships copying Israel and doing likewise on no other basis that Israel did it.
This escalation also threatens what little stability remains between the two nations. Just days after open hostilities and drone strikes, a fragile ceasefire persists. Legal provocations such as this may be just the nudge needed to push Iran into retaliatory action—something Israel’s hawks might welcome as justification to reignite conflict, potentially dragging the US and other allies into yet another Middle Eastern quagmire, though I don’t fancy Iran would rise to that bait.
In the context of regional diplomacy though, this move is still both inflammatory and regressive. It undermines any attempts at de-escalation, further destabilizes economic and political matters, and emboldens similar legal warfare tactics globally.
While the global community may initially ignore Israel’s move as merely symbolic, the long-term consequences are dire. Should other nations follow suit—whether due to diplomatic pressure, lobbying influence, or political expediency—it will signal a dangerous normalisation of lawfare.
Designating a national central bank as a terrorist organisation is just plain stupid—it is reckless. If this becomes a tool of statecraft, international financial systems risk being held hostage to bilateral political feuds. Global finance operates on predictability and mutual recognition. This move undermines both, the destabilisation risks spreading beyond just the Middle East therefore.
Already, some worry that states seeking to curry favour with Israel—or avoid its diplomatic wrath—might copy this tactic. If Israel proscribe the CBI who else will? If so, the implications for global financial governance, anti-terror legislation, and even international human rights norms are under threat, its all part of the knock on effect.
Institutions, movements, and individuals critical of Israel’s policies are being targeted using counterterrorism frameworks. The attempt to proscribe Palestine Action is not a domestic British issue—it’s part of a broader Israeli strategy to silence critics globally. We have a proud tradition of protest ijn this country, just this week Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary mulling over the proscription of Palestine Action was stood up in parliament wearing a suffragette rosette, the very movement that gave women like her the vote, direct action protest, often violent protest as that was and yet if we were dealing with the Suffragettes today, Cooper would proscribe them, or at least she would if she were present in parliament, because save for the Suffragettes, she wouldn’t even be an MP, she wouldn’t even have the vote, so the hypocrisy is off the charts. Whether through diplomacy, surveillance, lobbying, or legal designations, Israel’s long arm of influence appears willing to reach far beyond its borders to places where money still buys influence. Rather than proscribing Palestine Action, the UK should be proscribing Israeli finance to politicians.
What begins with banks and protest groups though may not end there. It’s journalists too as we’ve already seen, targeted by Israel in Gaza, or arrested on trumped up terror offences here in the UK, the likes of Richard Medhurst for instance. How about human rights organisations – well, we’ve already seen Israel target UNRWA and replace them with the lethal Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Who or what will be next? If we accept that legal instruments can be weaponised to suppress political dissent, no one is safe.
Israel’s legal move against Iran’s financial institutions is not merely an act of foreign policy—it is a warning. It demonstrates how terror laws can be twisted into tools of economic coercion and political repression. It sets a dangerous precedent that other states may follow, to the detriment of international law, human rights, and civil liberties.
This latest phase in the Israel-Iran conflict underscores Israel’s unwillingness to engage in peaceful coexistence with Tehran and its growing reliance on unconventional, legally dubious strategies. It is a policy driven more by vengeance and insecurity than by necessity or prudence.
At the same time, the creeping attempt to criminalise groups like Palestine Action reveals a broader agenda: the global suppression of dissent against Israeli policy. Whether through banks in Tehran or protestors in London, Israel is attempting to rewrite the rules of engagement in its favour and we need to be more aware of this, because it isn’t getting reported in main media as usual, so do support your favourite independent media if you can, who will.
Meanwhile, for as much as Israel are trying it on with terror designations, it is Iran who has very much had the last laugh as this tenuous ceasefire between the two states has come into effect. Do check out why in this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch.
Please do also hit like, share and subscribe if you haven’t done so already so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as spreading the word and helping to support the channel at the same time which is very much appreciated, holding power to account for ordinary working class people and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.