Scott Johnson

Correction: “Fantastic,” not “fantasy”!

What a fantasy profile of the gallant @AAGDhillon. Hurray for Harmeet!

A Minnesota Must-Read: “Let’s hope that Minneapolis will now consider normalizing relations with the United States.” @FreemanWSJ wsj.com/opinion/far-le…

In the loser category, beyond Iran, maybe Barack Obama hardest hit?

If this is true—and if it was, it was plainly leaked by JD Vance’s office, and the entire call was probably staged to facilitate the leak—it’s fascinating to note who Vance is willing to distance himself from: Israel, at the same time as he refuses to distance himself from the deranged Jew-hater Tucker Carlson, even as Tucker ramps up his attacks on his boss, Trump. A jarring contrast, especially since the talking point emerging from the claimed leaked call feeds directly into the core conspiracy Carlson claims: that Netanyahu “manipulated” Trump into the war. This is Vance’s boldest plan yet, if true. Let’s see how this works out for him. It could simply be that he is actually just bad at this politics thing. (The entire issue is a red herring anyway, since the Iranian people are being told to stay home. Regime change was always going to be a post-war issue.)

By publishing this explicitly false story, the @FT has officially become tabloid trash for market participants. Despite my direct, on-the-record denial of ever having advocated, explored, or espoused the idea that Chancellor-Bank of England statute serving as a prototype for a Treasury-Federal Reserve relationship, FT journalists manufactured a story with the headline, “Scott Bessent praised Bank of England as model for tighter oversight of the Federal Reserve.” These pathetic journalists have clearly fabricated a story to give the impression that both I and the Trump Administration are setting “about restructuring the relationship… at a time when President Donald Trump has launched an unprecedented assault on the world’s most important central bank.” Their mendacious assertion is based on vague statements from unnamed “financial industry executives familiar with the matter.” In short, FT has literally manufactured an entirely fake policy position for me and the Administration. Other than furthering a maliciously false narrative of dysfunction and divisiveness, it baffles the mind as to why they would shred their already diminished journalistic credibility. Over the past 10 years, I have written more than 20,000 words opining on the Federal Reserve decisions, personnel, structure, and modifications. Nowhere have I ever mentioned this ridiculous notion. The Governor’s letters to the Chancellor have proven to be a useless and perfunctory device. There is much to be said about the storied Bank of England, but any recreation of its operating framework on this side of the Atlantic has never been contemplated. The shameful journalists and editors at the FT are shocking in their meretriciousness, lack of standards, and general intellectual libertinism. It is the worst tradition of Fleet Street to manufacture news rather than report on it. They have brought irredeemable shame to their parent organization, Nikkei Inc., with whom I had previously held excellent relations. In 2025, I laid out a comprehensive 6,000+ word review of each and every policy reform that I believe should be adopted by the Federal Reserve. Read my actual, real thoughts on and proposals for Federal Reserve reform at the International Economy: international-economy.com/TIE_Sp25_Besse…

This is a great piece by @Parpanchi. "In less than a month, Washington has already achieved what twenty years of negotiations did not: an Islamic Republic with its nuclear and missile programmes sharply pushed back and its regional reach greatly reduced. Either way, the old status quo is gone."

Incredibly impressive interview by the UAE minister. 🇦🇪 IMO she lays out the case for victory against Iran more effectively than American or Israeli officials have done.

The desperate fecklessness of Europe. A story in four acts. I. Emirati presidential advisor Anwar Gargash tweets that Iran's attacks on Gulf countries "cement the Iranian threat as a central pillar of Gulf strategic thinking" and will lead to the "strengthening of our security partnerships with Washington." (x.com/alarabiya_eng/…) II. Gerard Araud, former French ambassador to Israel, the UN and the US, responds: "Strange. It means deepening your dependence on a country that has led yours into a disastrous conflict without caring about your interests." (x.com/GerardAraud/st…) III. I respond rather acerbically: "Trust the French to confuse an ally that wants you safe and prosperous and a tyrant who wants you cowed and controlled." (In other words, better to shelter under the American umbrella than to cower under the Iranian one.) I am subsequently blocked by his excellency M. Araud, presumably for defaming the masculine honor of the French nation. IV. Araud is then challenged in the comments by people pointing out that Paris is within Iranian missile range. His response (in the screenshot below): "Paris is within missile range of a lot of countries...we are not at war with Iran and exists a concept called : deterrence." When challenged that Iran's regime likes to yell "death to the West" among other assorted exhortations for the destruction of the arrogant infidel, he responds: "Who cares. What matters is not what you say but what you can." Oof. M. Ambassadeur, your two explanations for French sanguinity -- that France has deterrence and that Iran lacks the will to attack -- are precisely the things Gulf states can't rely on. They have no hope of ever deterring Iran, and Iran has proven countless times over many years -- the "Tanker War" of '84-'88, and at least 20 ships attacked from 2015 to 2024 -- and ever more egregiously in this war, that they are not only capable and willing to attack the Gulf states and shipping in Hormuz, but that they literally have no other strategy whenever they encounter a challenge. Iran is a one-trick pony. Or rather, two: (1) Threaten to attack their Gulf neighbors or (2) actually attack their Gulf neighbors. Are you really still confused, M. Araud, as to why the Gulf states now publicly want to move closer to America -- and reportedly are telling Trump to keep bombing the ayatollahs until the threat is removed, even if it takes a long time? M. Araud's blasé acceptance of Iranian violence and expansionism isn't really about his faith in proud and mighty France's ability to deter the ayatollahs. A regime whose entire existence is a slow self-immolation of Iranian society and whose survival, given its total incompetence in nearly every field of human endeavor, is premised solely on its ability to destroy everything around it on its way down, is by definition not deterrable. What could you threaten it with? The best-case scenario is that this talk of "deterrence" is a reference to France "force de frappe" -- i.e., nukes. But applying this French logic of second-strike "deterrence" to the UAE or Kuwait is a category error you wouldn't expect from an experienced diplomat. Which brings us to the worst-case scenario: Araud's "deterrence" is code for acquiescence. After all, France opposed Israel bombing Saddam's nuclear reactor in 1981 (it had built the reactor), then expressed "concern" over "violations of Syrian airspace" when Israel bombed Assad's North Korean-built reactor in 2007. France wasn't exactly a bulwark of nonproliferation when it would go on to become a vocal champion of the JCPOA, whose sunset provisions would by now have lifted any meaningful limits on Iran's nuclear program. France, like many of its European friends, also acquiesced to economic and energy blackmail by Russia -- remember Macron’s endless phone calls to Putin? Or the "don’t humiliate Russia" rhetoric (bbc.com/news/world-eur…) a couple years back? Or more generally, Europe’s willful dependence on Russian gas even after Crimea, all while Frenchmen like Araud lecture the Gulf about the importance of "strategic autonomy" from the US? If the French and their fellow west Europeans had had their way, the ayatollahs would long ago have had the bomb, as would Saddam Hussein and Bashar al-Assad. And they would have yapped about "deterrence" every step of the way. How, indeed, do the Gulf states dare to side with America against Iran? Where do they come off displaying that minimum threshold of courage and self-respect? Europe seems genuinely mystified. Luckily for the honorable ambassador, he won't have to hear my jabs anymore. Unluckily for the rest of us, the cowardice and self-abnegation of the West, the excuses and blinkered refusal to see reality and answer its challenges, continues unabated.

In Iran, they don't sound ready to end the war on US terms. A member of the Council for Determining Political Expediency of Iran, former commander of the IRGC, Mohsen Rezai, stated that the war with the USA will continue until Iran receives full compensation for all the losses incurred, achieves the lifting of all economic sanctions, and obtains international legal guarantees of non-interference by the USA in Iran's affairs. Rezai also warned the USA that in the event of a strike on Iranian infrastructure, Tehran's response would be disproportionate. “If you strike our infrastructure, it won't be an 'eye for an eye' — it will be a 'head for an eye'. You will be crippled,” emphasized the Iranian official.

❗️The Iranian terrorist regime launched a long-range missile for the first time since the start of Operation Roaring Lion that could reach a distance of ~4,000 km. During Operation Rising Lion in June 2025, the IDF revealed that the Iranian regime has intentions to develop missiles with a range of 4,000 km, which pose a danger to dozens of countries in Europe, Asia and Africa. The Iranian regime denied this. We have been saying it: The Iranian terrorist regime poses a global threat. Now, with missiles that can reach London, Paris or Berlin. The Iranian terror regime has carried out attacks against 12 countries in the region and is developing a capability that poses a much broader threat.

Speaks for itself: Feb. 25, 2026: “We are not developing long-range missiles… we have limited the range below 2,000 kilometers” — Iran’s FM Araghchi (IRNA). March 20, 2026: Iran fires missiles at Diego Garcia—ranging 4,000 kilometers (WSJ). ⬇️

This is a huge development and proves Iran has missiles longer than the 2,000 km range previously believed. It also proves two other things. First, that its so-called space launches actually were tests to develop long range missiles, including ICBMs. And second, Iran has been getting a lot of help with its missile program, probably from Russia, China, and North Korea. @A1Policy

I only gave one thing to say. Thank you, @AAGDhillon. United States v. Harvard powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/…

Netanyahu during his press conference citing the work of historian Will Durant a real blast to the past/my teenage years for me.

In the WSJ's Free Expression newsletter this morning, editor @MattHennessey takes up the issue of incomes taxes: who's paying what? My Power Line colleague and I discussed the issue in a 20-year-old essay that is not looking bad. Talking about taxes powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/…

I always listen to my @FDD colleague Eyal Hulata. You should, too.

“The State of Israel is, objectively, the most important ally of the United States. It is a nuclear power. It is the equal of any military on the globe in its ability to strike far and hard and to dominate its region. It’s an intelligence superpower and an engine of technological excellence and ever-increasing breakthroughs. If any country had to pick one strong ally not named the United States, it would pick Israel.”

This is the guy the NYT described with a sympathetic “family members killed by Israel” headline. After he attempted a massacre at a synagogue and preschool. Wow, the American press is really bad at this.