SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
big oil windfall tax
To Stop US Wars, Saying No Is Not Enough
The US left needs a foreign policy platform that projects a positive global role for the US and can gain enough popular support to catalyze a deeper resistance to Trump 2.0 and then shape the policy of a post-MAGA government.
Apr 09, 2026
The US-Israeli attack on Iran put an exclamation point on the Gaza genocide. It sent a message to the world from the regimes in Washington and Tel Aviv: We will do anything that our military strength allows us to do. There are no rules or international laws we are bound to respect.
Most European governments, many regimes elsewhere, and major sections of the Democratic Party leadership offer only a few “process objections” to this level of ruthlessness but go with the flow.
This is a road to global catastrophe. Despite the fragile (and welcome) ceasefire, It is accelerating a process that was already underway where every government in the world is deciding that their overriding priority must be increasing their military strength. And that security requires cracking down on opposition movements within their own countries as well.
An Interconnected World
To halt and reverse this course, it is essential but not sufficient to build mass opposition to the war on Iran and all the other evils perpetrated by Washington, The US left also needs a foreign policy platform that projects a positive global role for the US and can gain enough popular support to catalyze a deeper resistance to Trump 2.0 and then shape the policy of a post-MAGA government.
In today’s world, there will be security for no one unless there is security for all.
That vision starts with the reality of an interconnected world where humanity’s very survival is in doubt. Viruses and the fallout from nuclear explosions know no borders. An interruption of supply chains in the Middle East threatens food security across the globe. Destruction in the Amazon Basin wreaks havoc on the climate worldwide.
In today’s world, there will be security for no one unless there is security for all. Weaving the fight for human survival together with peoples’ struggles for self-determination and against all forms of oppression, and with the fight for working class power, workers fighting for their rights, is a complex task. Yet in a world where diplomacy and inter-state cooperation predominate, movements for democracy and social justice have more favorable conditions to achieve their goals.
Without softening our critique of the US-dominated world order that is passing away, developing a forward-looking platform entails assessing the heightened dangers faced under Trump 2.0. It means breaking down the largely artificial division between domestic and foreign policies. When militarism, racism, and misogyny is practiced abroad, these pathologies inevitably come home.
Competing Visions as the Old Order Collapses
Today this quote from Antonio Gramsci is popular throughout the Left: “The old order is dying, and the new one is struggling to be born.” The different factions of the oligarchy are rushing into this “interregnum” to shape what comes next.
MAGA-Trump 2.0 argues that considering values like democracy or human rights when formulating policy is naïve if not treasonous, and that multilateral institutions are simply shackles on US power. It sees staying No. 1 in global “lethality” as the road to safety and prosperity for the “heritage Americans” who will dominate the country after removing or subordinating the various “others” who now live here.
The anti-MAGA wing of the US elite insists that the “rules-based” world order of the last 80 years produced a great American way of life. A few “mistakes” (Vietnam, Iraq) just need to be corrected to get back on the right track. Their program is to preserve NATO and other Cold War-era alliances; keep China at bay; and use “soft power,” sanctions, and “smart wars” to remain the world’s dominant power.
The left has trenchant critiques of the racism and exploitation inherent in both variants of Washington’s imperial project. But we won’t win popular support if we don’t go beyond critique to offer a positive vision of what the world can look like if we are shaping US policy.
Global Cooperation vs. American Exceptionalism
That vision has to address the hopes, fears, and pressing needs of the majority of US people. It has to be compelling enough to counter the American exceptionalist ideology that permeates US culture. Resting on the longstanding position of the US as the hegemonic global power and promoted unceasingly by the political class and mainstream media, the idea that the US is an inherently virtuous nation which always acts as the world’s “good guy” has long defined US “common sense.”
Anti-war and solidarity movements targeting Washington’s role in Vietnam, South Africa, Central America, Iraq, and Palestine have spotlighted the destructive role the US has played in each case. At times, energetic social movements have built mass support for arms control agreements and aggressive steps to fight climate change. But we have yet to win a durable majority to a structural critique of imperial behavior and support for an alternative world order where all countries are on equal footing, conflicts are resolved via diplomacy, and a transition away from fossil fuels is a worldwide priority.
The left has always stressed the common interest of the global majority in fighting imperial exploitation. But in a period when the most dangerous threats to human life—climate change, nuclear war, global pandemics, obscene degrees of inequality—can only be addressed by joint action by all countries, the arguments against American exceptionalism and the way it makes US national sovereignty absolute become stronger and more urgent.
This is a framework that draws on the insight of Albert Einstein at the beginning of the nuclear age (“Everything has changed except our thinking”). It embraces the outlook of the United Nations Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which expressed the most advanced thinking in the coalition that defeated fascism in World War II.
Amid a continuing genocide in Gaza and seeing the disaster of the war on Iran, the numbers of people saying “stop” to the guardians of empire is growing by the day. Fanning those flames of opposition and offering these millions a vision to fight for is the combination needed to accumulate the political power to transform the US role in the world.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Could the UN Secretary-General’s 'Good Offices' Help to End the Iran War?
Given the two-week ceasefire, the recent appointment of an experienced personal envoy for the Middle East conflict by UN Secretary-General Guterres and the establishment of a UN Task Force to facilitate the opening of the Strait of Hormuz offer hope for lasting peace.
Apr 09, 2026
While the whole world held its breath, hoping for some way the overcome the ultimatum that President Donald Trump had given to Iran, Pakistan, working feverishly as a third-party mediator (with the help of Türkiye, Egypt, and other regional powers, as well as China), was able to obtain a last-minute agreement from the parties for a two-week cessation of hostilities which would allow commercial shipping to resume (with Iranian supervision) through the Strait of Hormuz.
Although widely welcomed, this brief ceasefire is only the beginning. To bring about a lasting end to the war, over the next two weeks the mediators will have to become involved in intensive negotiations with all of the parties to find a peace settlement acceptable to all.
This will require considerable in-depth, in-person consultations by the mediators with each of the parties to understand the issues and interests of each and to go beyond their incompatible positions to find common ground and develop creative solutions that reconcile differences, especially those related to each party’s security concerns.
Much of this work is best done through intensive shuttle diplomacy, wherein those acting as third parties discuss the issues and possible components of agreements through separate talks with each party. This is preferable to face-to-face plenary meetings between the parties, which are often unproductive, since the parties typically just reiterate and insist on their already well-known confrontational positions. Such work requires sufficient time, considerable finesse and creativity, as well as close coordination between all of those involved. Knowledge of previous peace processes and the substance of peace agreements is also very important.
If successful, however, the UN’s assistance with a viable solution would not only resolve the dangerous hostilities in the Middle East, but could also offer a more permanent off-ramp for the Trump administration.
Two recent initiatives by the United Nations secretary-general may prove useful in this regard. On March 25, Secretary-General António Guterres appointed Jean Arnault, a seasoned peacemaker with 40 years of experience in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Europe, as his “personal envoy of the secretary-general on the Middle East conflict and its consequences” to carry out good offices on his behalf. Although perhaps not widely known, the secretary-general’s good offices functions (often carried out through “quiet diplomacy”) have been widely used since the UN’s inception 80 years ago, in large and small conflicts around the world, with considerable success.
In some situations, the secretary-general’s envoy has worked on their own directly with the parties; in other cases, the envoy has worked in close coordination with a small group of UN Member States. In this situation, the UN secretary-general’s personal envoy could offer his assistance to the already-existing group of state mediators led by Pakistan in their efforts to arrive at a peace agreement. Given the extremely short time frame available, such assistance should be welcomed.
It is likely that Iran will also welcome the involvement of a personal envoy of the secretary-general, since in 1988, the UN Secretary-General’s Personal Representative on Iran-Iraq, Jan Eliasson, helped bring about the end of the very long and destructive Iran-Iraq war. In this and other conflicts, the secretary-general’s good offices have been acceptable to conflicting parties because the UN is viewed as impartial, unlike mediation efforts by states, which have their own interests. As well, the deep experience of UN mediators in applying constructive problem-solving approaches to conflict resolution makes them attractive as third party mediators.
A second recent initiative by Secretary-General Guterres that may prove to be very helpful is the creation of a UN Task Force to facilitate resolution of maritime problems in the Strait of Hormuz. This initiative was based on previous UN experience at the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, whereby UN involvement helped overcome the cessation of maritime grain shipments from Ukraine, as well as food and fertilizer from Russia, which were causing a world food crisis.
After extensive talks hosted by Türkiye, with UN assistance, the Black Sea Grain Initiative was signed by Ukraine and Russia, as well as by Türkiye and the UN, in separate but concurrent “mirror” agreements. The first outlined the safe export of grain and related food and fertilizers via demined corridors in the Black Sea, with Türkiye inspecting ships on their way to Ukrainian ports to ensure they weren’t carrying weapons. The second outlined a set of procedures for getting food, fertilizer, and raw material exports safely out of Russia.
Drawing on this previous experience, The UN Task Force will involve some of the same UN specialized agencies that were helpful in the Black Sea Grain Initiative, such as the International Maritime Organization. The Task Force is meant to work out constructive and “operational maritime solutions” that will help to secure the evacuation of over 2,000 ships and 20,000 seafarers currently stranded in the Persian Gulf, as well as facilitate humanitarian corridors for the safe passage of goods.
Since it came to power, the Trump administration has generally ignored the capacities of the United Nations; its history and experience; and its universally-accepted authority. If successful, however, the UN’s assistance with a viable solution would not only resolve the dangerous hostilities in the Middle East, but could also offer a more permanent off-ramp for the Trump administration.
Although not widely known, it is now well-documented, that, during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, UN Secretary-General U Thant played a pivotal role in helping to avert a nuclear war and resolve the worst international crisis since the end of the World War II, by using his good offices to make proposals to US President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev for de-escalation and the ultimate resolution of the crisis.
As explained by the authors of an article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the good offices of the secretary-general can offer a unique contribution to world peace:
For U Thant and his UN organization, the Cuban Missile Crisis was their finest hour... It was the week the United Nations helped the superpowers pull back from nuclear destruction. The nuclear clock did not strike midnight, largely because Thant facilitated face-saving and de-escalation, transmitted messages, traveled to Cuba, fostered restraint and hope, and made significant proposals, including the idea for the final settlement of the crisis... it is appropriate to finally give U Thant credit for his remarkable contribution to averting doomsday.
Let us hope that Secretary-General Guterres and his special envoy will be able to play a similarly constructive role in another extremely dangerous conflict and remind the world of the vital role that the UN has played and can continue to play in preventing and resolving violent conflicts among its member states.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Calls for 'Full Arms Embargo' Against Israel as Lebanon Massacres Imperil Ceasefire Hopes
"The United States and all other countries need to cut off weapons to Israel immediately."
Apr 09, 2026
Fresh demands for a total arms embargo against Israel emerged Wednesday as the country's devastating onslaught in Lebanon—leveling apartment buildings and killing more than 250 people—threatened to derail tenuous progress toward a deal to end the US-Israeli war on Iran.
"The United States and all other countries need to cut off weapons to Israel immediately," said Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the US-based Center for International Policy. "Full arms embargo."
Avi Lewis, leader of Canada's New Democratic Party, wrote on social media that "Canada must bring sanctions against Israel, cancel the Canada-Israel free trade agreement, implement a real two-way arms embargo, and use every diplomatic and economic tool at our disposal to rein in Israel."
"US-Israeli impunity has shredded the international order," he added. "Canada should lead in rebuilding it."
US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Wednesday that he "will be offering a resolution to stop US military aid to Israel" when Congress returns to session next week. The US is Israel's chief arms supplier; recent data shows that 99% of Israel's weapons imports are from the US and Germany.
Israel launched its barrage of airstrikes on Lebanon, including busy areas in central Beirut, just hours after US President Donald Trump, Iranian leaders, and Pakistani mediators announced a two-week ceasefire agreement aimed at providing space for a lasting resolution to the war that the US and Israel launched in late February.
Pakistan's prime minister said explicitly that Lebanon was part of the ceasefire agreement, but the Trump White House and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted the country was excluded, prompting fury in Iran.
"If this isn’t yet another case of the US early reneging, then what is it?" asked Esmaeil Baqaei, a spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry.
US Vice President JD Vance claimed Wednesday that there was a "legitimate misunderstanding" about the terms of the ceasefire, saying the Iranians "thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon and it just didn't."
"That said, the Israelis have actually offered to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon because they want to make sure that our negotiation is successful," Vance said.
More Israeli airstrikes were reported in Beirut as Vance made his comments.
More Israeli airstrikes in Beirut #Lebanon just as VP Vance says Israel will show restraint. “Israelis have actually offered to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon …to make sure that our negotiation is successful.”
This is in sheyyah area tonight pic.twitter.com/F4ZFrlKS52
— Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) April 9, 2026
Israel's assault on Wednesday marked the deadliest day for Lebanon during the latest round of bombing, which began days after the US and Israel launched their war on Iran. Lebanon held a national day of mourning on Thursday as rescue efforts continued across the country.
One woman, identified as Haniya Faraj, told The New York Times that nine of her relatives were wounded in an Israeli attack on a neighborhood in central Beirut.
“I don’t know if there are more, my head is about to explode," she said. "I can’t reach all my family members."
The Associated Press reported that its journalists "saw charred bodies in vehicles and on the ground at one of Beirut’s busiest intersections in the central Corniche al Mazraa neighborhood, a mixed commercial and residential area. Using forklifts, rescue workers removed smoldering debris and sifted through ruins for survivors."
Heba Morayef, Amnesty International's regional director for the Middle East and North Africa, said in a statement that the Israeli government "has an appalling track record of carrying out unlawful attacks in Lebanon and displaying a callous disregard for civilian life, fueled by the impunity Israeli officials feel they enjoy."
"These attacks are a reminder that states must immediately halt the transfer of arms and weapons to Israel, given the overriding risk that they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law," said Morayef.
European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, condemned Israel's massive bombardment of Lebanon and reiterated that the country must be included in the ceasefire agreement.
"We condemn these strikes in the strongest possible terms," said Macron. "They pose a direct threat to the sustainability of the ceasefire that has just been reached. Lebanon must be fully covered by it."
Sánchez, who has vocally condemned the Iran war from the start as illegal and immoral, went further, urging the European Union to "suspend its Association Agreement with Israel."
"There must be no impunity for these criminal acts," said Sánchez.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump-Iran Truce Frays, Dem Leaders Pursue Yet Another Round of War Powers Votes
"A two-week ceasefire is insufficient," argued House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. "We need a permanent end to Donald Trump’s reckless war of choice."
Apr 08, 2026
After accusations of cowardly delays, Democratic leaders in the US Congress moved Wednesday toward a vote on yet another war powers resolution aimed at stopping President Donald Trump from waging more unauthorized war on Iran as the tenuous day-old Mideast ceasefire unravels.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced Wednesday that Democrats will force a vote on a war powers resolution when upper chamber lawmakers reconvene next week.
"Congress must reassert its authority, especially at this dangerous moment," Schumer said during a press conference at his New York office. "No president, Democrat or Republican, should take this country to war alone. Not now. Not ever."
Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) reiterated remarks made during a Tuesday evening interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper, in which he said he's demanding House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) "immediately reconvene the House back into session" so lawmakers can vote on the war powers resolution.
"A two-week ceasefire is insufficient," Jeffries said. "We need a permanent end to Donald Trump’s reckless war of choice."
"Assuming it doesn’t happen this week, we’ll go back into session next week and we will present a war powers resolution as soon as it becomes available to us to do so as a matter of privilege on the House floor," he continued. "All we need are a handful of Republicans to join us."
"The American people strongly oppose this reckless war of choice and know that we should not be spending billions of dollars to drop bombs in Iran while Republicans and Donald Trump are unwilling to spend a dime to actually make life more affordable for the American people," Jeffries added.
The GOP-controlled House and Senate have rejected attempts to pass war powers resolutions, with Johnson denying that the US is even at war—a dubious argument used in as far back as the Korean War in order to skirt the constitutional requirement for congressional assent.
Jeffries also announced Wednesday that House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) has scheduled a Friday meeting online regarding “Trump administration accountability and the 25th Amendment," which allows for the dismissal of a president who is incapacitated, unable, or unwilling to perform their duties.
More than 80 Democratic lawmakers are urging members of Trump's Cabinet to invoke the measure and remove him from office for his genocidal threats against Iran.
Schumer's announcement came on the heels of a day that began with Trump's genocidal threat to wipe out Iran's civilization and ended with an agreement for the US and Israel to grant broad concessions to Tehran—including a two-week pause in hostilities—in exchange for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
“All of this happens when one man, especially a man acting as unhinged as Donald Trump, has unchecked power to wage war,” Schumer said. “He backs himself into a corner with dangerous, escalating rhetoric.”
“The entire world holds its breath, wondering what's next going to come out of his mouth,” Schumer said of Trump. “And can he ever find a way out? A commander-in-chief who is truly in control would never have gotten into this colossal mess to begin with.”
There have been several unsuccessful attempts to pass an Iran war powers resolution, including a bipartisan House effort led by Reps. Ko Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), and another spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in the upper chamber. A handful of House Republicans supported the Khanna-Massie resolution, while Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) broke ranks to vote against the Kaine-Paul measure.
“Republicans will once again have the opportunity to join Democrats and end this reckless war of choice," Schumer added. "The public must demand that Republicans join with us to approve the War Powers Act."
The renewed push for a war powers vote comes as the shaky Iran ceasefire is being heavily tested both by Israel's devastating attacks on Lebanon—which have reportedly killed or wounded more than 1,300 people over the past 24 hours—and Iran's refusal to allow ships to pass through the Strait of Hormuz.
Schumer said Wednesday that “this is one of the very worst military and foreign policy actions that the United States has ever taken."
“The war made us worse in terms of control of the Strait of Hormuz,” he argued, alluding to the ceasefire provision allowing Iranian control over the vital waterway and a $2 million-per-ship toll. "The war made us worse in terms of the strength of the Iranian regime. The war made us worse in terms of high gas prices... And the war made us worse because American credibility is down the drain.”
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—was enacted during the Nixon administration toward the end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. The law empowers Congress to check the president’s war-making authority by requiring the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours. It also mandates that lawmakers approve any troop deployments lasting longer than 60 days.
In addition to Iran, members of Congress have tried—and failed—to pass multiple war powers resolutions limiting Trump's attacks on Venezuela, whose president was kidnapped during a brief US invasion in January.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular