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
iran deal
Busting the Myth of Trump as an Anti-War President
Trump's vision is of a world where the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. It has nothing to do with peace.
Jun 24, 2025
It’s been said that Donald Trump’s decision to join Israel’s war with Iran underscores his failures as a peacemaker. This is a preposterous statement because the idea of Trump being “a peacemaker and unifier” has always been nothing short of preposterous.
Yes, long before his ascendance to the White House, Trump had managed to paint him as a peacemaker, promising to end America’s “endless wars.” But most people in the United States of Amnesia seem to have forgotten that during his first four-year tenure in the White House Trump embarked on a dangerous path with a series of reckless foreign policy decisions that threatened peace and made the world a far more dangerous place. Trump 1.0 walked away from an Iran deal and withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty while U.S. air wars became broader and “increasingly indiscriminate.” Iraq, Somalia, and Syria were among the countries that Trump loosened the rules of engagement for U.S. forces. Trump also ordered the killing of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani and threatened “fire and fury” against North Korea.In addition, Trump increased tensions between Israelis and Palestinians by recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The president of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas said at the time that Trump’s decision undermined all peace efforts and called his actions “a crime,” while the political leader of the Hamas movement, Ismail Haniya, who was assassinated by the Israeli Mossad in Tehran on July 31, 2024, called for a new “intifada.” Shortly upon assuming the Office of the President of the United States for the second time, Trump embarked on a jingoistic journey by threatening to take over Greenland (an idea he had floated back in 2019), make Canada the 51st state, reclaim the Panama Canal, and attack Mexico. And just as he had done during his first term in office, he withdrew the U.S. from the landmark Paris climate agreement, even though the climate crisis is an existential one and is expected to increase the risk of armed conflict.
So much for Trump being a peacemaker.
Trump is also a notorious braggart. He repeatedly said that he would end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours upon taking office and boasted that the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas militants would not have happened if he were president. Yet, five months into his second term in the White House and all that Trump has accomplished in connection with the war in Ukraine is to receive Putin’s middle finger. With regard to Gaza, of course, there is no difference between “genocide Joe” and Trump. Biden funded and armed the Israeli genocide of Palestinians in Gaza while Trump has not only continued to provide Israel with the weapons that is using to slaughter innocent people, mostly women and children, but has floated a plan to “clean out” Gaza and move Palestinians to Egypt and Jordan.
It is hilarious to see Trump’s decision to join Israel in its war with Iran as some sort of a setback in his quest to become a global peacemaker. Trump was never a peacemaker and, in fact, has always been a warmonger. His politics in general, both domestic and foreign, has never been about the pursuit of unity but rather about sowing seeds of division.
Trump’s view of international order is one based on pure power politics and the fear factor. As such, coercion, intimidation, violence and ultimately war are the means through which he understands that U.S. dominance in the international system can be maintained and reinforced. It’s a vision of a world where the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
Nonetheless, let’s not have any illusions that today’s world is the world that Trump himself has somehow created. We live in a dark world because the powers that be are fundamentally dark forces in themselves, and the most powerful nations call the shots on the international stage. And this is not to imply that the rest of the world is occupied by saintly creatures. Horrendous governments, religious fanatics and extremists of every twisted stripe ready and willing to engage in bloodshed are in plenty supply across the world. But none bears greater responsibility for international injustices and conflicts across the world than the country that stands as the most powerful actor in the world since the end of the Second World War.
Take the U.S. war on terror, which started following the September 11 attacks in 2001. It has been a disaster on multiple fronts. With the U.S. carrying out anti-terror measures in a total of 85 countries, nearly one million people were killed as a result of combat operations, almost 400,000 of them civilians, while an estimated 3.6-3.8 million “died indirectly in post-9/11 war zones,” according to the “Cost of War” project of Brown University.
There is little doubt that NATO, led by the U.S., provoked Russia into invading Ukraine in 2022. The U.S. and its allies have also repeatedly sabotaged possibilities for peace after Russia's invasion. Three years and four months after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, there is still no potential for a negotiated end to the war. Nearly 630 days since Israel launched a retaliatory incursion into Gaza, and the slaughtering of innocent people continues on a daily basis as part of what has been widely recognized, even by leading Israeli Holocaust and genocide scholars such as Omer Bartov and Raz Segal, to be an outright genocidal campaign by the neo-fascist Benjamin Netanyahu government. None of this horror would be happening if it were not for the full support provided to Netanyahu’s government by the United States and, to a lesser extent, by some of its key allies. Americans and Europeans alike have as much Palestinian blood on their hands as the Israelis themselves.
Notwithstanding interstate cooperation and the evolution of international law, the international system remains fundamentally anarchic. One of the most important provisions in the Charter of the United Nations, Article 2(4), prohibits the use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the organization. As a global hegemon, the U.S. has consistently sough to assert its dominant position internationally by acting in violation of the Charter. The use of force against Iran, both by Israel and the U.S., is in clear violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and amounts therefore to a crime of aggression. Yet, there is no international authority to punish Israel and the U.S. for their unlawful actions. Not only that, but both the U.S. presidency and U.S. lawmakers, as well as Israel’s intelligence agencies, are audacious enough to threaten an independent international organization like the International Criminal Court for pursuing international justice. Both Israel and the U.S. feel exempt from accountability for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide simply because of their overwhelming military power and because of the lack of an overarching authority to enforce rules.
And then, of course, there is Europe’s hypocrisy over Israeli and U.S. aggression against Iran. Consider, for example, the pathetic response of G7 leaders to the conflict between Israel and Iran, which started with the former launching blistering attacks on the latter’s nuclear and military structure. Instead of condemning the Netanyahu government for engaging in yet another display of state-sponsored terrorism by “bombing its way to a new neighborhood” as part of a strategic plan to change the face of the Middle East, the leaders of some of the world’s major liberal democracies issued a statement asserting that Israel has the right to defend itself, thereby endorsing its actions, and identified Iran as “the principle source of regional instability and terror.” If propaganda is the intentional twisting of facts, the European Union’s (EU) response to Israel’s crime of aggression against Iran is so surreal that it doesn’t even qualify as propaganda.
The EU’s response to the U.S. strikes on Iran was equally astonishing and jaw-dropping. No European leader dared to condemn Donald Trump’s strikes on Iran. In fact, German chancellor Friedrich Merz said outright that “there is no reason to criticize” either U.S. or Israeli bombing of Iran. But as the Brussels-based foreign policy expert and non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft Eldar Mamedov pointed out “This hypocrisy does more than expose EU moral posturing -- it actively erodes the foundations of international law and the much-vaunted ‘rules-based international order.”’
And then one wonders why there is such strong anti-establishment sentiment in contemporary democracies.
Be that as it may, it is about time that we put an end to the myth of Trump as the “peacemaker” president. He is a warmonger as well as a serial liar and a world-class hypocrite.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Is No Peace President. Call Him the Proliferation President
Weapons contractors could not be happier, but for the rest of us the state of world affairs is beyond alarming.
Apr 23, 2025
Much to my astonishment, some voters thought Donald Trump might be a “peace president.” I never bought it, so won’t outline the case for such magical thinking here, but his major increase already excessive U.S. weapons transfers to Israel as it continues its illegal genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, and recent, contradictory statements by Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio regarding working to end Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine, or throwing in the towel on diplomacy, should by now have disabused anyone that Trump is a consistent peace advocate.
In the wake of his and Elon Musk’s taking a sledgehammer to all manner of government programs, in both domestic and foreign policy, there is real concern more countries than the current nine—the U.S., Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea, which are all upgrading their nuclear arsenals, at an exorbitant opportunity cost to be paid in unmet human and environmental needs—might decide to build their own nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, the view is one of unpredictability, rather than stability, coming from Washington. That should frighten us all. So Donald Trump looks now to be more of a Proliferation President than a Peace President.
In an interview last fall with Fox News personality Sean Hannity, President-Elect Donald Trump stated, “nuclear weapons are the biggest problem we have.” Were he prone to reflection and self-accountability (admittedly a laughably far-fetched notion), Trump might admit he exacerbated the problem in his first term in office.
Trump petulantly pulled the U.S. out of the multilateral Iran anti-nuclear deal, which had effectively capped Iran’s nuclear program well short of the ability to produce The Bomb. Now his administration is exploring a new agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear program, and/or threatening to bomb Iran if it doesn’t agree to whatever he proposes. To Trump’s credit, he recently told Israel not to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, which it would need U.S. military assistance including in-air refueling to do, though Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hasn’t given up on the idea. The world, already aflame in too many places, holds its breath.
Moreover, Trump ditched the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and the Open Skies Treaty. He infamously threatened North Korea with “fire and fury” before embarking on failed, bizarre bromance summits with Kim Jong Un. Just last week the U.S. flew nuclear capable bombers over North Korea on the birthday of its founder, Kim Il Sung. The North Korean government understandably viewed the U.S. war drills with South Korea as a “grave provocation” and threatened unspecified retaliation. Meanwhile, nuclear weapons and overall Pentagon spending soared, under Biden and now Trump, to over $1 trillion per year. Weapons contractors could not be happier, but for the rest of us, the state of world affairs is beyond alarming.
After four years in which former President Joe Biden did little to correct these problems, the world faces Trump anew with considerable trepidation. Might he reverse course and embrace an historic opportunity to halt the new arms race and pursue nuclear cuts? He can’t just be trusted to do so, though perhaps his ego (desire for a Nobel Peace Prize?) and whatever strange symbiotic authoritarian relationship he has with Russian President Vladimir Putin might factor in. Trump is planning a military parade in Washington on his birthday in June, and wants to build Golden Dome, a Star Wars-type missile defense system over the U.S., which again might well spur other countries to increase their nuclear weapons in order to overwhelm such a system, whether it would work to protect the United States (highly unlikely) or not.
Regardless, history shows us that progress toward peace, disarmament, and enhanced global security for all only happens with sustained public pressure. It can’t be left only to capricious politicians. The wild card of Trump aside, there needs to be a two-track strategy to advance an anti-nuclear, pro-disarmament agenda.
On the one hand, those who have realistic ideas about increasing world peace need to continue advocating prudent steps to reduce the nuclear danger via international disarmament diplomacy; rejecting Sole Authority for any president to launch a nuclear first strike; declaring a No First Use of nuclear weapons policy for the United States, regardless of who is in the White House; cutting funding for the New Arms Race (the estimated $1.7 trillion over thirty years “nuclear modernization” scheme, especially the Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, which doesn’t work and is absurdly over budget, and other new nuclear weapons systems); and building support for the UN’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
On the other hand, while President Trump is unpredictable—and could possibly leverage several factors to pursue nuclear weapons reductions with Russia, China (very doubtful), and possibly other states—the Dr. Strangeloves in the “defense establishment” are pushing hard for the possible resumption of full-scale nuclear weapons explosive testing, which the U.S. has eschewed since 1992, and possibly exceeding New START deployment limits of 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads for both Russia and the U.S. That treaty, the only one remaining that limits U.S. and Russia’s deployed nuclear arsenals, is set to expire February 4, 2026, with no talks to extend or improve it ongoing. The Nukes Forever crowd propose increasing funding for and accelerating new nuclear weapons systems and warhead factories, and limiting congressional oversight while streamlining approval for such unproven programs, and more.
Anyone who cares about U.S. and global security needs to oppose, and in some cases work to pre-empt, such steps toward the nuclear brink. Stopping any move to resume nuclear weapons testing might well be key to reviving broad domestic and global opposition to nuclear weapons.
A clear eyed analysis shows Trump has never shown genuine interest in peace except for possible political gain. Then there is his bizarre bond with his tyrannical counterpart, Vladimir Putin, at the expense of Ukraine's (and Europe's) independence. This Trump-Putin relationship, along with Trump's fanciful yet terrifying imperialist goals (including possible conquest of Panama, Greenland, Gaza, and maybe Canada) and the high stakes economic, political and possibly military competition with China, make him seem much more militaristic than pacific.
So those expecting Trump to be a Peace President are likely to be sorely disappointed. The rest of us should remain vigilant and advocate opportunities for real progress toward peace and disarmament.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Video Campaign, Renowned Iranians Call for 'More Peaceful Tomorrow'
Urging Congress to support Iran nuclear deal, one renowned Iranian political prisoner recorded his message from inside a prison cell
Aug 25, 2015
To highlight the human rights implications of the proposed nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5+1 nations, dozens of Iranian civil society leaders and pro-democracy activists have launched a new social media campaign expressing their support for the deal in a series of short, moving videos.
Many of the campaign's participants have been persecuted in Iran for their beliefs or activism, sentenced to house arrest or lengthy prison terms. Others who recorded videos include celebrated filmmaker Jafar Panahi, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi, and human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh. One renowned Iranian political prisoner, Zia Nabavi--currently serving a sentence of ten years on charges of "creating unease in the public mind"--recorded his message from inside a prison cell.
"While one cannot be sure of what the future may hold, it can be said that the Iran Deal is a better choice for all of us as it demonstrates a more hopeful and peaceful tomorrow," Nabavi says.
"Those who have paid the highest price for the cause of democracy and human rights in Iran support the nuclear deal, not despite their pro-democracy and human rights activism, but precisely because of it."
--Mohamadreza Jalaeipour, Green Movement
"I support the Iran deal because I strongly believe that sanctions are violating the human rights of the Iranian people and more importantly because I support security and peace," says Ghoncheh Ghavami, the British-Iranian student who was jailed in 2014 for trying to attend a men's volleyball game. "It's time for Americans to contact their representatives in Congress and ask them to vote for peace. The whole world is watching."
Despite a well-funded opposition campaign, the Obama administration is "clearly winning the battle over the Iran deal," National Iranian American Council (NIAC) president Trita Parsi declared on Tuesday. It has done so "largely by focusing on the undeniable non-proliferation benefits of the deal."
"Put simply," Parsi wrote, "the deal ensures that two disasters are avoided: The disaster of Iran getting a nuclear bomb and the disaster of going to war with Iran."
But there are "numerous other benefits with this deal," he continued. "Dividends that the Obama administration have not relied on to seal the deal, but that are equally valid. One is how it improves the prospects for Iran moving in a positive direction internally regarding democratization and human rights."
And that aspect is what the new video campaign aims to underscore.
"We did this to show the American public and the world that not only the overwhelming majority of Iranians but also almost all leading Iranian human rights and pro-democracy activists, political prisoners, and independent voices of Iran's civil society wholeheartedly support the Iran Deal," Mohamadreza Jalaeipour, a former political prisoner who is at the helm of the video project, explained to Parsi.
"Those who have paid the highest price for the cause of democracy and human rights in Iran support the nuclear deal, not despite their pro-democracy and human rights activism, but precisely because of it," he said.
Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) formally announced Tuesday that she would support the agreement. Politico noted that this move brings the Obama administration closer to the 34 votes needed in the Senate to sustain any presidential veto of the resolution of disapproval on the nuclear deal.
"I support this deal because I believe it puts us in a better and stronger position to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons now and in the future," Murray said. "This deal gives us more tools to respond--not less, and it keeps the international community behind us in that effort."
"Just five more Senators need to endorse the agreement to ensure that a forthcoming resolution of disapproval can be blocked," NIAC Action said in a press statement.
"This deal is proving that it can stand on its own merits, but the battle is far from won," NIAC Action said. "Opponents of the agreement are already looking to additional legislation that could complicate implementation and kill the deal. The more lawmakers that come out in support now, the stronger the firewall will protect the agreement. It's time for other key Senators who have not announced their decision...to give peace a chance by publicly endorsing this deal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular