

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
It’s like someone burning down your house and then expecting you to be thankful because they thought it was ugly.
In his recent social media diatribes, Donald Trump has complained that our allies are ungrateful for the war he has initiated against Iran. He is angered that they aren’t anxious to send in their military forces to win a war that he claims is already won. Trump also doesn’t seem to think it matters that he never consulted, or even warned, any US allies, with the notable exception of Israel.
To anyone not in the Trump cult, these complaints qualify as batshit crazy. Trump’s war is a massive whack to economies across the world. These countries are not grateful for an economic hit that is equivalent to a massive weather disaster or serious pandemic.
How bad the economic hit ends up being depends on both how long the war continues and the lasting damage it does to physical facilities. But a cheap and easy calculation is to look at how much the rise in oil prices costs countries relative to the size of their economies.
This is the picture based on the assumption that oil prices have risen $40 a barrel from the pre-war level and remain there for a full year. I don’t have a crystal ball that tells me whether prices will stay at this level. There are many analysts arguing that they could go considerably higher. And if the Hormuz Straits are opened soon, whether by military action or a peace agreement, they will presumably move most of the way back to their pre-war level. But a $40 rise should be a reasonable starting point.

As I noted previously, the countries of Asia look to be the hardest hit from these price increases. South Korea would be spending an additional amount equal to 2.2 percent of GDP for its oil, followed by India at 1.8 percent, and Canada at 1.4 percent. For a benchmark, 1.5 percent of GDP in the United States would be around $3,700 per household.
This measure of the economic hit is far from complete. In addition to higher oil prices, the price of natural gas has doubled in Europe and Asia. Prices of other exports from the Gulf region, notably fertilizers, have also soared. In addition, the rest of the world has at least temporarily lost a major market for its exports.
There are also some positive entries. For countries outside the Gulf region that are major oil exporters, notably Canada, Brazil, and Mexico, the jump in oil prices is a windfall. But the hit in terms of higher oil prices can give a good first approximation of the costs our allies are bearing as a result of the war for which Trump says they should be grateful.
The Trumpian argument is the Iranian regime was dangerous, and everyone should be glad to see it weakened, if not actually overthrown. There are few who would look to Iran as any sort of model country. It has killed and imprisoned tens of thousands of its own people. And it did build up a considerable military force, making itself at least potentially a threat to the rest of the world.
But the Iranian regime hardly has a monopoly in these categories. If we’re looking around for repressive militaristic regimes, North Korea would almost certainly top everyone’s list. And we don’t have to worry that North Korea will develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. It already has them. There hasn’t been any talk of attacking North Korea. In fact, Trump still boasts about his “love letter” from its leader, Kim Jung Un.
Similarly, Saudi Arabia sits on the other side of the Persian Gulf. It is still ruled by a feudal monarchy that has no pretense of being democratic. It routinely arrests, tortures, and kills dissidents, and explicitly discriminates against women. Saudi Arabia also has developed substantial military capabilities. And it hasn’t been shy about taking its war against dissidents overseas, notably killing Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist who was a US resident, in its embassy in Turkey. Trump doesn’t seem to be planning any wars against Saudi Arabia. In fact, its de facto ruler, Mohammed bin Salman, is a friend of Trump’s and family business partner.
There is no shortage of countries with undemocratic governments that Trump has not felt the need to attack. It is also worth mentioning that there is some relevant recent history here. Few would argue that Saddam Hussein was a good guy. But it would be hard to argue that the Iraqi people or the world was better off by having him deposed.
The same would be true for the Taliban in Afghanistan. In that case, after 20 years of war and occupation, the country is back to where it was before the invasion in 2001. Similarly, Moammar Quadafy was a brutal dictator, but his overthrow in 2011 led to a civil war in Libya that continues to the present. It would be hard to contend that either the world or the Libyan people are better off from this military intervention.
The bottom line here is that Donald Trump somehow thinks that US allies in Europe and Asia should be thankful to him for starting a war that is tremendously costly to them and provides them little obvious benefit. It’s like someone burning down your house and then expecting you to be thankful because they thought it was ugly. That may make sense to Donald Trump, but not to anyone else in the world.
The US and Israel may have started this war, but it won’t be so easily ended. The damage done to Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine will be with us for a generation.
The costs associated with any war—losses of lives, treasure, and security—are to be expected. And so it is with the US-Israel war on Iran. It was unnecessary. It has been massive. And it has been waged without any clear objective or strategic purpose. Though only a few weeks old, and still too early to project how it will play out, early signs of this war’s costs and consequences are worrisome.
The amounts of weapons that the US and Israel have dropped on Iranian targets have had a devastating impact on Iran’s people and the country’s infrastructure and resources. It is difficult to imagine that this situation can be remedied any time soon. As a result, Iran, which was already struggling with a flagging economy and a reform-minded and restive population, will most likely endure years of political unrest met by massive repression.
Once illegally attacked by the US and Israel, instead of seeking support from neighboring Arab countries, Iran has struck out at them with a vengeance, destroying some of their infrastructure and economic resources. While the Arab Gulf states can recover, the fragile rapprochement that had been developing between them and Iran has been shattered and will not be easily rebuilt.
A disruption in the supply of oil and gas has resulted from Iran’s choking of the Straits of Hormuz and Israel’s and Iran’s bombings of oil and gas facilities on both sides of the Gulf. This has caused a steep rise in the price of fuel, a sharp decline in the stock market, and the loss of hundreds of billions in overall wealth of investments and pension funds. The war’s economic impacts will continue to reverberate throughout the remainder of the year.
This isn’t the first time that Israel or the US have looked at what they had done to these countries and their peoples and said, “Well, that’s finished,” only to find that the devastating toll of the losses they inflicted and dislocation they created produced a festering bitterness that didn’t dissipate in time.
Meanwhile, the excessive amounts of weaponry so far expended in the war has resulted in reported shortages in both the US and Israel, with President Donald Trump asking Congress to approve an additional $200 billion for the Pentagon and a substantial increase in Israel’s military assistance. As with Ukraine and Gaza, the only winners of this war appear to be the US arms manufacturers.
The damage done doesn’t stop there. The Lebanese Hezbollah forgot that Israel never plays by the rules. They responded to Israel’s murder of Iran’s Ayatollah—a spiritual leader for many Shi’a Muslims—by firing a few shells across their border. Despite the fact that Israel has daily violated its five-month-old ceasefire with Lebanon, Israel used Hezbollah’s shelling to launch a sustained and disproportionate attack on Lebanon. To date, Israel has killed over 1,000 Lebanese, has destroyed entire neighborhoods in Beirut, and has ordered almost one-quarter of Lebanon’s people to flee their homes, exacerbating existing sectarian divisions in the country. Israeli forces now appear to be preparing for a longer-term Israeli occupation of Lebanon’s south. This occupation will likely fare no better than the last time Israel attempted it from the late 1970s to 2000.
As if this weren’t enough, Israel’s far-right government has used the cover of war to consolidate annexation of the West Bank. Plans have been accelerated to evacuate and destroy Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley to build a “security wall.” Since the war began, the number of attacks by settlers (with the support of Israeli troops) on Palestinian villages has dramatically increased, now averaging 10 a day. These military and vigilante actions have involved deaths and injuries, land theft, and destruction of homes and properties (including orchards and livestock). While Israel’s intent to take full control of all of Palestine has been steadily proceeding in recent years, the actions of the past few weeks are making it all but irreversible.
Meanwhile, the Gaza genocide continues. The attention of the world may be focused elsewhere, but the nearly 2 million Palestinians who remain in that devastated strip continue to suffer from hunger, lack of proper shelter, sanitation, and medical and other essential support services. There is no way to understand the long-term impact this “hell on earth” existence will have on Gaza’s children. But an educated guess would be that it won’t be good.
At this point, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is strutting around as if he were the “Middle East Overlord.” At the same time, there are conflicting reports that the US is either attempting to “wind down” the war or to send ground troops to Iran to “finish the job.” Both are ill-founded. Whatever Trump’s intention, it is a fool’s errand. There is no winding down, nor is there a job to finish.
The US and Israel may have started this war, but it won’t be so easily ended. The damage done to Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine will be with us for a generation. This isn’t the first time that Israel or the US have looked at what they had done to these countries and their peoples and said, “Well, that’s finished,” only to find that the devastating toll of the losses they inflicted and dislocation they created produced a festering bitterness that didn’t dissipate in time. Beware the reckoning.
We reject war. But for wars to end, truth must be spoken openly and without hesitation. Journalists must be allowed to work without fear or intimidation. Media ownership must not become a mechanism of control and censorship.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appears to have little patience for questions that do not conform to his preferred style of declaring unsubstantiated victories, whether against South Americans or in the Middle East.
In a charged press conference on March 13, Hegseth did more than attack journalists for questioning his unverified claims about the course of the war in the Middle East. He singled out CNN, introducing a troubling dimension to the conversation. “The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better,” he said.
Ellison, a close ally of President Donald Trump and a strong supporter of Israel, is widely considered the front-runner to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, the parent company that owns CNN. If there was any lingering doubt that such acquisitions are driven by political and ideological considerations, Hegseth’s remarks dispelled it.
Such statements reflect a broader shift in how the media is viewed by segments of the US ruling class, particularly under the Trump administration. During both of his presidential terms, Trump has invested much of his public discourse not in unifying the nation but in deploying deeply hostile language against journalists who question his policies, rhetoric, or political conduct.
At this moment, journalists, intellectuals, and people of conscience must speak the truth in all its manifestations, using every available platform and opportunity.
“The fake news media is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American people,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on February 18, repeating a phrase that has become central to his political lexicon.
Yet American media entered this confrontation with little public trust to begin with, though for reasons that have little to do with Trump’s own political agenda. A 2025 Gallup poll found that only 28% of Americans trust the mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly, one of the lowest levels recorded in recent decades.
Historically, this mistrust has co-existed with Americans’ skepticism toward their government—any government, regardless of political orientation. But what is unfolding today appears qualitatively different. The long-standing alignment between political power, corporate interests, and media narratives now seems to be fracturing under the weight of widespread public distrust.
In Israel, however, the situation takes a different form. Mainstream media often mirrors the militant posture of the government itself, translating political belligerence into broad public support for war—whether in Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, or wherever Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu chooses to expand the battlefield.
Public opinion data illustrates this dynamic clearly. A survey released on March 4 by the Israel Democracy Institute found that 82% of the Israeli public supported the ongoing military campaign against Iran, including 93% of Israeli Jews.
Such figures reflect a media and political environment in which dissenting voices remain marginal and frequently isolated.
“With this kind of media, there’s no point in fighting for a free press, because the media itself is not on the side of freedom,” Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote in Haaretz on March 12.
While there is little that can realistically be done to shift the dominant Israeli narrative from within Israel itself, journalists elsewhere carry an immense responsibility. They must adhere to the most basic standards of journalistic integrity now more than ever.
This responsibility does not apply only to journalists in the United States or across the Western world. It applies equally to journalists throughout the Middle East. After all, it is our region that is being drawn into wars not of its own making, and it is our societies that have the most to gain from a just and lasting peace.
Over the past two years—particularly during Israel’s genocide on Gaza—we have seen just how difficult it has become to convey reality from the ground. Journalists have confronted censorship, propaganda campaigns, algorithmic suppression, intimidation, and outright violence.
Yet the consequences of this information crisis are far from abstract. When truth disappears, civilians suffer in silence. Political decisions are justified through distorted narratives. Wars themselves become easier to prolong when the public is denied the facts necessary to challenge them.
For years, many of us warned that if the promoters of war and chaos were not restrained, the entire region could descend into a cycle of deliberate destabilization. If this trajectory continues, our shared aspirations will suffer for generations. Our collective prosperity—already fragile—could be permanently undermined.
This struggle is not merely about journalistic integrity, nor even about truth telling as an ethical imperative. It is about the fate of entire societies whose futures are deeply interconnected. In our region, we either rise together or fall together.
Governments across the Arab and Muslim world warned against the military adventurism now engulfing the Middle East long before the current escalation. Their warnings went largely unheeded, and the consequences are now unfolding.
At this moment, journalists, intellectuals, and people of conscience must speak the truth in all its manifestations, using every available platform and opportunity.
We reject war. But for wars to end, truth must be spoken openly and without hesitation. Journalists must be allowed to work without fear or intimidation. Media ownership must not become a mechanism of control and censorship.
Politicians and generals risk reputational damage, the loss of office, or perhaps the disappearance of a generous holiday bonus if their wars fail. For the people of the Middle East—and for all victims of war—the stakes are far greater. We risk losing our families, our economies, our homes, and the very possibility of a stable future.
For that reason, gratitude is owed to the courageous individuals who continue to speak truth to power; to those who insist on unity during moments deliberately engineered to produce division; and to those who understand that honest journalism is not merely a profession.
It is a moral obligation.