Directive To Iran: Retaliation Bad; De-Escalation Good
De-escalation has become one of those coarse words in severe need of banishment, best kept in an index used by unredeemable hypocrites. It is used by the living dead in human resources, management worthies and war criminals. It's almost always used to target the person or entity that exerts retribution or seeks to avenge (dramatic) or merely overcome (mildly) a state of affairs imposed upon them.
You might be bullied in the workplace for being fastidious and conscientious, showing up your daft colleagues, or reputationally attacked by a member of the establishment keen to conceal his corrupt practices. When contemplating retaliation, the self-appointed middle ground types will call upon you to 'de-escalate' the situation, insisting that you appeal to the better side of your bruised nature. After all, you know it was your fault.
The joining of the United States in the war against Iran made Washington a co-conspirator to soiling international law and profaning its salient provisions. The US was in no immediate danger, nor was there any imminent threat, existential or otherwise, to its interests vis-à-vis Tehran. Yet President Donald Trump, having had the poison of persuasion poured into his ear by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had succumbed. His will annexed to that of the Israeli premier, Trump ordered the US Air Force on June 22 to conduct bombing raids on three Iranian nuclear facilities: Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow. They were recipients of that hefty example of phallocratic lethality known as the bunker buster, the GBU-57A Massive Ordnance Penetrator. With his usual unwavering confidence, Trump declared in an address to the nation that all the country's 'nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.'
In violating international law and desecrating that important canon injuncting states from committing crimes against peace, Israel and the United States are not the ones being told to restrain their violence and acknowledge breaching the United Nations Charter, risking yet another conflagration in the Middle East. It is their targeted state, the Republic of Iran, whose officials must 'de-escalate' and play nice before the diplomatic table, abandoning a nuclear program, civil or military. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East,' Trump directs, 'must now make peace.'
With suddenness, the advocates and publicists for international law vanished across the broadly described West. In Europe, Canada, the US and Australia, the mores and customs observed by states could be conveniently forgotten and retired. In its place reigned the logic of brute force and unquestioned violence. Provided such violence is exercised by that rogue combine of Amerisrael, deference and dispensation will be afforded. The same could never be said for such countries as China and Russia, abominated for not accepting the 'rules-based order' imposed by Western weaponry and force.
The lamentable, plaintiff responses from Brussels to Canberra tell a sorry tale: pre-emptive war waged against a country's nuclear and oil facilities is just the sort of thing that one is allowed to do, since the rotter in question is a theocratic state of haughty disposition and regional ambition. You can get away with murdering scientists in their sleep, along with their families, liquidating the upper echelons of their military leadership and killing journalists along the way.
The approved formula behind these responses is as follows. From the outset, mention that Iran must never acquire a nuclear weapon. If possible, underline any relevant qualities that render it ineligible to any other state that has nuclear weapons. Instruct Tehran that diplomacy is imperative, and retaliation terrible. Behave and exercise restraint.
Here is Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of the UK, speaking from his Chequers country retreat: it was 'clear Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon', which was 'why our focus has been on de-escalating, getting people back around to negotiate what is a very real threat in relation to the nuclear program.' If one was left in any doubt who the guilty party was, UK Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds helped dispel it, calling Iran 'a threat to this country, not in an abstract way, not in a speculative way'.
The German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, after convening his security cabinet on the morning of June 22, conveyed his views through German government spokesperson Stefan Kornelius: 'Friedrich Merz reiterated his call for Iran to immediately begin negotiations with the US and Israel and to find a diplomatic solution to the conflict.'
French President Emmanuel Macron similarly got on the de-escalation bandwagon with gusto, giving a teacherly warning to Iran to 'exercise the greatest restraint' and dedicate itself to renouncing nuclear weapons. It was the only credible path to peace and security for all. The president conveniently skipped past the huge elephant in the room: Israel's illicit possession of nuclear weapons, undeclared, unmonitored and extra-legal, as a factor that severely compromises the issue of stability in the Middle East.
From the European Union, the attackers and the attacked were given equal billing. 'I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation,' urged Kaja Kallas, Vice-President of the European Commission. The obligatory 'Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, as it would be a threat to international security' followed. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also thought it perfectly sensible to matronly instruct the Iranians on the next step: 'Now is the moment for Iran to engage in a credible diplomatic solution. The negotiating table is the only way to end this crisis.'
All these comments are deliciously rich given that Israel has never entertained negotiations on any level with Iran, dismissive of its nuclear energy needs, while the first Trump administration sabotaged the diplomatically brokered Joint Plan of Comprehensive Action that successfully diverted Tehran away from a military nuclear program in favour of a lifting of sanctions. Talk from Amerisrael and their allies would seem to be heavily discounted, if not counterfeit. The glaring, coruscating message to Iran: retaliation bad; de-escalation good.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
29 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
NZX down 0.3% as world waits for Iranian response
The New Zealand sharemarket fell on Monday after the United States launched strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities over the long weekend. The benchmark S&P/NZX 50 Index dropped 0.29% to 12,532.65 points with 38 million shares worth $135.7m changing hands. On his Truth Social media platform, US President Donald Trump said
RNZ News
39 minutes ago
- RNZ News
NZDF Hercules heading to Middle East to help evacuate Kiwis
A defence force hercules is on route to an undisclosed location in the Middle East, to help evacuate New Zealanders from the conflict zone if its able to. Some air space has been closed since the bombing started between Israel and Iran. The plane will remain on standby in the region to assist if and when possible. President Trump claims US stealth bombers have "totally obliterated" key iranian nuclear facilities. Iran has warned of dangerous consequences. International law expert Associate Professor Anna Hood from the University of Auckland spoke to Lisa Owen. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
1News
2 hours ago
- 1News
US signals willingness to renew Iran talks to avoid prolonged war
The Trump administration has signalled a willingness to renew talks with Iran and avoid a prolonged war in the aftermath of a surprise attack on three of the country's nuclear sites as US officials assessed Tehran's nuclear ambitions and the threat of retaliation against American interests. US President Donald Trump, who had addressed the nation from the White House on Saturday night (Washington time), allowed his national security team to speak for him the next morning, staying quiet on social media and scheduling no public appearances. The coordinated messaging by his vice president, Pentagon chief, top military adviser and secretary of state suggested a confidence that any fallout from the attack would be manageable and that Iran's lack of military capabilities would ultimately force it back to the bargaining table. This image provided by the Department of Defense shows a chart that was displayed during a news conference by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine at the Pentagon in Washington (Source: Associated Press) Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said at a news conference that America 'does not seek war' with Iran while Vice President JD Vance said the strikes have given Tehran the possibility of returning to negotiate with Washington. ADVERTISEMENT 'Operation Midnight Hammer, involved decoys and deception and met with no Iranian resistance, according to Hegseth and Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 'This mission was not and has not been about regime change,' Hegseth added. Caine said the goal of the operation — destroying nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan — had been achieved. 'Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' Caine said. Vance said in a television interview that while he would not discuss 'sensitive intelligence about what we've seen on the ground,' he felt 'very confident that we've substantially delayed their development of a nuclear weapon.' Pressed further, he told NBC's Meet the Press that 'I think that we have really pushed their program back by a very long time. I think that it's going to be many many years before the Iranians are able to develop a nuclear weapon.' The vice president said the US had 'negotiated aggressively' with Iran to try to find a peaceful settlement and that Trump made his decision after assessing the Iranians were not acting 'in good faith.' "I actually think it provides an opportunity to reset this relationship, reset these negotiations and get us in a place where Iran can decide not to be a threat to its neighbors, not to a threat to the United States and if they're willing to do that, the United States is all ears,' Vance said. ADVERTISEMENT Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on CBS's Face the Nation that "there are no planned military operations right now against Iran, unless, unless they mess around and they attack" US interests. Maxar satellite image reveals multiple buildings damaged or destroyed at the Isfahan nuclear technology center after US airstrikes (Source: Maxar Technologies) Trump has previously threatened other countries, but often backed down or failed to follow through, given his promises to his coalition of voters not to entangle the United States in an extended war. It was not immediately clear whether Iran saw the avoidance of a wider conflict as in its best interests. Much of the world is absorbing the consequences of the strikes and the risk that they could lead to more fighting across the Middle East after the US inserted itself into the war between Israel and Iran. Airstrikes that began earlier this month by Israel targeted Iran's nuclear facilities and generals, prompting retaliation from Iran and creating a series of events that contributed to the US attack. While US officials urged for caution and stressed that only nuclear sites were targeted by Washington, Iran criticized the actions as a violation of its sovereignty and international law. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said Washington was 'fully responsible' for whatever actions Tehran may take in response. 'They crossed a very big red line by attacking nuclear facilities," he said at a news conference in Turkey. 'I don't know how much room is left for diplomacy.' ADVERTISEMENT China and Russia, where Araghchi was heading for talks with President Vladimir Putin, condemned the US military action. The attacks were 'a gross violation of international law,' said Russia's Foreign Ministry, which also advocated 'returning the situation to a political and diplomatic course.' A Turkish Foreign Ministry statement warned about the risk of the conflict spreading to 'a global level.' British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the United Kingdom was moving military equipment into the area to protect its interests, people and allies, but that he was focused on finding a solution. The leaders of Italy, Canada, Germany and France agreed on the need 'a rapid resumption of negotiations.' France's Emmanuel Macron held talks with the Saudi crown prince and sultan of Oman. Iran could try to stop oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz, which could create the same kind of inflationary shocks that the world felt after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Oil prices have increased in the financial markets as the war between Israel and Iran had intensified, climbing by 21% over the past month. The Pentagon briefing did not provide any new details about Iran's nuclear capabilities. Hegseth said the timeline for the strikes was the result of a schedule set by Trump for talks with Iran about its nuclear ambitions. 'Iran found out" that when Trump "says 60 days that he seeks peace and negotiation, he means 60 days of peace and negotiation," Hegseth said. "Otherwise, that nuclear program, that new nuclear capability will not exist. He meant it.' ADVERTISEMENT That statement was complicated as the White House had suggested last Thursday that Trump could take as much as two weeks to determine whether to strike Iran or continue to pursue negotiations. But the US benefited from Iran's weakened air defences as it was able to conduct the attacks without resistance from Iran. 'Iran's fighters did not fly, and it appears that Iran's surface-to-air missile systems did not see us throughout the mission," Caine said. Hegseth said that a choice to move a number of B-2 bombers from their base in Missouri earlier Saturday was meant to be a decoy to throw off Iranians. He added that the US used other methods of deception as well, deploying fighters to protect the B-2 bombers that dropped a total of 14 bunker-buster bombs on Iran's sites at Fordo and Natanz. The strikes occurred Saturday between 6:40 p.m. and 7:05 p.m. in Washington, or roughly 2:10 a.m. on Sunday in Iran.
