The Delusion Of The Trump Ceasefire
The Delusion Of The Trump Ceasefire
Trump saves the day the media will have you believe. By applying his now infamous aptitude for striking a deal, he has ended the war with Iran.
“Israel Agrees to Truce With Iran After Trump Push to End War” (Bloomberg)
“Israel Iran live: Trump says ceasefire now in effect, hours after Tehran fired missiles at US base” (Reuters)
“Israel agrees to ceasefire with Iran as Trump tells both countries 'do not violate it” (BBC)
We forget that Trump started the war by blessing Netanyahu’s attack on Iran and funding Israel’s endeavours. I do not believe for a moment that Israel would attack Iran without the blessing of their biggest supporter - Donald Trump.
Trump, acting without the approval of congress initiated a war with another nation without being attacked and without providing any proof that attacking Iran was a necessity. Although ineffective, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the US constitution grants Congress the exclusive power to declare war, while Article II, Section 2 designates the president as commander-in-chief.
Netanyahu, who has proved that he is more than willing to start a war in order to secure his position as supreme leader of Israel has not provided any proof for his stated reasons to attack Iran.
They are not the only world leaders (if there is such a thing) that put their hypocrisy on full display.
“German Chancellor Friedrich Merz welcomed Trump's call for a sequential ceasefire between Israel and Iran, and appealed to the two parties to adhere to it.” (Reuters). Again he ignores Trump’s hand in starting the war.
EU leaders Kaja Kallas and Ursula von der Leyen omit the fact that the strikes on Iran are in clear violation of International law. Under the UN Charter, the use of force is prohibited except in two specific circumstances:
Self-defence against an imminent attack, and
With Security Council authorization
Neither of these conditions were met.
Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt made a strong statement condemning the U.S. strikes as a violation of international law. On social media platform X, he wrote: "I don't want to hear any 🇪🇺 statement that the 🇺🇸 has the right to defend itself. This is a clearcut violation of international law”. He is correct.
On June 15th von der Leyen stated:
“We are following with deep concern the situation, following Israel's strikes on Iran and the Iranian response. I spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu today. I reiterated Europe's commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. In this context, Israel has the right to defend itself.”
Read that statement again. Committed to peace and security, but “Israel has the right to defend itself” (they were not attacked by Iran). This statement, coming from Israel’s largest trading partner, the EU is riddled with paradox . More than that, it is an insult to any intelligent human following this crisis of leadership.
Israel would have you believe that they are doing the world a favour by attacking and angling to remove a theocracy. Netanyahu began his September 27, 2024 UN General Assembly speech by referencing Moses speaking to the Israelites about entering the Promised Land, citing Deuteronomy chapters 27 and 28 about choosing between "a blessing or a curse”.
"Ladies and gentlemen, over three millennia ago, as they were about to enter the Promised Land, Moses spoke to the people of Israel. He said they would find there two mountains facing one another – Mount Gerizim, the site on which a great blessing would be proclaimed, and Mount Ebal, the site of a great curse"
He concluded by citing 1 Samuel 15:29, translating it as "The eternity of Israel will not falter"
Are we to believe that Israel, though not a theocracy, is not influenced by its religion? They are close to a theocracy. Religious parties hold unprecedented power in Netanyahu's current coalition government. The coalition consists of six parties, with three being religious: United Torah Judaism, Shas, and the Religious Zionist Party. These religious parties represent theocratic communities that would enforce religious prohibitions over democratic liberties.
And who decides which religion is the best religion? The side that falls in line with the USA has the correct religion-that is the answer.
When analysing conflicts, examine the constitutional frameworks leaders violate, the international laws they selectively apply, and the economic relationships that silence criticism.
Trump's unauthorised strikes, Netanyahu's religious rhetoric driving policy, and von der Leyen's contradictory statements all demonstrate Orwell's truth: 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others'—a reality where U.S. and Israeli rule-breaking faces no consequences while others are punished for far less.