What you wrote can only be written by someone who does not live in the West. We have been conditioned for decades that there are no military solutions, only political ones and that the era of conquests was over in 1945. The US is a special case, but even the US have a tendency to use the “there is only a political solution” language which is so ingrained in the western psyche in Europe.
Why else do you think there are calls in the West for ceasefires in Gaza ? It is the old “there is no military solution”, it is insane to let this go on etc. But israel does not care, it wants victory and sees opportunities. The natural state of war is that it is waged until there is a clear victor and one state capitulates. Sometimes historically, there has been white peace and back to status quo ante bellum. But generally one side wins and only then is there a political settlement. The ceasefire, ceasefire calls (to force parties into ceasefires before wars are resolved) is a relic of post 1945 World Order (i.e that wars should not be fought to their conclusion but stopped with poltical deals and ceasefire). As you have observed with pain, this era is over and most in the West (and elsewhere in the world where states have learned to rely on norms and international law) do not yet get it. Russia broke the nr.1 post 1945 rule. The most important rule of all. They invaded for conquest of territory,by far the worst crime in the UN charter and the one the rest of the charter relies on. And they are not being stopped. Why then is there an expectation that other regional powers, like Israel, would stop short of victory unless they themselves are defeated?
There are ways to stop actors like Israel and Russia, but it requires a lot of effort and not words or calls to respect laws or norms.
My point is that the Era of Ceasefires seems to be over and it is no longer the natural state in armed conflicts (previously, it was unthinkable that the world would let Israel fight with full power for more than 14 days, and Israel’s military plans took it into account and they were only planning for very short intense wars; since the Security council would call for ceasefires). We are back to pre 1945.
Which of those have worked out for them? Afghanistan was a hole into which they poured wealth and blood for a generation, only to see exactly the same parties back in charge in a matter of weeks when they pulled out. Iraq was a quagmire that at least changed regimes, but has left a regional vacuum that has caused massive problems over a generation. Going back, Vietnam was a fiasco. Libya toppled a dictator and left chaos and a vastly worsened migration problem. The lower level military interventions have a chequered history as well, Serbia-Kosovo left unnecessary bitterness to achieve what probably would have been possible without the direct use of force. Somalia was a bloody micro-disaster akin to Yemen now.
There are a couple of dualities in American foreign policy thinking, where for both one of the poles is isolationism.
Yes, US created a mess, got into a mess, and left behind a mess. Then they created another mess…the cycle continues. Does that reflect that they were unconvinced about military solution?
Your framing assumes a monolithic decision-making, when the reality has been more like a sine-wave. The isolationist stream of American thinking about the world is very much in ascendancy, where in the Bush Jr era the neocons were very much in the internationalist stream. The internationalists are perversely both the proponents of a stable international rules-based order, and the most prone to arbitrary military intervention.
Iran really needs US help now. Their calls for US intervention and promise to submit to new nuclear deal with harsher terms is desperation, but the only chance they have is Trump and I doubt they have enough to offer him to stop Israel.
Because as far as much of the world is concerned, Israel is doing very dirty work that much of the world, in all honesty, doesn’t really mind ( extremely few states wants Iran to break out with nuclear weapons). So calls for ceasefires will be muted, and rather, there is probably more a grim hope that Israel will be successful and not fuck up (everyone fears they will do that exactly).
It’s not ignored. Almost all of the world supported JPOAC, but Trump torpedoed that one. But since it is gone and all.
A nucler deal in some form, was always the alternative to bombing. But Iran must take some blame, as they misread and overplay their hand when in a weak position. They have not been rushing into a new deal despite the specter of Israeli intervention looming.
Worth noting also that many of the greatest supporters of JPOAC supported it prinncipally because of very strong doubts (and fears) that a bombing campaign to stop their nuclear program would ultimately fail due to the dug in nature of the program. This remains to be seen.
Iran is doing so now today, asking the US to stop Israel and etc.
Regarding submitting, yes that is how the pre 1945 world worked,Ifthikar. You sumbit to the powerful in geopolitical disputes, protected yourself in alliances, or you were crushed.
Iran was supposed to be in the negotiating table on Sunday, before Israel hit them on Friday, Iran is the bad guy, don’t let the world forget that. Besides, Also, as if sticking to their part would have averted any conflict. Just as Gaza is experiencing.
But my point is that they are asking for this, today. If Iran would have not enriched Uranium to 60% as leverage for talks (not usuable in civilian industry), this attack would hardly have happened. Likewise, Gaza is not experiencing a natural disaster, but a direct result of strategic insanity by Hamas. Israel’s exaggerated war crimes is irrelevant in that context, everyone and their dog could have seen that coming as a response.
So yes, Iran (and Hamas) has agency. They have brains. They are humans. Ergo, they are also responsible when their ploys and plays backfire spectacularly in the face of a much superior enemy that they both managed to give fucking carte blanchè by acting irresponnsibly.
Why on earth should the Russians rush into a ceasefire ??? Only Trump is idiot enough to believe that when it is against the imperial interests of Russia to cease fire! The rest of us are adults and know that Russia must be forced into a ceasefire, which is why so many of us are up in arms and screaming loudly that no one is using enough leverage to force them to consider negotiations.
But just to be crystal clear. You seem to think that I don’t agree with your moral points, but I do. I just ignore them on purpose because this is what a multi polar world truly actually means and I don’t want to repeat myself.
Me ? I am a proponent for International Law. I want it to matter. But it doesn’t right now. Only parts of International Law is respected today by Great Powers and Regional Powers (and with these guys, law matters only if they agree to respect it). One cannot ignore this fact, I think, and pretend that it is 1999. I would love it to be 1999, but it is not.
And there won’t be. What is happening in Gaza and Ukraine is a lot worse on all parameters. Iran has no friends who dares take a stand for it. But it has a large collection of enemies, all of whom wants to see it’s nuclear program shelved.
