By design or accident, Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant
America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options.
Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability".
Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany.
Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts.
Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship.
In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement.
Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms.
Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not.
Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through.
By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing.
In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful.
Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack.
This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power.
For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion.
READ MORE:
It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction.
Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right.
Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs,
Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated."
Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself.
Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride.
America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options.
Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability".
Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany.
Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts.
Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship.
In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement.
Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms.
Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not.
Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through.
By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing.
In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful.
Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack.
This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power.
For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion.
READ MORE:
It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction.
Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right.
Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs,
Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated."
Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself.
Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride.
America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options.
Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability".
Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany.
Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts.
Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship.
In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement.
Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms.
Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not.
Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through.
By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing.
In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful.
Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack.
This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power.
For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion.
READ MORE:
It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction.
Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right.
Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs,
Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated."
Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself.
Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride.
America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options.
Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability".
Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany.
Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts.
Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship.
In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement.
Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms.
Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not.
Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through.
By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing.
In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful.
Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack.
This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power.
For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion.
READ MORE:
It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction.
Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right.
Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs,
Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated."
Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself.
Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Support for military action should depend on rule of law
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. WAR The recent US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities raise serious questions, not just about Iran's objectives, but about how military force is authorised in a democracy. President Donald Trump's decision to bypass Congress wasn't only constitutionally shaky, but it also set a dangerous precedent for unchecked executive power. Some have been quick to call any hesitation or push for diplomacy a sign of weakness. However, that's a simplistic view of a complex issue. Australia's decision to advocate for talks shows that we're thinking things through and sticking to what is right while keeping our long-term interests in mind. Backing our allies doesn't mean nodding along with every move they make. Our support should reflect our democratic values and respect for the rule of law. Bombs don't build peace; working together through proper channels has a much better chance of achieving it. Alistair McLellan, Yarrawonga Rethink alliance If only there were more Geoffrey Robertsons around to dispense incisive comment moulded by critical thinking (' Trump's rap sheet is long, but this may be his worst crime ', 23/6). The crux of the issue, with regards to the US' unprovoked bombing of another country, is entwined in the past efforts of United Nations members who, with honest intentions, strived to make the planet a safer, more secure place after the horrors of World War II. The UN has become hobbled by its own members. The fact that the Security Council has five permanent members of which two are actively engaged in 'aggressor actions' against fellow UN members speaks for itself. That these five countries have veto powers is beyond comprehension, and makes a mockery of the United Nations concept. President Trump, egged on by Benjamin Netanyahu, obviously never thought it through when he mulled over the idea of bombing Iran's alleged nuclear facilities. Australia has to tread carefully here and rethink its alliance with a potentially dangerous ally. David Legat, South Morang Iranian risks downplayed In downplaying Iran's threat to Israel, Geoffrey Robertson neither mentions the Iranian regime's 46-year-long commitment to destroy the Jewish state, nor that due to Iran, for over 20 months Israel has been fighting a war on as many as seven fronts. (And it's Israel who Iran primarily refers to as Little Satan, not the UK). Robertson is just another Israel critic who not only attempts to criminalise Israel's right to self defence, but who also condemns any other nation that assists Israel to this end. His likening of Saddam Hussein's 'mythical weapons of mass destruction' to Iran's nuclear program is absurd, given the atomic watchdog's explicit concerns about Iran's large stockpile of near weapons-grade uranium. Geoff Feren, St Kilda East Not all citizens In an effort to reduce conflating toxic governments with innocent people can we all make a concerted effort to add 'government' after talking about countries involved in current conflicts – Iran, Israel, Palestine, Russia, US – the list goes on. From talking to people from many of these countries in recent days, it strikes me that this distinction would make a difference to the racism experienced by citizens who did not ask to be led by dictators and zealots. Sara McMillan, Frankston South Slavish support As more reports surface that the US bombing of Iran was against international law, our relationship with the US seems to be undergoing change, (' PM stance marks shift from past ', 24/6). Our PM has now endorsed the attack, saying nothing about the legality of the action Australia must consider. Do we uphold international law or are we slavishly committed to support the US, the AUKUS deal and the erratic actions of Donald Trump? We can't have it both ways. For me, the law wins. Lorel Thomas, Blackburn South Nuclear powers Your correspondent seemingly sees no difference between the governments of Iran and Russia, and Israel and the US (Letters, 23/6), or why some can have nuclear weapons but Iran can't. Israel's Netanyahu is a democratically elected leader, like Trump, and has been fighting wars started and forced on his country by Iran and its proxies. They are determined to destroy the Jewish state, just as Russia is to destroy Ukraine. Neither the US nor Israel intend to destroy any state. Iran's regime, like Russia's, is autocratic, oppresses its own people, and strives for regional hegemony. Iran does so by having its proxies destabilise and cause violence throughout the region. A nuclear-armed Iran would be a total disaster for any prospect of Middle East peace. Unlike Israel, Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Agreement, which entitled it to international assistance in accessing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in exchange for refraining from developing nuclear weapons. It is clearly in breach of this agreement. Mark Kessel, Caulfield North History repeats Talk of regime change has reminded Age correspondents of disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan. Surviving CIA patriots who pursued US strategic and business interests in places like Central America, Vietnam, the Congo, Brazil and Chile – and many more – should probably be confined to their retirement communities. Norman Huon, Port Melbourne
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Donald Trump to meet Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky at NATO summit
Fresh from the ceasefire brokered between Iran and Israel - which appears to have been broken a matter of hours after it came into effect - US President Donald Trump is planning on meeting Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, a senior source in the Ukrainian presidency told AFP. The war-time leader has been a central figure at recent summits but given his fractious relationship with Trump, Zelensky has not been invited to the main working session with NATO members which begins on Tuesday local time. After much to-ing and fro-ing on Zelensky's part about whether the trip to the Netherlands would be worth it without a meeting with Trump, he has confirmed he will attend the two-day summit alongside the leaders of the 32 NATO members. 'The teams are finalising the details' of the meeting, the source told AFP, adding that the talks were scheduled for the 'early afternoon' in the Netherlands. The source added that the discussion would focus on Ukraine's 'purchase of a defence package, a large part of which consists of air defence systems'. The leaders would also discuss more 'sanctions against Russia, and a price cap on oil', the source added. Ukraine and its allies have sought to lower an existing oil cap imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine more than three years ago, from $60 to $45, to dent the Kremlin war chest. Trump so far has frustrated Western allies by refusing to impose new sanctions on Russia despite President Vladimir Putin's refusal to agree to a Ukraine ceasefire. Trump famously said during his election campaign that he would end the war in Ukraine 'in one day, 24 hours'. After brokering a short-lived ceasefire between Iran and Israel, he may be looking to advance plans to do the same in Ukraine.
The Age
an hour ago
- The Age
Israel-Iran ceasefire LIVE updates: Israel claims Iran violated ceasefire, Donald Trump warns against violations
Go to latest Pinned post from 6.19pm Israel warns of 'intense' retaliation attacks Further to reports that Israel is accusing Iran of violating the ceasefire, Israeli media has reported that Defence Minister Israel Katz has warned of 'intense' retaliation attacks. 'I have instructed the IDF to respond forcefully to Iran's violation of the ceasefire with intense strikes on regime targets in the heart of Tehran,' local media reported, quoting Katz. Katz reportedly said that, 'following Iran's blatant violation of the ceasefire' announced by US President Donald Trump, he directed the IDF to continue its intense operations in Tehran, aimed at 'regime targets and terror infrastructure'. Reuters is reporting that the Israel Airports Authority has not yet changed scheduled flights at airports in Tel Aviv and Haifa. 7.26pm 'Symbolic': How released Australian reacted to prison strike By Nick O'Malley An Australian academic who spent more than two years as a political prisoner in Iran says the Israeli missile strike on the notorious Evin Prison where she was held was a symbolic blow against Iran's repressive regime, intended to send a message to Iranians about the weakness of their ruler. Loading 'It was very affecting for me to see the footage of the strike on gates which I have passed through too many times to remember,' Kylie Moore-Gilbert told this masthead. 'In my view this was a symbolic strike designed to send a message to the Iranian people about the regime's weakness. Evin Prison is a hugely potent symbol of the regime's repressive apparatus and destroying the prison gates might have been a not-so-subtle nudge for the people to rise up and reclaim their freedom.' 7.13pm Iran military chief rejects missile strike claims Iran's armed forces chief Abdolrahim Mousavi has rejected Israel's claims that Iran violated the ceasefire, according to the BBC. The reported denial comes after earlier rejections of Israel's claims by Iranian state media. Israel's defence minister Israel Katz said in a statement that he had ordered the military to 'continue high-intensity operations targeting regime assets and terror infrastructure in Tehran' in light of 'Iran's blatant violation of the ceasefire declared by the President of the United States.' Hours earlier, Donald Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social: 'THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT. PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT!' With Reuters 7.03pm On the ground: While Trump was boasting, I was in a bunker By Matthew Knott There's no mistaking the sound of the alarm. A blaring noise so loud it could wake you from the deepest sleep. Matthew Knott 's phone started shaking and screeching at 5.12am, warning that missiles were on their way from Iran. Loading announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. A few minutes later, the intercom system in the hotel where Knott and photographer Kate Geraghty were staying instructed them to head quickly to the nearest bomb shelter. It was a surreal moment before the pair fled to take shelter. Click here to read Knott's full report, with photography from Geraghty, on the ground in Tel Aviv. 6.49pm In pictures: Scenes from Tel Aviv While confusion reigns as Israel claims Iran has 'violated' the ceasefire agreement, this masthead's photographer Kate Geraghty is on the ground in Tel Aviv with reporter Matthew Knott, covering the evacuation of Australians and the impact of the latest missile strikes in Israel. Here are some of the photographs Geraghty has filed so far. 6.34pm No missiles launched towards Israel, Iran media claims Iran state media is reporting Iran has not launched any missiles towards Israel, despite Israel claiming Iran violated the ceasefire agreement. The denial comes just minutes after Israel's Foreign Minister Israel Katz accused Iran of the 'blatant violation', saying it had fired missiles. Five minutes ago, too, Israel Defense Forces chief of general staff Eyal Zamir said: 'In light of the severe violation of the ceasefire carried out by the Iranian regime, we will respond with force.' 6.19pm Israel warns of 'intense' retaliation attacks Further to reports that Israel is accusing Iran of violating the ceasefire, Israeli media has reported that Defence Minister Israel Katz has warned of 'intense' retaliation attacks. 'I have instructed the IDF to respond forcefully to Iran's violation of the ceasefire with intense strikes on regime targets in the heart of Tehran,' local media reported, quoting Katz. Katz reportedly said that, 'following Iran's blatant violation of the ceasefire' announced by US President Donald Trump, he directed the IDF to continue its intense operations in Tehran, aimed at 'regime targets and terror infrastructure'. 6.06pm Israel to respond forcefully to 'ceasefire violation' Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz says he has ordered the country's military to respond forcefully to what he described as Iran's violation of a ceasefire with Israel. The directive followed an announcement by the military that it had detected missile launches from Iran towards Israel. Less than three hours earlier, US President Donald Trump said the ceasefire was now in effect. Katz said the military had now been instructed to carry out high-intensity operations against targets in Tehran. 6.00pm Israeli forces kill at least 25 Gazans waiting for aid, hospitals say Israeli forces and drones opened fire towards hundreds of people waiting for aid trucks in central Gaza earlier today, killing at least 25 people, Palestinian witnesses and hospitals said. The Israeli military did not immediately comment. The Awda hospital in the urban Nuseirat refugee camp, which received the victims, said the Palestinians were waiting for the trucks on the Salah al-Din Road south of Wadi Gaza. Witnesses told The Associated Press that Israeli forces opened fire as people were advancing eastward to be close to the approaching trucks. 'It was a massacre,' Ahmed Halawa said. He said tanks and drones fired at people, 'even as we were fleeing. 'Many people were either martyred or wounded,' he said. Hossam Abu Shahada, another eyewitness, said drones were flying over the area, watching the crowds first, then there was gunfire from tanks and drones as people moved eastward. He described a 'chaotic and bloody' scene as people attempted to escape. The Awda hospital said another 146 Palestinians were wounded. Among them were 62 in a critical condition, who were transferred to other hospitals in central Gaza, it said. AP 5.47pm What you need to know By Cassandra Morgan Thank you for joining us as we continue our live coverage of the Israel-Iran conflict. Here's a quick look at the latest developments: Israel has announced that it has agreed to a ceasefire after almost two weeks of conflict with Iran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's announcement came after US President Donald Trump declared the ceasefire on social media earlier in the day. Iran is yet to comment publicly after Trump's 2pm ceasefire deadline, however, it did report the truce on state media. Netanyahu said Israel had achieved its war goals, including removing the threat of Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Before the ceasefire came into effect, an Iranian missile strike on an apartment block in southern Israel killed four people and left more than 20 people injured. Nine people were also killed in Israeli strikes on residential buildings in the northern Iranian province of Gilan earlier today, according to Reuters. 5.17pm 'The 12-day war': From Israel's sneak attack to shaky ceasefire By Angus Delaney, Jamie Brown, Matthew Absalom-Wong and Tom McKendrick After nearly two weeks of fighting, US President Donald Trump claims to have brokered peace between Israel and Iran, though the legitimacy of the ceasefire is still to be proven. From sneak attack to shaky ceasefire, here's how the conflict – which Trump has suggested should be called 'THE 12 DAY WAR' – between Iran, Israel and the United States played out. Israel attacks Iran Israel attacked Iran at 3.30am local time on Friday, June 13, with explosions booming across the capital of Tehran. Israeli forces struck several locations, targeting nuclear sites, including Iran's main enrichment facility, ballistic missile and other military capabilities, as well as military commanders and nuclear scientists. Among those killed were the chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hossein Salami; commander-in-chief of Iran's army, Mohammed Begheri; and top-ranking commander Gholam Ali Rashid. Six nuclear scientists were also killed. The bombing of residential areas also claimed the lives of civilians, including children, Iranian media reported. Israel justified the attack as an act of self-defence, claiming Iran was rapidly approaching the ability to build nuclear weapons – something Israel has said for years. Iran, a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, has always denied having a nuclear weapons program. The White House said it wasn't involved in the attack, but that it was aware of Israel's plan. Iran vowed its 'sworn enemies' should expect retaliation and that Israel would receive 'harsh punishment'.
