Diplomacy can't deliver the quick wins Trump craves. But neither can war
The tumultuous '20s get ever more tumultuous. After the pandemic in 2020, the storming of the US Capitol in 2021, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Hamas's attacks on Israel in 2023 and the re-election of Donald Trump in 2024, now, at the midpoint of 2025, comes the US entry into the war against Iran.
Wearing a crimson 'Make America Great Again' cap in the Situation Room of the White House, the US commander-in-chief oversaw his country's most significant military intervention in more than 20 years. Not since George W. Bush gave the go-ahead in 2003 for US forces to invade Iraq has a president made such a potentially consequential decision.
The chaos of what happened after the fall of Saddam Hussein – which the brutal theocracy in Tehran revelled in fomenting – now hangs over America's latest Middle East adventure. But there is also the possibility that Trump could achieve a feat that eluded his predecessors: elimination of Iran's nuclear threat without heavy American loss of life. With so many unknown unknowns, it is too early to say.
Already, the crisis has put on display so many hallmarks of Trump's leadership. The utter unpredictability of a president who signalled last week that a window had opened up for diplomacy. His readiness to gamble. His impatience with the slow pace of negotiated solutions – it took the Obama administration and its European Union, Chinese and Russian partners two years to conclude the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal which Trump withdrew from in his first term.
There was the ritualistic trashing of European allies, who conducted talks with the Iranian foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, in Geneva on Friday. 'Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us,' he said as those talks came to an inconclusive end, even though the UK foreign secretary David Lammy had flown direct from Washington to Geneva carrying a message from the Trump administration to Iran's leadership. Lengthy diplomacy seems to bore this fabled dealmaker who boasted of ending the Ukraine war in a single day.
Loading
The crisis has demonstrated Trump's penchant for the dramatisation of world affairs. Always, he is centre stage. Each unfolding day is vested with the suspense of an episodic cliffhanger. Even when blood is about to be shed, a factor in his decision-making seems to be the sheer entertainment value of his actions. The flourishes he used in his speech to the nation following the B2 stealth bomber mission was classic Trump. 'We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before,' he boasted of his collaboration with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The 'great American patriots who flew those magnificent machines' had carried out 'an operation the likes of which the world has not seen in many, many decades', he added, using the patois of a carnival barker rather than a statesman.
Ahead of the US strikes, we were also reminded of his fixation with winning a Nobel Peace Prize, something his nemesis, Barack Obama, achieved, rather undeservedly, early on in his first term. 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between India and Pakistan,' he moaned on Truth Social, as he cited five conflicts in which his administration had purportedly played a mediating role. In full victim mode, Trump complained he would be overlooked for the prize 'no matter what' he accomplished. Hours after this self-pitying diatribe, he took America to war.
Winning is so central to his thinking. Israel, after days of strikes on Tehran and the nuclear sites, clearly had the upper hand. In joining Netanyahu – who stroked Trump's ego afterwards by praising him for 'courageously leading the free world' – he felt he was joining the winning side.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
40 minutes ago
- ABC News
Questions over the legitimacy of the US-Israeli attack on Iran fail to grasp the threat — and the opportunity - ABC Religion & Ethics
In the early morning hours of 13 June, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion. Since then, Israeli jets, drones and Mossad agents have targeted nuclear facilities, anti-aircraft batteries, missile launchers and military bases, and have killed a growing list of senior Iranian commanders and nuclear scientists. Iran retaliated by launching a barrage of drones and ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted by Israel's sophisticated multi-layered air defence systems. Then, on 22 June, US B-2 stealth bombers reportedly dropped around fourteen GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs) — otherwise known as 'bunker buster' bombs — and around sixty other 'precision guided weapons' on the fortified underground Iranian nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. An operational timeline of a strike on Iran is displayed during a news conference with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force General Dan Caine and US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon on 22 June 2025 in Arlington, Virginia. (Photo by Andrew Harnik / Getty Images) This dramatic turn of events marks the crescendo to a series of seismic shifts in the Middle East that began on 7 October 2023 with Hamas' terror attack on southern Israel — the worst such violence in Israel's history. Over the subsequent two years, Israel has set about dismantling the network of Iranian proxies surrounding its borders and re-established deterrence. Neutralising Iran's atomic and long-range missile capabilities opens the door to a new regional balance of power, and offers hope for a more stable and prosperous future for millions in the region. The debate over the war's legality No sooner had the conflict with Iran commenced than debates erupted over the legality of Israel's actions. Some scholars argue that self-defence under international law only justifies pre-emptive strikes when the threat is imminent. Since Iran did not yet possess nuclear weapons and was allegedly not poised to attack Israel, they argue that Israel's 'aggression' was illegal. The opposing view contends that Israel and Iran were already in a state of war, citing Iran's massive missile and drone attacks on Israel in April and October 2024. Therefore, they argue, Israel's current offensive is a lawful continuation of that conflict. There was also substantial evidence supporting the imminence of an Iranian threat. Recently released intelligence suggested that Tehran was accelerating its weaponisation of highly enriched uranium and restocking thousands of new ballistic missiles. Additionally, Iran is governed by religious zealots who openly threaten to destroy Israel — words backed by their actions over the last two years. Combined with Iran's destabilising activities across the region and assassination attempts against dissidents and world leaders — including Donald Trump — the threat appears to have been immediate and grave. Fire and smoke rise into the sky after an Israeli attack on the Shahran oil depot on 15 June 2025 in Tehran, Iran. (Photo by Stringer / Getty Images) Perhaps understandably, many Israelis view international law and the UN with a degree of scepticism. The 'automatic majority' of states in the UN General Assembly hostile to Israel has led to numerous anti-Israel and antisemitic resolutions — such as the repealed 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism. In 1955, Israel's founding father, David Ben-Gurion, famously mocked the UN as 'UM-Shmum' (a dismissive play on the Hebrew acronym for the UN). The sheer number of highly critical resolutions directed at Israel following 7 October 2023 by the UN and international law institutions like the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court has reinforced the Israeli belief that international law is often being used as a political tool against the Jewish state's right to self-determination. Many Israelis argue that the application of international law at the UN and other bodies embodies clear a double-standard grounded in this politicisation: obsessively scrutinising Israeli actions while ignoring the crimes of Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran — a regime notorious for repressing any opposition, women, LGBTQ+ people and minorities. Israel is often accused of human rights violations, particularly in Gaza. Yet it remains a democracy with robust judicial oversight — which were threatened by the Netanyahu government's proposed judicial overhaul, but remains healthy. Such safeguards are entirely absent in the Islamic Republic, where the judiciary is simply a tool of the clerical leadership. The operational window opens The legal debate over Israel's actions, while important, has been largely irrelevant to the pace of events on the ground. It was not a decisive factor in Israel's decision-making regarding Iran. Unlike superpowers, Israel cannot rely on prolonged operational flexibility. The rules-based order that prevailed after the Second World War deliberately complicates the ability to launch rapid pre-emptive actions — especially for a country like Israel, whose right to self-defence is often denied by many nations and some UN officials. Since surprise is essential to pre-emptive success, Israel had to act decisively. This is the essence of the 'Begin Doctrine', which underpinned Israeli strikes on nuclear reactors in Iraq (1981) and Syria (2007), and applies to Iran today. The operational window matured earlier this year, leading to the decision to move before it closed again. Politically, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he decided to move forward against Iran as soon as Donald Trump was re-elected in November 2024. Over the intervening period, there seems to have been clear coordination between Israel and the United States. Then, a damning report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran's nuclear enrichment programme in late-May led the agency's Board of Governors to declare on 12 June that Iran is in 'non-compliance' with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) — a major diplomatic milestone. Once the sixty-day ultimatum for Iran to conclude negotiations announced by President Trump expired, Israel launched its assault — an act that was widely seen as punishment for Iran's intransigence in its negotiations with the Trump administration. Maxar Satellite Imagery provides a close-up view of several large craters puncturing the ridge directly above the Fordo underground complex. (Satellite image © 2025 Maxar Technologies / Getty Images) Military readiness and a dramatic reduction of Iran's deterrence vis-à-vis Israel also played an important role. By late 2024, Israel had reduced Hamas to a guerilla force and gained control over much of the Gaza Strip. A surprise campaign against Hezbollah in September — which began with exploding pagers and a ground invasion of southern Lebanon — led to a ceasefire that left Iran's most powerful proxy severely weakened and politically isolated. This left Hezbollah with no legitimacy to drag Lebanon, which is still recovering from the war, into another round of clashes with Israel, and a government in Beirut working to disarm it. Ensuring airspace superiority en route to the Iranian sites was another factor. Following the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in December, Israel destroyed Syrian anti-aircraft installations. The new ruler in Damascus, Ahmed al-Sharaa, expelled Iranian forces and was later embraced by President Trump. Syria, now fragmented and ruled by a weak central authority, no longer poses a threat to Israel. In Iraq, under pressure from the United States, Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias are losing influence as Baghdad moves to disarm them. In October 2024, Israeli jets reportedly used Iraqi airspace to strike deep into Iran, demonstrating their long-range operational reach. More importantly, they struck Iran's most advanced air-defence systems, leaving it 'essentially naked' against an airborne attack. The 'day after' and political considerations For now, the United States and other key international players support Israel. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz reportedly said Israel is 'doing the dirty work for all of us', and Middle Eastern states — including the influential Saudi Arabia — quietly support Israel's efforts to eliminate a shared threat. However, questions are emerging within Israel. With no resolution in Gaza after twenty months of fighting, many now ask whether Netanyahu is again entering a war without a clear exit strategy. Some hope the Iran campaign may finally bring closure — securing a deal with Hamas, releasing hostages and ending the suffering of both Israelis and Palestinians. Iranians are a proud nation, and the Islamic Republic is still standing. Following a massive and humiliating assault, if the regime survives, the ayatollahs will most likely be more determined than ever to acquire nuclear weapons as a guarantee of survival. To secure a real victory, Israel will need US leadership in brokering a ceasefire that includes robust and penetrating monitoring of Iran. As for regime change in Tehran, while revolutions are inherently unpredictable, such ambitions probably remain unrealistic at this stage. Without a strong domestic opposition, foreign bombing campaigns alone most likely cannot topple the regime. US President Donald Trump, accompanied by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, speaks during a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House on 7 April 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images) Politically, Netanyahu has begun to see a steady rise in the polls following the apparent success of the Iran operation. Yet his critics argue that, as with Gaza, his push to attack Iran was influenced by political motivations — maintaining his coalition with hardline right-wing parties, which are now claiming credit for the campaign, the same way they 'boasted' after blocking attempts to reach a ceasefire with Hamas. Above all, Netanyahu is seeking to reshape the narrative about his legacy. Until recently, his story was about Israel's longest-serving prime minister who divided Israeli society over controversial judicial reforms, enabled Hamas to increase its power in Gaza leading to the terrible shock of 7 October, and was working to enable the bill which would legitimise military exemptions for ultra-Orthodox youth during wartime. More than anything, it seems, Netanyahu wants to remove the stain of his direct responsibility — which he refuses to admit — for the 7 October attack. Perhaps he now hopes to be remembered instead as the leader who brought Iran to its knees, ending an existential threat to Israel and changing the regional power balance in her favour. These are historic times. In the coming weeks, we will see whether the bold Israeli and American intervention has sown the seeds of peace — or of the next war. Ran Porat is teaches Israel and Middle Eastern Affairs at Monash University and is a research associate at the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation. He is also a research associate at the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC) and a research fellow at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism at Reichman University in Herzliya.
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
‘Wouldn't make sense' for Russia to support Iran in escalating conflict with Israel
Former IDF spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Conricus discusses the meeting between Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'The interesting statement that apparently was released by the Kremlin is that Russia seeks to support the Iranian people, that's an interesting statement,' Mr Conricus told Sky News host Sharri Markson. 'It wouldn't make sense for the Russians to invest resources that they apparently don't have a lot of after one of their allies that is apparently not doing very well on the battlefield.'
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Gone nuclear
DONALD TRUMP: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier … - Nine Network, 22 June 2025 Hello, welcome to Media Watch. I'm Linton Besser. And tonight we stand at a precipice, the world watching with trepidation the fallout of an unprecedented US strike on the Islamic Republic of Iran. Yesterday, news Donald Trump had bowed to the pressure and fired bunker-busting munitions at multiple sites in Iran said to house Iranian nuclear facilities and fissile material. By Sunday afternoon the first of Iran's retaliation, a major salvo of missiles targeting the Jewish state: TREY YINGST: …. We're gonna get inside here, stay with us, Trace … - Fox News, 22 June 2025 The US bombing campaign dubbed Midnight Hammer came just two days into the two weeks Trump had publicly flagged as a potential window in which Tehran might snatch a diplomatic exit. So was the world's media being used by a cunning if mercurial president to catch the Iranians off-guard? … his two-week deadline appears to have been something of a ruse, perhaps intended to lull Iranian officials into believing they had time to talk their way out of it. - BBC News, 22 June 2025 Since Israel began its ballistic missile campaign against Iran 10 days ago, the world's media has been marshalling resources to meet the moment. MATTHEW DORAN: Even though the missile didn't hit this property directly, it hit just a short distance away. All of the windows in the house have been completely blown out … - ABC News 7pm (Sydney), 22 June 2025 But there were few equivalent pictures from inside Iran in the immediate aftermath of the US attacks with internet blackouts and almost no independent journalists on the ground. The vacuum being filled on social media with war pictures from the frontlines of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and images many months old, now among those being fact-checked by BBC Verify: Let me make it easy for everyone. Every single video and image that is currently going viral online claiming to show the aftermath of US strikes on Iran's Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear sites is false. - X, Shayan Sardarizadeh, @Shayan86, 22 June 2025 And in this fog of war, it appears Channel Nine might already have taken a wrong turn reporting a promise of retaliation from Iran's leader: LAUREN TOMASI: 'Americans should expect greater damage and blows than ever before in history'. - Nine News, 22 June 2025 It was quite the scoop because it was missed by every other major press organisation on the planet including CNN and the BBC, and as far as we can tell he had made no such public comments at all about the bombing. In fact, the regime exercises tight control over public communications across Iran by clamping down on the internet and the free press. Instead, according to a US-funded Persian news service: … the Islamic Republic's state-run media is broadcasting scattered news from within the country, and the rest is a bombardment of news and propaganda about the effects of Iran's attacks on Israel. - Radio Farda, 20 June 2025 Israel also knows the importance of propaganda in conflict, having blocked the world's media from entering Gaza for the past 21 months and on Tuesday last week it struck Iranian state TV. To get some sense of what is happening inside Iran, the ABC's Middle East Correspondent Allyson Horn in the midst of her maternity leave reactivated her contacts inside the country via encrypted message: ALLYSON HORN: It was already hard to talk with people on the ground in Iran. Foreign journalists are rarely allowed in … ALLYSON HORN: But in pockets of connectivity I've reached some of my contacts … FARAH: This American attack, I can't stop my tears, I can't stop my tears. This is a war. Nobody knows what will happen next. - ABC News (Sydney), 22 June 2025 So, what does the bombing mean for Australia? And has the media done enough to ask tough questions of the Albanese government? The ABC's Melbourne radio host Raf Epstein thinks not. RAFAEL EPSTEIN: There has not been nearly enough questioning. What of our intelligence agencies asked of America's intelligence agencies. What is going across the desk of the national security committee of Cabinet … We're not even asking questions about whether or not it's illegal, we're not even asking questions about what the intelligence is … - Insiders, ABC, 22 June 2025 Twenty-four hours later the foreign minister fielded these very questions on ABC News Breakfast: JAMES GLENDAY: Do you know if any American facilities in Australia, for example Pine Gap, were used to carry out these strikes? PENNY WONG: James, again, we don't comment on intelligence matters. - ABC News Breakfast, 23 June 2025 In these earliest days of this dangerous new escalation, some of what we'll be told as is so often the case in war will be wrong, either innocently inaccurate or deliberately deceptive, which adds all the more gravity to the duty of the press to provide sound information and yes, to be asking the right questions. Because whatever trust the media has banked in times of peace, it cashes out in times of war.
