You Can’t Bomb Your Way to Peace, Mr. President

Donald Trump’s recent bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites reveals the recklessness of his so-called pacifist foreign policy. Sure, if it turns out that Iran was indeed very close to having a nuclear weapon and the U.S. military operation was as successful as Trump claims it was, then the enormous gamble may have paid off. But let’s be clear, Trump—the man who called himself the ‘candidate of peace’—is gambling with other people’s lives, not his own nor those of people he loves.

Trump isn’t the only leader who’s delusional thinking leads him to believe he can threaten, bully and bomb his way to peace and do so without the data to back up his actions. In a stark reminder of the justification for the Iraq War in 2003, we’ve seen a not-so-convincing argument about how close Iran is to building a nuclear bomb.

On March 25, Trump’s own Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified before Congress that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. On June 10^th, she released an unauthorized video on X asserting that “political elite and warmongers” are “carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers.” And that the world is “on the brink of nuclear annihilation.”

This angered Trump, who, days earlier had met with Israeli hawks who were lobbying him to support their attacks on Iran. Politico reported that a journalist aboard Air Force One asked Trump about Gabbard’s congressional testimony, and his reply was, “I don’t care what she said, I think they were very close to having a weapon.” She changed her tune in a statement on X June 21^st, saying that her congressional testimony was taken out of context and that Iran could produce a nuclear weapon within weeks or months.

Gabbard is far from being a reliable spokesperson, but the U.S. intelligence community is both widely respected and reliable. For the past two decades, they have come to the same conclusion that a recent report from the Congressional Research Service states, “According to U.S. intelligence assessments, Tehran has the capacity to produce nuclear weapons at some point, but has halted its nuclear weapons program and has not mastered all of the necessary technologies for building such weapons.”

Instead, Trump has chosen to believe Israeli intelligence that dovetails nicely with their wish for regime change in Iran. (To be sure, Iranian’s themselves want regime change and it is up to them to seek it.) He chose Israeli intelligence over U.S. intelligence to justify sending Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to drop a total of 14 “massive ordnance penetrator” bombs on Iran. This marked the first use of this type of bomb.

For decades Israel has tried to convince U.S. presidents to use these so-called bunker buster bombs to take out Iran’s nuclear development sites, particularly the one in Fardo which is deep underground. George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and even Trump in his more restrained first term, refrained from the possibility of igniting a wider conflict in the Middle East.

If we believe U.S. intelligence, then there was little to destroy and so then we are left with regime change, which is Israel’s goal. This makes Iran’s actual nuclear capabilities less relevant than the symbolism of striking its nuclear program, a symbol of strength and resistance against the U.S. and Israel.

On the Sunday morning debate show, Meet the Press, Vice President J.D. Vance insisted that this was a limited operation and that “we’re not at war with Iran, we’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program.” This may be in keeping with Trump’s campaign promise to stay out of wars and the wishes of their MAGA base of voters. Yet Trump quickly contradicted him in a statement on Truth Social. “It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’” he wrote, “but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???”

On Tuesday morning, Trump proclaimed a cease fire, but hours later, Israel then Iran continued launching missiles at each other. Later in the day, Trump announced another ceasefire, and within hours all three countries were taking victory laps. According to Ali Vaez, Iran director for the International Crisis Group, every side now had a narrative for victory. “The United States can say it has set back Iran’s nuclear program, Israel can say it has weakened Iran, a regional adversary, and Iran can say it has survived and pushed back against much stronger military powers.”

This certainly shows the power of saving face and even more so, the power of deterrence. It may just be wishful thinking. However, in their pursuit of dominance and posturing, both Trump and Netanyahu have taken us closer to catastrophe.

This is the English version of my column, La Globalista, in El Español.