Trump Must Accept Strategic Reality

For nearly half a century, Washington has relied on sanctions, isolation, and coercion to reshape Iran’s behavior. The results are sobering. Rather than capitulate, Tehran adapted. Its political system endured, its regional footprint expanded, and its negotiating posture hardened. Yet Donald Trump has revived the vocabulary of “maximum pressure,” again pairing economic strangulation with threats of military escalation and even rhetoric about targeting Iran’s top leadership.

This moment is being framed as a last chance for diplomacy. Ali Khamenei, now in his late eighties, faces a consequential decision: accept severe limits on Iran’s nuclear program or risk confrontation with the United States and Israel. Reports suggest U.S. envoys favor transactional breakthroughs, while military planners warn that a campaign against Iran could spiral into a prolonged conflict. Such caution is not academic. The Middle East’s history is littered with wars that began as “limited strikes” and evolved into grinding, unpredictable entanglements.

Even recent use of force underscores the limits of coercion. Joint strikes did not erase Iran’s nuclear capabilities outright. Meanwhile, Tehran signals it will not negotiate away what it views as core deterrence — uranium enrichment rights and missile capacity. Offers like diluting enriched uranium or joining a regional enrichment consortium hint at possible off-ramps, but maximalist demands risk closing those exits before they are fully explored.

There is another underappreciated dimension: regional complicity. Past operational successes by Washington and Tel Aviv were facilitated by access, logistics, and airspace in neighboring Muslim-majority states. If those governments now hesitate or refuse, the military calculus changes dramatically. Geography, not just firepower, shapes outcomes.

Regime-change fantasies should also be retired. Decapitation strategies rarely produce stable, pro-Western transitions; more often they unleash fragmentation, nationalism, and cycles of retaliation. Iran’s leadership has reportedly prepared for succession contingencies, signaling that the state’s continuity does not hinge on one individual.

Strategic reality demands sobriety. Escalation may satisfy domestic political narratives, but it heightens risks for regional stability, global energy markets, and civilian lives. Durable security will not emerge from threats alone. It requires credible diplomacy, respect for redlines, and a recognition that adversaries under pressure do not always break — they often dig in.

The wiser course is clear: de-escalate rhetoric, widen diplomatic space, and prioritize negotiated constraints over another open-ended conflict. History has already delivered its verdict on wars of choice. 

Time to dump Netanyahu

This morning, I was saddened as well perturbed after reading the details of conversation between the US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

President Biden told Netanyahu, he expects Israel to move towards a ceasefire with Hamas, but Netanyahu said Operation Guardian of the Walls will continue until Israeli citizens are secure.

Earlier, Netanyahu had said Israel does not have a set time by which it seeks to finish Operation Guardian of the Walls. The possible responses to Hamas are to either conquer Gaza or to deter them, he added.

In my opinion only Netanyahu can be held responsible for the present turmoil in the region. He went against the concept of ‘Two States’ and indulged in eviction of Palestinians from Jerusalem. He also continued construction of new settlements on ‘occupied land’.

Under the ‘Abraham Accords’, he was given an opportunity to normalize relations with Muslim countries, but he created a mess rather than building confidence. Now there is pressure on Muslim countries, which normalized relations, to bid farewell to these accords.

On can understand his haste, he was losing popularity in Israel. Four elections may have prolonged his rule, but criminal proceedings and ICC initiation of ‘war crimes’ proceedings shattered his dreams.

Instead of resolving the crisis with cool head, he opted for initiating war against Hamas or ‘conquering’ Gaza. This also backed fired because now followers of Judaism emerge his biggest opponent.   

Look at this picture, be it the residents of Israel or Gaza, they should not be exposed to this kind of torture. To establish sustainable peace in both the areas, the philosophy of ‘eliminating each other’ has to be given up. The prudent approach is, let both the people live in their own areas they way they wish.

It is also to remind that Netanyahu’s term has ended on 5th May 2021 and his stay in the office is ‘illegal’. He must immediately seek ‘vote of confidence’ or President of Israel must ask others to form a new government immediately.

To conclude, Netanyahu has ruled Israel for considerably long time and he must take an exit now. His effort to remain in power by promoting war with Hamas is killing hundreds and thousands of innocent people, both Jews and Muslims.