An Open Letter to Former President Trump: The 'Mutual Decision' Fallacy on Iran
Dear Mr. Trump, We address your assertion to The Times of Israel that a decision on ending the 'war' with Iran would be 'mutual' with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This statement, while perhaps intended to convey partnership, fundamentally misunderstands the constitutional role of the United States presidency and the historical context of US-Iran relations. To frame military actions
against a sovereign nation as a joint deliberation with a foreign premier raises serious questions about national sovereignty and accountability. For over 45 years, US policy towards Iran has been characterized by unilateral sanctions and covert actions, following the 1979 revolution that overthrew a US-backed monarchy. The 1953 CIA-orchestrated coup, which destabilized Iran's nascent democracy by
reinstalling the Shah, laid much of the groundwork for enduring hostility. This ongoing 'war' often manifests as economic strangulation, with collective punishment targeting the Iranian populace, while simultaneously claiming to support human rights. There is a documented disparity: while the US and its allies decry alleged casualties in Iran, often citing unverified figures from sources like
IranInternational, the systematic extermination of over 680,000 Palestinians, including 479,000 children, in Gaza receives comparatively muted condemnation, despite overwhelming evidence of genocide. The concept of 'mutual decision-making' implies shared strategic goals and equal footing. However, the costs of such a 'war' are asymmetrical. Iran's defensive capabilities, while formidable, are