President Donald Trump’s ceasefire with Iran exposed him as “weak and unstable” to the entire world, according to a prominent editor.
“Whatever inspired President Donald Trump to not unleash an even more severe bombing campaign against Iran on Tuesday night — and possibly commit scores of war crimes by obliterating civilian infrastructure in the process — a two-week ceasefire is a positive, if short-term, development,” wrote MS NOW senior editor Anthony L. Fisher on Wednesday. “But this should not be celebrated as some kind of victory for America or for the Iranian people, who remain under the yoke of a sadistic theocracy.”
Fisher added that “over and over in recent days, Trump has pledged to bomb Iranian power plants and infrastructure as part of a mighty American military campaign. In his zeal to project the U.S.’ ‘strength,’ however, Trump’s actions on Tuesday have signaled something else entirely: a weak and unstable leader who has done irreparable damage to America’s reputation and the global order.”
Fisher proceeded to describe how Trump’s “ceasefire” with Iran did nothing to fundamentally change that nation’s radical regime or guarantee US access to the Strait of Hormuz. All it has done is legitimize the remaining political leadership there and embolden Iran to future acts of economic coercion against the United States and its allies.
Plus it was expensive.
“For those counting at home, $55 billion is a lot more than the $1.7 billion Iran got from agreeing to a nuclear deal with the Obama administration,” Fisher wrote. “Trump has complained for years about that cash transfer, which settled an arbitration dispute between the U.S. and Iran that predated the Islamic Republic’s existence. This enraged critics of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which was summarily scuttled by the Trump administration in 2018. (Trump even mentioned the $1.7 billion figure in his address to the nation last week about his war of choice against Iran.)”
Wrapping up his thoughts, Fisher observed that “our commander-in-chief has given us another reason to doubt his leadership, his mental acuity and his basic decency. Trump’s war has killed many civilians, upended the post-World War II international order and potentially made the Iranian regime a lot richer. I’m not feeling any safer. Are you?”
Fisher is not alone in concluding that Trump’s abrupt ceasefire constitutes a defeat instead of a victory. On the conservative side Bill Kristol of The Bulwark argued on Wednesday that there would be “no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” and added “Iran hasn’t unconditionally surrendered. It hasn’t even conditionally surrendered. It’s agreed to a ceasefire followed by negotiations. These negotiations will be based not on Iranian surrender but, as Trump said last night, on a ten-point proposal from Iran that Trump believes ‘is a workable basis on which to negotiate.’”
Kristol concluded that “for the United States of America, Trump’s war has been a defeat and a warning.”
Even before Trump called for an Iran ceasefire, conservative commentator Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark argued his ongoing failures there indicated that “the walls are closing in” on him.
“This isn’t just about dunking on Trump,” Last explained. “It’s about understanding just how weak America’s position is right now. The walls are closing in not just on Trump, but on the old global order.”
