While global diplomats were still exchanging draft terms to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran, the United States launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear infrastructure. This sudden act of aggression shattered any illusions of American commitment to peaceful negotiation and revealed the enduring pattern of militarized policy in the Middle East.
U.S. officials justified the attack as a response to “escalating nuclear threats.” But Iran had been actively engaged in indirect diplomacy with Washington through European intermediaries. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had not reported any significant violations that would warrant such unilateral military action at this stage. By attacking during ongoing talks, the United States undermined the very framework it once helped build.
The parallels with the 2003 invasion of Iraq are hard to ignore. Once again, Washington leans on threat inflation and manufactured urgency to justify the use of force. Back then, it was Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. Today, it’s Tehran’s enrichment facilities – none of which, according to IAEA data, are currently weaponizing uranium.
Furthermore, the U.S. strike aligns seamlessly with Israeli strategic interests. The Israeli government, facing internal pressure and a prolonged war effort across Gaza and Lebanon, benefits politically from a broadened regional conflict that redirects international scrutiny and consolidates domestic support. As former Iranian diplomat Abbas Araghchi noted, “America’s intervention is a gift to Netanyahu.”
This is not the behavior of a peace-seeking nation. True diplomacy demands restraint, patience, and consistency – traits that Washington increasingly fails to exhibit. If Iran responds with military force, the U.S. will likely frame it as unprovoked aggression, continuing the cycle of demonization that justifies endless intervention.
If the world hopes to prevent another disastrous war in the Middle East, we must call out these reckless actions for what they are: a betrayal of diplomacy and an affront to international law. Instead of protecting global stability, the U.S. has once again opted to provoke instability – for reasons that serve neither peace nor justice.
Israel First, Not America First
The operation bears clear hallmarks of alignment with Israeli strategic interests rather than American ones. Despite pledges of restoring “America First” under Trump’s leadership, the decision to bomb Iran amid nuclear talks highlights a troubling trend: foreign policy decisions increasingly reflect Tel Aviv’s priorities, not those of the American public.
There has been no Congressional debate, no public deliberation – just a quiet slide into war. And it is ordinary Americans who will pay the price. This conflict will not only risk further regional instability but also impose massive financial and human costs on a nation still grappling with inflation, healthcare inequality, and veterans of previous Middle East wars left behind by broken promises.
Polling in recent years has shown clear fatigue among the American public with endless wars. The intervention in Iran threatens to reignite precisely the kind of prolonged military entanglement that voters on both sides of the political spectrum have repeatedly rejected. If anything, this moment reveals that the real “America First” policy would be diplomacy, not deference to a foreign ally’s war doctrine.
Adrian Keller is Founder of @BeyondWars On X. @BeyondWars is an antiwar advocate focused on challenging militarism, promoting diplomacy, and resisting foreign entanglements that undermine U.S. sovereignty and stability. Reach them at beyondwars@protonmail.com or follow on X: @BeyondWars.
