The Grave Mistake of an American War on Iran
A protester holds a sign in front of U.S. Marines in downtown Los Angeles on June 19th, 2025. Photo: Jon Putman/Anadolu via Getty Images
The war launched by Israel in its unprovoked assault against Iran is illegal under international law. According to UN legal conventions, Israel has violated Iran’s sovereignty, killed several hundred civilians within only the first few days, and damaged Iranian infrastructure, including critical civil and industrial infrastructure. Iran’s defense of its territory against Israeli military aggression is both legally and morally justified.
Since its founding in 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never attacked any country. In contrast, Israel has, from its inception, attacked almost all its neighbors, occupied parts of their lands, and killed numerous civilians, including women and children. The latest example is the genocide, mass killing, ethnic cleansing, and torture through starvation in Gaza. The International Court of Justice has condemned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in The Hague and is internationally wanted as a “war criminal.”
The pretext for this illegal war is the claim that uranium enrichment in Iran has reached a level that is “close” to enabling Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. This claim is backed by two decades of a manufactured narrative of Iran’s nuclear program as a “threat” through exaggerated, and at times, completely false claims, all to further Israeli dominance in the region. Yet Israel is the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses nuclear weapons, has refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has refused to allow international inspectors to view its nuclear facilities, and has continuously violated international law with impunity.
Another justification Israel offers for launching this illegal war is the rhetoric by Iranian leaders calling for “wiping Israel off the map.” This slogan does not correspond to Iran’s actual military capabilities and is merely a verbal boast that has grounds for criticism. Israel has the right to respond to a slogan with a slogan. But the appropriate response to rhetoric is not bombing and military aggression. Shouldn’t there be a proportionality between offense and retaliation, legally and ethically? On the other hand, if Israel is displeased with the verbal threats of the Islamic Republic of Iran, then from a legal and ethical standpoint, it has the right to respond with verbal threats, and it has been doing so. But under the rules of international law, the UN conventions, and moral standards, it has no right to use that as a pretext to launch military attacks on Iran, assassinate its nuclear scientists and military commanders, and bomb its infrastructure, killing civilians. Is this not state terrorism? Has Israel, since its founding, advanced through anything other than the assassination of its opponents? With such a coercive approach, what need is there for the United Nations and the international legal system? Every country would simply act unilaterally, doing whatever it pleases and punishing its opponents however it likes. Should this be called “civilization” or the revival of “modern barbarism”?
Another pretext Israel uses for this illegal war is “self-defense.” Self-defense is the justification Israel employs to justify its aggression against Palestinians, neighboring countries, attacks on opponents and dissidents, and its illegal war against Iran. Every individual and nation has the right to defend itself, but in all legal systems, this right is constrained and conditioned by the rights of others. Israel’s so-called “self-defense” — while repeatedly violating the rights of others — is a privilege granted to Zionists in the apartheid state of Israel that regards all other people of the Middle East as sub-human, devoid of basic human rights. This Zionist assumption is not only criticized by progressive Jews and Christians, but also by other masses around the US and the world who have mobilized in their struggles for liberation and justice. Such an apartheid-like understanding of the right to self-defense stands in direct contradiction to the first principle of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The people of Gaza, southern Lebanon, and Iran are just as human and just as entitled to human rights and humanitarian protections as Zionist Jews, Christians, and Israeli citizens.
President Donald Trump entered his second term with the slogan that he would quickly end existing wars, claiming to be a “president of peace” who did not want to drag America into another war. Under the slogan “America First,” he has already moved the U.S. economy and domestic and foreign policy towards furthering war within just a few months. In practice, however, the Russian invasion of Ukraine remains unresolved. Israel’s inhumane war against the people of Gaza has not only failed to end but has intensified. The Trump administration’s second term vetoed an immediate and unconditional ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, which had unanimous support from all members of the UN Security Council. Moreover, by expelling UN personnel involved in food distribution, it has become complicit with Netanyahu’s government in the slow killing of Gaza residents, either through airstrikes while waiting in line for food or from mass starvation.
Initially, President Trump did not appear to publicly support Israeli PM Netanyahu’s push for war against Iran. Israel launched its war on Iran at a time when the U.S. and Iran were engaged in negotiations — talks which, according to both sides, were making slow but steady progress. Following a report from the IAEA Board of Governors that made no claim Iran possessed nuclear weapons, Israel initiated its unlawful war against Iran, and Trump’s stance became erratic, contradictory, and inconsistent, and has recently taken a more openly militaristic posture.
Netanyahu and the war-mongering faction in the White House have, unfortunately, succeeded in dragging President Trump into involvement in this illegal war. This war not only violates the U.S. Constitution and the president’s own initial campaign promises, but it also runs counter to American national interests and risks drawing the United States into a far bloodier and more complicated war than the wars waged under President George W. Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan. President Bush invaded Iraq based on inaccurate intelligence that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. The war resulted in massive death tolls among both Iraqi civilians and military personnel, as well as among American troops. It was later revealed that the intelligence provided to the president at the time had been entirely false!
America’s active involvement in an illegal war with Iran is similarly based on thoroughly flawed intelligence. Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, and U.S. intelligence agencies have informed President Trump that there is no evidence suggesting that Iran has access to nuclear weapons or is actively working toward acquiring them. Unfortunately, the president has disregarded these official reports. Iran has shown a willingness to negotiate on the issue of uranium enrichment fairly and lawfully with the United States. However, demanding that enrichment be reduced to zero is neither reasonable nor realistic for a country that is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and has remained under continuous monitoring.
President Trump’s disrespectful and contemptuous tone toward the leaders of other countries— including the Leader of the Islamic Republic— as well as his demand for “unconditional surrender” from the Islamic Republic of Iran, is unacceptable to any honorable and patriotic Iranian. Although the Islamic Republic has acted poorly toward its own people— and I have been and remain one of its front-line critics— it is certainly not to blame for the recent war, nor did it initiate the war. This tone and approach of President Trump compels every patriotic Iranian, even those critical of the Islamic Republic, to side with Iran in defending Iran’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity.
U.S. involvement in Israel’s illegal war against Iran runs counter to the core slogan of “America First” and, in practice, marks a shift to “Israel First.” That is to say, a joint U.S.-Israel war against Iran follows Netanyahu’s plan and serves the personal interests of Netanyahu and Israel’s warmongering cabinet, to the clear detriment of the United States in both the region and the world. In this unequal war, the U.S. may be able to destroy Iran’s infrastructure, nuclear, and military industries— but at what terrible cost? Iran would certainly not remain silent. In self-defense, it would strike numerous American bases in the region, close the Strait of Hormuz, and inflict heavy casualties on the U.S. Many coffins would return to America. As the destructive impacts of the Iraq War continue to persist, American public opinion is extremely sensitive to this issue. If such an illegal war begins, President Trump’s dream of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize will never come true.
If Israel and the United States were to topple the Islamic Republic through an illegal war — similar to what the U.S. and its European allies did in Libya, where it served neither the interests of the Libyan people nor the West — this war wouldn’t serve the interests of the Iranian people or the U.S. Iran is not Libya, Syria, or Iraq. President Trump’s entry into this illegal war would ignite the entire region. It is unlikely that China, Russia, or the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf support such a war. The only country welcoming this development is Israel, and perhaps a few European states.
In the past seventy years, regime change through coups or military intervention by the United States has never brought democracy or human rights to any country. In 1953, during President Eisenhower’s administration and with the help of Prime Minister Churchill, the U.S. overthrew the lawful and democratic government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and installed the dictator Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi to rule Iran for a quarter-century more. The 1979 revolution and the illegal hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy in Tehran were among the consequences of that coup.
President Trump could repeat the mistakes of Presidents Eisenhower and Bush and go down in history as one of the U.S. presidents who endangered American lives for the sake of Israeli aggression and interests— and the first American president to launch a military attack on Iran. The United States, like Israel, would further its legacy in the Middle East as a symbol of injustice, lawlessness, immorality, and the violation of dignity, ethics, and humanity.
I hope that what we have heard so far from President Trump about a military attack on Iran and further alignment with Israel is merely bluster, and that he does not commit such a costly mistake. There are members of Congress and the Senate who are aware of the grave consequences of such an attack. I hope the American leadership as a whole does not make this disastrous error, and that one day relations between Iran and the United States improve, which would benefit the region, the world, and both nations.
