I am not writing this article in defense of the Ayatollah regime in Iran, or Maduro or any other authoritarian leader. Many of them have blood on their hands. My point is about international law and precedent. It is about the erosion of the international order when powerful states act from the muzzle and expect the rest of the world to accept it. No recent U.S. president has done more damage to the international order than Trump. His obsession with being remembered as a man of peace, his repeated claims to have ended wars everywhere, even in places far from the American conflict, ring hollow.
From the old Bush to Trump, promises of uprising and lack of a plan for the day after…
Just like Donald Trump recently addressed the people of Iran — appealing for an uprising to overthrow their regime — in 1991, George H.W. Bush made a similar appeal to the Iraqi people following the Gulf War when he said: “There is another way for the bloodshed to stop: and that is for the Iraqi military and the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein, the dictator, to step aside.”
Many Shia in southern Iraq and Kurds in the north understood this as a signal that the United States would back an uprising.
In March 1991, after the ceasefire, Shia populations in Basra, Najaf and Karbala revolted. The Kurds in the north also rose up.
For a moment, Saddam’s regime looked vulnerable.
But the U.S.-led coalition did not intervene to support the rebels. On the contrary, they allowed the Iraqi Republican Guard to operate and watched as they crushed the uprisings. What followed was brutal repression. Tens of thousands of Shia were killed.
So in 1991, Bush encouraged people to rise up — and then stood back as they were slaughtered.
Bush back then lied to the people of Iraq.
It feels uncomfortably familiar today.
Donald Trump has already lied to the people of Iran. Now he is encouraging Iranians to overthrow their government.
But why would the people of Iran believe him?
He has already misled them more than once. During negotiations with Iran — including recent talks in Geneva — while pretending he was serious about reaching a deal, he was at the same time preparing military action alongside Netanyahu.
And he lied again when he claimed that the nuclear sites had been obliterated. After last year’s bombing of nuclear facilities, he said they had been “obliterated.” Now he speaks of having “obliterated the obliterated site.”
The language shifts, but the pattern does not.
The problem is not only what he says. The bigger problem is that he has no plan for what comes next. After the failures of boots-on-the-ground policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States cannot afford another disaster in a country of 90 million people.
Even if Iran were somehow occupied, it would almost certainly face a prolonged insurgency.
The result would be carnage — for the very people Trump claims he wants to help.
Bombing first and justifying later is not a sustainable doctrine.
It has become very clear, yet again, that the United States has not learned the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan. Once again, without clear evidence — just as with the claims of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq — and without approval from the UN Security Council nor the U.S. Congress, military action has begun.
It is neither right nor morally acceptable for an elected U.S. leader to dictate to the world from the barrel of a gun. Bombing first and justifying later is not a sustainable doctrine.
The similarities with past interventions are striking. Vietnam. Iraq. Afghanistan. And before them, the CIA-backed coup in Iran in XNUMX. Years later, the CIA acknowledged that the overthrow of the elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq, which cemented the rule of the Shah, was undemocratic. That history still casts a long shadow. These episodes have left deep scars on the region and on America’s credibility.
Let me be clear: I am not writing this article in defence of the Ayatollahs’ regime in Iran, nor of Maduro or any other authoritarian leader.
Many of them have blood on their hands. My point is about international law and precedent. It is about the erosion of the international order when powerful states act from the barrel of a gun and expect the rest of the world to accept it.
No recent U.S. president has done more damage to the international order than Trump.
His obsession with being remembered as a man of peace, his repeated claims that he ended wars everywhere — even in places far removed from American conflict — ring hollow. His claims of ending the war between Albania and Azerbaijan are shocking and laughable.
His erratic tariffs and his threats toward Greenland and close NATO allies have shaken alliances. He has thrown out the rule book — and now once again he risks destabilising one of the most volatile regions in modern history: the Middle East.
During his campaign and throughout his first presidency, Trump repeatedly promised a non-interventionist foreign policy. He said the era of American adventures abroad was over. Guess what. He lied again.
Just as Bush and Blair did in XNUMX, crises are manufactured through unsubstantiated claims.
In a recent State of the Union address, Trump warned that Iran’s ballistic missiles could soon reach U.S. territory — a claim that echoes the “2003 minutes” narrative that preceded the Iraq War. Netanyahu’s assertion that Iran was about to attack Israel sits in the same realm.
Iran, after last year’s strikes by the U.S. and Israel, appeared more focused on preserving the status quo and peace than launching new wars.
The main problem seems to be that the whole Iranian nuclear crisis has been invented by Trump and his allies in Israel.
Iran offered to give up all of its nuclear ambitions — so why did Trump and his allies bomb Iran?
Iranian-born author and professor Trita Parsi, speaking to Al Jazeera, said Trump is not looking for a deal but is instead “looking for surrender.” “He wants the symbolism of surrender, and what he fails to understand is that the current theocratic system in Iran can survive a war.”
Yet again, Trump calls for upheaval.
Recently, Trump addressed the Iranians: “This will probably be your only chance for generations… For many years, you have asked for America’s help, but you never got it. No president was willing to do what I am willing to do tonight. Now you have a president who is giving you what you want, so let’s see how you respond.”
That sounds less like strategy and more like an invitation to upheaval. In a country as complex as Iran, with its ethnic and religious diversity, such a call could fracture the state and ignite a civil war that could draw in the entire region.
There is no clear sense of what the day after would look like — even if the current leadership were removed. And that is the danger.
Trump has done many reckless things during his presidency. This may be the height of it. He appears desperate for a win in Iran — perhaps ahead of midterm elections — hoping to boost his ratings.
It is the same game plan for Netanyahu. This war is a crucial domestic issue for him. Elections are only months away, and he needs to frame this war and this alliance in a way that will gain him votes.
And then there is Kosovo.
Instead of minding its own affairs and avoiding involvement in distant global conflicts far removed from its own fragile reality, Kosovo’s President rushed to take a loud position in world affairs — as if Kosovo were a decisive actor in global geopolitics.
President Vjosa Osmani publicly supported the United States’ strikes against Iran, describing the moment as an opportunity for freedom for the Iranian people. She wrote: “The hour of freedom has come for the people of Iran, thanks to the leadership of the United States and President Donald Trump. As always, the Republic of Kosovo stands unwaveringly alongside the United States and its allies in the defence of freedom, peace, security and stability.”
For a small and still diplomatically vulnerable country, whose statehood remains contested in many parts of the world, such declarations sound less like strategic diplomacy and more like political posturing.
Kosovo should be focused on consolidating its own democracy, strengthening its institutions, and navigating its delicate regional position — not performing loyalty displays in conflicts far beyond its weight and capacity.
The Middle East has seen enough bloodshed. The United States has seen enough costly miscalculations. The Iranian people and the American people both deserve better than another open-ended confrontation shaped by impulse rather than foresight.
Now, more than ever, what is needed is a united effort for peace — not more carnage in a region that has already seen too much of it.
Eki Rrahmani is a producer and director in Doha, Qatar.
