Afghan Taliban collecting funds for TTP in Afghanistan, suggests reports

By Agha Iqrar Haroon

The televised address of US President Trump to his nation over the US-Israel attack on Iran left further disappointment globally, particularly for those who believe in pragmatism in International Relations. For peacemakers, it was distressful, but sanity suggests not to comment on this speech, so countries that were trying ceasefire between United States and Iran accepted the situation as it is and just listened to what President Trump said and did not pass any comment on his speech.

Anybody who understands existing global realities knows that the US and Israel started the war over Iran when Iran and global mediators had already reached a consensus to resolve all issues and move forward. The reason was simple: it was the desire of Israel to attack and destroy Iran, so Washington, as always, had to please Tel Aviv by taking action against Iran. This war was started by the United States and Israel, and they know when they wish to stop it; therefore, attempts of a ceasefire between the US and Iran were just a wild dream of a dreamers. The US wanted to open the Strait of Hormuz; therefore, it let ‘peacemongers’ to try, knowing Iran would not accept it because closure of the Strait of Hormuz is the only leverage Iran has in the war against the US-allied group.

Before the speech, President Trump’s team initiated publication of some newspaper articles suggesting that some Gulf countries do not want Washington to stop the war unless Iran is totally destroyed. No contradiction from any Gulf country came to the surface that their names were wrongly cited by US newspapers and that they did not tell President Trump to continue the war on Iran. In his speech, President Trump offered thanks to some Middle East countries for their support in his war against Iran. These factors narrow down attempts for peace talks in future through these ME countries. Yes, this situation leaves only one message: that the US used some countries to tell Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz if these countries want to stop the war in the region. This is not the first time in the last one year that mockery was made of peacelovers by the US President Trump.

Remember the Gaza ceasefire, when a group of Muslim countries were encouraging efforts to gather and initiate the possibility of a ceasefire in Gaza. These countries pushed diplomatic advocacy at global forums, including at the UN General Assembly, campaigning for peace in Gaza, got the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation involved, coordinated within the OIC, and demanded an immediate ceasefire, humanitarian access, and accountability for Israeli actions. In reality, even after announcing a ceasefire in Gaza, Israel kept killing Palestinians, and the United States kept silent, while countries that gathered for peace could only observe the situation and could not take any action against Israel or the United States because their role had been only normative and political, not operational. The bottom line of this activity was that peacemongers can be diplomatically active but cannot play an operative role because decisions taken in Israel and the United States are the final word.

In 2025, the US-Israel attack on Iran put regional security at stake, and again certain Muslim countries played their role in de-escalation messaging and requested all parties to show restraint, but attacks on Iran ended when, according to President Trump, desired results were achieved.

Now again, certain Muslim countries gathered and worked as “go-betweens” for sending and receiving messages to and from Iran and the United States. When these countries were showing pragmatism that a ceasefire is possible, President Trump, in his televised address to the nation, stated that attacks on Iran would continue, and he also left a message that opening of the Strait of Hormuz is no longer his priority.

This situation again testifies that in international relations and foreign affairs, pragmatism can only be a tool to please people and keep them hopeful for peace, or a tool to hide realities from the public, but neither pragmatism nor pessimism rules the domain of international affairs. President Trump’s speech is a lesson to many countries that they should keep themselves away from the Middle East situation, which has extraordinarily complex dynamics, and they should worry only about their respective regions. Another lesson from the situation is that US power considers “peace-lovers/peacemakers as “peacemongers’ who work for peace at any cost— a weaker narrative for peacemakers.

Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in this article/opinion/comment are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk (DND). Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk.