No. of Recommendations: 3
"Others have opined that the participants have effectuated an offramp, where nobody loses and nobody loses face."
After his military parade sort of fizzled (compared to the crisply conducted events held by contemporary autocrats in Europe and Asia), he was probably feeling a bit testy.
Mark Mazzetti, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman, Eric Schmitt, and Helene Cooper reported yesterday in the New York Times that Trump had warned Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu against striking Iran but changed his mind after seeing how Israel’s military action was “playing” on television. The reporters write: “The president was closely monitoring Fox News, which was airing wall-to-wall praise of Israel’s military operation and featuring guests urging Mr. Trump to get more involved.”
He has been itching for a Nobel Peace Prize ever since pre-president Obama seemed to win one by apparently being able to fog a mirror and then, adding insult to injury, having "his" snatched out from his grasp by a Swedish kid with Aspergers.
So along came his chance - both to show how big a punch was able to land (bragging that he had obliterated the Iranian nuclear program, where in reality, while their centrifuges were likely destroyed, their stockpile of enhanced uranium is elsewhere, setting their program back a couple of years) and then that he could broker a quick end to the conflict - and simultaneously trying to enforce a truce.
So far, his efforts at being a "peace-maker" have been stymied by Israel's refusal to continue the terms of their first agreement with Hamas and then continuing with the siege and physical destruction of Gaza, and then by his trying to appear an unbiased mediator, but using extortion and putting his thumb on the scale of negotiating a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. He did seem instrumental in negotiating a ceasefire between Pakistan and India - and Pakistan nominated him for the Nobel Peace prize, only to condemn his "capricious" bombing of Iran the following day.
I guess, in his mind, despite being so obviously trustworthy and keeping his word, other seem to act on what they feel is their best interests rather than following his instructions.
Interestingly, (according to a report in the Kyiv Post), during multiple sessions of war games modeling a conflict between the US and Iran, the Iranian team won because Russia sent a small contingent of "experts" to the Iranian nuclear sites and the US backed off from bombing them out of fear of thwarting "the big one" with Russia. As the great Yogi Berra once said "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice - but in practice there is". Russia did not follow this strategy and thus could prove their friendship to Iran, while letting the US take the heat for the destruction of Iran's potential nuclear bomb program (despite Russia having stated that they would be against Iran developing a nuclear weapon).
This is a war involving strong personalities with "limited" adherence to their own country's laws. In this conflict you now have three belligerents (the US is now involved), all three of which have demonstrated that their word can't be trusted. I remember speaking to someone who was waiting for there to be peace before traveling to the Middle East. Fifty years later, I guess they are still waiting.
Jeff
