Before and after the U.S. bombing of the Iranian nuclear weapons sites, a phrase has been ringing in my mind. The phrase is “I may do it, I may not do it.”
This phrase is what President Trump uttered on June 18 in response to reporters’ questions about whether he had decided to order a U.S. strike on Iran, provoking Tehran to warn that swift retaliation would follow such action.
Trump continued with, “Nobody knows what I am going to do.” Note the emphasis on “I” and not “we” in both phrases. This is typically the way Trump talks—and how he regards things, unfortunately.
And then there is the strong hint of what we might call Donald Trump’s “whim,” where ideas become actions without careful planning.
This whim notion may be more in play if the reporting is correct that says the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was sidelined from the meetings to evaluate the options because she had reported to Congress in March that U.S. intelligence agencies had concluded that Iran was not building nuclear weapons. Of course, I have been critical of Gabbard for her role as Director of DNI, as she lacks experience and stability and has a fascination with dictators.
Trump said Gabbard was wrong on Iran. I would consider it ominous if President Trump values his intuition or the reports of others over those of veteran intelligence officers.
But Gabbard reversed her position on Iran on Saturday, now saying Iran could produce nuclear weapons within weeks, apparently trying to regain the favor of Trump.
And then there is the matter of the U.S. Constitution, which says only the legislature can declare war. Trump went to war against Iran without Congress’s assent. Many Democrats and some Republicans say the attack was a declaration of war and that the President acted illegally.
Trump is not the first President to try to assert their office’s ability to wage what some in the past have called “police actions,” actions short of war.
The Trump administration and its supporters are arguing that the action against Iran’s nuclear facilities is not a declaration of war. Several Congressmen disagree, including a few Republicans.
Several lawyers and scholars who have studied the international law of armed conflict say the United States is without a doubt at war with Iran for purposes of the application of that law and that Mr. Trump acted in violation of international conventions.
Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia asks and answers the question, “Would we think it was war if Iran bombed a U.S. nuclear facility? Of course we would.”
It seems unlikely that we would have been in the situation we were in before the U.S. Bombing of Iran had not Trump withdrawn the United States from the Iran nuclear deal. In 2015, under President Barack Obama, the United States, along with five world powers, signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. The five major world powers were the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany. Under its terms, Iran agreed to dismantle much of its nuclear program and open its facilities to more extensive international inspections in exchange for billions of dollars worth of sanctions relief. To ensure compliance, Iran accepted the Additional Protocol of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), granting inspectors round-the-clock access to nuclear sites.
Proponents of the deal said that it would help prevent a revival of Iran’s nuclear weapons program and thereby reduce the prospects for conflict between Iran and its regional rivals, including Israel and Saudi Arabia. However, the deal has been in jeopardy since President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from it in 2018. In retaliation for the U.S. departure and for deadly attacks on prominent Iranians in 2020, including one by the United States, Iran has resumed its nuclear activities.
Trump withdrew the U.S. from the deal after ignoring the advice of America’s allies, who had urged him to stay in the agreement and build upon it. The leaders of France, Germany, and the U.K. noted their “regret and concern” at Trump’s decision, calling on Iran to maintain its commitments under the deal. This was a “whim” in action, this time influenced by Trump’s racist disdain for Obama.
One questions the seriousness of the decision-making to attack Iran, especially after witnessing the flip-flop by Gabbard and the statements by Pete Hegseth and J.D. Vance the day after the U.S. Bombing. Each was more cheerleading for Trump than representing the high-level offices of the Secretary of Defense and Vice President, respectively.
