Manufacturing Consent
A breakdown on the escalation over the past week - an update on our vacillating president.
A roundup of the news this week. franknews is committed to bringing quality information to the public — and remaining independent, ad-free, and accessible to everyone. To support us, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Last Friday, Israel launched a sweeping aerial campaign against Iran, calling it a preemptive strike, hoping to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Iran responded with retaliatory strikes on Israel. At least 639 are dead in Iran and 24 in Israel. How did we get here —
Reporting from the New York Times indicates that intelligence sources informed Trump at the end of last month that Netanyahu was planning an imminent attack on Iran's nuclear program, with or without U.S. participation. This put Trump in an optically difficult position: his administration was already engaged in negotiations (though potentially failing ones) to persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions. He could either sit back and do nothing or join Israel in the attack.
In the days following the strikes, the administration initially distanced itself from Israel's actions, then grew more publicly supportive as Israel's military success became evident. Trump has kept the world guessing about whether the United States might take this a step further and actively join the conflict. As his press secretary cryptically said — “if there's a chance for diplomacy, the president's always going to grab it, but he's not afraid to use strength.” Trump has said he will make a decision within the next two weeks.
Meanwhile, consent for the war is being actively manufactured. Hawkish statements from Senators across the aisle — Lindsey Graham, John Fetterman — abound, and cable news beats the war drum. The campaign targets not just the public, but the president himself. Reports from the The Rolling Stone suggest that Trump's decisions are being influenced by Fox News content. They write: “The favored network of the president has put forth a parade of hosts, guests, and professional commentators with an effusively pro-war and pro-regime change message., the president has marveled at the militantly anti-Iran coverage on Fox, as well as footage of Israeli air strikes.” “Wow,” Trump has said, per the associate, commenting on what he views as the awe-inspiring ferocity of Israel’s operations. Trump has also privately expressed how impressed and, currently, optimistic he is about military campaigns against Tehran.” For a president whose policy decisions often down to a question of what he thinks projects strength, the daily hype reel is proving to be effective.
Meanwhile, a new Economist/YouGov poll shows that 65% of Democrats, 61% of independents and 53% of Republicans oppose U.S. military intervention in Iran. In a second poll of 1,008 adults, released Thursday by the Washington Post, 7 in 10 Americans believe Iran's nuclear program poses "an immediate and serious" or "somewhat serious" threat to the U.S. Clearly — the winning message here is that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.” This is the argument we have seen and will we continue to see that from Trump and other leaders eager to go to war. If that is going to the the narrative, it is important to get the facts right here.
Our own intelligence community rejects the statement that Israel is racing toward a nuclear weapon. CNN reported that US intelligence reports said that “Not only was Iran not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon, it was also up to three years away from being able to produce and deliver one to a target of its choosing.”
Iran is a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which legally binds it not to pursue nuclear weapon (Israel is not part of this agreement). It is allowed to possess and use uranium, but strictly for peaceful purposes, and Iran’s uranium-related activities must be monitored and verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to ensure compliance with these restrictions. The head of the IAEA for nuclear energy and atomic weapons has confirmed that the agency has not found “any proof” of an effort to obtain a nuclear weapon by Iran.
Iran often shows a willingness to give up uranium capabilities in exchange for lifted sanctions. At negotiations earlier this year, Iran came to the table offering: “permanently halt high-level uranium enrichment, restore inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog, and commit to implementing the Additional Protocol, allowing for surprise inspections at undeclared sites” in exchange for lifted sanctions. The 2015 nuclear deal negotiated under Obama (and repealed by Trump) saw Iran agree to curb its nuclear program and was motivated largely by Iran’s interest in lifting these sanctions.
Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia has introduced a war powers resolution aimed at keeping United States forces from being pulled into the conflict between Israel and Iran. The resolution is considered privileged, a special status that means Kaine can force a vote on the measure on the Senate floor, bypassing Senate GOP leadership. If adopted, it would require explicit congressional approval of any US forces engaged in hostilities against Iran through either a declaration of war or an authorization of use of military force, unless the US faced an imminent threat of attack. Meanwhile, according to AP reporting, the U.S. is shifting military aircraft and warships into and around the Middle East to protect Israel from Iranian attacks and respond to Iran’s threats to target U.S. military installations. There are already about 40,000 to 50,000 US troops at around 19 locations across the Middle East.
The public was told intervention in Iraq, Syria, Libya would be quick and painless. And so a pattern begins to repeat itself: promises of swift victory and democratic transformation, followed by protracted conflict, unintended consequences, collective forgetting. Each generation seems to rediscover the complexities of nation-building and the limitations of US might.
Other reading recs for more context on this potential war:
Séamus Malekafzali for Parapraxis Magainze on the origins and nature of the Axis of Resistance.
Our piece on the shifting foreign policy ideologies in the US.
