By Nilofar Suhrawardy
Ironically, the year 2025 began with US President Donald Trump declaring himself as a peacemaker. Sadly, the year’s end and beginning of 2026 doesn’t seem to be marked by his diplomatic rhetoric having yielded any results. In fact, one is tempted to say that it is time meanings of certain terms are rephrased. At least, the manner in which they seem to have been interpreted and even abused suggests this. Heading the list, perhaps is the word – ceasefire. Certainly, Trump has the right to take all the credit he desires for having led to their at least being considered during diplomatic talks, summits and finally on paper. But this term’s significance seems to be confined just to paper on quite a few fronts. Who can credit Israel for having respected the so-called Gaza ceasefire, despite it having been given so much importance by its key ally- United States. Interestingly, its key supporter appears to be giving minimum importance to violation of the ceasefire it has appeared to promote so aggressively. Some “belief” about it having been actually implemented is prompting initiation of diplomatic steps towards the next phase of ceasefire.
Virtually dead silence is also being maintained about Israel’s strikes against Lebanon. In contrast, substantial importance was given to Israel’s strikes against Iran. It apparently gave superpower an opportunity to display its strength also against Iran. Or in other words, an attempt was made to display strength of Israel against Iran. To a degree, it was snubbed by Iran’s retaliation and US had to step in. United States’ move was probably not simply against Iran but also against the powers, Iran is aligned with.
The world is apparently being viewed as a chessboard with United States under Trump being fairly frustrated at quite a few nations choosing to prefer ties with Russia and China instead of the superpower. What else does Trump’s tariff-war indicate? Israel led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is moving along the same path. What else do its strikes in the name of defeating Hamas and similar groups suggest? Israel’s aim is probably to dominate the terrain within its reach. In 2025, Israel carried out at least 10,000 strikes against more than six countries, including Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Qatar and Yemen. Strategic moves exercised by United States aiding Israel cannot be dismissed. Except for Iran and Qatar, the others may be viewed as weak targets without the potential to retaliate strongly against Israel. If Iran is not weak, Qatar has the wealth and is strongly aligned with US. The objective of these strikes is the same- ensure that these countries remain weak and be subject to pressure exercised by US, even if that leads to change of governments in these, aligned with Washington and not with Russia or China.
Of course, Netanyahu loves the literally blind eye turned to Israel’s strikes by US and other western nations. In a way, this is equivalent to their “legitimizing” violation of international law and also adding to credibility desired by Netanyahu where displaying his “power” is concerned. In addition, the media coverage received by Israel’s strikes only further increases this. Notwithstanding the criticism received by these strikes, the fact that they also display the weakness of countries targeted only adds to what Netanyahu apparently aims for. His “war-games” also contribute to diverting attention from perhaps what needs greater attention, of which the most dominant is the Palestinian-issue.
United States’ silence is not surprising. To a degree, perhaps, Israel is just playing a key role of asserting the superpower’s importance and restricting their ties with Russia as well as China. United States’ aggression against Venezuela, including naval blockade, may be viewed from the same angle. At least, this is what Trump desires.
Paradoxically, Ukraine is caught miserably in the war with Russia. Of course, Trump has time and again expressed his desire for “peace” regarding Ukraine as well as other wars. He went overboard in having talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin at Alaska and on phone several times. Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have held talks discussing “peace” plan fairly frequently. Zelenskyy has been strongly supported by most European countries. But talks between Trump and Zelenskyy, including the latest in Florida (December 29), have not led into effective peace deal. Perhaps, Ukraine is being used simply as a pawn in the rivalry between USA and Russia. Neither Russia nor China are keen to yield to US on the Ukraine front. Washington is probably hopeful that continuation of Ukraine conflict is likely to only further weaken Russia, which is apparently its key aim. A key aim of its tariff-war is also this. But as of now Russia is not as isolated and weak as US desires it to be and tends to be projected by western media. This perhaps is prompting Trump to strike and/or reach out in as many directions as possible in a bid to display his power to Russia as well as China. The recent United States’ weapons deal with Taiwan, which has not pleased China, may be viewed as a part of this design. War-oriented strategies being exercised by those claiming to have stalled several conflicts certainly demands a new interpretation of what is “peace” really understood by them as? Provoking, prolonging conflicts or what?
Nilofar Suhrawardy is a senior journalist and writer with specialization in communication studies and nuclear diplomacy.
30 December 2025
Source: countercurrents.org