The Horsemen of the New Cold War
Published in El Colombiano
(Colombia) on 26 June 2025
by (link to original)
It’s not a stretch to say that the three leaders, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ali Khamenei and Donald Trump, have based their decisions on political interests.
Donald Trump’s triumphant declaration about the proposed cease-fire between Israel and Iran, a product — according to him — of his leadership, is not only premature, but also deeply deceptive. Far from lasting peace, the announcement appears to be a work of distraction in the middle of a conflict with deep roots and global ramifications. It’s unknown which route will be the one to follow, under what conditions the cease-fire was agreed upon and whether or not there will be plans for further negotiation.
On June 13, Israel initiated attacks against Iranian military nuclear facilities, as well as against senior officers of Tehran’s Armed Forces and nuclear scientists. In the last two weeks, Trump gave a series of contradictory orders — some of them reversed within a matter of hours — that his advisers later attempted to present as a flexible strategy. This discursive chaos increased distrust among allies and rivals alike, worsened the perception of a White House without clear direction, and increased the climate of instability.
This “12-day war,” as Trump dubbed it in one of his hundreds of tweets, ended in the midst of confusion. While the U.S. president assures us that the B-2 bombing destroyed Iran's nuclear arsenal forever, his own country’s intelligence services report that the damage set the Iranian arms race back by only a few months.
In either case, bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities does not eliminate the threat. Despite what is said by the Pentagon and White House, there is at present no way of knowing the extent of the damage; that can only be verified on the ground. What is clear is that Trump is no strategist, as he has demonstrated in Gaza and Ukraine. He does not even have a team to manage a war. It was pretty embarrassing recently to see him silencing and disowning his closest advisers, who would have preferred not to attack the Islamic Republic.
It is interesting to note that Trump has decided to break one of his firmest election promises. Within MAGA, the division is palpable; many had believed his promise not to involve the U.S. in foreign conflict. But he seems to have been infected by what Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu learned a while ago: There's nothing like a conflict to strengthen the mix of populism and authoritarianism.
Trump has always been certain about his electorate and trusts that they will value his masculinity. That’s why he went where the four presidents who preceded him considered it best not to go. It was that same Trump who took the “historic decision” — in Netanyahu’s words — to attack Iran, and who also unilaterally pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal made by Barack Obama in 2015. It’s not a stretch to say that the three leaders, Netanyahu, Khamenei and Trump, have based their decisions on political interests. Each of them has presented to their citizens a version of reality they believe will make them more popular.
Netanyahu, facing trial for corruption and growing opposition from within his own party, has exploited the fear of an external enemy to unite his base, fully aware that the likelihood of an Iranian nuclear attack is remote and nigh-on impossible, for it would also mean the end of the Islamic Republic. Khamenei, for one, appeals to the pride of his people with anti-Western discourse, promising forceful responses to their enemies, even with advance warnings. And Trump, in the middle of an election campaign*, seems convinced that an international coup can revitalize his narrative of strength.
Whatever happens, although the intention to have a cease-fire in the Middle East is always good news, it can’t mask the dangerous exploitation of the conflict on the part of its key players.
Regrettably, after the shock we have experienced, the frightening Iranian regime will remain in power, the conflict in Gaza will continue to claim more victims and the U.S. will continue to watch in amazement as their democracy is dealt another inside blow every day.
The international community urgently needs to recover diplomatic prominence and stop the dangerous drift toward military popularism. While three leaders play chess with global security, millions of lives are still hanging from a thread.
*Editor's Note: There is no current national election campaign.
Donald Trump’s triumphant declaration about the proposed cease-fire between Israel and Iran, a product — according to him — of his leadership, is not only premature, but also deeply deceptive. Far from lasting peace, the announcement appears to be a work of distraction in the middle of a conflict with deep roots and global ramifications. It’s unknown which route will be the one to follow, under what conditions the cease-fire was agreed upon and whether or not there will be plans for further negotiation.
On June 13, Israel initiated attacks against Iranian military nuclear facilities, as well as against senior officers of Tehran’s Armed Forces and nuclear scientists. In the last two weeks, Trump gave a series of contradictory orders — some of them reversed within a matter of hours — that his advisers later attempted to present as a flexible strategy. This discursive chaos increased distrust among allies and rivals alike, worsened the perception of a White House without clear direction, and increased the climate of instability.
This “12-day war,” as Trump dubbed it in one of his hundreds of tweets, ended in the midst of confusion. While the U.S. president assures us that the B-2 bombing destroyed Iran's nuclear arsenal forever, his own country’s intelligence services report that the damage set the Iranian arms race back by only a few months.
In either case, bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities does not eliminate the threat. Despite what is said by the Pentagon and White House, there is at present no way of knowing the extent of the damage; that can only be verified on the ground. What is clear is that Trump is no strategist, as he has demonstrated in Gaza and Ukraine. He does not even have a team to manage a war. It was pretty embarrassing recently to see him silencing and disowning his closest advisers, who would have preferred not to attack the Islamic Republic.
It is interesting to note that Trump has decided to break one of his firmest election promises. Within MAGA, the division is palpable; many had believed his promise not to involve the U.S. in foreign conflict. But he seems to have been infected by what Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu learned a while ago: There's nothing like a conflict to strengthen the mix of populism and authoritarianism.
Trump has always been certain about his electorate and trusts that they will value his masculinity. That’s why he went where the four presidents who preceded him considered it best not to go. It was that same Trump who took the “historic decision” — in Netanyahu’s words — to attack Iran, and who also unilaterally pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal made by Barack Obama in 2015. It’s not a stretch to say that the three leaders, Netanyahu, Khamenei and Trump, have based their decisions on political interests. Each of them has presented to their citizens a version of reality they believe will make them more popular.
Netanyahu, facing trial for corruption and growing opposition from within his own party, has exploited the fear of an external enemy to unite his base, fully aware that the likelihood of an Iranian nuclear attack is remote and nigh-on impossible, for it would also mean the end of the Islamic Republic. Khamenei, for one, appeals to the pride of his people with anti-Western discourse, promising forceful responses to their enemies, even with advance warnings. And Trump, in the middle of an election campaign*, seems convinced that an international coup can revitalize his narrative of strength.
Whatever happens, although the intention to have a cease-fire in the Middle East is always good news, it can’t mask the dangerous exploitation of the conflict on the part of its key players.
Regrettably, after the shock we have experienced, the frightening Iranian regime will remain in power, the conflict in Gaza will continue to claim more victims and the U.S. will continue to watch in amazement as their democracy is dealt another inside blow every day.
The international community urgently needs to recover diplomatic prominence and stop the dangerous drift toward military popularism. While three leaders play chess with global security, millions of lives are still hanging from a thread.
*Editor's Note: There is no current national election campaign.
Previous article![]( "Australia Is Far from Its Own Zohran Mamdani Moment. Here’s Why")
Next article![]( "From Ronald to Donald")
