annihilationDonald TrumpFeaturedimmoraliranlibertyrhetoric

The high cost of Trump’s ‘annihilationist’ rhetoric

John Daniel Davidson of the Federalist ponders the impact of the president’s words.

After threatening the death of “a whole civilization” on Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump announced a two-week, “double-sided” ceasefire with Iran Tuesday evening, pending the immediate opening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The annihilation of Iran, it seems, was averted by a last-minute deal brokered by Pakistan. In his announcement of his ceasefire, Trump said Pakistan “requested that I hold off the destructive force being sent tonight to Iran.”

What’s going on? Did Trump really call off some devastating (possibly nuclear) strike because of a deal that only came through 90 minutes before the White House deadline? Maybe. Was the deal already in the bag before Trump made his hyperbolic threat that “a whole civilization will die tonight?” Possibly. And what about the 10-point proposal Trump said he received from Iran, which he called “a workable basis on which to negotiate?” The details of an Iranian proposal, which include things like reparations for Iran, Iranian control of the strait, and the lifting of all sanctions, have been public for days. Is that the proposal Trump was referring to on Tuesday evening, or is it something else? Who knows.

What does seem clear amid the fog of war, however, is that Trump’s maximalist, annihilationist rhetoric — talk of destroying Iranian “civilization,” “never to be brought back again,” taking out “the entire country,” bombing it “into the stone age,” targeting critical civilian infrastructure like power plants — has already gravely damaged the United States.

Why? Because America should only wage just wars, and waging a just war means being subject to certain restraints. Just war precludes immoral means — like the mass killing of civilians — to achieve victory. Even threatening such means, as Trump has done, damages the moral conscience of a people as much as it degrades the moral standing of a nation. Simply put, threatening to do something intrinsically immoral, even if you don’t actually do it, is wrong.

Source link

Related Posts

1 of 391