IN a striking reversal, President Trump has shifted his stance on the Israel –Iran conflict, now calling for Iran’s unconditional surrender.
This notion marks a significant departure from his previous efforts to broker a peace deal between Israel and Iran.
As global powers like Russia, China, and France express serious reservations over Trump’s strategy of dealing with Iran through force, it is clear that diplomacy is the only viable solution to the Middle East crisis.
Military posturing and coercion will only escalate tensions, while dialogue and negotiation can pave the way for a peaceful solution.
Thus, for the sake of global peace, security and stability, it is wise for President Trump to prioritise diplomacy over brinkmanship.
Since President Trump resumed his office as the 47th US president, he seemed determined to end the global wars.
And recently president Trump had expressed his desire to broker peace between Iran and Israel, referring his effort to establish a ceasefire in South Asia between the nuclear armed countries in South Asia.
Needless to say, like Kashmir issue in South Asia, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East is core to establishing a lasting peace in the region.
To promote and sustain peace in Middle East, Trump can mediate to cease hostilities by facilitating communication between the conflicting parties–Palestinians and Israelis, Iranians and Americans, encouraging dialogue, and using diplomatic pressure or incentives.
The first and foremost challenge is to make a ceasefire deal between Iran and Israel.
Further, President Trump faces two key challenges: firstly to establish a pragmatic nuclear deal negotiations between the United States– not under coercion—while reconciling differences between Iran, the US and other stake holders to revive the JCPOA, and secondly to end the Gaza Crisis by fostering a sustainable resolution between Israelis and Palestinians.
Moreover, three fundamental factors that demand an inevitable need of ceasing hostilities in the Middle East are: First, the need for a ceasefire to allow for negotiations and diplomatic solutions to the conflicts.
Second, the need to counter the potential for escalation and widening conflict, as suggested by the involvement of various actors and the deepening of hostilities.
Third, signifying the impact on civilian populations due to Israel’s unjust wars.
Critically put, one approach President Trump has previously attempted on a waning “Peace to Prosperity” controversial plan, which aimed to establish a moth-eaten Palestinian state while broadly defending the Israeli interests.
The current situation demands that he should fairly and judiciously work on his agenda to free this region from future conflicts and feuds, thereby making an end to these wars.
The complex relationships between these entities suggest that a multi-faceted approach, including diplomacy, negotiations, would be required to de-escalate hostilities.
Undeniably, the two-state solution is fundamental to peace approach for ending the Gaza conflict creating a Palestinian state alongside Israel, thereby justifiably resolving issues like borders settlements and Jerusalem’s status , endorsing a rights-based approach defending and protecting human rights and justice for both the Israelis and Palestinians.
Moreover, a potential “middle way” to resolve the US-Iran nuclear conflict could involve a revised nuclear agreement that builds upon the original JCPOA, addressing concerns about Iran’s enrichment program, albeit giving space for Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy, also providing sanctions relief and addressing regional security concerns.
Moreover, restoring Iran’s confidence is crucial for successful negotiations.
This likely involves demonstrating a commitment to the deal, potentially through easing sanctions or offering other incentives.
Building trust is a key element in international diplomacy, especially when dealing with sensitive issues like nuclear agreements.
From the Iranian perspectives, Iran has an undeniable right under the NPT, to acquire peaceful means of nuclear energy, and in the current situation, it proclaims that under the UN’s Charter, article 51, it has right of self- defense to protect and defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Israel ‘s presumed plan to launch preemptive strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites without substantial evidence of making a nuclear bomb-making is not only unjustified but also perilous, violating international law, and potentially triggering a wider conflict in the region.
The IAEA Board‘s yesterday resolution is an expression of grave concern regarding Israel’s ultra-vires air strikes on Iran nuclear sites where a Non-NPT signatory state ( Israel) brutally attacks the nuclear sites of an NPT signatory state (Iran).
Yet, amid the ongoing crisis, a new public psyche is echoing in Iran, to counter Israeli aggression in the region, Iranians believe they must have a deterrence alternative.
This notion is also getting hold in strategic thinking as Iran has been under the looming threats posed to it by Israel’s nuclear arsenal.
The Iranians argue President Trump must uphold his impartiality and credence, being free from his ingrained notion of polarization, animosity and premeditated approach of prejudice against the Iranians.
Attending a G7 summit in Canada, he stated that ’’Iran and Israel should make a deal, and will make a deal’’, expressing confidence that peace is possible under his leadership.
Pragmatically, Trump can get benefited from both overt and covert diplomacy role from Russia, China, Oman, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, crucially fostering roles in Middle East peace resolution.
Needless to say, with Europe embroiled in the Russian-Ukraine conflict, South Asia tense due to India-Pakistan confrontations, and the Middle East ravaged by the Israel-Gaza war, any further provocation could have catastrophic consequences for global security, peace, and stability.
Therefore, by leveraging his diplomatic efforts to mediate peace in the Middle East, President Trump can uphold the principles of liberty, justice and self-determination, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence that America was founded upon.
—The writer, based in Pakistan, an independent IR & International Law analyst, also an expert in Conflict and Peace Studies (with special focus on Palestine, Kashmir), is member of European Consortium of Political Research (ECPR), including the Washington Foreign Law Society/American Society of International Law.(rizvipeaceresearcher@gmail.com)
