From Nezavisimaya gazeta, March 18, 2026, p. 3. Complete text:
Behind the standard-issue accounts of US and Israeli combat operations against Iran, behind the reports of civilian casualties and damage to the fuel and energy intake of European and other states, the contours of the main question are becoming increasingly clear: What are the consequences of aggression for the overall picture of international relations?
The first thing that comes to mind is the mystery of the motives behind the decision by the White House and President Donald Trump personally to launch Operation Epic Fury. The peacemaker’s halo that Trump tried to create around his political image has sunk into oblivion. After the tragedy at the school where girls were killed by an American Tomahawk missile, he can no longer dream of a Nobel laurel wreath.
But this may not be so important for the president’s personal fate, since he could hardly count on being reelected for a third term in office – neither the US Constitution nor his age would permit it. And no US Navy aircraft carriers are likely to be named after him in the future.
But the prospects for future presidential elections and the fate of Trump’s entourage raise questions. Contrary to the canons and unwritten traditions of American politics, one of the most likely candidates, current Vice-President J.D. Vance, has hastened to dissociate himself from his boss and pretended that he had absolutely nothing to do with the president’s Epic Fury. Vance’s strategy is quite clear: In the two and a half years before the [next presidential] election, the negative consequences of the Middle East adventure will be erased from voters’ memories, but the Zionist lobby, which significantly determines the outcome of US elections, will retain its favorable opinion about the anti-Iranian action. In addition, it is worth remembering that Vance started his political career in the Democratic Party as a charismatic “guy from the Rust Belt” [sic; Vance has never been a member of the Democratic Party – Trans.]. To many supporters of the Democrats, he may be more attractive than their current standard-bearer, California Governor Gavin Newsom.
However, it is premature to speculate about prospects for the 2028 presidential election. It is not yet clear how the US Congressional midterm elections will end this fall. It is clear that the US has reached a qualitative threshold in its history, where cosmetic adjustments alone will be insufficient. Fundamentally new approaches to politics, both foreign and domestic, are needed.
The first sprouts of such a policy seem to have appeared in Trump’s first year back in office, in his positive reaction to Vladimir Putin’s initiative to resume mutually beneficial economic cooperation between our countries. Negotiations and consultations between the Russian president’s special envoy [for international economic and investment cooperation] Kirill Dmitriyev and [US presidential special envoy for the Middle East] Steve Witkoff and [Trump’s son-in-law] Jared Kushner gave hope for the implementation of the “peace through business” formula, which paves the way for a new multipolar world order, taking into account the national interests of all participants in international relations. Of course, the war in the Middle East has caused serious damage to the “Anchorage spirit,” but it could not harm the idea of economic cooperation.
And what about the second important figure in the Middle East geopolitical node – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? At first glance, he has achieved his main goal – to draw the world’s largest superpower into a conflict with Israel’s biggest opponent. Netanyahu would like to appear before the Israeli public and electorate on the eve of the parliamentary elections this fall with a victory over Tehran to insure himself against otherwise inevitable legal proceedings for his earlier sins.
But this is a short-sighted approach that is harmful to the future of Israel and 9 million Israelis. In recent years, Israel has at the very least coexisted with the hostile Arab environment: Diplomatic relations have been established with Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates, and trade and economic ties with Saudi Arabia were developing. It is also important that in Israel itself, a very impressive Arab community has gradually integrated into the structure of the state, has engaged in business, has taken part in political life, in parliamentary elections, and has its own representation, albeit small, in the Knesset.
It is also worth mentioning that Iran’s position has evolved significantly over the years: Instead of the anti-Semitic [former] president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the leaders who came to power in Tehran weren’t exactly “doves,” but at least they thought quite realistically and were ready to compromise.
But first, the actions of Arab extremists in Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023 [see Vol. 75, No. 41, pp. 3-5], and then by Israeli extremists in Iran have caused irreparable damage to all these developments of recent years. It is a mistake to think that by breaking Tehran’s resistance, Israel will complete the creation of a security belt along its borders. First, Iran is not broken, and anti-Israel sentiments there and in Arab countries have only increased.
Second, the Iranian adventure has raised a new wave of anti-Semitism in the world and has increased the anti-Israeli sentiments of the Ummah, the global Muslim community.
Third (and this is perhaps the most important thing), the aggression against Iran has dealt an irreparable blow to the nuclear nonproliferation regime that has been painstakingly built over decades.
Faced with the reality that the leader of a nuclear superpower can, on a whim, kidnap the head of one state [see Vol. 78, No. 1-3, pp. 3-7], kill the spiritual leader of another and unceremoniously lay claim to the territory of a third, even an allied state (Denmark) [see Vol. 78, No. 1-3, pp. 8-10], politicians the world over are comparing their situations to that of North Korea, which has much bigger beef with the US than Iran. But the White House and Trump are hesitant to use force against North Korea for fear of a nuclear response.
It should be added that global Islam already has an atomic bomb. Nuclear weapons are at the disposal of Pakistan, which has condemned the US-Israeli aggression against Iran from the very beginning.