For peace with Iran to work a reckoning with Israel is in order

Trump must get back to basics, and his promises to the American people. In order to do that he must put this relationship in its proper place.

James R. Webb

Apr 09, 2026

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/israel-ceasefire/

The two-week ceasefire between Tehran and Washington — at least for right now — is allowing a collective global exhale following an intense month of war. As of Wednesday, oil markets were rebounding, with prices dropping significantly from their record highs above $150 per barrel.

Domestically, perhaps a rare sigh of relief from coast to coast, as the most unpopular U.S. war in a century headed for a pause instead of the unprecedented escalation promised by President Donald Trump’s “a whole civilization will die tonight” Truth Social post.

But a durable peace and an end to this war are not guaranteed. Cracks are already showing over what was agreed and what was not by both sides, and accusations of violations are afoot.

Furthermore, America’s relations and reputation are severely damaged worldwide. Ensuring peace and fixing these relationships is where the hard work begins.

Arguably, the most important part of preventing a restart of the war before May is ensuring that our relationship with Israel returns to its rightful order. The U.S. is not a tool to be used to further Israeli regional ambitions. It should never go to war on behalf of any foreign government.

The most recent escalation by Israel in Lebanon, which should be noted, shows a flagrant lack of respect for Washington, and also underscores a pattern that is as evident as it is problematic: a seemingly deliberate attempt to prevent or undermine the ability of the U.S. to negotiate with Iran. Thus, it prevents the administration from acting independently and in the sole interest of the American people, which the Constitution charges it to do.

It is important to note two facts that underpin the dire need for U.S. foreign policy to move in this direction.

First, the U.S. did not go to war in the interest of of the American people. Rather, the stated rationale by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, and others, on Feb. 28, was that Israel was going to attack Iran; therefore, we needed to join them to protect our troops stationed in the region (Rubio has since walked his remarks back). But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had made several visits to the U.S. seeking Trump's buy in for new strikes since Operation Midnight Hammer in June 2025.

Especially egregious was the conflict, which was launched in the middle of U.S.-Iranian negotiations, opened with the targeted killing of Iran's head of state Ayatollah Khomeini and several members of his immediate family.

Second, Israel’s track record of adhering to ceasefire agreements, especially as of late, has been abysmal. Since the declaration of a ceasefire in Gaza on Oct. 10, 2025, Israel has violated the ceasefire agreement at least 2,073 times, and this data only runs through March 18, 2026. Coupled with this fact is the government's proclivity for assassination. In this war alone, the Israelis have taken out no less than 12 Iranian leaders.

Simply put, this presents a pattern that is not only inconsistent with American values and historical precedent but also at odds with how we fight wars. Each one of these targeted actions appears at face value to not only prevent de-escalation, but more importantly, to entrench the U.S. in a conflict by eliminating those within Iran who are moderate enough to negotiate. Despite what Trump says about a new, more “reasonable” crop of leaders replacing their dead counterparts, experts say the opposite is the case.

Further, they are actions that contradict the Pentagon's Laws of Armed Conflict Manual (Sec. 5.21, Overview of Good Faith, Perfidy, and Ruses). More importantly, it runs in contrast to the entire Western-based system of war that is rooted in 1648’s Treaty of Westphalia. The U.S. has not only followed this precedent but agreed to be party to numerous other agreements, including, but not limited to, the New York Convention of 1973, which criminalizes assassinating leaders and other “internationally protected persons.”

Part of the rationale is obviously simple: killing leadership makes it more difficult to negotiate.

In short, the assassination campaign, along with following a client state to war, is not a feature of American warfare or policy. But instead, it is a bug inserted into our operating system that must be removed, both to ensure a durable peace and to reclaim our national honor and reputation. Doing so will not necessarily be easy, but it is straightforward.

Israeli leadership must be reminded where their financial and military aid comes from and that this relationship is not a blank check. The U.S. and its taxpayers are their financial and military guarantors. Without our backing, their security is in serious jeopardy. Therefore, to maintain their security, they need to play by our rules and adhere to our principles. Otherwise, this relationship could end.

As a note, the U.S. public opinion of Israel has a low point, and a new generation of Americans is coming of age politically with a very cynical mindset of this relationship. It is very much in Netanyahu's interest to correct this through action rather than messaging.

Once our relationship with Israel is put into proper order, we can move on to repairing key global relationships that the war with Iran has severely damaged. Perhaps the most important and least discussed are those in Asia.

While there was much discussion about how closing the Strait of Hormuz negatively impacted China, as if Trump were playing some form of 4D chess, the reality is quite different. Trump’s lambasting of Australia, South Korea, and Japan for not helping open Hormuz militarily has undoubtedly negatively impacted U.S. influence in that region. Further, the impacts of economic disruption on these three countries, which are key players in the U.S. security strategy vis-a-vis China, cannot be overstated.

Despite the challenges ahead for the U.S. in securing a durable peace, there is perhaps a massive potential political opportunity for President Trump to fulfill a campaign promise.

A core promise that attracted independents and conservatives, and arguably was the single biggest driver of both of his electoral victories, was the removal of American troops from the Middle East. Preventing the continuation of, or yet another war with the U.S. is arguably Iran's most meaningful demand, and perhaps the most valuable for the U.S. at the bargaining table.

At this juncture, American basing across the region only serves to pressure and threaten Iran, whose existence is not and never has been an existential threat to the U.S. homeland. Further, what better way for President Trump to demonstrate victory than to publicly declare that our objectives have been met and that the troops are coming home, thus making a splash heading into midterms?

Conversely, this move would give the Iranian leadership a face-saving card to play with their own people, demonstrating that their sacrifice is justified.

The road to a durable peace between the two countries will not be easy. It requires leadership in Washington to make tough decisions and exert power to restrain Israel, which they have not been apt to do. However, for the political survival of this administration, it is necessary and if done correctly, provides ample opportunity both heading into the midterms and in restoring international faith in Washington as a good-faith partner.