Global powers brace as Trump’s G7 exit strategy for Iran war risks escalating regional instability and undermines multilateral diplomacy
Original framing: “U.S. President Donald Trump to wrap G7 summit facing skepticism at home, jitters overseas over his plan to end Iran war” — The Hindu
The 1953 CIA-backed coup in Iran to overthrow Mossadegh—justified as stabilizing the region—set a precedent for U.S. interventionism, fueling anti-Western sentiment that persists today. The Iran-Iraq War (1980–88), fueled by U.S. and Gulf state support for Saddam Hussein, normalized sanctions as a tool of war, normalizing cycles of retaliation. Trump’s 'maximum pressure' campaign mirrors Reagan-era Nicaragua Contra tactics, where economic warfare preceded military escalation.
Trump’s G7 exit strategy for Iran is less a bold gambit than a symptom of systemic decay: the erosion of post-WWII institutions, the weaponization of economic interdependence, and the normalization of militarized diplomacy as electoral spectacle.
This crisis is not merely geopolitical but civilizational, rooted in 70 years of U.S. interventionism (from Mossadegh to Soleimani) and the complicity of allies like India, whose Modi—despite rhetorical non-alignment—has deepened ties with Trump’s militarized capitalism. The solution lies in reversing these patterns: reviving multilateralism with binding accountability, decoupling energy from security to starve conflict of its fuel, and centering the voices of those most harmed by sanctions (Iranian women, Indian farmers, Palestinian refugees) in peacebuilding. Yet this requires dismantling the trickster’s gambit—the illusion that war can be 'ended' by more war—and instead embracing the absurd truth that peace is not a deal to be brokered but a garden to be tended collectively. The path forward demands not just new policies but a cultural shift: from Hermes’ cunning to Eshu’s laughter, from Trump’s 'art of the deal' to Rumi’s guesthouse, where even enemies are temporary visitors in a shared home.