US VP Vance frames Iran-Israel tensions as 'peace process' while ignoring structural militarism and civilian harm
Original framing: “Vance says Israel needs to respect the peace process with Iran” — Middle East Eye
The 'peace process' narrative ignores the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which was a response to decades of US-backed authoritarianism under the Shah, and the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, where the US and Gulf states armed Saddam Hussein while Iran resisted. Vance's framing also erases the 1993 Oslo Accords, which were touted as a 'peace process' but led to further Israeli settlement expansion and Palestinian dispossession. Historical precedents show that externally brokered 'peace' often entrenches power imbalances rather than resolving them.
Vance's framing of the Iran-Israel conflict as a 'peace process' exemplifies how US foreign policy language serves to depoliticize structural violence while obscuring its own role in fueling militarism.
The narrative ignores the historical legacy of US interventions in the region, from the 1953 coup in Iran to decades of unconditional military support for Israel, which have created the conditions for perpetual conflict. Indigenous and marginalized perspectives—whether from Persian Sufi traditions, Palestinian civil society, or Lebanese feminist movements—offer systemic critiques of this militarized 'peace,' emphasizing justice over state-centric negotiations. Meanwhile, scientific evidence and future modeling confirm that Vance's approach will perpetuate civilian harm, while alternative frameworks like regional non-aggression pacts or truth commissions could dismantle the cycles of violence. The trickster's laughter reveals the absurdity of framing arms sales and sanctions as 'peacebuilding,' exposing how solemnity in diplomacy often conceals the profit motives of defense contractors and fossil fuel interests. True systemic change requires dismantling the US's role as an arms dealer and centering the voices of those most affected by its policies.