Pezeshkian challenges US public to interrogate war profiteering amid escalating geopolitical tensions

Indigenous communities globally have long warned against the militarization of land and resources, framing war as a violation of sacred ecological balance. In Iran, Baloch and Kurdish peoples face dual oppression from state violence and foreign intervention, yet their calls for autonomy are sidelined in geopolitical narratives. Traditional conflict resolution methods, such as the Pashtun *jirga* system, prioritize dialogue over escalation but are dismissed as 'naive' in modern diplomacy.

The 1953 US-British coup against Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh set a precedent for regime change under the guise of 'stability.' The 1980s Iran-Iraq War, fueled by Western arms sales to both sides, exemplifies how external actors profit from prolonged conflict. Post-WWII, the US and USSR institutionalized proxy wars in the Global South, normalizing perpetual violence as a tool of influence.

In West Africa, the ECOWAS bloc has mediated conflicts by prioritizing regional economic integration over military intervention, a model largely ignored in Western diplomacy. The Japanese concept of *heiwa* (peace) emphasizes collective security through mutual prosperity, contrasting with the US’s 'peace through strength' rhetoric. Indigenous Australian *Treaty* movements highlight how unresolved colonial violence perpetuates cycles of conflict, a parallel to Iran’s unresolved 1953 trauma.

Research in political science (e.g., Blainey’s *The Causes of War*) demonstrates that wars are rarely initiated by public demand but by elite interests, often masked as 'national security.' The arms trade, valued at $2.1 trillion annually, thrives on manufactured threats, with 60% of global arms exports coming from the US and Russia. Game theory models show that escalation spirals are rational for actors prioritizing short-term gains over long-term stability.

Persian poetry, from Rumi to Forough Farrokhzad, frames conflict as a rupture in cosmic harmony, urging reconciliation over vengeance. In the US, protest music (e.g., Nina Simone’s 'Mississippi Goddam') has historically exposed war’s human cost, but such voices are marginalized in mainstream discourse. The Bahá’í principle of unity in diversity offers a spiritual counter to zero-sum geopolitics, yet is often dismissed as idealistic.

Scenario modeling by the RAND Corporation predicts that a US-Iran war could disrupt 30% of global oil supply, triggering a $10 trillion economic contraction. Alternative futures, such as the 2015 JCPOA’s revival, show that diplomacy can reduce regional tensions by 40% within a decade. Grassroots movements, like Code Pink’s anti-war campaigns, demonstrate that public pressure can shift policy, but require sustained mobilization.

Iranian feminists and labor activists have long opposed both theocratic oppression and imperialist aggression, yet their demands for democratic sovereignty are erased. In the US, Black and Latino communities bear the brunt of military recruitment and budget cuts to social programs, yet their anti-war organizing is underreported. Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, caught in crossfire, articulate the human cost of geopolitical games, but their testimonies are framed as 'biased.'