United States President Donald Trump declared, “We will destroy a great civilization,” regarding Iran, set a deadline, and then announced a two-week ceasefire just one hour before that deadline expired. In this process, where critical issues such as the nuclear program, uranium enrichment and the lifting of sanctions are on the table, statements from both sides claiming victory continue to maintain uncertainty. While the Trump administration argues that the nuclear threat has been weakened, Tehran claims that its demands have been met.
Dr. Yıldız Önen said that this situation represents not a compromise, but a forced pause. She stated that Trump made this decision under pressure from the anti-war public in the United States and his own voter base, particularly ahead of the upcoming congressional midterm elections, and highlighted the obstacles preventing a concrete agreement. She also noted that Israel’s operations in Lebanon and Gaza will directly affect the future of the ceasefire, stressing that the massive humanitarian and structural destruction in the region makes it impossible to declare a “winner,” and that Iran has been pushed into a weaker economic position compared to before the war.
This is only a ceasefire; reaching an agreement is extremely difficult
Dr. Yıldız Önen described the current situation between Iran and the United States as a temporary pause rather than a compromise, pointing to the contradictions between the demands of the two sides. Dr. Önen said: “This is only a ceasefire; the aim is to reach an agreement between the parties within two weeks. However, I believe this process will be extremely difficult. Because the demands of both sides and the discourse they put forward while declaring the ceasefire contradict each other. The United States announced this process by claiming that it had halted the nuclear program and weakened Iran. Iran, on the other hand, argues that all of its conditions have been accepted. Even the published texts contain differences for both sides.
As long as the current positions are maintained, it does not appear possible to find a middle ground where both the United States and Iran can claim ‘victory.’ For example, while the United States demands a complete ban on uranium enrichment, Iran claims that this right has been recognized. There is a similar gap regarding the Strait of Hormuz and the lifting of sanctions. For this reason, what exists for now is only a ceasefire, and I do not believe that either side has emerged as a winner.”
There is massive destruction in the Middle East, Iran is weaker than before
Dr. Önen focused on the humanitarian and structural devastation caused by the military escalation in the region, stressing that the immense destruction left behind after the clashes is being overlooked. Önen also said: “Trump’s sudden declaration of a ceasefire after issuing harsh threats can be seen as a step back for him, but the broader picture must be considered. As in the case of Palestine, many ceasefires signed under pressure from regional countries have not even passed the first phase. Israel’s operations in Gaza and the West Bank are still ongoing. In this process, which is said to extend to Lebanon, the bombs have not fallen silent.
Those who claim that ‘Iran has won’ should look at the massive destruction in the country and in Lebanon. As academics have also emphasized, everything, from civilian residential areas to universities, has been devastated. I am not only referring to the killing of leaders; thousands of homes and public buildings have been destroyed. It will take a very long time for the Iranian people to recover from this devastation. Iran is now in a weaker economic position than before the war, and what benefit controlling the Strait of Hormuz will bring to the people remains a major question mark.”
It is not correct to say “Iran has won”
Dr. Yıldız Önen pointed to the impact of anti-war sentiment among both the United States and Iranian publics on political decisions, emphasizing that the resistance of societies has been decisive in this process. Önen said: “It is necessary to acknowledge the resistance shown by the Iranian people. Anti-war protests in the United States made Trump feel that the public does not want this war and that he had to bring the process to an end. In Iran, millions of people going to areas expected to be bombed and defending them demonstrated that peoples do not desire this conflict. All available surveys also show that both the Iranian and United States publics are fundamentally opposed to this war. Trump is politically cornered domestically, and his support has declined by around twenty percent. Sixty to seventy percent of the public does not want a war or another conflict with Iran. In order to maintain his majority in the Senate in the congressional midterm elections to be held in November, he was forced to declare a ceasefire in line with these public demands.”
Önen also outlined the scale of destruction in the region, referring to reactions from international legal experts and concrete data: “Last week, more than one hundred legal scholars from universities such as Harvard, Yale and Stanford published a letter stating that the United States’ attacks on Iran constitute a war crime. There is indeed destruction on a scale that amounts to a war crime. I am not only referring to the killing of leaders; if I recall correctly, more than 18,000 civilian residential areas, libraries, health centers and universities have been destroyed. Even a newly built bridge worth 300 million dollars, which had not yet been opened, was demolished. It will take a very long time for Iran to recover from this devastation. Therefore, without acknowledging this destruction, it is not correct to say that ‘Iran has won’; the region is now in a weaker economic position than before the war.”
The US must change its relationship with Israel to sustain global dominance
Dr. Yıldız Önen emphasized that relations between the United States and Israel may enter a more strained phase in the future, noting that this situation is critical for Trump’s political trajectory. Önen said: “I believe that relations between the United States and Israel need to shift in a way that is less favorable to Israel. Although Trump is known to support Zionism, he is an elected president facing a critical midterm election process. Losing these elections would mean losing his presidential power entirely, so he must pursue a policy oriented toward his own public. Under current conditions, this requires taking a stance against the Zionist policies pursued by Netanyahu. Indeed, officials who resigned in the United States openly stated that this war was entered into under pressure from Israel. This situation has caused significant harm not only to the United States but also to Gulf countries.”
Önen added that in order to maintain its global power, the United States must reconsider its Middle East strategy, arguing that the current situation is unsustainable. She also said: “The damage suffered by Gulf countries directly undermines United States interests. These countries have begun to express doubts about whether they can continue their economic and military agreements with the United States. Therefore, if the United States wants to sustain its dominance in the world, it must change its traditional relationship with the Israeli government. Whether this change will occur remains to be seen, but the prolongation of the war in the Middle East is not in favor of the Trump administration. The destruction and instability in the region do not serve the strategic objectives of the United States.”
Halting attacks in Lebanon is key to sustaining the ceasefire
Dr. Yıldız Önen said that Israel’s operations in Lebanon must be brought to an immediate end, stressing that this is critical for the sustainability of the current ceasefire. Önen said: “Stopping Israel’s attacks on Lebanon is one of the most fundamental conditions for maintaining the ceasefire. Iran also made the restoration of calm in Lebanon a condition for signing this agreement. For this reason, I expect the United States to take concrete steps on this issue and that the attacks will come to a halt in a short time.
Negotiations between the parties can only reach a conclusion through mutual concessions. Just as in the process between Palestine and Israel involving hostage exchanges and the partial reopening of borders, a similar method will likely be followed in any agreement with Iran. On the nuclear program, a rapid agreement could be reached on keeping uranium enrichment activities at a certain level and opening them to international inspection. As for Lebanon, an agreement has become imperative, as the country has reached a point often described in political science as a ‘failed state’ and has effectively turned into a second Gaza. This situation must be brought to an end without delay.”
Public pressure played a decisive role
Dr. Yıldız Önen reiterated that the primary factor behind the ceasefire decision was domestic pressure within the United States and global economic instability. Dr. Önen said: “I believe that sanctions will be partially lifted during the agreement process. However, in the end, it should be clearly seen that the side that stepped back is Trump and the United States administration. The main reason for this step back is the spread of the conflict to Gulf countries and the serious disruption of the global economy.
The United States public, including Trump’s own support base, made it very clear that it does not want this war. Trump’s statement that ‘our people do not want this war’ was, in fact, the clearest signal of the ceasefire. The large-scale public protests experienced by the United States during past crises such as Vietnam and Afghanistan explain why it has been so difficult for the administration to enter into such a war. In the face of this strong public reaction, the administration had no choice but to halt the conflict.”
Leave a Reply