By Vishwamithra –

“In peace, sons bury their fathers. In war, fathers bury their sons.” ~ Herodotus

Donald Trump’s latest post in Truth Social is thus: ‘A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS? We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World. 47 years of extortion, corruption and death, will finally end. God Bless the Great People of Iran!’

It is not a random utterance by the leader of the so-called ‘free world’. Caught up in a quagmire of what appears to be a dastardly conducted warfare, both Israel and the United States of America seem to be relentless in pursuing their own perennial agendas for world dominance. Donald Trump, in particular, is notorious for exaggerated abuse of the English language; the words he delivers truly represent his thinking process and sometimes border on insanity and childishness. But Trump does not seem to care. His own self-image always overshadows real dangers and political injuries that might

be caused to the very continuation of the status quo of society.

Nevertheless, his latest Truth Social post represents a challenge not only to Iran—an heir to one of the most ancient civilizations known to man—but also to the global order that views the preservation of such heritage as vital to the civilized world. Ancient civilizations were distinct, yet often interconnected through networks of trade and diplomacy, though information exchange was slow and rarely accessible to the general population. For instance, the speed with which Trump’s post last night was disseminated to the world stands in stark contrast to the slow transmission of information in the ancient world. Such abuse of modern technology for his own politically narrow and socially disruptive

gains should be condemned without qualification.

However, that is not the case. Human civilization, whether one agrees with me or not, has advanced toward tremendous achievements despite the rule of brutal and incompassionate leaders who have led the world to the brink of apocalypse. Challenging Iran in terms of seeing the end of a civilization is not a shallow undertaking. This buttresses the argument that Donald Trump is more superficial than one would estimate him. There is a major disconnect between his war rhetoric and his actual goals;

these gaps prove his threats are largely empty.

But Trump has achieved one of the chief components of his very being: attracting attention to himself. The whole world is looking to him for the next step. Global leaders and markets are consistently reactive to his speeches and policy shifts, such as his recent engagement in the Middle East and his “blunt threats” regarding NATO defense spending. Trump is making the Gun Fight at O. K. Corral look like an afternoon picnic. What was once branded as a ‘regime change’ has now become a campaign for the destruction of a civilization. Such an undertaking by any leader in the modern world should be universally condemned and the one who delivered such a drastic statement must stand the test of ultimate human judgment.

The manifest results of such a sublime process- civilization- are far too sacred to be surrendered to the delusions of a madman or the shattering finality of a single afternoon’s bombardment. The “good guy/bad guy” construct is a false dichotomy that ignores the nuance of human behavior, where individuals rarely fall into all-good or all-bad categories; and it is a direct consequence of desire to conquer the ‘other’. The materially strong always has an edge over the perspective weak. The exercise of power often overlooks the nuanced, idiosyncratic needs of the human condition. Donald trump, it appears, has become a willing victim of this particular paradigm of human conflict.

The time, as I write this column, is past 11pm, Sri Lanka time. The deadline for Iran to open the Straits of Hormuz expires in another 6 hours. An unrelenting march toward certain apocalypse could be averted only in two ways: either Iran caves in and opens the Straits or Donald Trump resorts to his usual self and postpones his deadline, once again.

Who has the most to lose by adhering to his own stance? It is oft repeated that rigidity is one stark disadvantage in the enterprise of diplomacy. Refusing to adapt one’s stance in negotiation is often a recipe for a Pyrrhic victory—or outright failure. Donald Trump, sometimes adopts a stance of strength. He constantly paints his predecessors as weak, indecisive, and irresolute. Through the repetition of selected phrases, he tries to elevate himself above the rest. Having ascended to the helm of power—and with control over the nuclear switch—he is fully aware of the unenviable position he occupies. He is now adamant not just on creating history, but on redefining it altogether.

In the same vein, does Trump have the raw guts to follow through on the ultimatum he has thrown at Iran? Is a businessman—who some call a pretender of success while his companies declared bankruptcy on six occasions—secure enough within himself to cross the line he painted in the sand? It is crystal clear that he thrives on attention. The ‘otherworldly’ nature of his Truth Social postings, which he often shares hourly, confirms this.

In the context of this convoluted circumstance, what can the world do? Especially a small country like Sri Lanka has no choice other than hoping for the best and prepare for the worst. Where is Trump taking this world to? Not only the American voter, every man, woman and child in today’s world is demanding an answer for the proverbial question: Am I better off today than at the time Donald Trump assumed power?

*The write can be reached at vishwamithra1984@gmail.com