Ted Grimsrud—March 2, 2026
The fog is still way too thick in the very early days of our new war to draw any stable conclusions about it. However, I believe that it is not too soon to see ways already about how the US/Israel attack on Iran underscores many of the problems humane people see with the current American Empire’s way of being in the world. Let me suggest five points.
- We do well to redouble our work against warism. American warism created a society with an enormous military and with constant prowar propaganda so that we live in a kind of tinderbox waiting for a spark that set the fire off. Now that the nation has allowed an apparently quite war-oriented person to become president we have little potential for derailing the momentum toward an enormous disaster. What is needed, if we somehow survive the current crisis, is a concerted effort to empty the tinderbox. I don’t know how that can happen, but it is needed to prevent another similar crisis.
- We do well to assume that the US government regularly lies, especially in relation to international affairs. We have lived with decades-long propaganda campaigns of dishonesty that have facilitated antipathy toward China, Iran, and Russia. They make it easy for our government to pursue destructive policies toward those countries with little resistance from the American people. So, we see an ongoing willingness among the American people to believe numerous mistruths regarding each of these countries as events unfold in the present.
- We do well to recognize that our government has for a long time been ruled by a single war party with surface, largely rhetorical differences on domestic issues. I know a few people who voted for Trump in 2024 due to his promises to be a peace president and out of disgust with the unabashed warism of the Biden/Harris administration. Quite likely, as numerous independent pundits are saying today, this current war will doom the Trump presidency and likely the Republican Party’s chances in national elections in the near future. At least as likely, the Democrats will in turn pursue warist policies when they gain power. Nothing significant will change in US foreign policy as long as this war party remains in power.
- We do well to emphasize that the biggest failure of the Obama and Biden presidencies was to allow our nuclear weapons regime to remain intact. Now we are stuck in a terrifying context where the person with the nuclear weapons launch code seems all too impulsive, amoral, fearful, egotistical, and shameless—and surrounded by incompetent sycophants. We are far removed from the day when Secretary of State Henry Kissinger prevented a desperate and near-crazed Richard Nixon from pursuing nuclear war on Vietnam.
- We do well to acknowledge that our top leaders have for years displayed great stupidity in pursuing numerous self-destructive foreign policies. Just a couple of quick examples are Biden’s aggressive pursuit of a proxy war against Russia. He rejected peace possibilities such as the 2022 accords reached in Istanbul between Russia and Ukraine that would have ended that conflict shortly after it started. Instead, the US made an effort to “bleed Russia” through the war and powerful sanctions. Not only did Russia instead “bleed” the US (note the depleted American weapons stockpiles that are now hindering the American war-making ability against Iran), but the sanctions have also led to much closer ties between China and Russia—precisely the opposite effect American policy makers hoped for. In Iran, just Saturday US/Israel assassinated Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei in hopes that this would lead to a breakdown of Iran’s leadership and a quick fall of its government. Instead, the early impression seems to be that this murder actually will strengthen Iran’s internal unity.
A possible silver lining in the American/Israeli aggression is that it may make clearer to people of good will around the world the character of the American Empire. For example, twice within the past nine months the US interrupted peace negotiations with a seemingly serious Iran ready to make concessions by launching in partnership with Israel vicious air attacks in efforts to end the Iranian government. In recent years, as the US seems to be losing stature in the world and likely will become ever more dependent on collaboration and negotiations with others, the country has proved to be fundamentally untrustworthy.
This country is in deep trouble. At the same time, the way to healing remains as true as ever—all life is precious, human solidarity is life giving and disallows Othering so-called enemies, and our calling is to trust in the reality of love (God) and turn from idols.
These are a couple of resources that I have found helpful in these issues:
I just learned of this Substack. This article gives a wide-ranging and what I think is insightful analysis of the first day after the US/Israel attack.
https://islanderreports.substack.com/p/the-last-entry-iraq-syria-lebanon
For months, I have regularly read the almost daily commentaries from Julian McFarlane, a retired Canadian corporate consultant who now lives in Japan. I think he’s pretty insightful.
Thinking Pacifism 
Ted,
I am a subscriber to Thinking Pacifism and a good friend of David Myers. I think we had lunch once with David in Chicago, maybe 30 years ago.
Anyway, I read your post today on Iran and then went to read The Islander post and thought it very interesting and informative. On Substack, though, it was difficult to find out about the people behind The Islander, Bowes and Nolan, and so it raised my suspicions. After doing a bit of digging it appears both are very tied in to Russian media and propaganda. See for example: https://mythdetector.com/en/about-zourabichvili-was-circulated/ There are a number of other sources, like Wikipedia, that have also documented their ties to the Russians.
I think we have to be very careful not to become unwilling or unknowing tools of bad actors in this age of disinformation. I just wanted to make sure you had this information.
Peace!
Paul
Paul Kuehnert 207-441-8366
Thanks for taking the time to share your concern, Paul. It seems like a curious comment, though. I am finding The Islander to be a helpful site and as near as I can tell is pretty accurate and truthful in what it says. On the other hand, I find the writings I see from the New York Times and Washington Post to be pretty misleading and even dishonest, mostly Deep State propaganda. It seems clear to me who the bad actors are.
Hi Ted,
Of course we know that the NY Times and WaPost are misleading and push US deep state propaganda. That doesn’t mean we don’t read them and do our best to discern what is really going on. I am saying that the same standard must be applied to sources like The Islander, particularly when the principals are documented to have actively pushed Russian propaganda on multiple occasions and settings. I do not find it “curious” to insist on applying a critical eye to all sources of information and being wary of sources that have a clear relationship with warmongers, wherever they come from on the international political spectrum. Caveat emptor!
Paul
Paul Kuehnert 207-441-8366
Hi Ted, it was good for me to read Paul’s comments above as I have a similar problem. I benefit a lot from your writings and I trust your judgement so I subscribed free to both your recommendations. I have read them both for last 2 days and am bit disturbed by them. I want to be open so I think that maybe I have been mislead by news I have been reading all my life. But this article today from Julian McFarlane just doesn’t seem believable……https://open.substack.com/pub/julianmacfarlane/p/the-enemy-of-my-enemy?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=49647
like Paul found above this just seems to be biased toward Russia.
Why do you think these substacks are more believable than say the Truth out or Fair, two you recommended few years ago and I read. I find them to be trustworthy and very different from the recent two recommendations.
Donald
Thanks, Donald. I certainly still greatly value FAIR and would say I trust it as much as anything I read. At some point in recent years, I quit reading Truthout. I don’t remember why.
The fact that someone says something bad about the US and something good about Russia doesn’t necessarily mean they are biased toward Russia in a bad way. We face a huge challenge in trying to find consistently good sources for information. I tend to be suspicious of criticisms of Russia because US and European propaganda has been so ubiquitous for so long with its Russophobia.
I appreciate your reply Ted, and keeping your two recommendations on my reading list to see another side of the story.
Donald
Ted, thanks for these thoughts. I’m going to avoid the controversy over sources of information and analysis and focus on one vital thing you bring out: that both major parties have been and still are far too militaristic.
A critical corollary is that, while we ostensibly have a two-party system, at best it is a “two-party plutocracy” — a male-dominated one. Monied interests have a greatly outsized influence. And they are basically self-serving and amoral (often immoral as well).
Probably the only way out is to “transcend” it, not merely revolt against it. And that requires a “transpartisan” movement. One that can/will replace our two-party system. A mere emergence of a third party (or more) is highly unlikely to succeed or be a longer term solution. Major “electoral reform” and building of new, or refined, structures of participatory democracy, from hyper-local to national, is a key part.
There are many places and ways this is being worked on. Many orgs are showing what can be done from those local to national levels; new ones rapidly forming. I’ll give just two referrals, out of many possible ones, purposely not including the tiny one I’m personally involved in (i.e., not a self-promotion).
The first one may sound, via its name, like a third party attempt, but it’s not: the “Forward Party” (ForwardParty.com). Rather, it seeks to identify and promote truly independent candidates. It avoids typical “platform” stances, focusing on electoral processes and the move toward actual representation and accountability. The more we achieve this, I believe the more we can and will have at least the potential of unwinding our American propensity toward expansionism and domination.
The other one that some may find encouraging and/or useful is a well-organized, high-functioning group on LinkedIn: “Generate Democracy!”. It currently has 832 members, mostly organization leaders or active members of NGOs, academics in pertinent democracy and truth-promoting or “depolarization” areas, etc. Less than a year ago, it came to include some recently-fired government workers now working outside government. To join, one has to be on LinkedIn, but anyone can find and read posts and see their activities.
The Forward Party issued a statement on the war against Iran which
Sorry that sent before I was ready to send it. The Forward Party issued a statement on the war against Iran that sounded supportive of the war. So I would not recommend it.
Bill, this reply applies to your completed comment, below, but I didn’t have the option to place it there.
First, let me make clear that I am fully and adamantly opposed to the US/Israel having initiated and now continuing this war. It’s an atrocity.
I appreciate your mention of the Forward Party statement on the war. I hadn’t seen that, not following them closely on a day-to-day basis.
If I have understood the Forward Party’s principles and methods rightly, plus what I see currently on their website, the statement is not a policy position or any sort of judgment on the war. (The website, incidentally, is quite extensive and informative, so wherever one lands on supporting the org or not, I think the site is “must read” info for anyone who hopes for feasible and meaningful changes in our electoral and governance systems).
One further point before I will include the full statement to which you refer: Forward Party is purposely not presenting any form of what we typically think of as a platform. Note that they do speak of the process of constructing a platform via a broad range of citizens not committed to any current party … I don’t know enough about what they mean to comment further on that. Process, for elections and for governing accountability particularly, is where they focus and specialize, not political philosophy broadly or issue positions more specifically.
Note that the released Iran war statement accordingly focuses on how things should have been and should yet be handled by our constitution being properly followed. I don’t read the statement as either pro or con on the war itself. One might not like the overall tone or phrases like “strong national defense” or “force for good”, but the emphasis is on properly following our established processes for careful deliberation, which has clearly not happened. Here is their issued statement:
Mar. 3, 2026 – Washington D.C.
The Forward Party mourns the loss of American service members killed in Operation Epic Fury, as well as innocent civilians. We hold their families close in our thoughts and hope for a full recovery of those who were wounded.
For many years, Iran has been a destabilizing player on the world stage, supporting terrorist militias, propping up oppressive regimes, conducting cyberattacks, and selling arms to other hostile actors. These are facts.
At the same time, however, Americans want peace and demand that war not be rushed into. America’s credibility to act on the world stage comes from the strength of our deliberative decision-making. The Constitution clearly grants the power to declare war to Congress. Yet, neither Congress nor the courts have clearly defined when military action requires a formal declaration of war, leaving presidents to make that decision on their own.
In this Iran conflict, there has barely even been an explanation as to why and why now. This weakens our national unity.
The Forward Party believes America can maintain a strong national defense and be a force for good in the world while honoring constitutional balance. A presidency that respects the law, matched with a Congress willing to act as a co-equal branch of government, strengthens our country, protects our troops, and upholds the rule of law that defines us as a nation.
In our 250th year, we must rededicate ourselves to the constitutional principles that have enabled the United States to maintain such a critical position on the world stage.
-FORWARD PARTY