06/22/2025
Trump - BiBi vs Iran - What Now?
Please Note: This article is theoretical in nature. It extrapolates recent events involving the U.S. and Israeli military attacks on Iran as of June 21, 2025, to anticipate what may unfold in the months ahead.
(I am not an expert)
Based on the tone, content, and intent of both Donald Trump’s and Benjamin Netanyahu’s speeches following the joint U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iran, we are no longer in the realm of isolated military action. We are entering what history may record as the early phase of a new forever war—one that will reshape not just the Middle East, but the global balance of power, the role of international law, and the future of liberal democracy in both the U.S. and Israel. This is no longer about nuclear deterrence. It is a strategic pivot toward prolonged regional domination through open-ended escalation.
Moving forward, we should expect a sustained air and cyber campaign against Iran’s military, infrastructure, and economic hubs. Trump all but confirmed it when he said there were “many more targets” left, and that this would not be a “one-and-done” operation. Netanyahu has reinforced this with his commitment to “finish the job” and his public expectation that Iran will retaliate, giving Israel the justification to strike even harder and more frequently.
Retaliation by Iran is inevitable—likely through its network of regional proxies. We can expect Hezbollah to launch strikes from Lebanon, the Houthis to step up operations in the Red Sea, and Shi’a militias in Iraq and Syria to target U.S. personnel and assets. Iran’s cyber divisions will likely intensify operations targeting American energy grids, financial institutions, and critical infrastructure. This will create the pretext for an expanded digital theatre of war that justifies further militarization of cyberspace by both the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies.
Domestically, the United States is on a path toward semi-permanent wartime governance. Trump has already invoked the need for “stronger executive action” and emergency powers under the guise of national security. Expect increased surveillance, the revival of military tribunals, a crackdown on dissent framed as “anti-American,” and a legal campaign to curtail the rights of journalists, whistleblowers, and political opponents. With the 2026 midterms now in question due to “instability,” we may see moves to suspend elections or severely restrict electoral oversight in certain jurisdictions—especially if retaliatory attacks on U.S. soil occur.
For Netanyahu, the war provides an opportunity to consolidate power and deflect from ongoing corruption trials and deep internal dissent. The mass anti-judicial reform protests that plagued Israel earlier in the year have already been pushed off the front page. War unifies the public, justifies repression, and neuters political opposition. In the months ahead, expect his administration to pass new laws expanding the Prime Minister’s wartime authority, increasing media censorship under national security grounds, and criminalizing protest or speech deemed “supportive of enemy narratives.”
Internationally, we are likely to see major diplomatic fractures. The UN Security Council will remain paralysed due to U.S. veto power, but expect a growing chorus of opposition from non-aligned states and even some NATO members. France, Germany, and Turkey will likely push for ceasefire negotiations, while China and Russia exploit the chaos to advance their own geopolitical goals—arming proxies, brokering alternative alliances, and attempting to discredit Western liberalism on the global stage.
The Gulf States—particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE—will find themselves caught in a delicate balancing act. Publicly, they may condemn Iran’s response; privately, many will resist further escalation that risks destabilizing their own regimes. But if the conflict spills into the Strait of Hormuz, as it likely will, oil shipping lanes will become targets, driving up global energy prices and triggering inflation across already fragile economies.
Meanwhile, the weaponization of the war narrative will spread. In both the U.S. and Israel, critics of the war will be painted as traitors or enemy sympathizers. This will be echoed by billionaire-funded media ecosystems that frame permanent war as a moral necessity. Expect Hollywood, mainstream cable news, and social media influencers to push narratives of heroism, righteousness, and divine destiny—anything to justify a war that cannot be won, only sustained.
Canada will not be immune. We will be pressured to “stand with our allies,” possibly dragged into joint intelligence operations or logistical support missions, especially as cyberattacks cross the 49th parallel. We will face economic consequences through inflation and supply chain disruption, and increased political polarization as our own electorate divides between solidarity with Washington and growing anti-war sentiment.
All of this sets the stage for a future in which military conflict becomes a self-sustaining engine for political power. We’re looking at the institutionalization of war, not as a tragic last resort, but as a governing philosophy. It allows leaders to rewrite constitutions, control narratives, and criminalize opposition—all while draping themselves in flags and manufactured glory.
What comes next isn’t peace. It’s inertia. A slow, grinding, perpetual state of militarized nationalism that devours diplomacy, international law, and domestic liberty. If there’s no clear political will—either in Congress or the Knesset—to stop this now, then history will judge these strikes not as a climax, but as a trigger. And what they will have triggered is the slow death of peacetime governance.
We should be clear-eyed about what we’re seeing. This isn’t a regional dispute. It’s the reconfiguration of the post–World War II order under the shadow of drone strikes and national security edicts. The question is no longer how this war started. It’s how, or if, it will ever end.
GC
