Not a just war

Harry Huebner in his letter to the editor (Vanishing limits, March 7) was, in my opinion, bang on in his analysis of where the world now finds itself because of the U.S. Operation Epic Fury attack on Iran. Like him, I am skeptical of the possibility of a just war, generally believing that just wars exist only in theory, never in reality.

This war has already shown no American inclination toward reasonable justification, international legality, judicious destruction and commensurate violence, and anticipation of desirable outcomes — the determinants of just war. As in all wars, the first casualties are truth, reason, morality and humanity.

The language of war is deliberately deceitful, meant to divert our attention from its real agenda and its human consequences.

The pretense that this was a defensive move necessitated because all diplomatic channels had been exhausted simply does not stand up as more details about the preparation for war are revealed. The evidence regarding Iran as a nuclear threat — nuclear buildup and capacity — is unsubstantiated, by now a well-known falsehood. The reluctance to call it war, instead depicting it as a “targeted major combat operation” seems clearly intended to appease MAGA folks incensed with U.S. participation in foreign wars.

Any attempts to normalize this attack as a reasonable response to Iranian rhetoric falls pitiably short.

The reasons given and the callous explanations offered defy reality. It is easier to believe that both U.S. President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu see the war as an opportunity to distract attention from their corruption and other criminal allegations.

It is also clear that neither of them has the slightest regard for international law or, for that matter, only necessary violence. U.S. Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth’s flippant but hostile attitude regarding “stupid rules of engagement,” future “nation building” or “democracy,” and politically correct wars” demonstrate a level of arrogant callousness at least equal to Iran’s attacks on its own people. This is not a last resort as in “all reasonable alternatives” have been exhausted.

One can only guess that their goals are domination — Netanyahu as the powerbroker in the Middle East, and Trump, the whole world! There was no indication that an attack on Israel was imminent nor that Iran had become a nuclear threat. Even more farfetched is the idea that Iran had to be attacked because “they were going to strike us first.”

What could have been anticipated is that Iran would respond by attacking American allies, that they would try to cause as much destruction and blood shed as possible, and that the Americans were in for a much longer than expected war.

When asked about an endgame Trump’s answer is “unconditional surrender,” and having a say in who will govern Iran in the future, both of which seems patently delusional. It is becoming increasingly apparent that there was no clear-cut strategy to deal with either retaliation or long-term conflict, or even “winning” for that matter, because nobody seems to have thought of what winning might actually mean in this situation.

Has any thought been given to what peace in the region might look like, what reconstruction in Gaza and Iran would entail, and how “normalcy,” as defined by sovereignty and people’s rights in the UN charter, might be restored to a traumatized country and its inhabitants?

Has anyone thought about the consequences of the many states in the region and around the world being drawn into the war? Has anyone considered the human cost?

The human devastation of war is always calamitous and traumatic — innocent children are killed, families lose loved ones, soldiers live with the horrors of losing comrades and the terrors of war. The injustices fuel hatred and thoughts of despair, revenge and retaliation. Normal relationships and trust seem unattainable. The impacts are devastating and consequences are lifelong. Wars have no winners.

All of which makes the response of Canada and some European allies mystifying. We all know the war is illegal and unjustified. I suppose we all know that Trump and his cronies will try to punish anyone who dares criticize even his wildest transgressions.

But we all know that he has maligned and threatened all of us publicly and any attempts at appeasement have been futile. And we all know we could become the next targets of aggression. Only Spain seems to have the backbone to say, “enough is enough.”

Would that Canada could do the same invoking the UN principles of freedom from want and fear for all the world’s people.

John R. Wiens is dean emeritus at the faculty of education, University of Manitoba.