Afrasianet - Mazen Al Najjar - From using negotiations as a pretext for surprise attacks to kidnapping and assassinating heads of state and reneging on U.S. commitments—including his own—Trump's damage to U.S. diplomacy will be evident for years to come.
As the U.S.-Israel war on Iran enters its sixth month, it is clear to everyone, except for Trump's most hypocritical and sympathetic Israel, that the war has suffered a resounding failure.
A war of aggression that was supposed to spark a revolution, but instead mobilized popular support for the Iranian government in defiance of the country's oppressors, who have killed thousands of citizens and destroyed civilian infrastructure. A war waged to neutralize Israel's main adversary would certainly make this opponent far stronger geopolitically than before, while pushing U.S. support for Israel to an all-time low.
Besides wasting the lives of American soldiers in an unconstitutional war waged under false pretenses, Trump's mistake has drained the American arsenal and pushed the country into nearly $100 billion more in debt. Meanwhile, the longer Trump delays declaring his inevitable defeat, the greater the risk of an economic catastrophe engulfing not just America, but the entire world.
If this nightmare can be avoided, writes American writer Brian McGlenchie, Trump has probably done the longest damage to a critical but intangible national asset: the ability of American diplomacy to engage positively and effectively with its counterparts around the world.
From using negotiations as a pretext for surprise attacks to kidnapping and assassinating heads of state and reneging on U.S. commitments—including his own—Trump's damage to U.S. diplomacy will be evident for years to come. Of course, this is not to say that the reputation of U.S. foreign policy was sparkling before Trump came to power, but rather that he and his team were able to drag it to very low levels.
According to McGlinchey, Trump's cooperation with Israel to wage an unprovoked war on Iran exemplifies one of the worst foreign policy decisions in the history of the American Republic. But it is important to recognize that Trump was prepared for the catastrophe of 2026 eight years ago: In May 2018, at the instigation of then-National Security Adviser John Bolton, and Trump's favoring donors, Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal.
Canceling the nuclear deal and trusting America
The Iran nuclear deal was the culmination of two years of painstaking negotiations on delicate technical items, conducted by representatives not only of the United States and Iran, but also of China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.
Under the nuclear deal, Iran passed significant restrictions on its scientific nuclear energy program in exchange for the lifting of harsh economic sanctions. Among the terms of the deal were obliging Iran to phase out medium-enriched uranium, reducing its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98 percent, fixing future enrichment at 3.67 percent, agreeing to additional external monitoring, and disabling the heavy-water reactor.
In response to the wishes of ardent supporters of Israel and Republicans eager to regard any deal made by the Obama administration as high treason, Trump fiercely attacked the Iran nuclear deal throughout the 2016 election campaign, declaring that "his top priority is to dismantle this disastrous agreement with Iran." After being appointed national security adviser in April 2018, Bolton , a proponent of war on Iran, was quick to urge Trump to follow through on his promises to scrap the nuclear deal, despite Iran's full commitment to it.
Martin Malin, of the Belfer Center for Studies, said at the time: "Trump's move shows that America cannot be trusted to deliver on its promises. The move will escalate tensions in an already tense Middle East, and will give a pretext to hardliners and defenders of the nuclear bomb in Iran."
After Trump's withdrawal and the reinstatement of previous sanctions, Iran waited a full year, before starting to renege on its commitments, to increase uranium enrichment as a pressure card to reach a new agreement and ease sanctions.
After denying that Iran had developed a nuclear weapon — which U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly deemed true — Iran returned to negotiations during Trump's second term, once again ready to give up highly enriched uranium. In fact, less than 48 hours before the U.S.- Israeli aggression on Feb. 28, Iran made concessions that included reducing enriched uranium to 60 percent, halting new enrichment for several years, subsequently limiting enrichment to about 20 percent, and expanding IAEA oversight.
Britain's National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, was surprised by the strength of Iran's offer, as a reason for hope to avoid war. But his hopes and those of others were about to be dashed.
The Trump administration's assault on diplomacy is numerous, but nothing is more egregious than using ongoing negotiations as a means of launching a surprise attack on a negotiating partner, which included the assassination of the head of state.
This is exactly what the Trump administration did in Iran on February 28, 2026. Following the third round of talks in Geneva on February 26, the two countries were scheduled to hold what were described as technical discussions the following week. Instead, in alliance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump launched a full-scale war on Iran.
In addition to killing 168 elementary school students, hundreds of civilians and soldiers, the first attack resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, his daughter, son-in-law, and infant granddaughter.
Turning negotiations into a 'deliberate ploy'
Rubio has further undermined America's credibility by trying to portray the surprise attack defensively. "We knew that Israel was going to take action, which would lead to an attack on U.S. forces, and we knew that if we didn't launch an attack before they launched those attacks, we would suffer even greater losses," Rubio said. Observers quickly noted that regardless of Israel's status as a sovereign state, its reliance on Washington meant that Trump effectively had the power to veto any Israeli strike, making the rest of Rubio's justifications flimsy.
February was not the first time the Trump administration's dishonest diplomacy tricked Iran into launching a surprise attack. In June 2025, the administration completed five rounds of negotiations with Iran and scheduled a sixth round on June 15. On June 13, Israel launched an attack on Iran, which came as no surprise to Trump, who boasted that Israel had informed him in advance. On June 22, Trump joined the war with Operation Midnight Hammer, bombing Iran's nuclear facilities.
In addition to being intrinsically immoral, the outbreak of surprise attacks during negotiations undermines America's long-term interests and fuels the mistrust of all those who witnessed this blatant betrayal. After the all-out war began on February 28, 2026, Washburn University law professor Ali Khan wrote about the consequences of turning negotiations into a "deliberate ploy":
"The breach of good faith tells the whole world that it is futile to conclude any agreement with those who will do the opposite after creating an expectation or dependence on the other side. Iran, or any country, will be very reluctant to trust the Trump administration again in future negotiations."
It should not be assumed that global distrust will be so closely tied to Trump that he is gone once he leaves office. In his administration, there are at least two potential candidates to succeed him in office, Marco Rubio and Jay DeVance, as well as senators, lawmakers, and governors who have cheered Trump's outrageous behavior and are inclined to emulate him. Don't think for a moment that Democrats are immune to damaging presidential precedents, whatever their comments when entrenched by a Republican president.
By withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, Trump reneged on a pledge made by a former president and repeatedly reneged on his pledges.
________________
Mazen Al Najjar - Writer, researcher, and translator in history and sociology.
________________
