Economist Jeffrey Sachs delivers sharp criticism of Donald Trump’s conduct in connection with the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran. He describes Trump’s decisions as short-term, erratic, and unreliable, and sees possible links between political announcements and market movements. In light of repeatedly abrupt statements, he suspects that insiders within the US administration could be profiting from market fluctuations. More broadly, he warns of a deeper issue: Trump’s impulsive leadership style and lack of reliability pose a threat to international stability. At the same time, Sachs considers the checks and balances within the US political system to be weakened. Congress, he argues, is largely failing to fulfill its constitutional role, particularly in matters of war and trade policy, while the executive branch operates with little effective oversight.
Regarding the Middle East conflict, Sachs describes a closely intertwined relationship between the United States and Israel on political, intelligence, and personal levels, particularly between Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. He portrays both leaders as strongly driven by personal motives and accuses them of making strategic miscalculations, such as assuming that a violent regime change in Iran could be achieved quickly. He rejects the portrayal of Iran as solely aggressive and emphasizes that Tehran has repeatedly sought negotiations over many years, especially within the framework of the 2015 nuclear agreement, which was later abandoned by the United States. Since then, he argues, both the US and Israel have contributed to escalation through military actions and sanctions.
Sachs considers a near-term diplomatic resolution unlikely. Statements by Trump about alleged progress in negotiations with Iran were immediately denied by Iranian officials, suggesting either deliberate misinformation or a detachment from reality. In practice, military attacks continue on all sides. Sachs describes the situation as one marked by a lack of trust, absence of serious negotiations, and no clear prospect of ending the war. He places hope in the involvement of other major powers such as India, China, Russia, and Brazil, which could act as stabilizing forces and exert pressure on the United States to prevent further escalation and return to a rules-based international order.