Trump and the PR ceasefire exposed

Trump announces a ceasefire deal between Israel and Iran. But is this the result of bold diplomacy, or a desperate PR attempt to salvage his image after being blindsided by Netanyahu’s strike? What does this reveal about a President more obsessed with control over his PR? And where does Trump’s ceasefire leave international peace?

On June 24th, US President Donald Trump has claimed a ceasefire agreement has been reached between Israel and Iran. At first glance, the Trump authorised the attacks on Iran played a decisive foreign policy shift, signalling clever manoeuvring. The BBC reported on June 24th that Trump’s gamble with strikes has “paid off.” This is a naïve understanding, and others should not see it in this light. In truth, the move reflected desperation, not strategy.

Far from seeking war, Trump had edged closer than ever to brokering a peace deal with Iran and its proxies, including the Houthis in Yemen. He intended to exit Middle East entanglements and cement his self-proclaimed image as a peacemaker. But with one calculated move, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu undermined that ambition. Israel’s independent strike on June 13th forced Trump’s hand: either follow through and appear in command, or remain silent and risk looking powerless. Faced with embarrassment, Trump chose image preservation over strategic restraint.

This turning point reveals deepening fractures in the US-Israel alliance. Netanyahu, driven by long-held ambitions to dismantle Iranian nuclear infrastructure, exploited Trump’s need for dominance. Trump did not want these strikes – the strikes were not in his interest.

Prior to Israel’s surprise military strikes, Trump recurrently reassured the world of the promising progress being made during US-Iran nuclear negotiations. Signaling real diplomatic progress, describing talks as “fairly close to a pretty good agreement.” Iran even showed openness to US inspections, further fuelling hopes for a diplomatic breakthrough. Trump maintained his hard-line stance in public, but still positioned himself as open to negotiation. The Iranians had strong resistance to Trump’s “zero enrichment fantasies” while noting that both sides had kept communication channels open. Trump even went as far to publicly warn Netanyahu that “a strike… would be inappropriate to do right now because we’re very close to a solution.”

These developments stood in sharp contrast to Trump’s 2018 decision to unilaterally withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). At that time, his administration declared the Iran nuclear deal flawed beyond repair.

Despite his combative tone, Trump used diplomacy to reinforce his image as a master negotiator. His approach combined threat with dialogue, casting him as the ultimate powerbroker and peacemaker capable of securing a “better than pretty good” deal, one that, unlike Obama’s JCPOA, would align more closely with his political brand.

Although, what most important to Trump, is his ego. An image which he cannot let out of his control. A fictious character, which the last 11 days have highlighted, Trump cares about more than anything. And all at once as Israeli bombs descended upon on June 13th, Trump’s image was shattered. His character embarrassed. Making every US action since that day all because Trump’s ego took a hit.

A Netanyahu win

A strike… would be inappropriate to do right now because we’re very close to a solution.

With Trump so close to the deal he craved, so close to perpetuating the peacemaker title he bestowed upon himself, only for it to be snatched from grasp on the verge of completion, Netanyahu whirled away with a profound victory.

There is little doubt that in recent weeks tensions between the controversial allies of the US and Israel have been showing cracks. Understanding the context of these difficulties between Trump and Netanyahu can arguably unravel more than meets the eye of the ceasefire and June 13th attacks.

Most significantly, is Trump’s recent deal with the Houthis in Yemen, a proscribed terrorist group and proxy militia group of Iran. The Houthis were strangling American trade passing through the Red Sea, a key shipping lane for the US and therefore a substantial economic blow. Hence, Trump put any allegiances with Israel to one side because the domestic necessities of agreeing a deal with the Houthis were paramount.

The deal that Trump agreed with the Houthis meant the US were no longer to attack the Iranian proxy group, whom had launched serious attacks on Israel. In return, the Houthis were no longer to attack US ships passing through the Red Sea. Although, what is most remarkable about Trumps deal with the Houthis is that it was two days after the Houthis hit Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport with a ballistic missile.

In Netanyahu’s mind this act of diplomacy by Trump must have felt like an arrogant betrayal. Leaving Israel to fend to themselves from a deadly enemy. Surely giving Netanyahu a moment of pause about what his ally Trump really was capable of. Completely disregarding an affiliate for private interests.

Hence, as Trump was on the verge of a deal with another Israeli enemy, Netanyahu’s calculation must have been made for him by the Houthi deal, knowing that Israel could not be left alone again. They needed their ally in a world growing more and more anti-Israel. What’s more, it is no secret of Netanyahu’s long-term ambitions of eliminating Iranian nuclear capabilities. As early as the 90’s the Israeli Prime Minister has fantasied.

While there are other contextual elements that combine and must be taken into consideration, such as the depleting forces of Iranian proxies across the middle east, and the fall of Bashar Al-Assad, making Syrian airspace free to navigate missiles through towards Iran, Netanyahu’s fear of Trump’s abandonment must not be overlooked.

Thus, in bombing Iranian nuclear sites on June 13th, Netanyahu killed two birds with one stone: achieving a long-time desire and dragging Trump’s America back on the side of the Israeli’s. This was Netanyahu revenge. To control Trump and give him his victory.

The narrative

Trump has built his political brand around projecting himself as the ultimate decision-maker and global powerbroker. His supporters expect him to command the world stage decisively, reinforcing his image as the “boss of the world.” However, Israel’s strike on Iran exposed a vulnerability in this narrative.

We have capabilities that no other country on this planet possesses.

When Netanyahu acts independently, Trump risks appearing as a bystander rather than a leader. This perception undermines the core of his appeal, especially among his MAGA base, which values strength and autonomy. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasised this point during a press briefing: “We have capabilities that no other country on this planet possesses.” Yet, Trump’s apparent lack of ability to stop the strike weakens such messages as hollow.

By bringing America back on the Israeli side, Netanyahu destroyed the potential of any US deal with Iran unless Israel can have a say. Thereby, Trump is being pushed and challenged to make a decision. One suspects Netanyahu doesn’t care how Trump saves image.  He has pulled trump away from a deal with Iran and closer to his version of diplomacy.

Trump has continually reiterated that America does not want to be involved in foreign wars. A position which was the reason many voted for him. A wide-ranging Economist/YouGov poll found that 53% of voters who supported Trump in the 2024 presidential election did not want the United States to participate in Israel’s military campaign. That number highlighted a deep resistance within his core constituency to another Middle East conflict. High-profile figures within the MAGA movement, including Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, have criticised military escalation. Moreover, Trump’s own campaign benefited from his promise to extract the US from “forever wars” in the Middle East.

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie reinforced this sentiment by declaring on X, “This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution.” Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, who co-sponsored a bipartisan war powers resolution with Massie, warned that “they really will be then angering their Republican base,” referring to any attempt by the administration to escalate. He added, “This is an opportunity for the Democrats to become the anti-war party again.”

After Israel struck Iran, Trump quickly shifted his tone, attempting to reassert control over a rapidly changing situation. Maintaining the image of control without provoking war requires a delicate balancing act. Therefore, on one hand, Trump has to assert control over his unpredictable ally, Netanyahu, and show that Israel cannot openly defy him. However, once Israel undoubtably did defy Trump, he has had to reframe the narrative, positioning Iran as the unruly participants, risking and thereby threatening escalation as a face-saving geo-political need.

Trump needs to appear strong to keep his core supporters’ faith, yet cautious enough to avoid alienating the anti-war faction within his base. Israel’s strike disrupted this balance, forcing Trump to reshape the narrative quickly to preserve his authority and political capital.

Trump cannot be seen to be a pawn of Israeli policy. It damages Trump’s appeal. In Trump supporters’ eyes, it is deeply damaging to the air of Trump’s mystic. Their cult-like leader must be the boss. Trump cannot be shown up. Netanyahu knew this and exploited it. He knew Trump’s prize possession is his image, so he took it away from the US president. In other words, Trump cannot have a loose cannon. He needs to hold all the cards. And that is exactly what he does not have with his Netanyahu sized joker.

Recalibration

On the offensive, Trump claimed that Iranian officials had requested to send envoys to the White House for negotiations, a statement Tehran denied. Trump framed this supposed outreach as evidence of his influence, saying the talks had not collapsed but remained possible.

Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again!

He released a dramatic statement on Truth Social, declaring: “Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again!” Other than Trumps infamous editorial discretion, this statement showcases the shift from diplomacy to overt threat, reflecting a broader effort to recast events and reclaim authority.

Press Secretary Leavitt read a message from Trump stating: “Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.” Her comment, “If there’s a chance for diplomacy the president’s always going to grab it, but he’s not afraid to use strength as well,” further illustrated Trump’s attempt to project both toughness and restraint.

Despite Leavitt’s words, diplomacy now feels aloof after Trump announced that US forces bombed three Iranian nuclear sites, formally launching a campaign to dismantle Tehran’s nuclear programme on 22nd of June. The strikes targeted Iran’s military capabilities amid rising threats of regional retaliation. Despite earlier allowing two weeks for talks, Trump acted after just two days.

“Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror,” Trump said from the White House. “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”

US strikes hit sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Trump warned Iran against retaliation, vowing more lethal responses if required. Iran launched 20 ballistic missiles at Israel, injuring 16. “There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,” said Trump. “Remember, there are many targets left…”

Basking in his success, Netanyahu praised the strikes: “Congratulations, President Trump… will change history.” Trump called it teamwork: “We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before.”

Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the strikes as “outrageous and will have everlasting consequences.” He added that the door to diplomacy is closed after US strikes. Since, Iran have responded hitting a US site in Qatar. Although, there were no casualties, and Trump thanked for Iranians for weak attacks.

Performative

Interestingly, both Iranian and American governments gave forewarning to each other of their attacks. Thereby, indicating the strikes as symbolic and performative, even possibly collectively orchestrated between the governments so both can claim dignity and both can walk away from this messy situation claiming their own victory.

Therefore, no surprise that Trump now claims an Israel-Iran ceasefire. But surely nobody believes this is the end of the conflict in the long-run. Merely kicking the can down the road in the meantime.

In the end, Trump, Netanyahu and Iran can all claim a triumph. The Iranian regime is still standing, their nuclear knowledge is safe despite their sites being destroyed. Netanyahu has fulfilled his long-term ambitions of attacking Iranian nuclear strikes, and shown himself independent of American weight. And Trump can now claim his peacemaker mantle with the US president claiming there is a ceasefire.

Consequently, Netanyahu challenging Trump’s ego has demonstrated they’re not as joined at the hip as Trump thought or needs. Netanyahu, to the surprise of nobody except Trump, is not a dog to be pacified with a bone. A dog with his own bombs cannot be taken for a walk. Hence, the collar Trump would love to put around the Israeli Prime Minister’s neck simply refuses to fit.

In fact, what Trump has found is that Netanyahu rejects to chew any bone other than his own. Ironic considering the double-meaning sentence echoes the life of the US President enough that even his disillusioned self could surely recognise. But, alas not.

There is now enough evidence that Trump and Netanyahu are not signing from the same hymn sheet. While Netanyahu petulantly shrieks and purposefully misses the high notes, Trump pretends he is in the sound of music, expecting the rest of us to miss what is going on in the real world behind his idyllic fantasy. Or, it could just be another unwatchable entry from the dumb and dumber franchise. Although, despite all the phoney deaths in Hollywood, the deaths from falling bombs are in fact very real.

What now?

The June 13th strikes on Iran illuminated far more than a battleground; they exposed a crisis in political performance. Trump did not order these attacks out of strategic clarity, but out of political panic. Netanyahu, sensing Trump’s vulnerability and aware of the president’s obsession with optics, engineered a situation that cornered Trump into becoming a participant. By doing so, Netanyahu not only advanced his own geopolitical goals but sabotaged Trump’s carefully curated narrative of restraint and dominance.

Outrageous and will have everlasting consequences

The true cost of this operation lies not in the immediate damage, but in what it symbolises: the erosion of international norms and the empowerment of unilateralism. Netanyahu made clear that Israel would not wait for American permission. Trump, in turn, chose to act not from strength, but from the fear of appearing weak.

In securing a ceasefire and spinning it as victory, Trump may convince some of his base. But the broader world has seen what lies behind the curtain: a President manipulated by an ally, forced to bomb for self-image, not peace. This moment has set a precedent, weakening diplomacy and enabling others to emulate Trump’s image-first militarism, with potentially long-lasting global consequences.

By attacking Iran and becoming a pawn to the whims of Israel, and claiming a ceasefire after the deeds are done, Trump is not securing a lasting peace. Instead, he is image-saving amid the risk of being upstaged and embarrassed, in doing so, Trump has created in new normal in geo-politics which will open the door to more leaders being able to justify attacks on enemies.

Trump’s recalibration forced by Netanyahu returns the world to pre-WW2 notions of might is right. The land of freedom which justifies and solidifies leaders like Putin and Xi Jinping. Will China now take Taiwan? Will Azerbaijan carve a bigger portion out of Armenia? Will Trump actually take Greenland?

Now there is nothing stopping any of this happening outside of the whims of government leaders. Precedents from the free world has been set. Anything is justifiable. Trump has showcased this, and claimed it as a victory. The international community have shown they will not stand up for worldwide law. The UN has been made to be irrelevant as international law is completely ignored and disregarded. Thus, what nation can legitimately apply the rules of international law against another after not standing up to Trump’s actions?

If America ever was great – then putting the world on the edge of war is not the hour when greatness can be re-established. Rather, American strikes symbolise another hour closer to the ringing inditement upon the doomsday clock. Yet now Trump has claimed peace, and despite it being noticeably a self-interested façade, Trump will never let anyone forget that he has “saved” the Middle East. However, a façade it remains, and Trump’s peace moves us closer to 12.

Al-Monitor, France 24, The National, Al-Jazeera, Middle East Eye, The Guardian, BBC, The New Arab, Times of Israel, The Arab Weekly, Associated Press, CBS News, Bloomberg, ABC News