Once again like a band of robbers – and the “collective West” nods in agreement
by Karl-Jürgen Müller
More than 20 years ago, when a “coalition of the willing” led by the United States had just launched a war of aggression against Iraq in violation of international law, we quoted for the first time the Church Father Augustine and his timeless comparison of an imperialist state (“empire”) with a band of robbers. At that time, we had high hopes that serious violations of the law by the state would not leave civilised people indifferent.
Today, we refer to this again, quoting Augustine in full:
Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies? For what are robberies themselves, but little kingdoms? The band itself is made up of men; it is ruled by the authority of a prince, it is knit together by the pact of the confederacy; the booty is divided by the law agreed on. If, by the admittance of abandoned men, this evil increases to such a degree that it holds places, fixes abodes, takes possession of cities, and subdues peoples, it assumes the more plainly the name of a kingdom, because the reality is now manifestly conferred on it, not by the removal of covetousness, but by the addition of impunity. Indeed, that was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when that king had asked the man what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride, What you mean by seizing the whole earth; but because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor. (De Civitate Dei, 4th book; chapter 4)
Following the bombing of Iran by the US Air Force and US Navy on 22 June in violation of international law, and the ceasefire between Israel and Iran announced by the US President on social media just one day later, this President celebrated himself as a peacemaker and allowed himself to be celebrated. The whole process is reminiscent of a grotesque spectacle, a mixture of absurd madness and cruel tyranny. Was it not the same president who made Israel’s war crimes possible in the first place and provided massive support for them? How can such a US president allow himself to be praised as a peacemaker after having previously promoted war? It is reminiscent of the Wild West.
But that is just an aside.
The alarm must be sounded again because the renewed US breach of international law (the UN Charter’s prohibition of violence with the sole exception of self-defence) is hardly causing any public outrage in the West anymore. On the contrary, international law is increasingly being ignored if not openly relativised.
I reviewed the extensive national and international press review of the public broadcaster Deutschlandfunk from 23 to 25 June and, with one exception, found no mainstream Western voice addressing this blatant breach of law. Newspaper commentaries range from open approval of this war of aggression violating international law, to certain realpolitik concerns. The only exception was the “Nürnberger Zeitung” on 24 June, which at least stated that Trump’s act of war “creates fear rather than friends beyond Israel because it ignores international law. If world politics remains so reckless, it will soon be worthless, like the paper on which it was so hopefully recorded after the Second World War.”
The statement issued by the Russian Foreign Ministry on 22 June, excerpts of which are reproduced here, was also appropriate:
Russia strongly condemns the attacks by the United States on several nuclear facilities in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which were carried out in the early hours of 22 June following the recent attacks by Israel.
This reckless decision to launch missile and air strikes on the territory of a sovereign state, regardless of the justifications put forward, constitutes a flagrant violation of international law, the Charter of the United Nations and the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, which has consistently and unequivocally condemned such actions as unacceptable. Particularly worrying is the fact that the attacks were carried out by a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.1
And from which country does the following comment originate?
Some politicians in Europe and the United States supporting the attack on Iran have succumbed to the illusion that this war will be the last war in the Middle East. This illusion has become so deeply ingrained in the minds of some politicians that they are regarding the attack on Iran and the violation of international rules as “dirty work”. They even show gratitude because the burden of this dirty work is being taken off their shoulders. Such thinking spells the end of morality and humanity.
This was reported in the Tehran newspaper “Shargh” on 23 June. Incidentally, this is not a newspaper close to the government, but one of the political opposition in the country.
There are good reasons to doubt that the Middle East has moved closer to peace as a result of what Donald Trump has called the “12-day war”. Israel and its allies continue to push for regime change in Iran and what they call the “New Middle East”2. There are too many indications that this is only a brief respite – and not even that for Israel’s immediate neighbours. Relations have been poisoned too deeply. Western interests in the total colonisation of this region of the world are too tangible.
Our mainstream media continue to fan the flames. On 25 June, the foreign policy editor of the “Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung” wrote in a commentary: “It is rather unlikely that in such a large country [as Iran], the regime controlling the essential institutions could be overthrown by air strikes alone. But a prolonged war would put the clerical-military ruling system under severe pressure, especially if it were conducted with American participation.” Similarly, the editor-in-chief of the bellicose “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” on 27 June (https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/trumps-angriff-auf-iran-ist-eine-chance-fuer-den-nahen-osten-ld.1890743; also “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” of 28 June 2025).
The question remains whether we citizens are willing to accept the continuing unabated warmongering of our governments, their henchmen and the interest groups behind them with their propaganda of enemy stereotypes and their arms obsession – as is now the case again with NATO’s decision to massively increase military spending.
So that we and our children will almost certainly be led to the slaughter again in the 21st century.
Or if we ourselves will actively campaign for more peace in the world and support those who are already committed to peace – for an unbiased, realistic analysis of the world situation, against enemy stereotypes and warmongering, for diplomacy and international understanding. •
1 https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2029109/ of 22 June 2025
2 Highly recommended on this topic is the book by former Swiss diplomat Kurt O. Wyss, published posthumously in 2022, Die gewaltsame amerikanisch-israelische “Neuordnung” des Vorderen Orients (The Violent American-Israeli ‘Reorganisation’ of the Middle East), Léry Verlag,
ISBN 978-3-033-09019-4.
“This is unworthy of our humanity”
“[…] It is truly distressing to see the principle of ‘might makes right’ prevailing in so many situations today, all for the sake of legitimising the pursuit of self-interest. It is troubling to see that the force of international law and humanitarian law seems no longer to be binding, replaced by the alleged right to coerce others. This is unworthy of our humanity, shameful for all mankind and for the leaders of nations. After centuries of history, how can anyone believe that acts of war bring about peace and not backfire on those who commit them? How can we think that we are laying the foundations of the future apart from cooperation and a global vision inspired by the common good? How can we continue to betray the desire of the world’s peoples for peace with propaganda about weapons build-up, as if military supremacy will resolve problems instead of fuelling even greater hatred and desire for revenge? People are beginning to realise the amount of money that ends up in the pockets of merchants of death; money that could be used to build new hospitals and schools is instead being used to destroy those that already exist!! […]”
From the address of Pope Leo XIV to participants in the plenary session of the “Reunion of Aid Agencies for the Oriental Churches” (ROACO) of 26 June 2025; https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/speeches/2025/june/documents/20250626-roaco.html of 26 June 2025
Germany on a war footing – but there is also opposition
km. Countries on a war footing usually behave like bands of robbers. The law is ignored, and they are prepared to do anything. And it is usually about the tangible material interests of a few, respectively about maintaining or expanding power. In a sense, the peoples of the states on a war footing are themselves victims of the policies of their (ir)responsible power elites. But talking openly about this is to be avoided at all costs. This is what the dictatorship of opinion serves, what propaganda serves, what “beautiful” propaganda formulas serve. As a rule, it is said that it is a matter of the “defense” of one’s own country, which is necessary for survival. When power elites demand “war readiness,” this is already a particular audacity.
The war policy of the German power elites, one must say in disbelief, is currently progressing “from success to success” – as far as their propaganda is concerned. According to the latest ZDF Politbarometer1 survey conducted on 27 June, 65 per cent of respondents support massive rearmament in the coming years so that Germany can also meet NATO’s five percent of GDP target for military spending. In western Germany, the figure is even as high as 68 per cent – significantly more than the 49 per cent in eastern Germany. Sixty-three per cent of respondents rate Chancellor Merz’s foreign policy as “good.” That is, the German chancellor who thanked Israel – in violation of international law and the German constitution – for doing the “dirty work” of waging war against Iran and who wants to authoritatively put Germany on a war footing. And Minister Pistorius of the SPD, who wants to make the country “fit for war,” even tops the “popularity scale” of German politicians.
Yes, even the German SPD, which once claimed to stand for peace and justice, for détente and peaceful coexistence, is now mostly on a war footing. At its party conference from 27 to 29 June, a motion from those who supported a manifesto for a new policy of détente2 published on 11 June was rejected with 65 percent voting against it. The motion called on the party to oppose NATO’s goal, adopted with the votes of the German government, of permanently increasing member states’ defence spending to five percent of gross domestic product. According to the motion’s proponents, this would currently mean spending 225 billion euros annually on armaments – almost half of the federal budget.
The motion stated: “We oppose restricting the federal government’s future ability to act and the Bundestag’s budgetary sovereignty to such an extent through NATO commitments.” They stated there needed to be a social debate before a decision on defence spending is made. It didn’t make sense for this to be based on GDP “rather than on potential threats.” In the debate prior to the vote, an SPD member of the Bundestag said that the “five percent dictate” was “the opposite of peace policy.” A former SPD member of the Bundestag accused the federal government of agreeing to the five percent because of a “snap of the fingers” from US President Donald Trump and not because the money was really necessary. A former SPD member of the European Parliament called the NATO decision “disturbing, disconcerting, and irritating.” He said it would trigger “a gigantic arms race” because Russia and China would then also rearm.
Sixty-five per cent against is a lot. More than 30 per cent in favour of the motion is not bad either. So, there is a strong minority – not only in the SPD, but among all German citizens – who, despite all the propaganda, disagree with the German power elites’ course of war. It is definitely possible to build on this.
1https://www.zdfheute.de/politik/deutschland/politbarometer-nato-ziel-100.html
2 «Friedenssicherung in Europa durch Verteidigungsfähigkeit, Rüstungskontrolle und Verständigung. (Peacekeeping in Europe through defense capability, arms control, and understanding). Manifest der SPD-Friedenskreise»; (Manifesto of the SPD Peace Circles); https://augengeradeaus.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/20250611_Manifest_SPD-Friedenskreise_Friedenssicherung_in_Europa.pdf