In Washington, the phrase “peace through strength” operates as a national security lullaby. The American Spectator captured this sentiment in its purest form when it argued that “U.S. foreign policy, spearheaded by Trump’s overarching view of peace through strength, ought to negotiate more forcefully… He could achieve his peace through strength ideals by informing Iran that unless all uranium enrichment ceases, he will encourage Israel to make targeted strikes on Iranian nuclear production.”

The logic feels unassailable: squeeze Iran’s economy, rattle sabers in the Strait of Hormuz, and watch Tehran crawl to the negotiating table to sign away its nuclear ambitions.

It is a seductive fantasy. It is also a historical trap.

President Trump is currently pursuing a strategy toward Iran that prioritizes the illusion of control over the reality of stability. Recent reporting confirms that even as negotiations proceed, the U.S. military option remains very much “on the table.” This is not diplomacy; it is a coerced transaction.

History has a specific name for a peace treaty dictated under such an imbalance of power:........

© Eurasia Review