Lying is as much a part of statecraft as it is of human nature. History is littered with deceptions—some confessed, others concealed—employed by politicians for everything from survival to conquest. In the fragile balance of war and peace, a well-timed lie has often been dismissed as a ‘necessary evil’ meant to de-escalate tensions or provide a face-saving exit from the brink of conflict.

In our hyper-connected era, a political lie’s shelf-life has plummeted. With facts weaponized in real-time, leaders find it increasingly impossible to build sustainable agendas on foundations of falsehood.

Donald Trump appears to be the exception to this rule of political gravity—not once, but more times than one can recall. By appearing to believe his own fabrications, he forges ahead with policies based on ‘alternative facts’ even as they are exposed in real-time. This creates a structural paralysis for diplomacy; when the architect of foreign policy is untethered from objective reality, diplomacy loses its primary function as a tool for de-escalation. In the current war on Iran, this becomes a compounding crisis as the public remains largely uninformed of the conflict’s ‘why.’ Meanwhile, career diplomats and ad-hoc envoys are trapped in an impossible position: unable to walk back his statements or openly correct them, they are left to navigate a geopolitical minefield guided by a map of falsehoods issued from the highest echelon of power.

READ: Trump prefers peace but ready to ‘unleash hell’ in Iran: White House

The cost of this ‘post-truth’ diplomacy is most visible in the justifications for the war on Iran. President Trump repeatedly claimed military action was a response to an ‘imminent threat’ and an accelerating nuclear program, yet the U.S. intelligence community has declined to endorse this. During congressional testimony, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard notably sidestepped the ‘imminent threat’ claim, stating instead that such ‘determinations’ are the President’s alone. Furthermore, while the administration cites preventing a ‘global catastrophe’ as a primary goal, the war was launched even as indirect negotiations were underway in Oman to prevent that very disaster. This disconnect peaked this week when Trump’s claims of ‘major points of agreement’ were immediately dismissed  by Tehran as ‘fake news.’

When a war is sold on a foundation of ‘alternative facts’ and non-existent negotiations, any diplomatic exit disappears, leaving allies confused and the public led into a conflict where the ‘why’ is a moving target.

When a war is sold on a foundation of ‘alternative facts’ and non-existent negotiations, any diplomatic exit disappears, leaving allies confused and the public led into a conflict where the ‘why’ is a moving target.

This pattern of defying political gravity is equally entrenched in the administration’s domestic agenda. To justify radical environmental rollbacks, Trump has marketed an ‘Energy Dominance’ built on statistical fallacies, recently claiming U.S. oil output—already the world’s highest—could soon triple. This ignores both physical and economic reality. Despite such rhetoric, the current Strait of Hormuz crisis serves as a stark reminder that global market forces and geopolitical volatility—not White House decrees—dictate the actual price at the pump. By labeling climate change the ‘greatest con job ever’ during his 2025 UN address, Trump effectively silenced scientific consensus to pave the way for fossil fuel expansion. When ‘alternative facts’ become the official ledger for the national economy, diplomacy dies at home; the public is left to pay for a reality that exists only in the Commander-in-Chief’s rhetoric.

Trump’s current ‘post-truth’ maneuvers are not an aberration; they are the evolution of a long-standing tradition of manufactured consent. One need only look back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq—the ‘Big Lie’ that launched a thousand ships on the back of non-existent WMDs.

Trump’s current ‘post-truth’ maneuvers are not an aberration; they are the evolution of a long-standing tradition of manufactured consent. One need only look back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq—the ‘Big Lie’ that launched a thousand ships on the back of non-existent WMDs.

It was a masterclass in black sarcasm: a superpower ‘liberating’ a nation by destroying it, guided by intelligence that was not just wrong, but effectively invented. Today, twenty-three years later, the irony remains as dark as the smoke that once covered Baghdad. Millions of Iraqi civilians paid for those ‘alternative facts’ with their lives, while the country itself has been pushed beyond the point of repair—a permanent monument to the cost of a lie that everyone in power eventually admitted, but no one was ever punished for.

READ: Hebrew media: Iran sets five conditions to end war with US and Israel

This cynical playbook was refined again in 2011 during the intervention in Libya. Major media networks and politicians pumped out unverified reports of ‘thousands killed and raped’ and ‘Viagra-fueled atrocities’ to trigger the UN’s ‘Responsibility to Protect.’ Yet, as subsequent investigations by the UK Parliament and human rights organizations later revealed, the threat to civilians was wildly overstated to justify a predetermined goal of regime change. In both cases, the ‘alternative fact’ served as the perfect lubricant for war.

Today, as the Trump administration uses similar tropes of ‘imminent threats’ to justify the war on Iran, the world is witnessing a grim repeat of history. When the highest echelons of power treat the truth as a disposable inconvenience, diplomacy doesn’t just fail—it is murdered to make room for the next profitable conflict.”

Today, as the Trump administration uses similar tropes of ‘imminent threats’ to justify the war on Iran, the world is witnessing a grim repeat of history. When the highest echelons of power treat the truth as a disposable inconvenience, diplomacy doesn’t just fail—it is murdered to make room for the next profitable conflict.”

The cumulative weight of these historical deceptions—from the phantom WMDs of Iraq to the manufactured atrocities of the 2011 Libyan intervention—has led us to a terminal point in international relations. We are no longer merely dealing with ‘political spin’; we are witnessing the total devaluation of truth as a diplomatic currency. When the world’s leading superpower treats facts as subjective ‘alternatives,’ it effectively bankrupts the very language of negotiation.

For nations in the Global South, and particularly across the Middle East, the ‘Western’ call for human rights or democratic transition is no longer heard as a moral imperative, but as a cynical prelude to the next ‘regime change’ operation.

For nations in the Global South, and particularly across the Middle East, the ‘Western’ call for human rights or democratic transition is no longer heard as a moral imperative, but as a cynical prelude to the next ‘regime change’ operation.

By the time the truth finally emerges from the rubble of a destroyed state, the architects of the lie have already moved on to their next profitable fiction, leaving behind a world where diplomacy has no ground left to stand on.

The ultimate cost of this ‘post-truth’ era is not just the erosion of trust, but the physical destruction of the human beings caught in the gears of these ‘alternative facts.’ As the Gaza Genocide continues under the thin veneer of a ‘Board of Peace’ and the war on Iran is fueled by manufactured ‘imminent threats,’ the world is left with a chilling realization: when a President lies, diplomacy doesn’t just die—it is replaced by a permanent state of transactional violence. For the people of the Middle East, from the ruins of Tripoli to the streets of Tehran and the rubble of Gaza, the ‘Truth’ is not a political debate; it is a matter of survival. Until we restore a shared reality where facts are once again the baseline of international engagement, the only language left to speak will be the language of conflict. The ‘Global Cost’ is a future where no one is an honest broker, no treaty is worth the paper it is written on, and the only certainty is the next manufactured war.

OPINION: Board of Peace is a tactical smokescreen for war in Iran and Gaza

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

© Middle East Monitor