As the world watches for any kind of out for the US/ Israel and Iran stalemate it is increasingly apparent that the Trump administration is backed into a corner with no clear escape. However signs are indicating movement by US as Rubio today indicated the war is over and mention of a one page memo circulating which could lead to an interruption to hostilities.

One thing is clear and that is this war is driven by Israel interests as espoused by AIPAC a lobby groups supporting interests of Israel which provides cover for Netanyaho to proceed unilaterally. Each time any positive message, cease fire, or signs of diplomatic movement occurs Israel always follows up with a massive attach on Lebanon to hammer this point home.

There is much talk by all sides on national interests, and this challenge has somewhat obscure roots yet can be explained. At face value the Liberal Rules Based order (see Mearsheimer-Walt post). Particularly in the US under Trump the Liberal Values are under pressure and they gravitate to control and hegemonic power. There is no nuance to this shift in the case of America. Many other powerful countries hold the line on maintenance of values publicly, however even they gravitate to the natural order of hegemonic power to the extent they have sufficient power. We can see this shift real time in Europe

The recent elevation of this in case of US and Israel. The resignation of Joe Kent and seemingly innocuous affair brought this matter to the forefront. Israel national interests are framed in survival and expansion mode, which are expressly far from the Liberal Rule Based order of 1945. Israel was formed later in 1947 which goes some way to illustrate the conundrum. Nevertheless this is 2026 and US preference at face value is to give precedence to Israel interests and Iran events support this thesis.

This takes us to something I have been tracking I refer to as the Mearsheimer-Walt frame (M-W) (detailed in separate post) — that Israeli lobby influence systematically distorts US foreign policy away from US national interest. Founded on Joe Kent resignation (March 17, 2026) who explicitly called out US subservience to Israel as promised by AIPAC the Isreal (not Jewish, but explicitly Israel) lobby.

The US-Israel coordinated strikes on Iran (Operation Epic Fury, February 28) are the central case: a war whose strategic rationale aligned overwhelmingly with Israeli objectives (IRGC degradation, nuclear site strikes, Khamenei assassination) rather than US interests narrowly defined by the Liberal Rules Based Order..

Relevance to US/ Iran resolution

So how does this flow into Hormuz. The honest conclusion: the liberal word was not misused by accident in post WW2 Liberal order. It was useful precisely because it resonated with real values. But the structure underneath was always hegemonic, and when the hegemony came under stress, the liberal commitments were the first thing sacrificed.

In plain English the Liberal order was a cover for natural powerful country behaviour seeking hegemony and the method of achievement lies in the aspirational liberal order. As a reminder that order follows.

1. Rules-Based Order Over Power Politics 

2. Collective Security 

3. Liberal Internationalism / Interdependence as Peace The Kantian thesis — that economically interdependent liberal democracies don’t fight each other — was structurally embedded.

4. Open Markets and Economic Liberalism 

5. National Self-Determination (Selective) Wilson’s principle from WW1 was carried forward, but selectively. Applied to Europe and former Axis territories; much less consistently to colonial territories where Western powers retained interests. Decolonisation complicated this value severely through the 1950s–70s.

6. Human Rights and Individual Dignity The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was the explicit articulation of this — a direct response to the Holocaust. The Nuremberg trials established individual criminal accountability over state sovereignty as an absolute shield. This was genuinely new: the idea that states could not hide behind sovereignty when committing atrocities against their own citizens.

7. Democracy as a Prerequisite for Legitimate Membership Not universally enforced, but structurally embedded. NATO’s founding was explicitly a democratic alliance. The Marshall Plan was extended to Western Europe on terms that reinforced parliamentary government. West Germany’s rehabilitation was conditional on democratic reconstruction. The value: only democratic states are reliable partners in a rules-based order.

8. Multilateralism Over Bilateralism The interwar period was characterised by bilateral deals that fragmented the international system. The post-WW2 architecture was explicitly multilateral — decisions made through institutions with agreed procedures, not ad hoc great-power bargaining. This was as much a structural choice as a value, but it embedded equality of procedure if not of power.

National Interest as a practical matter in America is based on hegemonic power

This natural view of self interest as cover for hegemony to protect the home country is a direct reflection of the realpolitik espoused by Kissinger in his 900 page opus “Diplomacy”.

Relevance to US/ Iran resolution

So how does this flow into Hormuz. The honest conclusion: the liberal word was not misused by accident in post WW2 Liberal order. It was useful precisely because it resonated with real values. But the structure underneath was always hegemonic, and when the hegemony came under stress, the liberal commitments were the first thing sacrificed.

In plain English the Liberal order was a cover for powerful country behaviour seeking hegemony and the method of achievement lies in the aspirational liberal order.

The degree of masking lies in the politics of the country, and the America example of a country run by one person through hundred of social media posts daily becomes a country of chaos and constant changes in direction. Hegseth is the shadow of Trump, and Rubio the fixer but that latter role is an impossible task. Today Rubio is fixing Papal relations but that fight was so long ago in Trump years it is already forgotten.

Hormuz. Is it any surprise IRGC and Iran politicians are at loggerheads when they cannot read the enemy. Iran has the benefit of 4,000 years of Kings, Princes, Colonialism and radical Islam. Yet that institutional thread informs them to have much patience and recognize when they have the negotiating upper hand. China will not sit still and will bring the eventual solution begun by their reliance on Chinese law that prohibits US legal interference in its affairs, but that is a separate matter.

National interests can no longer be described in a value system that is not based on realist beliefs and facts. Here I will repeat what was stated earlier. This conclusion points out to Banks and business that Risks cannot be mitigated without proper risk definition based on factual structure.

The honest conclusion: 

the liberal word was not misused by accident in post WW2 Liberal order. It was useful precisely because it resonated with real values. But the structure underneath was always hegemonic, and when the hegemony came under stress, the liberal commitments were the first thing sacrificed.