When he was running for president in 2024, Donald Trump promised that he would shut down the Ukraine war shortly after taking office, if not before he moved into the White House. He also promised that he would not start any more wars and would markedly improve U.S. relations with Russia. Very importantly, he engineered a ceasefire in Gaza on January 19, 2025, the day before he was sworn in again as president, which provided hope that the Gaza genocide might come to an end.
But after that auspicious start, President Trump has failed to deliver on his promises. The Ukraine war and the Gaza genocide rage on. Trump, like President Biden before him, is fully complicit in a genocide. On top of that, the United States directly attacked Iran on June 22, 2025, a move Biden had the good sense to avoid. Most observers think it is only a matter of time before Trump and Israel attack Iran again. Relations between Moscow and Washington have improved a bit, but remain antagonistic at their core, while U.S.-India relations, which had improved greatly over the past twenty-five years, have recently turned poisonous. Finally, there is an ever-present possibility in East Asia that China and the United States could get into a shooting match.
All of this is to say we live in not just troubled times, but dangerous times. Remember that we live in a nuclear world. Sadly, there is no easy way to fix the many problems facing us. But we can minimize the chances of making bad situations worse, and maybe even make major inroads in solving some of the key problems we face. Additionally, we can minimize our chances of creating further disasters.
The best way to make progress of this sort is to openly debate foreign policy issues, so that critics of the conventional wisdom or government policy can have their say. Media institutions are hugely important in fostering this kind of debate, which is why freedom of the press is so important in the United States. It allows critics to make their views known to large numbers of people and it provides legitimacy. Critics of existing policy are not always right, but sometimes they speak truth to power and help us avoid or correct big mistakes.
Unfortunately, the mainstream media in the United States have become much less effective since the Cold War ended. It has become increasingly difficult for dissenters to get a platform in prominent media outlets, and mainstream media outlets often seem to speak with one voice on the big foreign policy issues of the day. This situation is not healthy, and it helps explains why America’s standing in the world has declined over the past three decades.
Thankfully, alternative media outlets have proliferated in recent years, making it possible for critics of US foreign policy to make their voices heard. Indeed, growing numbers of concerned citizens and policy analysts pay as much attention, if not more, to alternative media sites than the mainstream media.
Antiwar.com is one of the most important alternative platforms
on the planet. It is an ideal place to find first-rate analysis that challenges the foreign policy orthodoxies of the day. I visit Antiwar.com every day and am invariably rewarded for doing so. That is not to say I agree with everything I read, but that simple fact is one reason it is such a valuable platform. We need a diverse and contentious discourse. For this reason, I urge readers to generously support Antiwar.com. In these disturbing times, a flourishing Antiwar.com is a truly important national asset.
Sincerely yours,
John J. Mearsheimer
