Date posted: 09-29-2026
Estimated Reading Time : 4 Minutes
As the world bids goodbye to summer, 2026, Iran wants to revisit the month of June. That is, they want to return to the terms of the June cease-fire agreement (which they refused to honor, only hours into the agreed-upon deal).
During the first week of September 2026, Israel Katz (defense minister for the nation of Israel) threatened to “send Iran back to the Stone Age.” This approach to the recalcitrant regime in Iran is very similar to statements made in recent weeks by President Trump. Given that war in Iran amounts to engagement with a group “never-at-any-point-acting-in-good-faith,” Trump’s promise in March to “obliterate” the regime is, sadly, the only practical perspective.
America should welcome any cease-fire that saves American lives, protects our allies (read: Israel), and gives diplomacy a chance. But Americans must not confuse a cessation of hostilities with reconciliation—and certainly not mistake negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran for evidence that Tehran suddenly shares our desire for peaceful coexistence.
Such distinctions matter significantly. The United States and Iran reached an interim cease-fire agreement in June, but the arrangement quickly deteriorated. By July, President Trump declared the cease-fire over after renewed attacks, and by September 1, fighting had resumed. Iran now says it is willing to return to the June agreement if Washington does the same.
This is why Americans must reject the comforting assumption that behind diplomatic negotiations is the search for a mutually beneficial settlement.
During the Cold War, America’s nuclear strategy rested substantially upon Mutually Assured Destruction—MAD. The Soviet Union and the United States understood that launching a nuclear attack could invite retaliation so devastating that neither side would survive intact. That grim calculation did not make Moscow benevolent or Washington naïve. It made both sides understand the catastrophic consequences of escalation.
Iran presents a fundamentally different strategic problem.
Americans must understand that the Islamic Republic is not simply another secular nation-state pursuing ordinary geopolitical interests. Its government is explicitly ideological, combining revolutionary Islamism with state power, supporting terrorist organizations, and has long pursued nuclear and ballistic-missile capabilities. Congress itself has formally identified Iran’s nuclear activities, unconventional weapons, ballistic missiles and support for international terrorism as threats to America, Israel and our allies.
That does not mean every Iranian—or every Muslim here in this country— is our enemy. Americans are intelligent enough to distinguish between ordinary Muslims, many of whom simply want to raise families and live peacefully, and an authoritarian regime whose revolutionary ideology has repeatedly sponsored violence beyond its borders.
We must acknowledge that Islam is an extremely dangerous ideology
The Iranian regime’s hostility toward Israel and America is not merely a negotiating posture that will disappear once the right economic incentives are offered. Tehran’s leadership has repeatedly framed its struggle in religious and revolutionary terms. Its partnership with militant, proxy forces throughout the region demonstrates that its lusts for power extend well beyond defending Iran’s borders.
This is where naïve Western assumptions can become dangerous. Judeo-Christian civilization developed a moral vocabulary emphasizing the inherent dignity of human life, the rule of law, individual responsibility, and the restraint of political power. Those principles may be imperfectly practiced, but they remain foundational to the American constitutional order.
Our Islamic enemies do not share those premises.
America therefore must fight and negotiate (if at all possible) from strength. Any agreement with Tehran must be enforceable and genuinely protective of American interests. But an agreement that merely pauses Iran’s ambitions while granting the regime time to rebuild its military, nuclear, and terrorist capabilities is not peace. It is an intermission.
President Trump is right to demand that Iran never obtain a nuclear weapon. The American people should insist upon nothing less.
Our Judeo-Christian, morally based, Constitutional republic has a responsibility to pursue and preserve peace. But peace is not the same thing as appeasement. Scripture itself recognizes the necessity of wise judgment: “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Romans 12:18). That is a command for prudence—not surrender.
President Trump should be commended for putting American lives, American sovereignty, and American interests first. Our military forces exist to deter aggression and protect our citizens, but admittedly, not to fight endless wars. It means using diplomacy when diplomacy serves American security— and overwhelming strength when deterrence fails.
So let Washington pursue a cease-fire.
But let Americans understand what a cease-fire is: a pause in war, not proof of peace. With caliphate-obsessed Muslims, there is never guaranteed peace. Such sober, grown-up realizations are hard for many to stomach.
We should pray for peace, prepare for war, defend our allies, protect our homeland, and never surrender the hard-earned freedoms entrusted to us.
“America First” must never bend into “America fearful.”
It means America awake.