Just weeks into Liberia’s historic tenure on the United Nations Security Council, the world finds itself staring into the abyss of yet another avoidable conflict. Less than a fortnight ago, Israel launched a direct military strike on Iran, dragging an already tense region closer to full-scale war. While the justifications are being loudly trumpeted in Tel Aviv and quietly endorsed in Washington, it is increasingly clear: Israel got it wrong.
This strike, reckless in execution and questionable in legality, is not simply an act of self-defense; it’s a culmination of years of hawkish paranoia, driven largely by one man: Benjamin Netanyahu.
For more than two decades, Netanyahu has been screaming to the world that Iran is on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons. His warnings have ranged from dramatic UN presentations with cartoon bombs to urgent pleas for military action. And yet, time and again, his cries have been exposed for what they are–fear-mongering and misinformation.
The unpalatable truth is, there remains no conclusive evidence that Iran is building a nuclear weapon. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly stated it has found no signs of a current, active nuclear weapons program. Iran’s enrichment of uranium, though concerning, has not crossed the red lines Netanyahu has been drawing since the 1990s. His apocalyptic forecasts are not only inaccurate but also dangerously manipulative.
It’s time to call this what it is: a strategic campaign of deception. Netanyahu has built his career on the politics of existential threat, using Iran as both a domestic distraction and an international boogeyman. But the world should not be held hostage to one man’s obsession, especially when his credibility is in shambles and his political motivations are increasingly transparent.
And yet, the United States has once again jumped into the fray, this time with bunker-buster bombs that escalated tensions instead of cooling them. Washington’s uncritical support for Israel, even in its most provocative actions, is as predictable as it is destabilizing. The use of such massive weaponry, in response to Iranian retaliation, does not reflect measured diplomacy. It reflects addiction to militarism, to domination, and to a worldview in which bombs speak louder than law.
This is where Liberia must decide who it is and who it wants to be.
As a member of the UN Security Council, Liberia is no longer just a spectator. It has a seat at the table where global peace and security are debated and decided. The world is watching. Will Liberia echo the language of old allies and outdated allegiances, or will it speak with its voice, one rooted in justice, principle, and historical clarity?
We’ve been here before. In the 1970s, President William R. Tolbert Jr. took a bold and controversial stance at the United Nations General Assembly. He called on Israel to return lands seized during the 1967 war and to recognize the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. At a time when few African nations dared to challenge Israel, Liberia led with moral courage. That moment matters now.
Today, we face a moral test once again. And once again, we are asked to speak clearly, even if our voice shakes.
Let’s be clear: Iran is no champion of human rights. The Islamic Republic’s treatment of its people is brutal and unconscionable. LGBTQ+ individuals live in fear of surveillance, imprisonment, and execution. Women are policed and punished for demanding basic freedoms. Dissidents are jailed, tortured, and often disappear without explanation. There is no reason to romanticize this regime.
But condemning Iran’s internal abuses must not blind us to the illegality and danger of bombing it. Israel’s strike was not a defense of democracy; it was an act of provocation. And America’s involvement did not promote peace. It intensified the conflict.
Liberia must now speak from its center of gravity. For too long, our foreign policy has been shaped by proximity to power, especially American power. We must respect that history, but we must not be owned by it. Friendship is not obedience. Strategic partnership is not surrender.
Being on the Security Council means more than casting votes. It means articulating values. It means showing moral consistency. If we claim to support the UN Charter, then we must oppose illegal military strikes, regardless of who carries them out. If we believe in sovereignty and peace, we must challenge the rhetoric of war, even if it comes from those we’ve long admired.
We can, and must, hold more than one truth at the same time: that Iran is guilty of terrible oppression; that Israel has a right to exist but not to occupy or bomb at will; that the United States is an ally, but one capable of grievous mistakes. These are not contradictions. They are the realities of a complicated world, one that demands courageous diplomacy, not cowardly silence.
This is Liberia’s first major test as a member of the Security Council. And it’s about more than Iran, Israel, or the U.S. It’s about whether Liberia will act like a country with its mind and mission, or remain under the thumb of others, parroting policies that betray our principles.
Our founding as a nation born from the pursuit of freedom should mean something. Our history of speaking truth at the UN should mean something. Now is the time to make it mean something again.
The stakes are high. The moment is here. Let Liberia rise to meet it.