As Trump Sabotages the ICC With Sanctions, There Are Many Ways to Fight Back

Trump officials now face a temporary restraining order for violating the First Amendment with the sanctions.

By Marjorie Cohn

October 18, 2026

Source: Truthout

Tony Webster - The International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague. Flickr.

The U.S. government has long sought to incapacitate the International Criminal Court (ICC), the world’s first global court that was created to prosecute the most atrocious crimes. As the ICC seeks to provide accountability for Israeli crimes, the Trump administration has become increasingly aggressive in its attempts to hobble the court. On October 9, 2026, Team Trump imposed punitive sanctions against the court itself, which constitutes the gravest intensification of its war on the ICC. But there are several strategies available to mitigate the worst effects of these sanctions.

Executive Order 14203, Signed February 2025

In February 2025, Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14203, which authorizes the imposition of sanctions against the ICC. The sanctions amount to illegal unilateral coercive measures because only the UN Security Council has the authority to impose sanctions.

The executive order prohibits U.S. persons from providing material support or services to certain designated persons and entities, including financial services. It exposes non-U.S. persons to secondary sanctions for engaging in conduct prohibited under the order. U.S. persons who violate it may face criminal penalties of up to 20 years imprisonment and fines of up to $1 million.

Trump’s 2025 order has led to the sanctioning of nine of the ICC’s 18 judges, three ICC prosecutors, the ICC president, and a senior ICC trial attorney. The Trump administration also sanctioned three highly respected Palestinian human rights organizations — Al-Haq, Al Mezan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights — for their assistance to the ICC. Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on Occupied Palestine, who wrote three courageous reports documenting Israel’s genocide in Gaza, was sanctioned as well.

The October 9 Sanctions

In December 2025, a top Trump administration official told Reuters there was “growing concern” that “the ICC will turn its attention to the president, to the vice president, to the secretary of war and others, and pursue prosecutions against them,” adding that this was “unacceptable, and we will not allow it to happen.” He said the ICC had been warned that unless it amended the Rome Statute to ensure it would not investigate Trump and his top officials, new and very severe U.S. sanctions would be imposed on the court.

Sure enough, in an attempt to permanently paralyze the court, the Trump administration sanctioned the entire ICC on October 9, pursuant to Executive Order 14203. These harsh financial sanctions prevent the court from using U.S. dollars and U.S.-based financial services and technology companies. They bar U.S. citizens and companies from supplying the court with funds, goods, or services without a license from the U.S. Treasury.

U.S. sanctions have serious impacts on targeted individuals, whose bank accounts can be frozen or closed. Their financial transactions can be rejected, and they can be denied access to digital services and entry into the United States. Sanctions have a chilling effect on non-U.S. banks and other companies outside the jurisdiction of the United States; they themselves could lose access to the U.S. banking system. The ICC could lose access to companies on which it relies for its critical functions, including banking, information, technology, and travel.

Although the sanctions contain a six-month wind-down period and exemptions for certain services, they still pose significant risks. In the face of global reliance on the U.S. financial and IT systems, even non-U.S. service providers, including banks, might stop providing services to the ICC for fear of penalties or reprisals by the U.S. Treasury. This could affect the court’s ability to maintain a bank account, receive financial contributions from States Parties, pay staff, make payments, and maintain essential operations.

The imposition of these outrageous sanctions is the latest, and most devastating, chapter in the U.S.’s long campaign to undermine the ICC. Moreover, these sanctions were imposed on the same day that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Navi Pillay, a South African lawyer who served as a judge on the ICC for five years and led the UN Commission of Inquiry in 2025 that confirmed Israel’s commission of genocide in Gaza.

History of U.S. Attacks on the ICC

The International Criminal Court, which became operational in 2002, is a permanent international court created to prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression. Nearly two-thirds of the nations in the world have ratified the Rome Statute, thereby becoming States Parties and taking responsibility for arresting and sending those under warrants to the ICC for trial. The court was established to complement, not replace, national criminal justice systems. It will assume jurisdiction only when national systems are unwilling or unable to prosecute.

Bill Clinton signed the ICC’s Rome Statute in 2000 as his presidential term was ending, but George W. Bush removed the U.S. signature from it in 2002. The U.S. Congress then enacted the “The Hague Invasion Act,” which says that if a national of the U.S. or its ally (which includes Israel) is detained by the ICC in The Hague, the U.S. military can use armed force to extricate them. The Bush administration effectively blackmailed 100 States Parties to the Rome Statute by forcing them to sign bilateral immunity agreements in which they promised not to turn over U.S. persons to the ICC, or the U.S. would withhold their foreign aid.

In November 2024, after an investigation lasting more than three years, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. They stand charged with the war crimes of starvation as a form of warfare, and intentional attacks on civilians; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts, for their actions in Gaza since October 7, 2023.

The U.S. contends that the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israeli (or U.S.) nationals since neither Israel nor the U.S. are States Parties to the Rome Statute. However, the statute authorizes the ICC to exercise territorial jurisdiction over crimes committed by non-State Party nationals in the territory of a State Party. Palestine is a State Party to the statute, so the ICC determined that it has jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed by Israeli nationals in Palestine. Indeed, the U.S. has supported several ICC investigations and prosecutions of crimes allegedly committed by non-State Party nationals, including the arrest warrant that the court issued for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

On July 13, 2026, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio pledged to “dismantle” the International Criminal Court. He accused the ICC of “waging a war against our country, not with bullets or missiles,” but with “the force of so-called international law.” Venezuela and Chad announced their withdrawal from the Rome Statute following U.S. threats to reduce or withdraw assistance if they refused to do so.

Meanwhile, the court faces a leadership vacuum following the firing in July 2026 of the ICC’s former chief prosecutor Karim Khan, who had requested the issuance of the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. UN investigators said they “found evidence that Mr. Khan engaged in ‘non-consensual sexual contact’” with a lawyer who had worked as a special assistant to him in 2023. But after a three-month review of a 152-page report by the Office of Internal Oversight Services and of the 5,000+ pages of underpinning material, the Ad Hoc Panel of Judicial Experts unanimously determined that the facts did not establish evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of any wrongdoing on the part of Khan. Nevertheless, the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute voted to fire him with no due process on July 24.

In December 2026, the assembly will elect six judges to fill one-third of the ICC’s 18 judicial seats. The U.S. will invariably endeavor to interfere with those elections.

Lawsuits Challenging EO 14203

On July 15, Democracy for the Arab World Now and the Taxpayer Alliance Against Genocide filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that Trump’s EO 14203 violates the constitutional right to engage in Palestine-related human rights advocacy. They claimed that the sanctions violate the First Amendment by limiting what people in the U.S. can say to an international tribunal or to foreign advocates, and by limiting their ability to associate with sanctioned parties.

U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman granted Democracy for the Arab World Now and the Taxpayer Alliance Against Genocide a temporary restraining order on October 13, which temporarily blocks the Trump administration from imposing civil or criminal penalties on the two organizations for supporting ICC’s investigations into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The judge said the two organizations were likely to prevail on their claims that Trump’s sanctions violated the First Amendment.

Democracy for the Arab World Now announced it would immediately resume its advocacy with the ICC for the prosecution of Israeli and U.S. perpetrators of grave crimes, and it will work with the three sanctioned human rights groups and the Special Rapporteur.

On August 11, the American Friends Service Committee, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights Watch, and the Open Society Institute filed a lawsuit in the same New York federal court, alleging that Trump’s executive order violates the U.S. Constitution; U.S. statutes; and international law, including the Genocide Convention, Geneva Conventions, and customary international law.

Actions to Protect the ICC

On October 12, the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC), comprised of more than 120 organizations from over 60 countries representing all regions of the world, and dozens of legal experts, human rights defenders, and members of the EU, issued a joint statement, urging States Parties to act now to protect the ICC from unlawful U.S. sanctions.

The statement condemned “unequivocally and in the strongest terms the decision by the United States to impose unlawful sanctions on the International Criminal Court.” The CICC said, “This unprecedented measure represents a direct attack against the rule of law, the independence of the Court and international justice, ultimately undermining the rights of millions of victims and survivors of mass atrocities worldwide.”

The CICC listed 12 actions that States Parties should take, individually and collectively, to protect the court. They include the immediate adoption or activation of blocking measures at the national and regional levels; for example, the immediate adoption of the EU Blocking Statute and equivalent domestic legislation elsewhere. Blocking measures would shield those sanctioned, including the court and its officials, the UN Special Rapporteur, and civil society organizations, from the extraterritorial reach of the sanctions.

In addition, the CICC urges States Parties to guarantee that the court and those cooperating with it have access to banking and other essential services; to find concrete measures to mitigate the impact of sanctions on civic space, freedom of speech, and freedom of association; and to explore all possible diplomatic and legal avenues to challenge the sanctions and their legality under international law, including by supporting U.S. legal challenges and a referral to the International Court of Justice.

And the CICC implores States Parties to refuse, “without exception,” coercion by a non-State Party to influence votes, positions, or conduct within the Assembly of States Parties or any other body of the Rome Statute system.

The battle to save the ICC and its capacity to enforce accountability for the most heinous crimes is one struggle with many fronts: local, regional, national, and international.

---

This article was originally published by Truthout; please consider supporting the original publication, and read the original version at the link above.

Marjorie Cohn

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, dean of the People's Academy of International Law, and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. She is a member of the national advisory boards of Veterans For Peace and Assange Defense, and is a member of the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the U.S. representative to the continental advisory council of the Association of American Jurists. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues.

 

Serbia: Building a New Democratic Socialist Alternative

Serbia has a new democratic socialist initiative. Following its founding in Novi Sad in late September, IDS co-chairs discuss their political vision, the student movement and challenges ahead.

By Melanija Lojpur, Radivoje Jovović , Štefica Gazibara 

October 18, 2026

Source: Transofrm! Europe

Members of the Initiative for Democratic Socialism (IDS) at its founding assembly in Novi Sad, Serbia, on 20 September 2026. | Photo: Štefica Gazibara / transform! europe

On 20 September, the Initiative for Democratic Socialism (IDS) was founded in Novi Sad, bringing together the Political Platform Solidarnost (Solidarity), the civic group Borba je obaveza (Struggle is a Duty) and activists from different political and social struggles.

IDS emerges at a turbulent moment in Serbia, marked by a powerful student-led movement, growing social mobilisation and political repression, as the country heads towards parliamentary elections on 25 October.

The initiative also builds on long-standing links to the European left. The Centre for the Politics of Emancipation (CPE), with which several members of Solidarnost are closely connected, has been part of the transform! europe network since 2018, while Solidarnost is a partner of the Party of the European Left. Representatives of the European Left, transform! europe, the Communist Party of Austria (KPÖ) and Greece’s Nea Aristera attended the founding assembly in Novi Sad. Ines Schwerdtner, Co-Chair of Germany’s Die Linke, addressed the assembly in a video message.

We spoke with IDS co-chairs Melanija Lojpur and Radivoje Jovović about why they decided to join forces now, the student movement and the upcoming elections, political repression in Serbia, and what building a democratic socialist alternative could mean beyond election day.

---

Štefica Gazibara: IDS brings together Solidarnost, Borba je obaveza and activists from different political and social struggles. Why did you decide to join forces at this particular moment?
You chose the name Initiative for Democratic Socialism for a reason. What does democratic socialism mean in Serbia today – what kind of political alternative do you want to build?

Melanija Lojpur: Political life in Serbia has been devastated by 14 years of SNS rule, compounded by raw neoliberalism in the last 26 years and a legacy of single-party obedience during the socialist period. Representative democracy has become meaningless as elites serve big capital. However, the tragedy of the Novi Sad railway station canopy collapse exposed rampant, deadly corruption, making citizens realise that no institutions work in their public interest. This systemic decay sparked a rebellion among younger generations.

We united Solidarnost, Borba je obaveza, and activists now because this crisis demands a bold alternative – we have to be real and to demand something that is presented as unreal. Democratic socialism in Serbia today means returning politics to the people. We draw inspiration from the social vanguard of 1970s and 1980s Yugoslavia, proving we don’t need to reinvent the wheel. We want to protect the state as a public good, secure food sovereignty through regenerative agriculture, and stop human and natural exploitation for profit, ensuring dignity is our highest value.

Radivoje Jovović: Over the past years of struggle against an autocratic regime, we have reached a point where it is time to unite and renew the Left in Serbia. People have become increasingly aware on a massive scale of the extent to which our society, our nature, and our environment have been exploited, and finally, after decades of media demonisation of the Left, political space has emerged for its revitalisation. We ourselves have been working towards this revitalisation for a long time, always face to face with workers, our fellow citizens, and all those who deserve to have their security and dignity restored.

The democratic socialism we represent is much more than the pale social-democratic projects of the past, which in Serbia have invariably ended up in an alliance with neoliberalism. We want democracy and dignity both in politics and in the workplace; the development of models of worker participation and (co-)ownership; the development of cooperatives and cooperative forms of organisation; strong protection of public goods and assets under public ownership; fair progressive taxation; a living wage; and a financial system that serves overall social development. For us, democracy cannot stop at the doors of parliament or city hall; it must also extend into the workplace and the economy. We must also fundamentally reform the social security system that has kept people in a subordinate position, making them vulnerable to exploitation by corrupt authorities and unscrupulous capital. All of this, and much more, is a path towards restoring the dignity that the people of Serbia deserve.

One of IDS’s first political decisions was to give its full support to the student movement and Studentska lista – Studenti pobeđuju (Students Will Win), while stressing the importance of preserving the movement’s autonomy. What role does IDS see for itself in supporting the movement in the run-up to the elections?

ML: Our primary role is to support students in rebuilding social cohesion, solidarity, and respect for the electoral process and the will of the voters. This will be difficult. The European Union is fully aware of our problems: 5.5 million adult voters versus 6.4 million registered citizens on the electoral roll, phantom voters, their orchestrated migrations, and countless voters without a proper address.^[1]

Our problem is not just a mafia-like regime; it is also Europe’s tendency to turn a blind eye to every abuse and corruption in the name of “stabilocracy.” For now, our role is to help students politicise citizens, safeguard the election process, protect the popular will, and establish the basic standards of a state that genuinely serves its people.

RJ: We are an organisation whose entire membership has stood alongside the student struggle from the very beginning. This is not only because the students’ organisational models are left-wing, or because the economic and social programmes of the student movement are left-wing and clearly socially oriented, but also because of our firm conviction that ideals can only be achieved through a responsible approach to society. We see the student movement as the central democratic force capable of challenging this regime and creating the political foundations from which we can fight for the long-term building of a community based on justice, dignity, and solidarity.

We have placed all our people and resources at the service of the student movement’s victory. Whether it is our election monitors and observers, our activities and media presence, or our tangible material resources, everything has been put towards advancing a single slogan whose fulfilment we eagerly await: Students Will Win.

You have emphasised the importance of “the day after the elections” and the need for the left to offer a longer-term political alternative. IDS also brings together representatives in local assemblies across Serbia, including the Assembly of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina. How do you see IDS developing beyond the immediate electoral struggle – at the local and regional level and as a broader democratic socialist alternative in Serbia? What role do regionalisation and decentralisation play in this?

ML: Decentralisation and regionalisation are core pillars of our programme and values.

Decentralisation also means giving people real mechanisms to participate in decisions that affect their communities, rather than simply bringing administration closer to them. Without true autonomy for local self-governments to address their specific needs with state support, politics loses its purpose. Centralisation has devastated Serbia’s regions, concentrating a quarter of the population – unofficially even more – into urban centres. Today, Belgrade stands as a symbol of an unliveable city with collapsing infrastructure.

Regionalisation is vital for building a sustainable future and a dignified life. Drawing on our experience living in Vojvodina, we know that respecting regional autonomy—rooted in solidarity and mutual aid—is the only way to tackle global ecological crises, which always manifest locally and demand local responses. Beyond the elections, IDS will leverage our presence in local assemblies and the Vojvodina provincial parliament to fight for real decentralisation, transforming our communities from the ground up.

RJ: Centralisation in Serbia has exacted a heavy social toll. Today, we have villages and smaller towns without dentists, doctors, access to drinking water, sewerage networks, and more. Centralisation came in through the front door in the 1990s, accusing separate territorial units of separatism, while in reality, financial and political interests lay behind it all. Here, life at the local level depends on transfers of funds from the Republic and on the political loyalty of local communities toward the centre.

We must change this. IDS is aware of how deeply rooted certain political myths are in the consciousness of a large part of society, but no one ever said it would be easy. The task of the Left has always been difficult, but it has also always been the right one.

At the founding assembly, several people who will take on leading roles within IDS were presented, representing different political, activist and professional backgrounds. Could you tell us a little about the people behind IDS – where do you both come from politically, and what different experiences and movements are represented within the new initiative?

ML: Our initiative brings together a diverse mosaic of anti-fascists, leftists, LGBT activists, feminists, trade unionists, eco-activists, and ordinary citizens. Our camaraderie—forged through various struggles over the past 15 years, especially with our comrades from Borba je obaveza—has finally been politically articulated into an initiative that brings socialism back into play.

My own political path stems from a decade of work in the public sector and trade union activities, combined with the devastating industrial collapse of Zrenjanin, the city where I grew up during the 1990s. Once an economic and cultural giant, it has been reduced to a city where a foreign rubber tyre factory operates like a labour camp in the fertile Banat plain. My politicisation was further shaped by my sexual identity and feminist education, which helped me articulate the overlapping oppressions of this system. Imagine the rich diversity of our initiative when this is just one of many personal stories.

RJ: IDS brings together people from different backgrounds, social contexts, and generations. I consider this a major strength, precisely because the challenges facing the Left are multidimensional and must be viewed from different perspectives – not least from a communications perspective.

Personally, I entered politics as a university professor and political scientist. Coming from a working-class background and a partisan family, and having grown up during the terrible bloodshed and extremely difficult social conditions of the 1990s, I have always hoped that, in some way, I would contribute to the revival of the Left in Serbia. For years, I was an active member of the academic community and the NGO sector, but that was not enough. Through its repression and shameless conduct, the regime of Aleksandar Vučić pulled me out of the classroom and into the real world – first into activism, and then into politics.

Unfortunately, there has been little opportunity to put my political science expertise to use for the common good; more often, my role has simply involved direct, hands-on activism. But these are the conditions of the struggle at this moment; all that is left to us is to decide whether we will fight or not.

Radivoje, you mentioned arrests, detention and other forms of pressure experienced by you and others involved in IDS. From your own experience, what does this tell us about the conditions under which political opposition and social movements are currently operating in Serbia? Has this repression changed the way you organise politically?

RJ: We must operate with the constant awareness that we may be under surveillance, and that details from our private conversations could potentially be used for political and judicial persecution – as happened last year, when several of our comrades spent months in pretrial detention as a result of such a case involving unlawful surveillance. We must act carefully and patiently, with every step thoroughly assessed and calculated. Simply being out on the streets always carries potential risks, while unlawful arrests and detentions have placed a serious burden on the previous period of our activities.
We have been through a great deal. I have personally been arrested nine times But it has created an even stronger sense of unity and solidarity among us and forged a determined team that knows, having lived through these experiences, that we are capable of doing much more in the future.

IDS places workers’ rights and social justice at the centre of its political project. Melanija, your political and activist work has ranged from trade union organising and workers’ rights to feminist activism and local struggles. How can these different struggles be brought together to build a left that is rooted in people’s everyday lives – particularly at a time when economic insecurity, inequality and gender-based violence are so closely intertwined?

ML: My political path was deeply shaped by militant queer movements in 2009, when we fought to organise Pride despite state bans. This activism profoundly impacted me, alongside my philosophy degree from the University of Belgrade. Discovering intersectionality and postcolonial thought through feminism, as well as ecofeminist struggles, revealed a powerful truth: a career in the public sector and serving citizens ultimately share the same core goal. Serving our community and society should be the most honourable profession, in which protecting the dignity of nature and humanity as its integral part is inseparable from the impulse of trade unionism – togetherness. Through all of this, the most crucial realisation has been that ignorance is our greatest enemy, no matter what field of action or interaction you find yourself in.

IDS also maintains long-standing connections with left-wing parties, foundations and organisations across Europe. How does the initiative see its place within the broader European left in the future, and where does it stand on European and international questions such as European integration, peace and security?

ML: Our long-standing cooperation with European left-wing parties and organisations is fundamental; without it, we could not exist as a leftist alternative today. Internationalism is our core value, alongside a class-based understanding of global capitalism. European integration is essential to make the world better for all of us together.

Peace is a prerequisite for change, exposing the hypocrisy of Western political elites who rely on fear narratives and Carl Schmitt’s enemy logic to maintain a ruinous economic status quo. The US-Israeli military-industrial complex and NATO make the planet increasingly unstable. Wars never help ordinary people—we in the Balkans know this too well. Ignorance combined with fear is a destructive cocktail. Yet, having touched the generations that built former Yugoslavia, we know that labour and faith in human creativity can still build a life of dignity.

RJ: We see ourselves as part of the broader European and international left, and we want to further strengthen these ties through solidarity, internationalism, and political cooperation. We support European integration, but we believe that Europe as a whole must become more democratic, socially just, and based on solidarity rather than competition and austerity. For us, this also means the democratisation of political and economic life, the protection of public goods and the strengthening of social rights. It also means that Europe must take a firm stance against aggressor states and governments deeply involved in the perpetration of war crimes.

When it comes to questions of peace and security, our starting point is internationalism and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Coming from a region that has experienced the devastating consequences of war, we see peace, regional cooperation, social justice, and solidarity among peoples as inseparable. We reject the idea that security can be built through permanent militarisation and confrontation. We want to contribute to a European left that connects the struggle for democracy, workers’ rights, and economic justice with the broader struggle for peace, solidarity, and a society in which human dignity and the public interest come before profit and power.

Notes:

[1] Editor’s note: According to official figures, Serbia has around 5.5 million adult residents but around 6.4 million registered voters. While Serbians living abroad can also vote, the unusually high number has raised concerns about the accuracy of the electoral roll and possible voter manipulation. “Phantom voters” are people registered at addresses where they do not actually live, while “orchestrated migrations” refers to the organised registration of voters in other municipalities to influence local election results. Such practices were reported by independent election observers during the 2023 elections, and issues with the electoral roll remain a concern today.

---

This article was originally published by Transofrm! Europe; please consider supporting the original publication, and read the original version at the link above.

Melanija Lojpur

Radivoje Jovović

Štefica Gazibara

 

Take Action October 20 to End the Illegal Us-Israeli War on Iran

By Kevin Martin

October 17, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image by David Geitgey Sierralupe/Wikimediacommons, licensed via CC BY 4.0

President Donald Trump has been less than coy about possibly ramping up his illegal war of aggression against Iran after the mid-term elections, and now states the United States would not use a nuclear weapon, but possibly the “Mother of All Bombs,” MOAB for short (with apologies to that lovely town in Utah), officially the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb. The target would supposedly be Iran’s energy infrastructure and nuclear facilities, which were supposedly obliterated by U.S. and Israeli attacks over a year ago. 

A few reminders are in order. The US/Israeli war on Iran is illegal under domestic and international law, lacking authorization from Congress and the United Nations Security Council. Combined with ongoing attacks on Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, the region is in flames, and putting out the fire with gasoline would be a stupendously bad move. There are indirect diplomatic talks underway, and those need to succeed, and quickly, to end this disaster harming the people of Iran, the region, and the U.S. and global economy. Unfortunately, Trump, ever the statesmen, quipped, “I don’t know who the hell we are negotiating with.” 

Iran does not have nuclear weapons, and was verifiably in compliance with its obligations under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), foolishly abrogated by Trump in his first term (and former President Joe Biden, who as Vice-President was part of the Obama Administration that negotiated that agreement, inexplicably failed to renew while in the White House). Yet Iran still does not have nuclear weapons, and the US (thousands) and Israel (hundreds) do. 

Moreover, the US plans to send more conventional weapons to Israel (the latest proposed shipment being 40,000 one-ton bombs) and Saudi Arabia, and to conclude a nuclear technology deal with the latter, which cannot help but put Iran and other countries in the region even more on edge. 

The war is not just illegal, but massively unpopular with the U.S. public, and Trump and his Republican enablers may take a deserved shellacking, in no small part because of the war, at the polls in November. 

Voting is crucial, but not sufficient. On Tuesday, October 20, just two weeks before the mid-terms, peace advocates will hold dozens of rallies across the country to demand Peace with Iran NOW! A coalition of nearly 100 national and local organizations, including the National Iranian American Council, Action Corps, Peace Action, and veterans, faith-based, peace and human rights organizations, are holding rallies at congressional offices to demand the following of Congress:

• Cut off funding for the war;
• Enforce the Iran War Powers Resolutions passed by Congress (which make clear the illegality of Trump and Netanyahu’s war of aggression);
• Demand accountability for the Minab elementary school bombing on the first day of the war, which reportedly killed 120 children as well as teachers and staff AND investigate the bombing of the civilian wedding party in Kuhestak. The public deserves a full accounting, and the victims’ families deserve truth and accountability;
• Support diplomacy, sanctions and a peace agreement to end the war. 

Looking longer term, a Middle East Weapons of Mass Destruction-Free Zone was first proposed by Iran and Egypt over five decades ago, and establishing such a Zone was included in the UN Resolution that ended the first US war on Iraq. It remains to be established, but still could be a useful part of the solution to the current mess started by the US and Israel. 

We need lasting solutions, including the following:

• End this war now, via diplomacy, and/or Congress refusing to fund it. 
• End the sole authority for any president to initiate a nuclear attack, especially when Congress has not declared war.
• Dramatically reduce the War Budget, especially for nuclear weapons and Golden Dome; invest in human needs and addressing climate catastrophe.
• Support a Middle East Weapons of Mass Destruction-Free Zone, and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. 

For now, the immediate priority is to demand Congress do its job, and we have the opportunity to say so, loud and clear, at pro-peace rallies on Tuesday, October 20.

Kevin Martin

Kevin Martin serves as the president of Peace Action, the country’s largest grassroots peace and disarmament organization with over 200,000 supporters nationwide. He also convenes the CeaseFire Now Grassroots Network.