Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Trump's Iran Fiasco: Kushner Lit the Fuse, the World Pays the Price

Blog

Trump's Iran Fiasco: Kushner Lit the Fuse, the World Pays the Price
Blog

Blog

Trump's Iran Fiasco: Kushner Lit the Fuse, the World Pays the Price

2026-03-14 22:11 Last Updated At:22:11

The US-Israeli war on Iran has now ground on for two weeks. And guess what’s the most jaw-dropping part of this entire conflict? Trump decided to go to war on pure gut instinct, consulting only a handful of advisers — chief among them his son-in-law Jared Kushner — with apparently zero contingency plan for Iran's response.

The Strait of Hormuz blockade is case in point: Trump has been completely paralyzed, leaving the war effort in shambles. Facing this disaster, he's doing what he always does — refusing to own it. Instead, he's throwing Kushner under the bus, saying "based on what he told me, I thought Iran was going to attack the United States." The implication is stark: his son-in-law may have fed him bad intelligence that dragged America into war.

Trump’s Iran war is falling apart. He now blames son-in-law Kushner (right), saying Kushner’s intel pushed him to strike.

Trump’s Iran war is falling apart. He now blames son-in-law Kushner (right), saying Kushner’s intel pushed him to strike.

The reality: Kushner, Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, and the rest of the White House's so-called "Jewish clique" were the key architects of this conflict — openly siding with Israel while dragging the rest of the world into the wreckage.

When the war kicked off, Trump was riding high. He was convinced that America's overwhelming military firepower would bring Iran to its knees within days.

Envoy Witkoff (left) is also in his sights — another key player in the White House “Jewish clique” driving Middle East policy.

Envoy Witkoff (left) is also in his sights — another key player in the White House “Jewish clique” driving Middle East policy.

He badly miscalculated. Iran did way more than just holding the line — it hit back hard and relentlessly, pushing the situation to the edge of Trump's control. The Strait of Hormuz remains firmly in Iranian military hands, and Washington has no answer. Reports say shipping companies have begged the US Navy for warship escorts, only to be flatly turned down — too few navy ships, risks too high. It is a humiliating display of impotence.

With the strait sealed shut, global oil and gas supply chains are in chaos and prices keep climbing. US allies are seething, and it's only a matter of time before that anger boils over at home too. Caught in a catastrophe of his own making, Trump is working two angles at once — engineering a face-saving exit while furiously offloading blame. This time, the scapegoats he has chosen are Kushner and Witkoff.

A few days ago, Trump told reporters his decision to go to war was built on what Kushner and Witkoff had told him — intelligence that made him believe "I thought [Iran] was going to attack us", and something needed to be done. Translation: if their advice was wrong, the blood is on their hands, not his.

What Kushner Actually Told Trump

So what exactly did Kushner and Witkoff tell him? The picture is coming into focus. Shortly before hostilities began, the two men flew to Geneva to negotiate with Iranian representatives. On their return, they briefed Trump, reporting that Iran had claimed to possess enough enriched uranium to build 11 nuclear warheads — and that both men believed Iran could use those weapons to strike the United States. Trump later told Fox News the US had no choice but to act pre-emptively. His analogy: in a gunfight, the gunman has to draw first.

Now that the war has sunk into a quagmire, Trump is leaning on that same briefing to explain why he "felt" Iran was about to strike — and to justify his rush to war. The subtext is impossible to miss: they may have fed him bad intelligence, and he would never have acted so recklessly on his own.

Whether or not Kushner actually misled his father-in-law, the fact that Trump launched a war on his son-in-law's word alone is breathtaking in its recklessness. Democratic lawmakers have said so bluntly: a president who bypasses the CIA, the NSA, and the entire US intelligence apparatus — choosing instead to act on the advice of a family member and a tight inner circle — and then drags the country into a costly, deadly war that harms innocents and devastates allies, has a serious problem of judgement.

There's another layer of absurdity that demands scrutiny. Kushner is Jewish, and his family business carries deep, entangled financial ties to Israel. His father is a close personal friend of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

There is every reason to believe that the intelligence and advice Kushner delivers to Trump tilts in Israel's favour — and that he may be actively steering Trump's decision-making toward Israeli objectives. Whose interests he puts first is not a difficult question to answer.

The "Jewish Clique" at the Core

Chinese Mainland commentator "Chairman Tu" has written a sharp exposé of the White House "Jewish clique" and its stranglehold on American policy. Kushner tops the list — a five-star inner-circle figure in terms of proximity to Trump. Second is Middle East envoy Witkoff, also Jewish, a real estate magnate with equally tight financial ties to Israel. Third is Commerce Secretary Lutnick, who also wields meaningful influence over Trump's Middle East agenda.

This "Jewish clique" at the heart of American power is the single greatest force behind Trump's decision to go to war with Iran. They have covertly helped Israel pursue its goal of destroying Iran, while dragging the rest of the world into the wreckage — forcing everyone to pay an enormous price for a war that was reckless, absurd, and entirely avoidable.

Lai Ting-yiu




What Say You?

** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **

France has traded on some golden brands for a century: fine food, fine wine, great art. And then there is "democracy." But the recent riots have exposed what many refused to see. That brand is wobbling, the democratic machinery has seized up, and voters are not just disappointed. They are disgusted.

A Golden Brand Tarnished

The New York Times weighed in on the unrest yesterday with a pointed question: why are young people and the working class turning on France's democratic system? It cited a Pew Research Center poll showing 69% of French people are dissatisfied with democracy, up 11 percentage points from six years ago. More and more voters, in other words, feel democracy has failed.

NYT: French riots fueled by disillusionment with democracy.

NYT: French riots fueled by disillusionment with democracy.

France is hardly alone. In the United States, the share dissatisfied with democracy is also 69%. The golden brands are crashing down together, and that mindset will shape election after election. No one should take it lightly.

Post-mortems on the riots are now rolling in. The New York Times argues that centrist parties in Europe's largest country are in deep trouble. Slow growth, high inflation, mountains of government debt and bleak prospects for the young are fueling an anger that keeps the protests coming.

The latest riots are a case in point. People believe the democratic system has failed to deliver on its promise of a better future. So the anger boiled over.

Disappointment with "democracy" is curdling into suspicion and outright rejection. That is pushing voters to the extremes and feeding the rapid rise of far-right and far-left parties. The New York Times cited the latest Pew Research Center poll: 69% of French people are dissatisfied with democracy, against 68% in Spain and 62% in Italy. The United States is neck and neck with France at 69%.

The result is startling. If most people no longer see the current democracy as a "good system," how can the leaders it elects, or the decisions they make, command the public's trust?

Pew: 69% in France, US dissatisfied with democracy.

Pew: 69% in France, US dissatisfied with democracy.

A friend who read the piece dug up a similar survey from 2020. The shift is stark: back then, 58% of French people were dissatisfied with democracy; the figure has since climbed 11 percentage points. Among Americans, it rose 10 points.

Two Failures, One Reckoning

Why are Americans and the French growing so fed up with democracy? The article cites MIT professor Daron Acemoglu, who pins the malaise on two failures.

The first is the failure to deliver on shared prosperity. The working class has taken the hardest hit, and leaders have forgotten their contract with voters: keeping the infrastructure of daily life running smoothly.

The second failure runs deeper. Ruling elites dominate the traditional parties, yet they look down on the issues their supporters care about, or simply ignore them. The result? Working people have drifted to far-left or far-right populist parties, above all in France and Germany.

For ordinary people, democracy is not just a lofty slogan hung high on the wall. It is supposed to solve their problems and improve their lives.

Yet France's parties of every stripe have long been trapped inside the system, elbowing and tripping one another while the country's problems pile ever deeper.

Trapped in a Doom Loop

One columnist reached back 20 years to recall former French Prime Minister François Fillon warning that he was a leader facing national collapse, and that this could not go on. At the time, France owed 1.2 trillion euros, or 64.2 percent of GDP.

His urgent warning changed nothing. Instead of turning around, the crisis went into overdrive. Today the debt has swollen to 3.6 trillion euros, or 119.3 percent of GDP, and interest costs have climbed to nearly 5 percent. Money that should go to better public services and education now goes to paying interest. How can the public not be furious?

France's centrist parties must keep their core voters happy, so 32 percent of the education budget goes to paying civil servants' pensions. That leaves little left to improve classrooms and teaching facilities.

France is not alone. Other Western European countries suffer from the same disease: governments must control spending to shrink their deficits, but cutting welfare and education inevitably ignites public anger. So they keep spinning in a doom loop.

The result is a deeper hole. Voters grow more disillusioned with their governments, and their patience is running out even for the haloed "democratic system" itself.

The Bill Comes Due

Europe's four most populous countries go to the polls next year.

Public anger with traditional democracy will shape the results, and it will spread to other countries.

At a time when people in many countries are fed up with and disappointed in "democracy," some of Hong Kong's yellow camp are still beating the drum. Isn't that ridiculous?

Lai Ting-yiu

Recommended Articles