CNN invoking the economy as a gotcha against President Trump’s retaliation for Iran’s unprovoked strikes on cargo ships is like telling FDR not to strike Japan after Pearl Harbor.
CNN Business’s dense senior reporter David Goldman — who’s become the poster-child for some of the network’s dumbest economic hot takes — woke-scolded Trump in a July 8 item headlined, “Trump is playing with economic fire by calling the peace deal with Iran ‘over.’”
For context, Trump’s comments on him being done dealing with the Islamist regime in Tehran came after Iran fired on three commercial vessels July 7 in Oman’s territorial waters near the disputed Strait of Hormuz. Goldman completely glossed over Iran’s unwarranted violence by attributing renewed fears over the Strait’s accessibility to a bilateral “exchange of fire” as if Trump was somehow equally complicit.
In fact, Goldman didn’t even mention that it was Iran that struck first at all — despite his own network covering the attacks. His entire thesis assumes that Trump is the economic villain for realizing that Iran is about as reliable as a punctured inflatable pool and throwing his hands up over the ever-dwindling expectations of a negotiated peace.
Goldman claimed that the previously instituted Memorandum of Understanding didn’t provide enough time for the U.S. to “avoid the looming ‘economic catastrophe’ that Trump feared would earn him comparisons to Depression-era President Herbert Hoover.” This just shows that Goldman knows as much about game theory as he does about economics: Zilch!
A negotiation — as anyone with even a cursory understanding of how game theory works — only functions properly on the assumption that the parties in question are acting in good faith, which Iran has proved is not by constantly attacking commercial ships in the middle of negotiations. Acumen Risk, LLC senior analyst Yaron Schwartz wrote in a March 31 op-ed that Iran “perceives war as an ongoing state rather than a temporary aberration of the international order.” He continued: “This fundamental divergence has resulted in nearly 50 years of conflict that have left the free world to grapple with a delusional understanding of peace and war.”
The only recourse for the U.S., then, would naturally be the legitimate use of force to nullify further threats. But anyone reading Goldman’s spin would assume that no one but Trump would be to blame if the Strait closes and sends markets reeling over commodity traders losing their marbles again:
Trump threatened Wednesday to resume America’s naval blockade of the strait – but so far, the strait remains open to ships willing to take the risk to get in and out. But if it closes again, the US economy could take an unwelcome hit.
Goldman even attempted to ding Trump for putting sanctions on Iranian oil following the attacks, which he fretted accounted for much of the 200 million barrels that’s passed through the Strait of Hormuz for the past three weeks. “Another caveat: Much of that oil – around 60 million barrels worth – is Iranian, which the Trump administration sanctioned again on Tuesday, giving buyers just 10 days to take hold of it before it’s off-limits again,” Goldman bleated.
Interpretation: Ah, so what if Iran bombs a few commercial vessels? Why are you overreacting?
Utter insanity. The real “economic fire” is coming from a trigger-happy Islamist regime that would rather see the U.S. smoked into smithereens than sustain a negotiated peace.
