Uncategorized
Hannah Arendt could have anticipated the Trump administration’s lies in Minnesota — and elsewhere
During the last half-dozen years of Hannah Arendt’s life, the celebrated political and moral philosopher, who died in 1975, was shaken by a series of personal and political crises. Not only was she still dealing with the fallout from her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Study in the Banality of Evil, but Arendt lost two of her closest friends: her husband Heinrich Blücher and her mentor Karl Jaspers. Moreover, she was increasingly alarmed by the assassinations of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King, the churn of student antiwar protests, and mounting police violence.
“For the first time,” Arendt told her friend, the novelist Mary McCarthy, in 1968, “I meet middle-aged, native-born Americans (colleagues, quite respectable) who think of emigration.”
One affair during this period that struck Arendt with great force was the New York Times publication of the Pentagon Papers in June 1971. These papers, commissioned by former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, documented in despairing detail America’s deepening involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Leaked to the Times by the RAND Corporation analyst Daniel Ellsberg, the papers quickly led to a series of crises — constitutional, political, nearly existential — that led both to the landmark decision by the Supreme Court to allow their publication and, of course, Richard Nixon’s decision to draft a team of plumbers to burglarize the office of Ellsberg’s psychiatrist.
Arendt was of course shocked by the blood-soaked futility and consequences, for civilians no less than soldiers, of American military strategy. But she was also staggered by how successive governments packaged this deadly madness for public consumption. It was nothing less, she declared in her essay “Lying in Politics,” a “quicksand of lying statements of all sorts, deceptions as well as self-deceptions,” one which will engulf any reader intent on making sense of our government’s actions.
First published in the New York Review of Books more than a half-century ago — and subsequently included in Arendt’s collection of essays Crises of the Republic — the piece is hauntingly prophetic, anticipating the salvo of crises now roiling our country. These dangers most often issue from a single source — namely, the embattled status of what Arendt calls our “common world,” one structured by the existence of truth and fact. Were we to undermine these, we would undo that very same world.
The history of political lying is, in a sense, little more than a series of footnotes to Plato’s notion of the “noble lie” — lies the powerful tell the weak in their quest for power and, if they succeed, hold on to it.
“Truthfulness,” Arendt drily notes, “has never been counted among the political virtues, and lies have always been regarded as justifiable tools in political dealings.”
But there is lying and lying. For a prince or president to maintain power, Machiavelli famously declared, “it is necessary to know how to do wrong.” While the use of deception and deceit is among these necessary wrongs, it is important for the ruler to use them sparingly and surgically. Yet this was hardly the case for the succession of presidents who presided over the military and moral debacle in Vietnam. Instead, they and their officials lied with great but also systematic abandon over the reasons for the war — which evolved over time — as well as its human cost and progress. That these lies, Arendt writes, “became the chief issues of the Pentagon Papers, rather than the illusion, error, miscalculation, and the like, is mainly due to the strange fact that the mistaken decisions and lying statements consistently violated the astoundingly accurate factual reports of the intelligence community.”
This deliberate dissonance between facts and claims, in turn, feeds a kind of rot that eats away at the epistemological and ethical foundations of our world and lives. And this is no small matter, for it goes to the heart of Arendt’s analysis of totalitarianism. She argues that factual truths, unlike rational truths, are never compellingly true. That 2+2 will always equal 4 needs no witnesses; that a violent mob stormed out Capitol on Jan. 6, 2020 does, however, require witnesses and factual evidence.
“Facts need testimony to be remembered and trustworthy witnesses to be established in order to find a secure dwelling place in the domain of human affairs,” she wrote. This web of truths is as intricate and fragile as a spider’s web; just as a swat of a stick can collapse the latter, so too can the constant swatting of lies by groups or peoples destroy the former.
The path to the Nazi destruction of European Jewry was paved by the deconstruction of factual truth, the obliteration of moral judgment, and the contagion of state lies. This was no less the case with those Arendt called the “problem-solvers” at RAND — the club of the best and brightest which Ellsberg decided to quit — than with the architects of the Final Solution. In both instances, Arendt writes, “defactualization and problem-solving were welcomed because disregard of reality was inherent in the policies and goals themselves.”
But the rot runs broader and deeper. Eventually, it destroys not just common sense and a common past, but the world we hold in common. If everybody always lies to you, Arendt observes, the consequence is that you will no longer believe anything at all. The next step, quite simply, is the unmaking of reality.
As Arendt wrote in “Truth and Politics,” a companion piece to “Lying in Politics,” the “result of a consistent and total substitution of lies for factual truth is not that the lies will now be accepted as truth, and the truth be defamed as lies, but that the sense by which we take our bearings in the world is being destroyed.”
Of course, this is the existential threat posed by our nation’s current management, one dedicated to the destruction of factual truth and the world it undergirds. Yet the still provisional success of the citizens of Minneapolis who, in their relentless attention to factual truths — truths they have witnessed and share not only amongst themselves but also the world beyond their city — reminds us that this enterprise in nihilism is hardly predestined.
Arendt would not have been surprised, I believe, by this insurgency on behalf of not just factual but also moral truth in our glacial Midwest. Yet another reason, as this new chapter to the crises of the republic unfolds, Arendt shall remain our indispensable guide.
The post Hannah Arendt could have anticipated the Trump administration’s lies in Minnesota — and elsewhere appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Syrian State Forces Deploy in Kurdish-Run City Under Ceasefire Deal
Syrian Interior Ministry security forces vehicles travel to enter the city of Hasakah in northeastern Syria, following an agreement between Damascus and the Syrian Democratic Forces reached on Jan. 30, in Al-hasakah, Syria, Feb. 2, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syrian government security forces deployed in a Kurdish-controlled city in the northeast on Monday, a first step toward implementing a US-backed ceasefire deal that foresees the Kurdish–run regions being merged with Damascus.
The deal, declared on Friday, staved off the prospect of further confrontation between President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s government and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, which lost swathes of eastern and northern Syria to government troops in January.
Reuters journalists saw a convoy of more than 30 interior ministry vehicles begin moving towards the ethnically-mixed city of Hasakah from its outskirts in the early afternoon. Sources in the city said they entered shortly afterwards.
Members of the Kurdish Asayish security force observed as the convoy entered the city.
Government forces are expected to be stationed in Syrian state buildings in Hasakah’s so-called “security zone,” a Syrian official and a Kurdish security source told Reuters ahead of the deployment.
The accord declared on Friday foresees a phased integration of Kurdish fighters with government forces. The United States has hailed the agreement as a historic milestone towards unity and reconciliation after 14 years of civil war.
The SDF was once Washington’s main Syrian ally, playing a vital part in the fight against Islamic State terrorists.
But its status weakened as President Donald Trump built ties with Sharaa, a former al Qaeda commander who has now brought almost all of Syria back under the authority of Damascus.
The deal announced on Friday includes the formation of a military division that will include three SDF brigades, in addition to a brigade for forces in the SDF-held town of Kobani, also known as Ain al-Arab, which will be affiliated to the state-controlled governorate of Aleppo.
A convoy of 20 aid trucks entered Ain al-Arab, state–run Ekhbariya TV reported.
The deal also provides for governing bodies in SDF-held areas to be merged with state institutions.
The Syrian state news agency SANA reported that interior ministry forces had begun deploying in rural areas near Ain al-Arab on Monday.
Since rebels toppled President Bashar al-Assad 14 months ago, Sharaa’s efforts to bring the fractured nation under central rule have been complicated by deadly violence last year against Alawites and Druze, fuelling suspicion of his rule among minority communities despite his promises to protect them.
ANALYST SEES GAPS OVER INTEGRATION
SDF commander Mazloum Abdi, in comments to Kurdish broadcaster Ronahi published on Saturday, said there was an agreement on a limited number of government security forces entering the security zones of both Hasakah and Qamishli, another SDF-held city on the Turkish border.
Their mission would be only administrative, to follow up on the process of the integration of the Asayish, he said.
Abdi said government forces would not enter Kurdish villages and cities, adding that their administration would remain in the hands of their residents and local forces.
Nawar Rahawi, director of the government-affiliated Hasakah media center, told Reuters that some 125 to 150 members of the security forces had entered Hasakah on Monday, and another 15 to 20 vehicles would enter on Tuesday if the entry goes smoothly.
“If things go smoothly, as all Syrians hope, the process of integrating the Syrian Democratic Forces with the Syrian government forces will begin,” he said.
But Noah Bonsey, a senior adviser with the International Crisis Group think-tank, said statements from both sides since Friday indicated gaps over how the integration of the SDF and Kurdish–run governing bodies in the northeast will pan out.
“What the practical details of integration look like will determine what continuing role SDF elements play on the ground, how much autonomy they retain, and how significant and extensive government command and control is,” he said.
Uncategorized
Iran, US to Hold Nuclear Talks on Friday, Some Regional Countries to Participate
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference after meeting with his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan, in Istanbul, Turkey, Jan. 30, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Dilara Senkaya
Iran and the United States will resume nuclear talks on Friday in Turkey, Iranian and US officials told Reuters on Monday, while a regional diplomat said representatives from countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt would participate.
US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi will meet in Istanbul in an effort to revive diplomacy over a long-running dispute about Iran‘s nuclear program and dispel fears of a new regional war.
Turkey and other regional allies have sought de-escalation.
“Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt, as well as some other countries, will attend the Istanbul meeting. There will be bilateral, trilateral, and other meetings,” the diplomat said.
US NAVAL BUILDUP NEAR IRAN
Tensions are running high amid a US naval buildup near Iran, following a violent crackdown against anti-government demonstrations last month, the deadliest domestic unrest in Iran since its 1979 revolution.
US President Donald Trump, who stopped short of carrying out threats to intervene during the crackdown, has since demanded Tehran make nuclear concessions and sent a flotilla to its coast. He said last week Iran was “seriously talking,” while Tehran’s top security official Ali Larijani said arrangements for negotiations were under way.
Iranian sources told Reuters last week that Trump had demanded three conditions for resumption of talks: zero enrichment of uranium in Iran, limits on Tehran’s ballistic missile program, and ending its support for regional proxies.
Iran has long rejected all three demands as unacceptable infringements of its sovereignty, but two Iranian officials told Reuters its clerical rulers saw the ballistic missile program, rather than uranium enrichment, as the bigger obstacle.
PREPARATIONS FOR POTENTIAL US–IRAN TALKS
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran was considering “the various dimensions and aspects of the talks,” adding that “time is of the essence for Iran as it wants the lifting of unjust sanctions sooner.”
A Turkish ruling party official told Reuters that Tehran and Washington had agreed to re-focus on diplomacy and possible talks this week, in a potential reprieve for potential US strikes.
Witkoff was expected to visit Israel to meet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s military chief, two senior Israeli officials said separately on Monday.
‘BALL IN TRUMP’S COURT’
The Iranian official said “diplomacy is ongoing. For talks to resume, Iran says there should not be preconditions and that it is ready to show flexibility on uranium enrichment, including handing over 400 kg of highly enriched uranium, accepting zero enrichment under a consortium arrangement as a solution.”
However, he added, for the start of talks, Tehran wanted US military assets moved away from Iran.
“Now the ball is in Trump’s court,” he said.
SATELLITE IMAGERY SHOWS SOME REPAIR WORK AT IRANIAN SITES
Tehran’s regional sway has been weakened by Israel’s attacks on its proxies – from Hamas in Gaza to Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and militias in Iraq – as well as by the ousting of Iran‘s close ally, former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
In June last year the United States struck Iranian nuclear targets, joining in at the close of a 12-day Israeli bombing campaign. Since then, Tehran has said its uranium enrichment work has stopped.
Recent satellite imagery of two of the targeted sites, Isfahan and Natanz, appears to show some repair work since December, with new roofing over two previously destroyed buildings. No other rebuilding was visible, according to the imagery provided by Planet Labs and reviewed by Reuters.
Washington-based think tank ISIS said satellite images from late January showed construction work on tunnel entrances at Isfahan that could “indicate a preparation for additional military strikes” as was seen ahead of last year’s US strikes.
It could also signal the movement of assets from other facilities, it added.
NUCLEAR TALKS STANDOFF
After five rounds of talks that have stalled since May 2023, several hard-to-bridge issues remained between Tehran and Washington, including Iran‘s insistence on maintaining uranium enrichment on its soil and refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
The UN nuclear watchdog has called on Iran repeatedly to say what happened to the highly enriched uranium stock since the June attacks.
Western countries fear Iran‘s uranium enrichment could yield material for a warhead. Iran says its nuclear program is only for electricity generation and other civilian uses.
The Iranian sources said Tehran could ship its highly enriched uranium abroad and pause enrichment in a deal that should also include the lifting of economic sanctions.
Uncategorized
Iran Fears US Strike May Reignite Protests, Imperil Rule, Sources Say
People walk on a street in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 31, 2026. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
Iran’s leadership is increasingly worried a US strike could break its grip on power by driving an already enraged public back onto the streets, following a bloody crackdown on anti-government protests, according to six current and former officials.
In high-level meetings, officials told Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that public anger over last month’s crackdown — the bloodiest since the 1979 Islamic Revolution — has reached a point where fear is no longer a deterrent, four current officials briefed on the discussions said.
The officials said Khamenei was told that many Iranians were prepared to confront security forces again and that external pressure such as a limited US strike could embolden them and inflict irreparable damage to the political establishment.
One of the officials told Reuters that Iran‘s enemies were seeking more protests so as to bring the Islamic Republic to an end, and “unfortunately” there would be more violence if an uprising took place.
“An attack combined with demonstrations by angry people could lead to a collapse [of the ruling system]. That is the main concern among the top officials and that is what our enemies want,” said the official, who like the other officials contacted for this story declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter.
The reported remarks are significant because they suggest private misgivings inside the leadership at odds with Tehran’s defiant public stance toward the protesters and the US.
The sources declined to say how Khamenei responded. Iran‘s Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on this account of the meetings.
Multiple sources told Reuters last week that US President Donald Trump is weighing options against Iran that include targeted strikes on security forces and leaders to inspire protesters, even as Israeli and Arab officials said air power alone would not topple the clerical rulers.
PEOPLE ARE EXTREMELY ANGRY, SAYS FORMER OFFICIAL
Any such uprising in the wake of a US strike would stand in contrast to Iranians’ response to Israeli and US bombing attacks on Iran‘s nuclear program back in June, which was not followed by anti-government demonstrations.
But a former senior moderate official said the situation had changed since the crackdown in early January.
“People are extremely angry,” he said, adding a US attack could lead Iranians to rise up again. “The wall of fear has collapsed. There is no fear left.”
Tensions between Tehran and Washington are running high. The arrival of a US aircraft carrier and supporting warships in the Middle East has expanded Trump’s ability to take military action if he so wishes, after repeatedly threatening intervention over Iran‘s bloody crackdown.
‘THE GAME IS OVER,’ SAYS FORMER PRIME MINISTER
Several opposition figures, who were part of the establishment before falling out with it, have warned the leadership that “boiling public anger” could result in a collapse of the Islamic system.
“The river of warm blood that was spilled on the cold month of January will not stop boiling until it changes the course of history,” former prime minister Mirhossein Mousavi, who has been under house arrest without trial since 2011, said in a statement published by the pro-reform Kalameh website.
“In what language should people say they do not want this system and do not believe your lies? Enough is enough. The game is over,’” Mousavi added in the statement.
During the early January protests, witnesses and rights groups said, security forces crushed demonstrations with lethal force, leaving thousands killed and many wounded. Tehran blamed the violence on “armed terrorists” linked to Israel and the US.
Trump stopped short of carrying out threats to intervene, but he has since demanded Iran make nuclear concessions. Both Tehran and Washington have signaled readiness to revive diplomacy over a long-running nuclear dispute.
SIMMERING ANGER, ‘DANGER OF BLOODSHED’
Analysts and insiders say that while the streets are quiet for now, deep-seated grievances have not gone away.
Public frustration has been simmering over economic decline, political repression, a widening gulf between rich and poor, and entrenched corruption that leaves many Iranians feeling trapped in a system offering neither relief nor a path forward.
“This may not be the end, but it is no longer just the beginning,” said Hossein Rassam, a London-based analyst.
If protests resume during mounting foreign pressure and security forces respond with force, the six current and former officials said they fear demonstrators would be bolder than in previous unrest, emboldened by experience and driven by a sense that they have little left to lose.
One of the officials told Reuters that while people were angrier than before, the establishment would use harsher methods against protesters if it was under US attack. He said the result would be a bloodbath.
Ordinary Iranians contacted by Reuters said they expected Iran‘s rulers to crack down hard on any further protests.
A Tehran resident whose 15-year-old son was killed in the protests on Jan. 9 said the demonstrators had merely sought a normal life, and had been answered “with bullets.”
“If America attacks, I will go back to the streets to take revenge for my son and the children this regime killed.”