I have spent rather too much of Sunday pondering upon “what if?” questions.

The sense of anxiety that I feel, which I explored in my early-in-the-day post concerning Trump's threats issued with regard to a Monday deadline, was increased by his utterly intemperate, and frankly mad, expletive-laden post on social media during the day. This only served to expose his most base character trait, which is that of the playground bully threatening the small kid with violence if they do not hand over their pocket money on demand, except that the scale of violence threatened on this occasion is on an extraordinary scale and is targeted at a civilian population who have no influence on the outcome of the decisions that their leaders will make.

I will not make the mistake of thinking that Trump is merely being used by others to deliver the threats that he expresses. Whilst he is, no doubt, at the top of a pyramid populated by those intent on perpetuating their power and enhancing their personal wealth by exploiting, abusing, and killing vast numbers of people on earth, I do not see him as the mere agent of those intent on this plan. Nor do I think, as some might suggest, that Trump is senile and therefore not accountable for his actions. Threatening to undertake behaviour that induces both horror and disgust is not a sign of senility; it is, instead, a sign of depravity, and that is what we should see it as.

Trump and his cohort are depraved. That term describes someone who is morally corrupt, wicked, or perverted, reveals a severe lack of moral principles, and promotes ideas that represent a profound deviation from what is considered right. What we have to face is the likelihood that depraved actions will have been committed by US troops by Tuesday morning, contrary to international law, and exposing many, if not most, people within the Trump administration and the senior personnel within US armed forces to potential prosecution for war crimes.

Amongst those things that they may do is use nuclear weapons against a civilian population. We now need to embrace the possibility that the unimaginable may happen.

What then is my question? It is what comes next? What will the world do?

Will our Prime Minister stand by and watch, saying, yet again, that this is not our war and therefore not an issue he needs to comment on?

Will other countries do the same thing, or is it possible that, in the face of atrocity, a unified front against the USA might be created?

I do not know.

Might it also be possible that, in the face of an atrocity, humanitarian support might be put in place to provide relief to the people of Iran, who are the innocent victims in this war, as are all the people lving in fear in Lebanon, Kuwait, Oman, Dubai, Saudi Arabia and Israel, but with those in Iran likely to be suffering on a scale utterly disproportionate to all the rest, except, maybe, the  Lebanese?

Might Yvette Cooper, as our Foreign Secretary, finally cease putting out inane statements that seek to blame Iran for acting in self-defence, which is its right, and instead offer support in the face of a wholly unwarranted bombardment, part of it committed with the active participation of the UK government by permitting the use of UK air bases for that purpose?

Will NATO end? Might it expel the USA, as it should?

Similarly, might an attempt be made at the United Nations to suspend US membership, as is possible, albeit that the USA has the right to veto this?

And might governments coordinate to exclude the USA from world trade? That might be necessary if it perpetrates totally repugnant acts in Iran in pursuit of goals that are very obviously morally corrupt, undertaken solely for the gain of those in its political regime.

Perhaps the most important question, though, cannot be included in the list of UK-centric points I have already raised, because it concerns what will happen in the USA as a consequence of any such action. It is already clear from opinion polling that most people in that country disapprove of Trump's actions in Iran, just as they disapprove of so many of his other actions, including those on migrants into the USA. The “No Kings” demonstrations indicate that there is a large body of opinion and many people in the USA who are willing to demonstrate against what Trump is doing. Is it possible that they might declare that they have had enough? And how might they do that? And if they did, what might the reaction be? Might the leadership of an army that has committed war crimes become sufficiently desperate that they would permit the use of US military forces inside the USA to end US democracy and perpetuate the Trump regime in power, as I am aware that the likes of Tim Snyder now think to be possible?

And what might happen then? Would the UK special relationship continue if the USA were a totalitarian, fascist regime?

Will King Charles still pop over for tea with Trump later this month if that were to happen? The question might sound trite, but the geopolitical symbolism is now off the scale.

Quite clearly, I cannot answer these questions. What I do know is that they can all, now, be legitimately raised, and that, just because that is possible, we are now facing one of the most significant days and weeks in world history in my lifetime, and perhaps a little longer.

That is what underpins my anxiety. I think that, in the face of the destruction of people by evil power, anxiety is permissible, and that is the prospect before us.

PDF of article