In a piece for Global Policy, Thomas Reifer writes about the current relevance of Daniel Ellsberg’s new posthumous book Truth and Consequence: Reflections on Catastrophe, Civil Resistance, and Hope. Reifer contends that we are drifting into an uncontained and potentially global war in which world leaders are deliberately acting mad. This “madman” approach is particularly dangerous in the nuclear age. Today, Reifer points out, “the number of armed conflicts around the world are higher than at any time since World War II.” One person speaking out against unjust wars, Reifer adds, is the Pope.
In his 1959 “The Political Uses of Madness,” Ellsberg lectured on Hitler’s strategic use of perceived irrationality, looking at the implications of this strategy in the thermonuclear age. In an interview, Reifer stated: “These actors are aiming to appear irrational. It’s not that either side is actually mad. Simply appearing mad carries its own dangers, especially in the nuclear world.”
THOMAS EHRLICH REIFER; [email protected]
Reifer is a Professor of Sociology at the University of San Diego, and an Associate at the Transnational Institute (Amsterdam).
Reifer told the Institute for Public Accuracy: “I have received more positive responses about this piece from people around the world––including leading authorities on the Middle East, Iran, and U.S.-Iranian relations––than anything I’ve ever written before.
“In the last month or two, as the situation in Lebanon has unraveled, the Strait of Hormuz has stayed closed; it’s effectively blockaded. Both sides in the war are using the media to broadcast propaganda, and the media often uncritically reports announcements that the Strait is open. Even the Financial Times, in its April 18 weekend edition, reported with dramatic headlines: ‘Oil Tumbles as Hormuz Strait Opens’… If you follow closely, both sides are engaged in a propaganda war.
“Even if the war ends tomorrow—which it won’t—costs are rising globally. We are in a stalemate. Trump’s maximalist aims are driven by a desire not to appear as though he is losing the war, which, in some sense, is already happening. The Iranians are unlikely to agree to Trump’s terms or enter negotiations, if they feel that as in the past, this is mere pretext for further attacks. This creates a serious dilemma, especially since President Trump appears impervious to the human suffering caused by the war, including the rising human and financial cost of the greatest energy shock in world history. The risk of escalation remains as long as the stalemate persists.
“One lesser-known aspect of Ellsberg’s work, drawn from his study of the Pentagon Papers, is what he called the ‘desperate proposal pattern’: leaders seek to avert losses by tempting fate with risky, desperate and murderous gambles, betting against ever-increasing odds. They become impervious to human costs and focus only on whether they will appear to win or lose. ‘Loser’ is perhaps the most feared word in Trump’s vocabulary. We cannot assume he will avoid risky gambles under pressure. This is an extremely dangerous situation. Both sides are gambling with catastrophe.
“Moreover, at the heart of the present crisis is the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. As long as the U.S. supports Israel’s illegal military occupation––next year will be its 60th ––ongoing regional conflagrations will flare up that cannot be resolved. The primary barrier to peace is continued U.S. and Israeli support for the occupation, rather than embracing the international consensus of the two-state solution, supported by the overwhelming majority of states in the most recent September 2025 vote of the UN General Assembly.
“In addition, the U.S. could resolve the nuclear dimensions of this crisis by making the Middle East a nuclear free zone––but then they would have to admit what everyone knows but what the U.S. and Israel won’t admit under Israel’s policy of opacity: that Israel has nuclear weapons. This is a classic war of aggression. Yet the media pays little attention to the fact that the present war constitutes a crime against peace.”