From Good Friday to “Black Friday”: When the illusion of dominance crumbles

In the lead-up to Orthodox Easter and Good Friday which falls on April 10, a time for spiritual reflection, humility, and sacrifice, questions about true values gain particular relevance – not only in religion but also in politics. Against this backdrop, the contrast between the moral significance of Good Friday and today’s international developments becomes especially striking.

In Christian memory, Good Friday carries meaning beyond religious ritual, serving as a universal humanist symbol: sacrifice without display, strength in humility, faith measured through action, not words. It is a moment that reveals the essence of moral leadership — when silence speaks louder than speeches, and sacrifice is more powerful than slogans.

Against this backdrop, transformations in the international arena suggest a very different kind of “Friday” — one that can be described politically as “Black.” Not as a commercial event, but as a moment of exposure, where reality displaces rhetoric and slogans lose their shine when faced with facts.

Personal Contradictions: Between Faith and Showmanship

Donald Trump has repeatedly positioned himself as a defender of Christianity, addressing his audience in clearly religious terms. Yet contradictions emerge when this language sits alongside pronounced self-aggrandizement. His famous statements — “I alone can fix it” and “We have the greatest military in the history of the world” — place the leader at the absolute center, in contrast to the values Good Friday represents: humility and sacrifice, not exceptionalism and spectacle. The ethical tension deepens when religious narratives depict the leader as “chosen,” raising profound questions about the use of faith in politics.

Military Dimension: Cracks in the Narrative of Supremacy

Recent media reports, including from CNN, highlight these contradictions. U.S. forces are reportedly still searching for a crew member of an F-15 fighter shot down over Iran. Any potential rescue in hostile territory is extremely risky, signaling that complete U.S. dominance over Iranian airspace is no longer a given. Meanwhile, Trump warned that “time is running out” for Iran to fully reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, threatening “full hell” if no agreement is reached. Iran, for its part, has agreed to allow “essential goods” to pass through the strait, without clarifying conditions, as diplomatic efforts continue to maintain global shipping.

Economic Consequences: The Domino Effect

The oil crisis is creating ripple effects across consumer markets. According to the American Automobile Association (AAA), the average U.S. gasoline price has reached $4.10 per gallon. When political strategy rests on the assumption of “absolute control,” any contrary facts immediately challenge its foundations. Simultaneously, U.S. and Israeli strikes targeted Iran’s industrial infrastructure, including petrochemical plants and areas surrounding nuclear facilities. In this context, the central question is no longer whether the U.S. has power, but whether the perception of power aligns with reality. “Black Friday” becomes a precise political metaphor — a moment when the gap between claims and reality is laid bare.

Governance Crisis: When Loyalty Outweighs Competence

The issue extends beyond foreign policy to domestic power structures. Trump has repeatedly framed himself as a defender of religious values, yet this image intersects with a clear tendency toward personalization of power. Recent reports (April 2026) note major personnel shifts in the U.S. administration, including:

Dismissal or replacement of key figures in the Department of Justice;

Pressure on senior military leadership, including Army command;

Rapid restructuring of the security and military hierarchy.

Officially, these moves are explained as efforts to strengthen loyalty and accelerate policy execution. Yet they raise fundamental questions:

What happens to institutional stability?

Where does accumulated experience go?

Is it possible to manage conflicts of this scale without independent, professional assessment?

In military practice, leadership is rarely replaced in the midst of conflict — experience is not incidental but central to decision-making. Replacing institutional judgment with individual will destabilizes not only internal processes but also the state’s image internationally.

Regional Context: Middle East Dynamics

The situation cannot be fully understood without considering the broader regional approach of exaggerating power, simplifying complex realities, and privileging individual decisions over institutional mechanisms. External actors often treat the Middle East as if force alone can dictate outcomes, yet the region historically resists such logic, maintaining its own balance of power.

Iran, in this context, is not merely a political target but a sovereign state with a long history and a complex regional role. Ignoring this reality only intensifies instability.

Between Values and Reality

Today's world needs leadership rooted in trust and consistency, not louder statements.

Between Good Friday symbolizing the highest values and “Black Friday” exposing reality — international politics faces a choice: return to responsibility or continue testing the limits of illusion.

The greatest risk is weakening the state itself. In the Middle East, the question is no longer who is stronger, but who can avoid catastrophic error.

Author: Rita Boustany