The return of Donald Trump to power in the United States continues to be a major topic in media worldwide. On the agenda of the unpredictable president is once again Iran, a responsibility imposed on him by those who helped him come to power.
If someone were to ask Donald Trump, away from television cameras, why Iran is the subject of his interest and what exactly bothers him about Tehran's policies, they would likely receive no answer. The newly elected president would struggle to find a strong argument that the policies of this Asian country contradict the positions he advocates.
Let's list just a few examples that Trump's supporters tend to ignore, likely to avoid raising the question of why the newly elected president of the world's greatest power is bothered by Iran. This would inevitably open the question of why he is so determined to focus on a country on the other side of the world, which over the past eight years has gone from being interested in communication with Trump to issuing an arrest warrant for him, to completely rejecting any contact with him. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wrote on the social network X on Friday that "there should be no negotiations with a government like the United States," targeting Washington's failure to adhere to agreements. This particularly applies to Trump, who destroyed the Tehran agreement with major powers on Iran's nuclear program at the beginning of his first term.
For decades, Washington and Tehran have had almost no diplomatic relations and mostly communicate through weapons and intermediaries. Trade, which has been Trump's obsession since the beginning of his second term, does not exist between the United States and Iran. Iran has no ambition to camp on American borders, and Trump wants to withdraw American troops from missions around the world.
Similarly, when discussing the ideological basis of the policies of the two sides, assuming Trump adheres to any ideology, the conservative values that Trump wants to reimpose in the United States have not been questioned in Iran for almost half a century.
Thus, Trump's isolationist policies and economic model based on achieving a trade surplus with other countries should keep Iran out of his interest.
Yet, Trump has been dealing with Iran since his first day in the White House. It is clear that someone for whom Iran is much more important than Trump, who is working to isolate the United States to avoid involvement in other parts of the world unless it brings profit, is pushing Trump in this direction.
From sanctions to sanctions
Trump's first term was also marked by his policy towards Iran. Trump entered into dangerous confrontations with Iran at least three times. First, he withdrew the U.S. from the aforementioned nuclear agreement, then imposed heavy sanctions on Iran, and finally brought the two countries to the brink of war, with American troops in Iraq under attack by American missiles, when he ordered the assassination of General Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad. The famous Iranian general was planning to meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi. On that occasion, the leader of the Popular Mobilization Forces, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was also killed. The mentioned Shia militia, later largely integrated into Iraq's military and security system, is one of the most deserving of the defeat of ISIL.
In addition to the three aforementioned acts targeting Iranian diplomacy, economy, and military, Trump prevented Iran and Russia, along with the Syrian army, from bringing large parts of the country and its oil fields under Damascus' control. Later, Trump said that American troops were in Syria to control oil fields, prompting then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to "praise" him as the best American president in history for telling the truth about what he was doing.
Trump also began his new term with sanctions against Iran. Last week, Trump sanctioned, according to agencies, a network of Iranian companies and individuals transporting Iranian oil to China. This symbolic move, since, for example, the company Sepehr Energy was sanctioned by then-President Joseph Biden at the end of 2023 and now again by Trump, is not typical of the current president's policy. Without fanfare, Trump imposed sanctions on an already sanctioned company, then stated that Iran must not have a nuclear bomb and that he wants negotiations with Tehran and peace in the Middle East. Before and after that, Trump threatened "maximum pressure" on Iran, essentially announcing a return to his policy from his first term.
The fact that Trump wants negotiations with Tehran and openly says so, which he refused in his first term, is an important moment. He is now simultaneously extending a hand to Iran and threatening financial sanctions, preparing the ground for his next moves, and improving his negotiating positions while threatening the harshest financial measures at his disposal.
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in Washington, undoubtedly the main reason why Trump is dealing with Iran again. The new round of sanctions was a kind of gift to the guest who has long advocated military intervention against Iran. Netanyahu knows that Israel cannot successfully carry this out without direct American military support.
What Trump and Netanyahu discussed behind closed doors is not known to the public, but what the American president said in front of cameras certainly did not please his guests. In a verbal exchange with a journalist, Trump even claimed that Iran is militarily strong, and before and after that, he called for the mentioned talks and expressed his intention not to allow Tehran to have nuclear weapons.
In this regard, it should also be noted that Iran has repeatedly said it does not want to build a nuclear bomb, and that part of the American media, before Netanyahu's visit, "prepared the ground" with articles, published as needed for decades, claiming that Iran is a few months away from producing such a weapon.
Trump has not publicly said he will undertake a military operation against Iran, which he has not ruled out in the case of Panama, or even Denmark—an American ally in NATO—over Greenland, which he claims is important for American national security, or in the case of the displacement of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.
Iran's Stance
The media have reported, and both sides have sometimes denied, that Trump's administration contacted the Iranian leadership immediately after his electoral victory in the presidential race last November. In this context, even Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, was mentioned, whom some of Trump's critics these days call the "president" of the United States to show his real power in the new presidential administration.
On the other hand, since Trump's return to the White House, Iran has conducted military exercises and then shown the public secret underground bases filled with missiles, and tunnels hiding the capabilities of its navy. Finally, Iran presented to the world a drone carrier and new missiles and air defense systems. Tehran also said they have purchased modern Russian Sukhoi Su-35 aircraft, without giving details on the number or whether they have been put into service by the Iranian military.
It seems that Iran has decided to show Trump that the country has the strength to wage war, and Ayatollah Khamenei's stance on negotiations with Washington indicates that they are not ready to agree to new tricks and are seeking guarantees that they will not negotiate only for the other side to withdraw from the agreement again.
There is no doubt that Trump does not shy away from using the military and any other force. After all, that is what Netanyahu expects from him in the case of Iran. This should not be overlooked, especially since Trump is building an image of a leader without limits. But more important is the fact that Trump has the same capabilities as Biden, and in that regard, nothing has changed in the twenty days of his presidency. This is clear to both Tehran and Washington, and the balance of power is more or less the same as before.
What is even more important in this strategic maneuvering between Washington and Tehran is the fact that in the past four years, the world has undergone numerous changes, and American rivals are more connected than ever. The integration of the payment systems of Iran and Russia, for example, illustrates this new world, as does the fact that the number of Chinese and other companies and individuals sanctioned by the United States is increasing, meaning that some of them naturally turn to those who reject these sanctions.
New Middle East or Old Balance of Power?
Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, changed the Middle East. The direct consequences were the ousting of Assad from power in Damascus, the assassination of the leader of Lebanon's Shia Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, a double direct attack by Iran on Israel, and one in the opposite direction, the rise of Yemen's Houthis as a regional factor, and the suffering of Palestinians that led Netanyahu and other Israeli officials to international manhunts and pillars of shame around the world.
Netanyahu, however, does not stop. His army has occupied parts of Lebanon and important parts of Mount Hermon in Syria. He believes that the next target should be Iran and that now is the time to do it.
However, Israel cannot defeat Iran alone. An Israeli attack on Iran showed that it can strike, but that is not enough for a strategic defeat. The double Iranian attack on Israel, defended by the United States and several of its Arab allies, was a moment that irreversibly shook Netanyahu's rule and shattered the myth that Tel Aviv could not be the target of an attack.
Netanyahu repeats that Israel has a historic opportunity to create a "new Middle East." The consequences of this stance are Israel's behavior in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, and Syria. Victories along Israel's borders could be a sufficient reason to continue such a policy in the coming period, counting on the fact that in politics, there can always be a turnaround.
But if the conflict between Iran and Israel continues in this way, without direct American military involvement, it could last a long time and, as before, have ups and downs for both sides. (Pro-)Iranian forces and Israel have exchanged heavy blows in recent years, but neither has been strong enough to bring the other to its knees.
Trump can now choose between continuing sanctions against Iran, direct military conflict with the participation of Israel and perhaps some Arab regimes, or attempting to reach at least a tacit agreement with Tehran on what the Middle East will look like in the coming years. Knowing Trump's history of choosing possible solutions, it would not be surprising if, even with the best intentions, he chooses the worst, whether for the United States and Israel, or Iran, or the entire Middle East.
Netanyahu will push Trump towards escalating relations with Iran. These days, Netanyahu stated that Tel Aviv has found the greatest friend in the White House ever, and the biographies of the people Trump has surrounded himself with suggest that this is probably the most Israel-friendly administration in history.
Trump certainly has in mind that any prolonged military conflict with Iran would lead to scenarios like Iraq and Afghanistan, which he has repeatedly cited as reasons for the decline of American power. Iran's show of strength does not please him, as it should be remembered that the announcements of tough measures against Mexico and Colombia, made about ten days ago after their response, were changed into a good-neighborly conversation about real problems. In other words, Trump is not immune to resistance and preserving the image of a man who does not lose battles.
And that is the crux of the problem that Trump has with Iran and Iran with Trump. All the moves Trump can make are known to Iran and its allies, just as all the cards Tehran is counting on are known to Washington. In such circumstances, entering into open conflict is preceded by a calculation of how much it will cost each side and then the question of whether each side is willing to pay that price. Trump does not have a magic wand to change this, so an analysis of the conflict with Iran would lead him to the same conclusion reached by George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joseph Biden. However, if he achieves a sustainable agreement with Iran, to the satisfaction of both sides, it will set him apart from his predecessors. In that case, many worldwide would applaud him, but it would likely mean a break with Netanyahu's policy.
This article was previously published on PISJournal.net.
Comentarios