Trump's threats to strike Iran to force a deal risk backfiring - Bloomberg
Kyiv • UNN
US President Donald Trump is considering limited military strikes on Iran to force Tehran to sign a new nuclear deal. This could lead to a new destabilizing conflict in the Middle East.
US President Donald Trump has stated that he is considering limited military strikes to force Iran to sign a new nuclear deal, but bombing the country could have the opposite effect, risking a new destabilizing conflict in the Middle East, Bloomberg reports, writes UNN.
Details
The Pentagon has organized a large-scale deployment in the region, which includes two aircraft carriers, fighter jets, and refueling aircraft, which, as the publication points out, has given Trump the opportunity to launch limited or expanded operations against Iran.
Nevertheless, Trump and other administration officials have provided conflicting public explanations of what they actually want from a new deal with Tehran. Iran experts argue that bombing the country in the middle of negotiations could derail a deal and provoke a deadly cycle of retaliation.
Tehran is likely to suspend participation in negotiations if the US strikes, according to a senior government official in the region.
"He won't be able to get a diplomatic agreement from the Iranians if he attacks them again," said Barbara Slavin, a fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington. "Military threats alone — even if the US ultimately doesn't act — 'will make them less willing to deal.'"
Despite Trump setting a deadline of 10 to 15 days, it also remains unclear what a new series of airstrikes — limited or otherwise — would actually achieve, the publication writes.
In June, Israel and the US intensively bombed the country's nuclear facilities and air defenses, and the US president then stated that "key nuclear enrichment facilities were completely destroyed."
According to Slavin, the US and Israel could target Iran's ballistic missiles, but there is a danger that Tehran could be pushed to launch them at US or allied targets before it loses them.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose administration has recently waged wars in Gaza and Lebanon, and bombed targets in Syria and Iran, as the publication points out, has repeatedly pushed for US airstrikes on Iran for years. He recently visited Washington to advocate for more comprehensive demands in the ongoing diplomatic talks between the White House and Tehran.
When asked during a Friday press conference what his message to the Iranian people would be, Trump said: "They better make a fair deal. They better negotiate."
Despite Trump's preference for swift military operations, including short bombing campaigns in Yemen, Syria, and Nigeria, as well as an operation in which Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro was captured in January, "an attack on Iran could trigger retaliation that would draw the US into a longer conflict," the publication points out.
Historically, Tehran has not acted according to US assumptions, and limited strike campaigns do not always unfold as intended, said Becca Wasser, head of defense at Bloomberg Economics.
"Air and missile strikes are incredibly attractive to senior leadership because they can be delivered from a distance and can supposedly achieve quick victories," she said, adding that limited campaigns often turn into "long, expensive endeavors."
The changing American rationale for negotiations — and strikes — makes deciphering US intentions even more difficult. Trump's initial threat of airstrikes came in support of protests in Iran in December and January, which the regime has since brutally suppressed, killing thousands, the publication writes.
And while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called for concessions on Iran's ballistic missile program, support for militants such as the Yemeni Houthis, and treatment of protesters for a deal to be "meaningful," Iranian officials have opposed a broader agreement.
Now Trump appears to be pushing for a limited nuclear deal, despite having abandoned the 2015 Iran deal, struck during the Obama administration, during his first term — an exit that could make large, upfront concessions from Tehran even less likely.
Of course, it's unclear whether Trump will order strikes or simply pressure Tehran, the publication writes. The public concentration of US forces in the region — with transponders on military aircraft turned on — is likely an intentional signal, said a former US official familiar with US Central Command planning.
A preemptive US strike could target Iran's anti-ship missile batteries, he said, which would eliminate a key capability and minimize the risk of civilian casualties due to their location far from populated areas.
Iran has been weakened by previous airstrikes and has recently faced its most serious unrest in decades. But the country remains capable of retaliating against the US. According to a former US official, Iranian retaliation could likely include the use of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles that could target US bases in the region, as well as the activation of its regional proxies.
"They're trying to buy time now and they're trying to make concessions that are more symbolic than real," said Dennis Ross, President Bill Clinton's envoy to the Middle East, now a distinguished fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"The Iranians are signaling that there will be a long war, knowing that Trump doesn't want a long war. Trump is telling the regime that it will pay a price it hasn't paid before," he added. "Neither side wants war."
Trump considers 'limited military operation' against Iran - WSJ20.02.26, 04:37 • 11306 views