As foreign policy leaders rush to warn of the dangers of a US attack on Iran, the White House is confident that President Donald Trump will handle the consequences of such a strike. This confidence reflects a pattern that has shaped Trump’s thinking for years. The foreign policy establishment in Washington warns the president against actions that violate norms. He ignores their advice and continues, facing seemingly no repercussions. When Trump broke with US policy in 2018 by moving the embassy to Jerusalem, experts predicted widespread unrest and violence, which never materialized. A similar scenario played out last June when Trump backed Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, with analysts warning of a broader war and accelerated nuclear arms race, yet little happened.
The behavior of Trump also increases the risk of escalation. His desire to show himself as a peacemaker has led to a situation where he must either force Tehran to sign a major new agreement or resort to considerable force. The ambiguity surrounding his motivations makes the situation even more dangerous. Trump’s current intentions alter Iran’s calculations, with Tehran feeling the need to shock Trump to avoid perpetual danger.
In terms of strategy, Trump has no valid reason to attack Iran. While Tehran poses a threat to US interests in the Middle East, it does not present an immediate danger to the US. Tehran understands that it cannot win an open war against the US or Israel, but it still has the means to inflict real damage on the US. The US military presence in the region, with approximately 40,000 troops and a strong naval and air force, is a significant factor in the equation. The Iranian regime may target global oil flows and international maritime transport, raising energy prices and posing a serious political challenge for Trump. The situation is delicate, with Trump’s actions potentially leading to unintended, violent consequences and a longer, potentially costly conflict for Washington.
