After US “bunker buster” strikes last June, Donald Trump said that it had been his “great honour to destroy all nuclear facilities and capability” in Iran. But as the third round of US-Iran nuclear talks kick off today in Geneva, “those grand claims” look “not so helpful” to America’s negotiating stance, said CNN.
With Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff saying Tehran is “probably” one week away from having weapons-grade nuclear material, “suddenly, it’s not about highlighting the success of a past mission but rather about building the case for a future one”.
Why is Trump talking about new strikes?
During his State of the Union address on Tuesday, Trump said Iran wants “to start all over again” with its uranium enrichment programme and is “at this moment again pursuing their sinister nuclear ambitions”. “I will never allow the world’s number-one sponsor of terror, which they are by far, to have a nuclear weapon”, he said.
Asked why the US might have to strike Iran again even though Trump said he’s “obliterated” its nuclear capabilities, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said there were “many reasons and arguments that one could make for a strike against Iran”. It seems the administration is “still searching for a logically consistent one”, said CNN.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.
Latest Videos FromThe Week
What does Trump want?
Trump has “repeatedly changed his messaging on his end game in Iran”, said the BBC, “veering from narrow nuclear issues to wider regime change”.
Tehran has signalled that it is willing to abandon its nuclear ambitions in exchange for an easing of crippling sanctions – the root cause of the economic instability that sparked the January uprising. But if the US goal is regime change, Trump may be hesitant to agree to anything that could improve Iran’s economic stability.
“A ground invasion is not on Trump’s agenda” and the Iranian regime “cannot be toppled by air and sea alone”, said Middle East expert Amin Saikal on The Conversation. Besides, the rule of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would only collapse “if a sizeable part of its security forces defected to the opposition”, and so far they have “remained quite loyal and solidly behind the leadership”.
What will Trump do?
The US has amassed its largest concentration of sea and air power in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The world “is on edge, waiting to see” what happens next but Trump provided “no clear signal” during his State of the Union address, said the BBC.
He could opt for calibrated strikes: “whack Iran once and see if that makes its government more amenable”, said Sky News. Or, with all the “military muscle” he has “mustered” in the region, he could launch a full-force attack. He has already said his generals believe such a war would be “easily won”.
Iran is vowing to respond to any attack with force and Trump may back away from new strikes if the Geneva negotiations make progress. But “having built up so much firepower, doing nothing would look weak”. It could “have consequences for America’s standing” and for Trump personally, “at a time when his approval ratings are cratering”.
