WASHINGTON – One week into the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran that has plunged the Middle East into turmoil, President Donald Trump faces a growing list of risks and challenges that raise questions about whether he will be able to translate military successes into a clear geopolitical win.
Even after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and devastating blows against Iranian forces on land, at sea and in the air, the crisis has quickly widened into a regional conflict that threatens a more prolonged U.S. military engagement with fallout beyond Trump’s control.
That is a scenario that Trump had avoided in his two terms in the White House, preferring swift, limited operations like the January 3 lightning raid in Venezuela and June’s one-off strike on Iran’s nuclear sites.
“Iran is a messy and potentially protracted military campaign,” said Laura Blumenfeld of the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington. “Trump is risking the global economy, regional stability and his own Republican Party’s performance in the U.S. midterm elections.”
Trump, who came to office promising to keep the U.S. out of “stupid” military interventions, is now pursuing what many experts see as an open-ended war of choice unprompted by any imminent threat to the U.S. from Iran, despite claims to the contrary by the president and his aides.
In doing so, analysts say he has struggled to articulate a detailed set of objectives or a clear endgame for Operation Epic Fury, the biggest U.S. military operation since the 2003 Iraq invasion, offering shifting rationales for the war and definitions of what would constitute victory.
White House spokesperson Anna Kelly rejected that assessment, saying Trump has clearly outlined his goals to “destroy Iran’s ballistic missiles and production capacity, demolish their navy, end their ability to arm proxies, and prevent them from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
However, if the war drags on, American casualties mount and the economic costs of interrupted Gulf oil flows multiply, Trump’s biggest foreign policy gamble could also hurt his Republican Party politically.
Despite criticism from some Trump supporters opposed to military interventions, members of his Make America Great Again movement have largely backed him on Iran so far.
But any softening of their support could imperil Republicans’ control of Congress in the November midterm elections, given opinion polls showing opposition to the war among the broader electorate, including a crucial bloc of independent voters.
“The American people are not interested in repeating the mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan,” said Brian Darling, a Republican strategist. “The MAGA base is split between those who relied on no-new-war promises and ones who are loyal to Trump’s judgment.”
High on the list of analysts’ concerns is the mixed messaging from Trump and his aides on whether he is seeking “regime change” in Tehran.
At the outset of the conflict, he suggested that overthrowing Iran’s rulers was a goal, at least by fomenting internal rebellion. Two days later, he stopped short of mentioning that as a priority.
But then on Thursday, Trump told Reuters he would play a role in picking Iran’s next leader and encouraged Iranian Kurdish rebels to launch attacks. That was followed by his demand in a social media post on Friday for Iran’s “unconditional surrender.”
Across the region, the dangers have escalated with Iran’s retaliatory strikes on Israel and other neighbors as it seeks to sow chaos and raise the costs for Israel, the U.S. and its allies.
Showing that Iran may still be able to activate proxy groups, Lebanon’s Hezbollah militia has renewed hostilities with Israel, expanding the war to another country.
American casualties have been low so far, with six service members killed, and Trump has largely shrugged off the prospects for more to come while declining to completely rule out deployment of U.S. ground troops.
Asked whether Americans should worry about Iran-inspired attacks at home, Trump said in a Time magazine interview published on Friday: “I guess … Like I said, some people will die.”
But Jonathan Panikoff, a former deputy U.S. national intelligence officer for the Middle East, said: “Nothing is likely to hasten an early end to the war more than American casualties … That’s what Iran is counting on.”
- Latest
- Trending
