Trump may start a war, but he cannot control its end, Iranian officials claim, warning of a domino effect across the Middle East.
The countdown to a new disaster in the Middle East appears to have begun. Against the backdrop of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and a "large armada" en route, US President Donald Trump is dangerously escalating his rhetoric toward Iran, warning that the next attack will be "much tougher" than that of June 2025.
While both Washington and Tehran speak of negotiations, the Americans are showing their teeth with talk of preemptive strikes and strategic power, while the Iranians threaten a full-scale war that would bring the US to its knees and lead to the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers. All signs point to an uncontrollable regional explosion being only a matter of time; though the balance of power is clear, no one can predict how it will evolve or where it will end.
New York Times: Attack within the next 48 hours
A military strike by the US against Iran could occur within the next 48 hours, according to the New York Times. An official close to the administration stated on condition of anonymity that if the White House orders the commencement of military operations, the carrier Abraham Lincoln will be ready to join the action within one to two days. The ship is currently in the western Indian Ocean, accompanied by three cruisers armed with Tomahawk missiles. The newspaper notes that Washington has intensified pressure on Tehran, weighing a military scenario in case of a refusal to deal on the nuclear program.
Trump: A massive US army is ready to attack Iran; the strike will be very harsh
US President Donald Trump stated that the "great US armada," led by the carrier Abraham Lincoln, is ready to use force against Iran. In his message, Trump once again called on Iran to negotiate. "As in the case of Venezuela, the Navy is ready, capable, and, if necessary, can quickly complete its mission with force. Let's hope Iran comes to the negotiating table quickly and agrees to a fair and mutually beneficial deal without nuclear weapons, a deal that satisfies all parties. Time is running out and is truly precious," Trump said, warning that a potential attack this time would be "much tougher" than last summer.
Locking targets
Information suggests that Trump is considering options against Iran that include targeted strikes on security forces and leadership figures to encourage Iranian protesters. Multiple sources noted that Israeli and Arab officials believe air power alone would not lead to the overthrow of the Khamenei regime. According to Reuters, Trump wanted to create conditions for "regime change" after the suppression of a nationwide protest movement earlier this month killed thousands. To this end, he was considering strikes on commanders and institutions responsible for the violence to give protesters the confidence to seize government and security buildings. Other options discussed by Trump's advisors include a much larger strike with long-term impact, possibly against ballistic missiles that can hit US allies in the Middle East or against nuclear enrichment programs.
Rubio: US has the right to launch a preemptive strike if threatened by Iran
The United States could launch a preemptive strike if Iran threatens to attack American forces in the region, stated US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. "The President always retains the right to pursue a preemptive defensive course of action," he said during testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Although he expressed hope things would not reach that point, he emphasized that Washington considers the threat of Iranian attacks real, as US military bases are within range of Iran's weapons. Consequently, he said, the US sees the current situation as an opportunity to deploy sufficient forces to the region to defend against a "potential threat."
Air strikes are not enough
A senior Israeli official with direct knowledge of the planning between Israel and the United States told Reuters that Israel does not believe air strikes alone can overthrow the Islamic Republic. "If you want to overthrow the regime, you have to put boots on the ground," he said, noting that even if the US killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran "would have a new leader to replace him." Only a combination of external pressure and organized internal opposition could change Iran's political course. The official added that while the leadership has been weakened by unrest, it remains firmly in control despite the deep economic crisis.
Iran's message: Yes to dialogue with the US, but Trump is not ready
Tehran is open to talks with the American government, provided Washington is truly ready for dialogue regarding a potential deal, said Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf. "If it is about genuine talks aimed at reaching an agreement within international regulations, then yes. But those are not the kind of talks US President Donald Trump seeks. He simply wants to impose his will on others," the Iranian official told CNN. "Perhaps Trump can start a war, but he does not control its end. Thousands of American soldiers deployed in the Middle East will surely suffer damage, which is not good," Ghalibaf added. Earlier, an advisor to the Supreme Leader stated that Tehran would consider any aggressive US action as the start of a full-scale war.
Gharibabadi: US and Israel will suffer defeat
Iran is entering the third phase of its conflict with the United States and Israel, argued Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi. "So far there have been three phases. The first was the 12-day war, the second was the riots seven months after the war. Now we are entering the third phase," explained the diplomat, highlighting that current events are the start of the next phase of the conflict. He announced a change in tactics by the US and Israel but assured that in this phase "they will suffer the same defeat as in the previous two."
Iran at the UN: We will respond like never before
Meanwhile, Iran's mission to the United Nations emphasized that if the US attacks, Tehran will respond "like never before." "Iran is ready for dialogue based on mutual respect—BUT IF PRESSED, IT WILL DEFEND ITSELF AND RETALIATE LIKE NEVER BEFORE!" the mission posted on X. It also referenced US casualties and expenditures in past wars: "The last time the US was involved in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, it wasted over $7 trillion and lost more than 7,000 American lives."
Warning from the Houthis
"Any military attack against Iran will activate a total war with incalculable consequences for the United States and its allies. Do not touch Tehran," the Houthis stated.
What Trump really wants from Iran
Trump warned that time is running out and that if the US and Iran do not sit at the table quickly, "the next attack will be much worse." But what kind of "fair and equal deal" does he want? The issue is that nothing could satisfy the US leader because he demands the impossible. Trump wants a deal for the renunciation of Iran's nuclear arsenal, but no such arsenal exists.
No nuclear weapons
What exists is the Iranian nuclear program, which was the target of the US operation "Midnight Hammer" last summer, ending the 12-day war. Iranian nuclear facilities were damaged, but the program was neither destroyed nor restricted. At the same time, authorities have not lifted the ban on nuclear weapons, meaning Iran has no intention of building an atomic bomb. However, following the Israeli-American attack, it has every reason to do so; if Tehran had nuclear weapons, no aggression would have occurred. Netanyahu has been scaring Americans for 30 years with the imminent acquisition of an Iranian bomb, but it seems he will be the one to convince the ayatollahs of the need to build one.
Official capitulation
Trump now wants Iran to officially renounce its nuclear program, a symbol of the Islamic Republic's sovereignty, because it gives Tehran the freedom of choice. In other words, Trump wants Iran's official capitulation—absolutely impossible before June 22 and certainly not after. Given that Trump called for the government's overthrow during recent unrest, only a weak Iranian would negotiate denuclearization with him.
An act of national treason
Yes, Tehran does not have nuclear weapons, but the mere fact of a deal with the US to abolish the program or place it under "international" (i.e., American) control would be perceived in Iran as an act of national treason. No one would ever agree to it. Does Washington not understand this? They do. Then why all the fuss?
Pressure from Israel
It is clear that Israelis are actively lobbying for an attack on Iran—they need to start the second phase of the peace process in Gaza (the withdrawal of troops), which they categorically refuse to do. But Netanyahu alone is not enough to risk a real war with Iran. Even in the form of massive bombings and assassination attempts, the risk of a regional conflagration is high. Therefore, almost all of Iran's neighbors, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates, oppose an attack. Trump continues to press the issue—perhaps to distract from internal problems like the unrest in Minnesota?
Domino effect across the Middle East
No, there will not be a "small victorious war" with Iran, but a domino effect across the Middle East is very likely. Washington cannot force a regime change in Iran, but it can create massive problems for the Gulf Arab states. US relations with Russia and China will suffer further, and Trump's ability to play against Putin and Xi Jinping will be weakened. This doesn't even mention the worst-case scenario for the US—becoming entangled in a prolonged war with Iran. Clearly, Trump does not want this, but why then continue playing with matches?
The power card
The President simply believes he has control of the situation and that intimidating Iran brings only benefits. The strike of June 22 was spectacular, and then came the equally impressive kidnapping of Maduro. Everyone sees how tough Trump is. Let them tremble in Tehran, and at the same time, Moscow and Beijing will appreciate Trump's resolve (or at least think he is reckless and be careful with him).
Strategic ambiguity
Everyone understands that an attack on Tehran is at best pointless and at worst extremely dangerous, but Trump reserves for himself this "strategic ambiguity," the right to sudden and transgressive actions. It is certainly easier to extract concessions from everyone—in Greenland, Ukraine, or trade deals. This idea inspires Trump, but the problem is he is playing his game in a geopolitically highly flammable region. Even a single misplaced spark could cause a massive explosion.
War machine in full deployment around Iran
The carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and three destroyers from the South China Sea are already approaching Iran. Simultaneously, three more American destroyers are operating in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. The picture is completed by increased activity from C-17 Globemaster III transports and KC-135 Stratotanker refueling aircraft, directly pointing to preparations for a major military operation. In close proximity to the Iranian border are 12 F-16 Fighting Falcons, 3 squadrons of F-15E Strike Eagles, and 12 A-10 Thunderbolt IIs. Sources also report the deployment of RAF aircraft and the strengthening of THAAD and Patriot systems.
Who fears Iranian retaliation
The Gulf states, hosts of major American bases, fear they will be the first targets of Iranian retaliation, which could include missile or drone attacks from Tehran-aligned Houthis in Yemen. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and Egypt have lobbied Washington against a strike. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told the Iranian President that Riyadh will not allow the use of its airspace or territory for military actions against Tehran. "The United States may pull the trigger," said one Arab source, "but they will not live with the consequences. We will." Experts believe planning has shifted from a single strike to something more prolonged, driven by the belief that Iran could reconstitute its capabilities.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών