Is Donald Trump gambling his popularity and presidency with strikes on Iran?
The US bombed three nuclear sites in Iran overnight, which might be a surprise if you heard his campaign rhetoric against foreign intervention.
Boasting to be 'the only president in generations who didn't start a war' on the campaign trail, he said his presidency would 'turn the page forever on those foolish, stupid days of never-ending wars'.
So what led to him sending B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to drop 'bunker buster' bombs on Iran last night, as as well as firing Tomahawk cruise missiles from US Navy submarines?
Angelia Wilson, Professor of Politics at the University of Manchester, told Metro that his motivations are most likely to be political rather than borne from ideological conviction.
'Two weeks ago he had a big military parade that no one showed up to, and he had millions of Americans protesting against him over 2,000 cities. You've got to get those headlines shifted somehow,' she said.
Her work looks particularly at the Christian Right in the US, and she said that key figures have been calling for the US to support Israel in their war against Iran.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
'I monitor the emails from political organisations to their constituents, and they've spent the last two weeks softening the ground for this,' she said.
Many had been sharing Bible verses such as Numbers 23:24, which describes Israel rising 'like a lion' to destroy and devour its enemies until all the blood of its prey is drained.
Military action supporting Israel is therefore likely to play well with this key section of his base, which also includes those with the biggest pockets to fund Republican politicians.
'MAGA' supporters, who tend to be more secular, working class, anti-establishment and supportive of the 'America First' slogan against involvement overseas, are unlikely to be cheerleaders for the bombing campaign.
The in-fighting between these two factions of Republican supporters could be seen most clearly when Senator Ted Cruz debated Tucker Carlson over Iran.
The former Fox News heavyweight savaged the politician, claiming he knew little about the country he intended to bomb, and could not say its population of ethnic mix.
But Professor Wilson, who wrote The Politics of Hate: How the Christian Right Darkened America's Political Soul , said that although Maga supporters may not like the idea, they are unlikely to turn against Trump over it, so long as strikes remain limited, and troops are not sent to fight.
Trump has 'weighed up which of the constituents he needs to keep happy at this stage, and it's very much the Christian right,' she claimed.
Asked whether he was gambling his presidency over the issue, she said she doubted he was too concerned with his personal political legacy as he doesn't have to be elected again (constitutionally, he can only serve two terms).
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
She claimed he was more likely to be concerned with keeping rich backers happy to secure income for the future – and the Christian Right have deeper pockets.
'I think he's taken a calculated decision that he's not going to get that much push back for it,' she said. 'Whatever he does in the next three years, it's going to be to suit him and his needs.
'I suspect he's thinking that by standing by Netanyahu on this particular account, that he will benefit from it financially in the long-term, post-presidency.'
She said that what he is really gambling with is 'the reputation of the Republican Party'.
So even though few are falling out of line just yet, he might face more pushback when it comes to the next election campaign.
'Americans get two weeks holiday a year in the summer, she said. 'And if gas prices are through the roof, I don't care who's president: they get very angry at the president.
'So having a war in the Middle East is not going to be good for the popularity of the president or the Republicans.'
Trump himself has claimed that war in Iran does not contradict his 'America First' strategy.
He told the Atlantic: 'Considering that the term wasn't used until I came along, I think I'm the one that decides that.
'For those people who say they want peace — you can't have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don't want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon — that's not peace.' More Trending
Professor Wilson pointed out that the slogan was not developed by Trump, having emerged during World War One when it was used by isolationists and later the KKK, and again being used to oppose the US joining World War Two.
The decision to bomb Iran without approval from Congress was also not popular with Democrats, unsurprisingly.
US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for him to be impeached over it, saying the strikes could be unconstitutional if they amount to a declaration of war.
Professor Wilson said this was unlikely to phase him, however, as 'while both houses of Congress are in the hands of the Republicans, then he's not going to get prosecuted for anything.'
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: London to Dubai BA flight turns back 90 minutes from landing after Iran strikes
MORE: Has World War Three started and how close has Iran come to having a nuclear bomb?
MORE: Moment officer tells Christian street preacher 'it's all wrong' outside station
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The world is safer without a nuclear-armed Iran
During his first term as president in 2019, Donald Trump pulled back from ordering an attack on Iran even as US warships locked missiles on to their targets and bombers were in the air. The American military was 'cocked and loaded' only to be stood down with just 10 minutes to spare. The abandonment of a major operation at such a late stage was seen as emblematic of the president's deep reluctance to involve his country in another conflict in the Middle East, and what he called the region's 'forever wars'. Yet on Saturday night his reticence evaporated. He sent US stealth aircraft armed with so-called 'bunker buster' bombs to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons programme once and for all. Mr Trump declared the operation a great success, though it will be several days before it is known whether the three sites have been 'obliterated', as the president has claimed. The whole episode has been a classic Trump performance. First he issued the threat to back up Israel's assault on the Iranian nuclear weapons plants, only then appearing to retreat once more by indicating nothing would happen for a fortnight. Whether it was brought forward in order to catch the Iranian regime off guard is not clear. It is more likely that the intelligence reports of the Iranians moving their enriched uranium away from the plants expedited the mission. Dozens of lorries were seen at the Fordow site, which is buried deep in a mountain, probably removing enriched material to another location. The president may have feared that waiting another week or so risked leaving him in the same position as George W Bush, who invaded Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein's arms programme only to find the weapons of mass destruction had gone or were never present. Mr Trump was critical of that decision and his America First doctrine gave the impression he would keep the US out of any foreign conflict unless directly threatened. But he has discovered, as have past presidents all the way back to Woodrow Wilson, that things are not that simple and isolationism is very hard to sustain. As the most powerful defender of democratic values against despotisms, the US cannot, and should not, just depart the scene. The geopolitical ramifications of these strikes on Iran are profound. Mr Trump may perhaps now care to reflect on his ambivalence towards Russia's invasion of Ukraine, where similar criteria apply, of an autocracy threatening the existence of another country. Will he now be more critical of Vladimir Putin and more supportive of Nato, which is holding its annual summit in the Hague this week with an across-the-board promise to increase defence spending dramatically? If Iran has moved its enriched material, is Mr Trump prepared to order further strikes or will it be left to Israel to follow up? The president might well hope the strikes have indeed obliterated the sites and no more US help is required; but once involved in a war, it can be hard for a country to extricate itself easily from it. There is also the threat from Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz through which almost a quarter of the world's oil and gas is shipped. However, this may not be possible for Tehran, both because of the presence of a US carrier group, but also because China relies heavily on energy supplies coming through the Gulf. A blockade would be calamitous for the Chinese economy and for India's. Tehran will be keen to get both these countries into their camp in a stand-off with America. Furthermore, there is a very real risk of terrorist attacks on US assets, which include shipping and some 40,000 troops in the region. Iran will hope its proxies Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis will step up their activities against Israel, but their ability to do so has been severely degraded. It will also seek to sponsor violent action abroad. Here in the UK we have already seen how the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has targeted émigré Iranian dissidents and engaged in spying and cyber warfare. It is possible that the damage inflicted on Iran and the assassination of some key military figures will hasten the demise of the theocratic rulers and the removal of the zealots who have caused so much trouble in the region and the world for so long. Washington says it is not seeking regime change and the idea that it would be replaced by a benign, Western-style democracy of the sort never seen in Iran is fanciful. More likely is that the IRGC would take over in a military coup with unknown consequences. There are many uncertainties, but one thing is clear. Despite the calls from Sir Keir Starmer and others for 'de-escalation', the world is a safer place without a nuclear-armed Iran. As Benjamin Netanyahu put it: the most dangerous regime in the world has been denied access to the most dangerous weapons. The Israeli prime minister, who scored a diplomatic coup by convincing Mr Trump to act, believed it would usher in a period of 'peace and prosperity' for all in the region and beyond. We can but hope, but history is not a happy guide.
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘We weren't expecting it yet': US attack met with panic in Iran
Asal* had been expecting the US to bomb Iran, just not so soon. The 22-year-old Tehran University student had believed Donald Trump when his administration said on Thursday that it would wait up to two weeks before deciding whether to attack Iran, apparently to give diplomacy a chance. And so at 4am when the newscaster announced the bombing on TV, Asal was in disbelief. She rushed to wake her father and the rest of the family, who huddled together in front of the set as the sounds of the news blended with those of bombings elsewhere in the city. 'We weren't expecting it yet. But we knew one way or another the US would take part in it,' Asal told the Guardian from Tehran. 'We are dead worried. You know, sleep doesn't come so easy these past few days.' Iranians woke to the news on Sunday morning that the unthinkable had finally happened: the US had attacked Iran. In the early hours of the morning, American warplanes dropped so-called bunker busters weighing 13,500kg (30,000lb) on the nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. The news was met with panic in Iran. It prompted a renewed wave of displacement in Tehran as people feared a more intensified assault on the city now that the US was involved. The question of whether the US would join Israel in its military campaign in Iran had hung over the heads of Iranians since the first Israeli bomb fell nearly 10 days earlier. Iranians watched with worry as Trump played coy with reporters, telling them 'nobody knows what I'm going to do' about Iran. On 13 June, Israel had launched hundreds of airstrikes on Iran, an operation it said was aimed at preventing the country from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran quickly responded with a barrage of missiles and drones, kicking off an escalating tit-for-tat war. Israel asked the US to join its military campaign as it was the only country with the firepower necessary to penetrate the Fordow nuclear facility, buried up to 100 metres underground. On Sunday, the US granted its request. The Iranian government, incensed by the attacks, said it would do whatever was necessary to retaliate. The president, Masoud Pezeshkian, appeared in front of hundreds of protesters in a square in central Tehran, who raised their fists and chanted 'Revenge, revenge!'. Asal has little appetite for revenge, she just wants the war to be over. To her and her friends, the US attack felt like a betrayal. 'No one is rooting for either side to win. We just want peace. Not even those Iranians who wanted a regime change are happy. They expected Trump to take a different route or at least give us two weeks,' Asal said. Trump's administration has said the strikes were in line with his 'peace through strength' doctrine and has urged Iran not to retaliate but instead to return to the negotiating table. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, flatly rejected the request for talks, telling reporters in Istanbul on Sunday that now was not the time for diplomacy. To Navid*, Trump's claims that the US bombing of Iran was a peace initiative rang hollow. The 28-year-old business owner in Tehran had been following international developments closely over the last 10 days, appointed the unofficial source of news for his family. 'Who, exactly, cares about civilians?' he said. 'The Israelis? Have they ever shown concern for civilian lives in Beirut or Gaza? The Americans? Did they show any in Libya, Afghanistan or Iraq?' Instead, he suggested the attack was less about strategy, and more about Trump's ego. 'He always wants to swoop in like Superman and do the things he claims no one else can.' US officials insisted that the strikes were a one-off and that they had achieved their goals in crippling Iran's nuclear capabilities. Nonetheless, some Iranians feared that the apparent success of the US operation would inspire either Israel or the US to extend its aims and seek to change the regime in Iran – a fight they did not want to be caught up in, whether they support the government or not. Ava*, a 25-year-old accountant in Tehran, said: 'We are angry, scared and frankly disgusted by not only the regime but also each one of you outside Iran who is sitting in the comfort of your homes and calling for US war on us. Who are you to decide for us?' *Names have been changed.
Scottish Sun
22 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
US warns it WILL strike again and world ‘should listen to Trump' as Iran leaders jet to meet Putin after nuke bomb blitz
'WE WILL DEFEND' US warns it WILL strike again and world 'should listen to Trump' as Iran leaders jet to meet Putin after nuke bomb blitz THE US has warned it will strike again and that the world "should listen to Trump" after unleashing an unprecedented blitz on three nuclear facilities. It comes imminently after the Iranian foreign minister revealed he is to meet with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and warned the West of "unprecedented danger". 5 Iranian worshippers burn the flags of the US and Israel on Friday 5 United States President Donald J Trump addresses the nation Credit: AP 5 Russia's President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during a meeting at the Kremlin in April Credit: AFP 5 B-2 Spirit drops a GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bomb (stock image) 5 US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said Operation Midnight Hammer was 'an incredible and overwhelming success' that took months and weeks of planning. He added Trump has been clear that "any retaliation by Iran" against the US would be "met with force far greater" than what was seen on Saturday night. Hegseth said: 'Iran would be smart to heed those words. He's said it before, and he means it.' The Defence Secretary went on to praise the US leader, calling it "bold and brilliant, showing the world that American deterrence is back". He urged: "When this President speaks, the world should listen." Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi has said he is going to Russia today to meet mad leader Putin. He revealed: 'I'm going to Moscow this afternoon, and I have a meeting with President Putin tomorrow morning.' Arghchi called Moscow a 'friend of Iran,' adding 'we always consult with each other'. Fears loom that the conflict could spiral into a world war, with Putin puppet Dmitry Medvedev making a veiled threat to supply Iran with nuclear weapons. He said: "A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear weapons." After declaring the US strikes as being a success, Trump warned that further action could be taken if Tehran doesn't agree to an adequate peace deal. He said in a nationally televised speech at the White House: "Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier." "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days." 'Remember there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. 'But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight." And shortly after speaking on-camera, he posted to Truth Social: "This cannot continue. There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. "Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. "But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill." Meanwhile Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi dubbed the strikes "outrageous and will have everlasting consequences". He also called the military action "a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations". Stay up to date with the latest on Israel vs Iran with The Sun's live blog below...
