'Unmitigated disaster': What Donald Trump could be weighing up on Iran

SBS Australia

4 hours ago

US President Donald Trump says he's considering whether or not to involve the US in the Israel-Iran conflict. Source: AAP, Press Association / Suzanne Plunkett As hostilities between Israel and Iran continue, United States President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing as to what he might do next. Israel launched a sweeping aerial campaign against Iran a week ago, calling it a "pre-emptive" strike to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Iran has denied plans to develop such weapons and retaliated by launching counterstrikes on Israel. Trump has repeatedly criticised Iran, called for an "unconditional surrender", and floated the possibility of US action in Iran.
On Thursday, Trump said he has yet to decide how the US would proceed, but will do so in the next two weeks. He has indicated there is still a chance of negotiating with Iran. "Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks," press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters, quoting a message from Trump. Leavitt told a regular briefing at the White House that Trump was interested in pursuing a diplomatic solution with Iran, but his top priority was ensuring that Iran could not obtain a nuclear weapon.
Professor Wesley Widmaier, from the Australian National University's Department of International Relations, said domestic policies could play a major role in Trump's decision. Widmaier said a portion of Trump's voter base may not support involvement in the conflict. "I think right now he is poised on the horns of a dilemma between the isolationist MAGA [Make America Great Again] coalition base and anti-Iran pro-Israel kind of foreign policy imperative," he said.
"And politicians like to keep things ambiguous for as long as possible; it gives them maximum mobility." Widmaier said the two-week time frame will provide Trump with an extension to weigh up tensions in his supporter base, political strategy and pressure, and the US relationship with Israel. Michael Green, professor and CEO of the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, said Trump is likely deciding whether or not to use a 13,000kg Massive Ordnance Penetrator 'bunker buster' bomb on an Iranian underground nuclear facility. Only the US military has the bunker buster bomb. "I believe that the decision he has to make is whether or not the US drops that bunker-busting bomb on Fordo, the remaining intact part of Iran's nuclear weapons programs," he said. "The reason he might do it is because the Israelis believe that the Iranians are weeks away from creating nuclear weapons capability. The reason to not do it is because there's no guarantee of success."
Trump has not outlined exactly what US involvement in Iran could look like, but he has floated several possible scenarios. Comments and social media posts about his plans have veered from proposing a swift diplomatic solution to suggesting the US might join the fighting on Israel's side. On Wednesday, he said nobody knew what he would do. A day earlier, he mused on social media about killing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, then demanded Iran's unconditional surrender. Iran has warned of "all-out war" if the US joins the military action.
Green said while the Iranian regime is vulnerable, it could still "lash out" and cause threats to US forces and allied interests. He said Trump may be hoping the threat of the bunker buster bomb could influence Iranians to agree to peacefully give up their nuclear capability. "I am sceptical that Iran will, even under this huge amount of pressure, give up their nuclear program, [but] they might agree to meet, they might agree to talk about it, to dissipate the pressure," he said. "The most likely scenario is they put something out there to save themselves and it will be debated whether it's enough, and Donald Trump may or may not take it."
Widmaier said he believes the US bombing Iran would be a "disaster". "My sense is this would all be leading to a disaster. It would just be a disaster for the region, it would be a disaster for American foreign policy," he said. If the Trump administration decides to pursue US action in Iran, Widmaier said it would need to have clear aims and a clear exit strategy. He said the US government would also want to be sure of public support if it were to take action. "These are lessons of the Vietnam war, these are lessons of the Iraq war, and I see no sense that they really know what they want," Widmaier said.
Wars are easy to start, but hard to end. Wesley Windmaier "I say with a high level of confidence that it would be an unmitigated disaster, and it's something absolutely to be avoided. "I don't think you need a PhD to see that, given the disastrous military interventions that are a history of US foreign policy."
While Trump has publicly criticised Iran and sided with Israel, US action against Iran is not guaranteed. In the next two weeks, Trump will weigh up different factors and scenarios, including opposition from some of his Republican colleagues, some of whom have said the US should avoid war. Kentucky senator Rand Paul said he hoped Trump would not give in to pressure to get involved. "It's not the US' job to be involved in this war," Paul said on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday. Republican representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky said on X: "This is not our war. We should not engage our military here."
Widmaier said it's possible the president could opt out of the US becoming directly involved in another Middle East conflict. He pointed out Trump does have a record of holding off in the context of Iran. "In his first term, he came right up to the brink of ordering some strikes against Iranian sites, and he backed off at the last possible minute," Widmaier said. "So he does seem to have some inhibitions against, it may be that at the last minute he pulls back ... he does have a pragmatic streak too." — Additional reporting by Reuters and the Australian Associated Press