One week into Iran war, dangers for the US and Trump multiply

Washington. One week into the U.S.–Israeli war with 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 victory.

Even after the killing of Iran’s 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 consequences beyond Trump’s control.

That is a scenario Trump had avoided during his time in the White House, preferring swift and limited operations such as the January 3 lightning raid in Venezuela and June’s one-off strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“Iran is a messy and potentially protracted military campaign,” said Laura Blumenfeld of the Johns Hopkins School of 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 United States out of what he called “stupid” military interventions, is now pursuing what many experts see as an open-ended war of choice, unprompted by any imminent threat to the United States 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 largest U.S. military operation since the 2003 Iraq invasion. The administration has offered shifting rationales for the war and differing 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, cripple its navy, end its ability to arm proxy groups and prevent it from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon.

However, if the war drags on, American casualties mount and the economic costs of disrupted Gulf oil flows increase, Trump’s biggest foreign policy gamble could also hurt his Republican Party politically.

MAGA support holding, for now

Despite criticism from some Trump supporters who oppose foreign military interventions, members of his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement have largely backed him on Iran so far.

But any weakening of that support could threaten 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. “The MAGA base is split between those who relied on no-new-war promises and those who remain loyal to Trump’s judgement.”

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 encouraging internal rebellion. Two days later, he stopped short of presenting that as a priority.

However, on Thursday Trump told Reuters he would play a role in selecting Iran’s next leader and encouraged Iranian Kurdish rebels to launch attacks. That was followed by a demand in a social media post on Friday for Iran’s “unconditional surrender”.

Across the region, tensions have escalated with Iran launching retaliatory strikes on Israel and other neighbours in what analysts say is an attempt to spread instability and raise the costs for Israel, the United States and their allies.

Showing that Iran may still be able to activate proxy groups, Hezbollah has renewed hostilities with Israel, expanding the war to another country.

American casualties have remained relatively low so far, with six service members killed, and Trump has largely shrugged off the possibility that the number could rise, while declining to rule out the deployment of U.S. ground troops.

Asked whether Americans should worry about Iran-inspired attacks at home, Trump said in an interview with Time magazine 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

Venezuela miscalculation?

Many analysts believe Trump, who has shown an increasing willingness to use military force in his second term, miscalculated that the Iran campaign would unfold like the Venezuela operation earlier this year.

U.S. special forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, allowing Trump to pressure more compliant former loyalists into granting Washington considerable influence over the country’s vast oil reserves without prolonged U.S. military involvement.

By contrast, Iran has proved a far tougher and better-armed opponent, with a deeply entrenched clerical and security establishment.

Even the joint U.S.–Israeli “decapitation” strike that killed Khamenei and other senior leaders has so far failed to prevent Iran from mounting a military response, and has raised questions about whether they could be replaced by even more hardline figures.

Looming over the conflict is the possibility that Iran could descend into chaos and fragment if its current rulers fall, further destabilising the Middle East.

Mark Dubowitz, head of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, praised Trump’s overall war strategy but said the president must make it clear publicly that he does not want the country to disintegrate.

Oil chokepoint

For now, one of the most pressing concerns is Iran’s threat to the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow chokepoint through which about a fifth of the world’s oil passes. Tanker traffic has halted, raising the prospect of severe economic consequences if the disruption continues.

Although Trump has publicly dismissed concerns about rising U.S. petrol prices, he and his advisers have been scrambling for ways to limit the war’s impact on global energy supplies as voters continue to cite the cost of living as their top concern.

“It’s an economic pain point for the U.S. economy that appears not to have been fully anticipated,” said Josh Lipsky of the Atlantic Council in Washington.

One former U.S. military official close to the administration said the widening economic impact of the war had caught Trump’s team off guard, partly because experts on oil markets were not consulted before the attack on Iran.

White House spokesperson Kelly said “the Iranian regime is being absolutely crushed”, but did not specifically address concerns about preparation for a prolonged conflict.

Trump pressed ahead with the strikes despite warnings from some senior aides that the escalation could prove difficult to contain, according to two White House officials and a Republican close to the administration.

Some traditional U.S. allies were also caught off guard. “It’s a decision-making circle of one,” said one Western diplomat.

The length of the war remains a major unknown that will likely determine the scale of its repercussions. With the cost of the Iran campaign rising by the day, Trump has said the operation could last four or five weeks, or “whatever it takes”, while offering little detail about what would follow.

Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Ben Hodges praised the U.S. military’s tactics in Iran but told Reuters: “From a political, strategic and diplomatic standpoint, it seems not to have been thought all the way through.”

Trump also has much at stake in helping oil-producing Gulf Arab states weather the Iran crisis. The countries have long hosted U.S. military bases and have pledged major new investments in the United States.

While Gulf allies appear to have largely fallen in line behind the campaign, especially after Tehran targeted them with missile and drone strikes, not everyone in the region supports the war.

In an open letter to Trump published on Thursday, UAE billionaire Khalaf Al Habtoor asked: “Who gave you the right to turn our region into a battlefield?”