Why it will be hard for Trump to stay out of the conflict with Iran

President Donald Trump is desperate not to fight a war with Iran.
But can he really avoid it?
Compelling national security arguments and domestic political considerations mean it makes sense to stop short of direct US offensive operations in the long-dreaded conflict that Israel describes as a matter of preserving its own existence.
But powerful forces could suck America deeper into the conflict than its current role in helping to shield Israel from Iran's deadly rain of missiles and drones.
CNN reported that over the weekend, Trump rejected an Israeli plan to kill Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, according to two sources.
But some of this is out of Trump's hands.
Should Iran's battered regime decide it has nothing to lose and attack US bases and personnel in the region, or US targets across the globe, Washington will be forced to respond hard to preserve credibility and deterrence. Another possibility is that Tehran could create duress on Trump to rein in Israel by attacking international shipping in the Gulf or Red Sea and bring on a global energy crisis.
Pressure is also mounting on Trump from inside his own party for action that only the United States could carry out — a mission to destroy Iran's subterranean site at Fordow, which is believed to be beyond Israel's airborne capabilities. The logic of such a strike would be that Iran is now uniquely vulnerable, and a better chance may never come for the US to destroy the possibility of an Iranian nuclear weapon.
CNN's White House team has reported that the president is deeply skeptical about throwing the United States into the fray. Such a move would be fraught with danger. It could lead to the expansion of the conflict beyond its current belligerents and lead to a grueling open-ended war with no clear endgame.
If there is one lesson from the early 21st century, it's that war objectives and analyses of the Middle East drawn up in Washington almost always turn out disastrously wrong. The idea that Iran's brutal clerical regime could fall might be attractive. But the toppling of Saddam Hussein and the civil war in Syria show that Middle East nations can simply splinter when power vacuums open.
A US intervention would also widen deep strains in Trump's political base and dismantle a core principle of his 'America first' movement: that the United States should stay out of foreign quagmires after more than a decade of pain in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is only a few weeks, after all, since the president set out a new vision for the Middle East and American involvement.
'The so-called nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built — and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves,' Trump said in a major speech in Saudi Arabia in May. 'A new generation of leaders is transcending the ancient conflicts and tired divisions of the past and forging a future where the Middle East is defined by commerce, not chaos; where it exports technology, not terrorism; and where people of different nations, religions and creeds are building cities together — not bombing each other out of existence.'
A new American war is utterly incompatible with such a vision. Still, hawks in Washington might argue that Trump has a unique opportunity to remove the major impediment to his vision by eradicating Iran's path to a nuclear weapon or even contributing to the toppling of its theocratic leadership.
Presidents have often written in their memoirs about momentous and agonizing choices to deploy troops in foreign wars. Sometimes, however, a decision not to rush in even when it appears tempting requires as much courage.
Dilemmas like the one now facing Trump typically come with negative outcomes either way.
Political heat is already mounting on the president to come off the sidelines even as the United States made clear that Israel's decision to launch major attacks against Iran is its alone and that Washington's forces have no offensive involvement.
One of the complicating factors for Trump is that while Israel's attacks seem to have been successful in taking out top military leaders and nuclear scientists, it remains unclear whether Israel has the capacity to eradicate Iran's nuclear program itself.
Former Vice President Mike Pence said on 'State of the Union' Sunday that if Israel's attack doesn't somehow convince Iran to make major concessions in Trump's diplomatic attempt to end its nuclear program, then the United States should be prepared to join the conflict.
'Now, if the Iranians want to stand down, I think the president's made it clear he's willing to enter into negotiations. But there can be no nuclear program of any kind, no enrichment program of any kind,' Pence told CNN's Dana Bash. 'And at the end of the day, if Israel needs our help to ensure that the Iranian nuclear program is destroyed once and for all, the United States of America needs to be prepared to do it, because this is about protecting our most cherished ally.'
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham argued the worst possible outcome of a conflict between Israel and Iran would be for Tehran's nuclear capabilities — which it has long denied are designed to build a bomb — to remain.
'If diplomacy is not successful, and we are left with the option of force, I would urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that, when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program,' Graham, a key Trump ally, said on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' 'If that means providing bombs, provide bombs. If that means flying with Israel, fly with Israel.'
These calculations are difficult enough. But Trump also faces a complex domestic political scenario that is the result of his own transformation of the GOP into a more isolationist party. This means he faces a different political scenario than the one before President George W. Bush when he went into Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of the loudest voices on the right, including Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk, have already warned Trump against fracturing trust with the MAGA base by diving into a new Middle East war. The president has always been extremely careful with his own complex coalition. He's loath to take steps that annoy his voters. One example was his turnaround last week in halting deportation sweeps against agricultural workers — partly to avoid angering farmers and employers in the rural heartlands where he draws much of his support.
Trump's preoccupation with the political costs was evident in a conversation with journalist Michael Scherer of The Atlantic on Sunday.
'Well, considering that I'm the one that developed 'America first,' and considering that the term wasn't used until I came along, I think I'm the one that decides that,' Trump told Scherer. '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.'
The president appeared to be rehearsing an argument for his base that he'd have to use if he joined Israeli action. It's fascinating to watch him wrestling with a conundrum between national security arguments that would face any conventional American president and the sectors of the political movement that lifted him to power. He doesn't seem absolutely convinced yet by his own argument, perhaps because, as Kirk pointed out, younger male voters who flocked to his reelection campaign last year do not want to join a 'quagmire' in the Middle East.
This is hardly where Trump hoped to be early in his presidency — one reason he appeared so bullish even as recently as this month about his effort to force Iran to agree a deal to peacefully end its nuclear program.
Trump started his second term vowing to be a peacemaker.
But five months in, two major wars raging when he took office are worse and the dangerous new conflict with Iran promises the greatest test of 'America first' restraint.
Trump's authority has been flouted by three key leaders: Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. And his 'art of the deal' approach to foreign policy is a failure.
Putin has ignored Trump's efforts to end the Ukraine war. Xi has twice forced the US leader to fold in their trade war. And Netanyahu's decision to launch the conflict with Iran that American presidents have long sought to avoid appears to have scuttled Trump's Iran diplomacy — and is based on a bet that no American president could afford not to defend Israel even if he differed with its decisions.
At home, presidents must create public trust for their decisions to go to war. Here, Trump may struggle since he's alienated millions of people with his searing approach to affairs at home. This includes his decision to deploy the military in California amid anti-ICE protests last week and warnings he plans to use troops everywhere.
Trump's second term has already belied the notion that the weight of his personality, supposed respect for him among foreign adversaries, and what aides see as an almost magical dealmaking ability would change the world. The promised rush of trade deals shaken loose by his tariffs, for example, has not materialized.
Trump's first peacemaking foray — in Gaza — failed. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are now facing starvation as Israel's pounding of the Strip, triggered by Hamas' attacks in October 2023, continues.
The president's effort to end the Ukraine war never went anywhere. The conflict widened. It spread into Russia with Ukrainian raids on Russian bases that prompted Putin to launch vicious attacks on civilians in Kyiv and elsewhere. The White House made it known that Trump was getting frustrated with the Russian leader and set a two-week deadline to consider tougher sanctions on Moscow. But nothing revealed the risible nature of that spin and Trump's biased attitude to the war more than his excitement on Saturday that Putin had called to wish him a happy birthday.
Events have overtaken Trump's 'American first' reticence to get involved abroad and exposed the shallowness of his statesmanship. Worsening crises may offer a preview of a world that becomes more volatile in the absence of steady and constant American leadership.
Trump's increasingly brittle domestic political grounding and his already questionable authority internationally will only complicate his dilemmas. In many ways the Iran conflict is the kind of international crisis with no easy answers that he avoided in his first term.
Now it could define his second.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

7 minutes ago

• USA Today

Activist Mahmoud Khalil speaks out after release from ICE custody

NEWARK, NJ − Mahmoud Khalil emerged though the airport gate, fist raised and smiling to a cheering crowd, as he pushed his newborn baby's stroller with his arm around his wife. Arriving at Newark International Airport the afternoon of June 21, a day after a federal judge ordered his release from immigration detention, the 30-year-old Columbia University graduate and Palestinian activist vowed to keep up his advocacy. Standing with his family and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, he declared he wouldn't be deterred. 'Your words of support, your messages, have kept me going,' Khalil said in brief remarks. 'Still, the fight is far from over.' He planned to continue speaking out against what he called a genocide in Gaza, and American support, including from Columbia, for Israel's siege of the Palestinian territory after the 2023 Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel. Israel has denied this accusation, though some human rights observers have reached this conclusion. At the airport, Khalil approached the crowd to take a Palestinian flag from a friend, then draped it over the stroller of his son Deen, who was born 2 months ago, while Khalil was detained in Jena, Louisiana. Asked if he had a message for the Trump administration, Khalil said, 'My existence is the message. Palestinian existence is a message.' A day earlier, a federal district judge in New Jersey ordered Khalil's release after over three months in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody following his advocacy at the Ivy League campus. The order marked a blow to the Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian student protests. Ocasio-Cortez said Khalil's detention by the Trump administration was solely political. "It is an affront to every American," she said. "We will continue to resist the politicization and the continued political persecution that ICE is engaged in. We welcome Mahmoud home." Why was Khalil in ICE detention? Khalil, a lawful permanent resident born in a Syrian refugee camp, was a student negotiator and spokesperson for pro-Palestinian demonstrators in spring 2024. Students called on Columbia to divest from its investments in Israel that helped propel war efforts. Israel's siege of Gaza has killed 55,700 Palestinian people, mostly women and children, according to Gaza's health ministry. The mounting death toll came after Hamas-led attacks in Israel that killed 1,200 people and took 251 others hostage, Israeli tallies show. Critics, including university administrators, accused the protesters of creating an unwelcoming environment for Jewish students. Organizers have denied accusations of antisemitism, and Khalil spoke out against antisemitism on CNN. Columbia's encampment demonstrations triggered similar protests on college campuses across the country. On March 8, federal agents detained Khalil, without a warrant, at his university-owned apartment building lobby in Manhattan. His wife Noor Abdalla, who is born in the United States and was 8 months' pregnant then, was by his side as they returned from dinner with friends. In recorded cell phone video, Abdalla repeatedly asked agents why he was being taken and what agency they represented. They gave her no responses before taking Khalil, who appeared calm in footage. His detention triggered waves of protests in New York City calling for his release. Eventually, Khalil arrived to a Louisiana ICE detention center, where he'd stay for over 3 months. During that time, his son was born and other international students were detained in the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on immigration. Khalil's case was the first of several high-profile incidents in which pro-Palestinian student activists were detained by immigration authorities and targeted for deportation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio alleged Khalil participated in "antisemitic protests and disruptive activities" that "undermine U.S. efforts to combat anti-Semitism." Rubio cited an obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to revoke Khalil's green card on the basis that he threatened American foreign policy interests. What did the judge rule in Khalil's case? Federal district Judge Michael Farbiarz of New Jersey ruled June 11 that Rubio had no authority to detain or deport Khalil on foreign policy grounds. Farbiarz said the government's other argument, that Khalil 'fraudulently or willfully' misrepresented material facts on his application for permanent residency, could still be used to detain him. On June 20, Farbiarz called Khalil's months-long detention in a Louisiana detention center potentially punitive. "Extraordinary circumstances" warranted Khalil's release, Farbiarz said. Among those were findings that Khalil − who has no criminal record nor has been charged with any crimes − didn't pose a flight risk or a danger to others in the community. Farbiarz, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, also raised concerns about the chilling effect his detention had on free speech, and the ability of an immigration judge to take on such issues. Justice Department lawyers didn't object to evidence presented. They also didn't present proof alleging Khalil committed violence, property destruction or incitement to violence, Farbiarz added. After the ruling, the Trump administration disputed Farbiarz's order, arguing he had no authority in immigration removal proceedings. Meanwhile, administration officials said Khalil was twice removable on foreign policy grounds − namely over accusations of antisemitism and support for the Hamas militant group, and that he misrepresented information to obtain legal status. While Farbiarz has ruled out the foreign policy argument, the court is considering information he submitted to immigration officials. Khalil's lawyers have called the administration's allegations "meritless." Khalil has a pending lawsuit in New Jersey federal court against the Trump administration. Khalil's lawyers say the Trump administration violated his constitutional rights around free speech and due process. A day after his arrival to Newark, demonstrators planned to rally in New York City in support of Khalil. Columbia didn't respond to an email request for comment. Smiling alongside his wife and son, who he'd only seen once during his detention, he looked at the crowd and vowed to continue demonstrating. "This is why I will continue to protest with every one of you," Khalil said. "Not (even) if they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine." Contributing: Michael Karas, The Bergen Record; Michael Loria, USA TODAY.

Fox News

8 minutes ago

• Fox News

Wesley Hunt defends Trump's move to restore Robert E. Lee's name to military base

All times eastern Fox Report with Jon Scott Fox Report with Jon Scott FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Failed senate candidate Beto O'Rourke joins Senator Bernie Sanders on the 'Fighting Oligarchy' Tour

The Hill

8 minutes ago

• The Hill

Delaware governor signs executive order protecting gender-affirming care

On Friday, Delaware Democratic Gov. Matt Meyer signed an executive order increasing protection for receivers and providers of gender-affirming care. 'In Delaware, we cherish privacy, dignity and the right to make personal medical decisions. Everyone deserves the freedom to access healthcare rooted in science and compassion,' said Meyer. The executive order prohibits any state agency from providing 'medical records, data or billing information, or utilize state resources' that could help any criminal or civil investigation against someone receiving or providing gender-affirming care. It also dictated that the state professional regulations board cannot disbar healthcare professionals only due to providing gender-affirming care. California, New York, Illinois and 11 other states, and Washington, D.C., have enacted similar legislation to shield patients and doctors from aggressive legislation in states where gender-affirming care is highly restricted. Patients can now travel to shield states to receive their care without fear of retribution in their home states. This comes after a Supreme Court decision on June 18 that upheld Tennessee's decision to ban puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors. 'This ruling undermines doctors in delivering care to some of the most vulnerable patients in our country,' Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.), the nation's first openly transgender member of Congress, said Wednesday on the social platform X. Since President Trump took office transgender rights have increasingly been limited. Trump signed an executive order recognizing only two genders, has tried to ban transgender troops from the military, has refused requests to change the gender of passports and has tried to defund gender-affirming medical care. Delaware has a long history of tolerance for LGBTQ populations. According to the order, the state hosts 40,000 LGBTQ individuals and 6,300 transgender adults. In 2013, it legalized same sex marriage and implemented anti-discrimination laws in housing, employment and public accommodation. 'We will do everything in our power to protect transgender families in the state of Delaware and throughout the country,' the Executive Committee of the Delaware Democratic Party PRIDE Caucus said in a press statement earlier this week. 'We call on every legislator, from the state and county level to the federal level, to speak out and step up. This is the moment to act – not with caution, but with courage.'