After the hubristic beginnings came the reality. The road travelled since the most momentous foreign policy decision of his presidency seems to have delivered Donald Trump to a sobering destination: that Iran has been the nemesis of several US presidents before him for a reason and is an adversary not to be taken lightly.
Trump's Maximalist Goals Shrink
It is an oft-stated principle of warfare that hopes and plans optimistically hatched and trumpeted at its outbreak do not survive first contact with the enemy. Yet even by that cautionary standard, Trump's wildly diverging goals and narratives since embarking on war with Iran on 28 February amount to a bewildering odyssey that threatens to take him back to where he started.
After weeks of stop-start negotiations, the US and Iran now reportedly stand on the verge of a deal to end the fighting, the most immediate and tangible consequence of which will be the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran's closure of the strategically vital waterway has had a baleful effect on the US economy, sending gasoline prices soaring and leading to a shortage of fertilizer that threatens food supplies and prices.
Strategic Leverage and Negotiations
The priority given by Trump to reopening the strait illustrates the extra deterrent leverage gained by Tehran as a result of the conflict. The Trump administration's decision to address the problem through negotiations rather than military force further emphasizes this point. Shipping passed through the strait unimpeded before the war began.
The reported memorandum of understanding reached with the help of Pakistani and Qatari mediators would extend the current ceasefire for 60 days, during which negotiations would take place on the two-decades-old dispute over Iran's nuclear program. The specter of fudged compromise is in itself an illustration of how Trump's maximalist goals have shrunk.
Criticism and Political Fallout
In a recent Atlantic article, Robert Kagan, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, wrote that "Trump's endgame is surrender," adding that the president "no doubt hopes that he can slip away without Americans noticing the magnitude of this defeat." Many of Trump's hawkish Republican supporters have recognized the scale of the incipient retreat from previous objectives and warned of the dangers of a deal on Iran's uranium enrichment capability that may end up resembling the 2015 JCPOA.
Anti-Iranian Republican senators such as Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, and Roger Wicker, as well as Mike Pompeo, have all warned against an agreement which Trump last weekend said was "95% negotiated."
Trump's Own Pain
Trump is to a large degree the author of his own pain, thanks to an extravagant basket of goals and claims voiced at the war's outset. He initially called for regime change, demanding "unconditional surrender" and declaring the war virtually won. However, Iran's military capabilities were not reduced as much as presented, with potentially 70% of ballistic missiles and 70-80% of drones intact.
Contrary to Trump's initial expectations, the Islamic regime remains intact, and the regime appears more unyielding than ever. With regime change apparently dismissed as an unattainable fantasy, Trump has shifted his primary goal to preventing Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Nuclear Stockpile and Historical Context
Iran is still believed to possess about 970lb of highly enriched uranium, potentially enough to build 10 bombs, dispersed at underground locations. Critics point out that Iran was only able to accumulate the stockpile as a result of Trump's 2018 abandonment of the JCPOA.
The limited military success of his war may now force Trump to address it by resorting to the pragmatic type of compromise that he and his rightwing allies once lambasted Obama for. Robert Litwak, an international relations professor at George Washington University, said Trump is being forced to confront a "persistent tension" between transformational and transactional approaches.
Improbable Conditions and Trust Issues
Perhaps to disguise the depth of his predicament, Trump has lately taken to setting improbable conditions, including demanding that Iran and US allies sign the Abraham accords. For Iran's vehemently anti-Zionist regime, the idea is a non-starter. Trump also threatened to "blow up" Oman if it reached any deal with Iran that imposed charges for passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
Vali Nasr, an international relations professor at Johns Hopkins University, argued that Iranian reluctance stems from a suspicion that Trump may intend to use any peace deal as a preparation for future hostilities. "The reason they don't sign on is because they don't trust him," Nasr said.
