The United States attacked three nuclear targets in Iran on Saturday night to Sunday. Experts see how US President Donald Trump is fulfilling a long-cherished wish to weaken Iran. “He couldn’t go back.”
Trump spoke of a “very successful attack” and says that “now is the time for peace.” In Trump’s eyes, the attacks would prevent further escalation and bring Iran back to the negotiating table. Iran had previously said that it would only talk about a possible nuclear deal again if the Israeli attacks stopped.
“He is trying to sell it as a problem that needs to be solved,” says political scientist Chris Nijhuis to NU.nl. But Trump himself caused that problem. “He stepped out of the nuclear deal with Iran that former President Barack Obama had concluded in his first term.”
Therefore, Trump’s “sales pitch” is mainly for show, thinks political scientist and America expert Raymond Mens. Behind Trump’s alleged good intentions to prevent the conflict from escalating further, other goals would be hidden. For example, after the Israeli attacks on Iran, Trump faced a choice: whether or not to intervene. “And Trump couldn’t go back, because he had already threatened attacks if Iran did not agree to peace.”
Otherwise, he might be seen as a “dog that barks but doesn’t bite,” Mens says. “Or only Israel could take credit for weakening the Iranian nuclear program.” And that is a long-cherished wish of the Republican party in the US, Nijhuis adds. “Together, Israel and the US have thrown the nuclear program back in time.”
‘Perfect opportunity to attack Iran’
But it’s not just about whether or not to develop an Iranian nuclear weapon anymore. Mens sees how Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu places the conflict in a broader context by speaking about the “destabilizing factor” of Iran in the Middle East. “Israel wants to weaken Iran and therefore the US wants that too.” Israel and the US have had a close alliance for decades.
This was the perfect opportunity for Israel to put that plan into action, says Nijhuis. During the Gaza war, Israel weakened several groups supported by Iran, such as Hamas, the Houthis, and Hezbollah. “As a result, the chance of a strong counterattack has become smaller. Israel can hit Iran without too great consequences.”
The intervention of the US in the conflict with Iran exposes Trump’s contradiction. He promised his voters to be a peace president, but at the same time, he is not afraid to violate international law and escalate the conflict, says Nijhuis.
Mens speaks of a “big hurdle” that Trump had to overcome to break his election promise. “He has opposed former presidents under whom the US was involved in wars.”
It is therefore still questionable whether Trump will gain popularity among his supporters. An earlier poll among the American population showed that 60 percent are in favor of a diplomatic solution in Iran. This shows no broad support for military action. “But it’s always different when a situation actually occurs,” says Nijhuis. “We will have to wait and see how the conflict develops.”
Trump can expect little criticism from Europe, the experts think. So far, no European government leaders have spoken out negatively about the attacks. That is worrying, Nijhuis thinks. “Europe is always full of international law, but when it is violated by allies, it falls silent.”
International law is meant to protect everyone, but in this way, the law of the strongest would apply, he says. “That’s nice if you are the strongest, but it’s not how you should want the world to work.”