American Herald Tribune | MASSOUD MAALOUF: With President Donald Trump�s decertification of the�Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known as the Iran Nuclear Deal, and with his permanent verbal attacks on this deal and on Iran�s meddling in several Middle Eastern countries, talk of a possible war with Iran has been intensifying. Israel never concealed its clear satisfaction with seeing such a war taking place, even sometimes hinting that it might initiate some military action on its own. Saudi Arabia subtly encourages the US to take such action and some other Persian Gulf countries would be relieved if Iran�s expansionism could be curbed.

However, talk of going to war with Iran and actually declaring war are two different things. Many factors tamper down the US administration from following such a dangerous path.

First of all, what reason could Trump offer to the American people to convince them to accept sending their sons and daughters to fight in Iran? When George W. Bush made the decision to invade Iraq, his intelligence services erroneously persuaded the Americans that Saddam Hussein was responsible for terrorist attacks against US citizens and that he possessed weapons of mass destruction that he could transfer to terrorists in order to attack America. What danger does Iran constitute now to the Americans, especially given that the international community, through the JCPOA, has been able to put a stop to Iran�s �nuclear military� ambitions? The President needs a legitimate reason to take such an important and risky path. The war on Afghanistan came in the aftermath of 9/11 with the tragic and unacceptable attacks on US soil. Can Trump justify a war with Iran now?

Secondly, in addition to a legitimate reason for war, it is imperative to have the military and political support of an international coalition. In the current circumstances, can the US assemble such a coalition as the�US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley was calling for a few days ago? The closest US allies in Europe already have criticized Trump�s decertification of the JCPOA and have expressed in no uncertain terms, their support for the Iran deal and their non-acceptance of renewed negotiations. Some of them are already involved in large infrastructure contracts and commercial deals with Iran. Important allies of the United States, such as the United Kingdom, France and Germany do not hide their lack of confidence in President Trump and it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to assemble a coalition of powerful and influential countries against Iran in the current circumstances.

Third, it is clear that the American population has no appetite for war, of any sort. After the US military adventures in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, it will be extremely hard to find support for such a war, absent a hostile terror or military action by Iran against the US which is highly unlikely.

Fourth, we should not ignore the North Korea looming crisis where a leader is close to having his fingers on a nuclear bomb and repeatedly threatens the United States. Can Trump afford going to war with a country that has not directly threatened the US and whose nuclear capabilities have been put in check, while a rising nuclear power is proffering direct and extremely dangerous threats at the US?

Finally, in a country that is experiencing an almost full employment and a booming economy and an oddly high disapproval rate of the president�s general performance (65% according to the latest polls), it is quite certain that the domestic conditions� will weigh on Trump�s decision in this respect.

But is Donald Trump a president who plays by the rules or makes rational decisions? Can the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense control his impulsiveness? Will the president decide he needs another deflection from the Russia investigation by focusing on Iran?� Now that the Russia investigation is taking a dramatic turn with the rumors of firing Special Counsel Robert Mueller, time will tell.