Trump and cost of unreasonable action against Iran

IRNA – Analysts believe that despite the escalation of tensions between Iran and the United States, the reaction of the Islamic Republic’s authorities to a possible attack on Iranian soil has led President Donald Trump to be cautious about the costs of its military action and its scope.

Tensions between Tehran and Washington have been steadily increasing since early summer. Although the United States has unofficially engaged in nonviolent confrontation with Iran since the exit of Trump from a nuclear deal with a focus on the “maximum pressure” approach since over one and a half year ago, the US moves in the Persian Gulf, increasing forces and deploying warships in the region in the face of the downing of the US Global Hawk UAV in Iranian territorial waters and Tehran’s more focus on ships in the Strait of Hormuz were among the factors that prompted some analysts to consider a hot or at least limited conflict between Iran and the US as likely.

During this time, Trump has repeatedly been beating at the drum of direct talks with Iran’s top officials, but at the same time emphasized Tehran’s increasing sanctions and restrictions. However, the set of policies pursued by the Islamic Republic of Iran yielded the same result as Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei had pointed out; Iran refused to negotiate under the US pressure and no war broke out.

In recent days, however, another factor has raised tensions in the region. Ansarullah’s crushing response to Riyadh’s nearly 5-year-old aggression has changed the game a lot. Ansarullah’s drone attack at the heart of the Saudi Penninsula showcased Saudis, especially the US’ vulnerability as a guarantor of Riyadh’s security. It was enough for some US officials, along with the Saudi royal palace, to blame Iran for the drone attack on Saudi Aramco facilities. The blows that the Yemeni fighters’ surprise attack on the body of Riyadh and Washington were so severe and crushing that they called such an operation out of Ansarullah’s capability.

Tehran has denied involvement in the attack and Ansarullah while claiming responsibility for the attack threatened if the Saudi-led coalition continues its aggression, it will bring more deadly blows to the country and its allies.

In this situation, despite the media analysis and remarks of some countries’ officials on the inevitability of the Iran-US conflict, field developments do not lead to such a conclusion. Although the Pentagon has announced that it has prepared military options against Iran and the US president is speaking out of readiness for any kind of offensive, he is cautious about military action.

On the other hand, however, military officials in Tehran have stated their readiness to deal with any scenario, saying that the offensive will not be limited to limited confrontation and that the Islamic Republic of Iran will wipe out any attacker. Iran has made it clear that if the enemy takes the wrong step, there will be a crushing response. The Guardian newspaper says Iran has said it is suppressing any aggression as tensions rise in the Persian Gulf. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif also spoke with CBS News stressing he was certain that Tehran would not start the war, but the starter of war certainly is not the one who ends it.

According to the report, Riyadh has announced that it sees Iran as the responsible for the attacks until the outcome of the investigation is revealed, but Zarif once again dismissed Tehran’s involvement in the attacks, saying that if independent and impartial investigations were carried out, Iran it reveals that Iran has no involvement in it.

Most analysts see the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran as the starting point for the tensions and do not see the higher possibility of conflict between Iran and the United States for various reasons.

R.T.E News Network on the possibility of a confrontation between the two states underlined that neither side sought a war, especially as Trump promised during the election campaign to withdraw the US troops from the Middle East. He even promised to reduce the number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan; Washington refused to intervene widely in Yemen. The White House fears it will voluntarily or mistakenly engage with Iran and suddenly get caught in a full-fledged war. Iranian analysts have so far avoided targeting the US troops and have indicated that they do not want to clash with the country.

According to the above analysis, Saudi Arabia and Israel are allies of the US, but Iran also has friends who block any US action in the Security Council. Washington, on the other hand, is reluctant to clash with Iran because of fears of war and the potential for widespread expansion, but as sanctions continue the US is intensifying the tensions.

Even US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was the first White House official to accuse Iran of attacking Saudi oil facilities, recently said that the whole purpose of the White House is to pursue a diplomatic course with Iran. He expressed this view after his recent visit to Riyadh; a move Western analysts say is a sign of a sharp decline in Washington’s saber-rattling with Iran. The Guardian quotes several sources in the White House as saying Trump is deeply reluctant to launch another conflict in the Middle East because he is trying to reduce the number of US troops in the region while he is contemplating a presidential election.

According to this analysis, many Trump critics insist that Washington has no commitment to Riyadh and should not exert pressure on itself. On the other hand, they blame Trump for focusing too much on the anti-Iranian approach of maximum pressure because they see this as a factor that has put the region on the brink of war.

The New York Times also believes that although Trump is pursuing the defense of Saudi Arabia, he has no intention of attacking Iran. More US troops are being sent to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in this context, for psychological reasons.