US President Duland Trump’s attitude toward conflict Israel – Iran It is constantly changing: from the open support of Israeli attacks, to statements of distancing – again back.
While The battles between Israel and Iran escalatethis ambiguity intensifies the pervasive sense Trump From the G7 summit in Canada, notes in its analysis BBC.
He simply said that there were ‘Important things’ in Washington to which he had to return and face in Washington. The White House said his departure was related to “what was happening in the Middle East”, and later on the Truth Social platform he made it clear that leaving “had nothing to do with a ceasefire”.
Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had stated that the attacks were “fully coordinated” with the US.
What exactly affects Trump’s decisions and what are the choices he has right now?
1. To succumb to Netanyahu’s pressures and escalate
As Israeli rockets fired against Tehran on Thursday, Trump threatened Iran’s leadership with “even tougher” attacks by his Israeli allies with US bombs.
Trump’s supreme goal is known. Like Netanyahu, he says Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. In essence, he has stated that the choice he prefers (unlike this time with Netanyahu) is to be reached through an agreement between the US and Iran (this option reflects the image of the negotiating international standards, which Trump himself promotes for himself).
However, the road to this deal is blurry: Trump when he threatens with military action and when he promotes diplomacy.
Last week, he even said that an Israeli attack on Iran would facilitate an agreement or “prevent” it.
Trump’s unpredictable behavior is described as a “strategy” by his supporters – the so -called “crazy” theory in international relations.
This theory has also been used in the past to describe Trump’s negotiating methods and is based on the fact that uncertainty and ambiguity regarding the possibility of escalation is aimed at acting as coercion for opponents (or even allies in Trump).
Some of Trump’s advisers and supporters support her approach ‘Maximum pressure’ As for Iran. They believe that the threats will prevail in the end, as they claim – Iran does not take the prospect of negotiations seriously (although in 2015 the country signed an Obama nuclear agreement, but Trump later retired).
Netanyahu has exerted constant pressures on Trump to follow the military rather than the diplomatic roadand the US president – despite his claims that he wants to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – may ultimately recognize the need to make his threats to Iran a reality.
Israel is also likely to exert even greater backstage pressures for greater American intervention so that ‘To finish work’. The US has bombs that Israel believes they can destroy Uran’s Uranium Underground Installation in Forto, the most powerful fortified nuclear facility of Tehran.
As attacks are escalating, there is also pressure on Trump by Republicans in Congress, who have long been demanding a change in regime in Iran.
2. The average solution
At present, Trump reiterates that the US is not involved in Israel’s attacks.
Any escalation poses serious risks to him, who could mark his political hysteria. US destroyers and ground rockets are already helping Israel’s defense against the Iranian counterattack.
Some of Trump’s advisers to the National Security Council may warn him not to do anything that could increase the intensity of Israel’s attacks on Iran in the coming days, especially with some Iranian missiles violating American-Israeli defenses.
Netanyahu now argues that the targeting of Iran’s top leader, Ali Hameni, will end, instead of escalating, the conflict.
However, an US official informed some news agencies over the weekend that Trump made it clear that he was opposed to such a move.
3. Reduces under the weight of Maga and ‘America First’
A decisive factor that affects Trump is internal pressures.
The majority of Republicans continue to support Israel, including the ongoing supply of US weapons. Many have strongly supported Israel’s attacks on Iran.
However, there are important voices within the Maga (Make America Great Again) movement who now categorically reject this traditional “steadfast” support for Israel. In recent days they have been wondering why the US is at risk of being involved in a war in the Middle East, given the promise of foreign policy by name Trump’s “First America”.
The philosopher journalist Tucker Carlson He wrote a caustic criticism on Friday, saying that the US government’s claims that he was not involved were not true and that the US should “give up Israel”. He implied that Netanyahu “and the thirsty war of his government” were acting in a way that would drag US troops to fight for him.
Carlson wrote: “Participation would be like showing the middle finger to the millions of voters who voted in the hope of creating a government that would finally put the US above all.”
Similarly, a strong faithful to Trump MP Marjori Taylor Green wrote on the X platform that: “Anyone who strongly demands that the US be fully involved in the Israel-Iran war is not with American first/Maga.”
This may also be the Achilles’ heel of Trump: he is pushing him to distance himself from the Israeli attack and there is any evidence, at least publicly, that he has responded to this pressure.
Iran has already threatened to attack US bases in the region if, as is already the case, Washington helps Israel’s defense.
The risk of losses of US soldiers or civilians may exponentially boost the voice of Maga’s isolationer, by applying additional pressure to Trump to back and call Netanyahu to rapid de -escalation.
It remains to be seen which road Trump will choose …
BBC information