The White House is trying to manage the 'optics' of starting an unprovoked war on Iran
News Desk - The Cradle
Advisors to US President Donald Trump are “privately arguing that an Israeli attack would trigger Iran to retaliate, helping muster support from American voters for a U.S. strike,” POLITICO wrote, citing two people familiar with the discussions.
“The calculus is a political one – that more Americans would stomach a war with Iran if the United States or an ally were attacked first,” the magazine added.
According to recent polls, a majority of US voters support Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-time goal of regime change in Iran, but do not support risking the death of US troops to accomplish it.
Influential conservative journalist Tucker Carlson has expressed his opposition to any attack on Iran, saying it would be done on behalf of Israel.
“What I really object to, what makes me mad, is when American leaders, whose job it is to represent Americans, are more loyal to a foreign country than they are to their own,” he said on Saturday.
Trump’s advisors are therefore considering the optics of how an attack is conducted and what justification is best to use, such as Iran’s nuclear program.
“There’s thinking in and around the administration that the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us, and give us more reason to take action,” said one of the people familiar with discussions.
POLITICO noted that negotiations with Iran are appearing less and less likely to succeed; therefore, “the primary question is becoming when and how the US attacks.”
Whether or not Israel attacks Iran first, as it did during the 12-day war on the Islamic Republic in June, “the likeliest scenario may be a jointly launched US-Israel operation,” the two people speaking with POLITICO said.
Trump is under pressure from the Israeli prime minister, who visited the White House last week to insist that US negotiators demand that Iran give up its nuclear program, ballistic missile program, and its support for resistance movements in the region, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and Ansarallah in Yemen.
A third round of indirect negotiations between Iran and the US, held in Geneva on Thursday, concluded after several hours of talks described as “positive” by Omani mediators.
However, reports said Washington stuck to its “tough” demands and is only offering “minimal” sanctions relief.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei referred to US demands as “contradictory,” adding that “US leaders should focus on negotiations rather than sending mixed messages.”
Despite the talks, those closest to the president say that “we’re going to bomb them,” one of the people familiar with discussions told POLITICO.
However, this raises fears that the US military’s supplies of missile defense interceptors will quickly be depleted while seeking to stop barrages of Iranian ballistic missiles on US warships and bases in the region.
“There’s a high likelihood of American casualties. And that comes with lots of political risk,” said one person familiar with the discussions.
US supplies of missile interceptors are already low after defending Israel during its war against Iran in June and following years of transfers to Ukraine, its war against Russia.
No comments:
Post a Comment