Israel's decision to launch a large -scale military operation against Iran may have been a shock for many, but it is something that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been anxious to do for more than a decade. The question now is whether President Trump will end up holding an Israeli bombing campaign that could last days, if not weeks.
The fact that Israel carried out the operation several days before the envoy of the Middle East of Trump, Steve Witkoff, was scheduled to meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi for a sixth round of nuclear conversations in Oman did not miss in most observers.
Netanyahu has not particularly supported the diplomatic scope of the Trump administration to the Iranians and As reported, pressed The White House to the joint traces of the green-Israeli light against Tehran's nuclear facilities last month. Trump demured, choosing diplomacy instead, but Netanyahu seems to have never believed that conversations would result in something substantial.
Israel's negotiation position has been maximum for a long time: all nuclear complexes in the Iranian soil must be destroyed, and under no circumstances could they even stay with a rudimentary uranium enrichment capacity. Trump's position is not as definitive as Netanyahu's. Sometimes, US officials have talked about reaching an agreement that would allow Iranians to continue enriching themselves at a low level with strict and integral international supervision. On other occasions, Trump has declared that Washington will not sign any agreement that would allow Iran enriching at all.
Several proposals have been made in the months since these negotiations began, including a regional nuclear consortium that involves Iran, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and other powers, which could avoid an indigenous Iranian enrichment program, but still provide the Pacific Nuclear Energy region to the region, and also derive the possibility of a career of weapons in the Middle East. The Iranians, however, not Buy the idea that no enrichment in the Iranian soil would be allowed.
The Military Attack of Israel Alta The diplomatic chess board, as it is, turning the last months of US discussions. UU. They will go into a empty theater. Trump claims He knew what Israel was doing all the time and congratulated Netanyahu for the attack. That only makes it difficult to imagine the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei authorizing their subordinates to continue discussions with Americans. To do so would be a very public act of weakness on the part of Tehran.
Even so, the White House still expects Iranian officials to appear for the next round of conversations. As Trump argued after the initial Israeli save, Iran is no longer in a position to reject. “I could not take them to an agreement in 60 days” Trump saidreferring to the Iranians. “They were close, they should have done it. Maybe now it happens.”
Actually, which is likely to see is a collapse of the current diplomatic process and a situation that will be much more disorderly to handle.
Israeli political and military officers have made it clear that military operations will persist until next week and may continue even more than that. The Iranians, in turn, will feel pressure to continue taking reprisals with every day that passes, either in the form of drones and missiles aimed at Israel's aerial defenses, terrorist attacks against Western objectives or sabotage load ships in the Persian Gulf. In any case, the Middle East is as close to a large -scale war as it has been.
This is a critical moment for the Trump administration, and how it chooses to act in the hours and days that will be the determining factor in the United States is dragged to another regional conflagration or not.
Israel will do what you think you should do to maintain your safety. Even assuming that Trump would try to press Netanyahu to stop the bombings (the evidence of that scenario is scarce, he barely guarantees that the Israeli prime minister listens. For better or for worse, Israel's strategic calculation has changed after the attacks of October 7, 2023. Netanyahu is now much less adverse to the risk than during his previous periods.
The United States can only control what you can control. As much as Trump would like to see the largest state sponsor in the beaten world, he also does not want to help a conflict that can expose tens of thousands of US troops based in the middle eastern the imminent risk. In addition, any participation of the United States in offensive Israeli military operations would be a betrayal of Trump's central supporters and its campaign promises to avoid fruitless and endless wars. In addition, American offensive participation would kill any great diplomatic ambition that Trump can have in the Middle East and nibble the axis of the administration to the Indo-Pacific while China tries to consolidate its power in Asia.
Sometimes, the best response to a dangerous situation is to do nothing. He will not satisfy the most aggressive elements in Washington, but hopefully Trump sets on fire.
Daniel R. dependris is a member of the defense priorities.
Perspectives
Times Insights It offers an analysis generated by the voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear in any news article.
point of view
Perspective
The following content generated by AI works perplexed. Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
- Israel's attack to Iran reflects the objective of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities, with Israel demanding the complete destruction of all Iranian nuclear facilities and an enrichment prohibition of Uranium[3].
- The United States previously resisted Israeli pressure for joint strikes, opting for diplomacy, but Netanyahu's actions have destabilized the nuclear conversations in the course of the United States. UU. Iran, which included proposals as a regional nuclear consortium[3].
- The administration of President Trump faces a dilemma: support for Israel's campaign runs the risk of dragging the United States to a broader conflict of the Middle East, endangering troops and undermining efforts to pivot the strategic approach to counteract China in Asia[3].
- The restriction by the United States is aligned with Trump's promises to avoid new wars and could avoid greater escalation, even if he frustrates Hawks in Washington[3].
Different views on the subject
- The United States has the strategic obligation to help Israel defensive, as evidenced by its role in the interception of Iranian missiles, to defend regional stability and deter further to the Iranian aggression[1][3].
- Allow IR will retain any uranium enrichment capacity, risk nuclear proliferation, which makes proactive military actions necessary to neutralize threats before they materialize[2][3].
- The continuous diplomatic commitment, such as the planned conversations of the United States.[2][3].
- Not decisively supporting Israel could be emboldened to Iran and its representatives, increasing the probability of asymmetric attacks against US interests in the Middle East[1][2].
