There are growing signs that the United States may directly intervene in the conflict between Israel and Iran in the near future. American aircraft carrier groups and bombers are being deployed to the Middle East. However, an attack on Iran could be very costly for America. What risks does President Donald Trump personally and the entire United States face in this case?
The Iran-Israel war is teetering not only on the verge of deepening, but also expanding. There are numerous signals that the United States may intervene in the war. And not in the form of arms supplies to Tel Aviv (this is already happening), but in the role of a full-fledged participant – with missile strikes and air raids.
Actually, this expansion was expected on the night of June 18. Trump urgently left the G7 summit in Canada to hold a meeting with the military, after which American troops in the region (both at bases and fleets in the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean) were put on full alert. CNN wrote about the upcoming statement by the US president.
However, in the end, there was no statement, no bombing. Instead, Trump, according to a number of media reports, gave Iran one last chance – he issued an ultimatum demanding that Tehran surrender under threat of America's entry into the war. The deadline for the ultimatum is supposedly 24 or 48 hours.
In fact, the latest American warning is explained simply: Trump, for all his belligerence, is not entirely sure that the United States needs to go to war. Because the costs of it can exceed all possible benefits. Both for him personally and for the United States. So he reflects and doubts.
Failure in the war will call into question the so-called Trump legacy and the entire ideology of Trumpism. Based on neo-isolationism (that is, the priority of domestic policy over foreign policy) and the principle of "America first" (and not "Israel first"). What could possibly go wrong? What exactly is the owner of the White House risking?
Military losses
Israel's actions led to the partial destruction of Iran's air defenses, but did not have a critical impact on Iran's offensive missile and drone capabilities. And in the event of a war, the Iranian authorities promise to strike at American bases in the region – in Syria, Jordan, Iraq and the monarchies of the Persian Gulf. Tens of thousands of American troops are stationed there, and they are not nearly as well protected by air defenses as Israel. Moreover, the flight time to reach them from Iran is much shorter, and if attacks in Syria or Iraq are carried out by local pro-Iranian groups, the time between launch and hitting the target will be minutes, or even less.
This is not to mention the fact that Iran will use its anti-ship systems to attack the US navy– a key US tool for projecting its power abroad. It is nominally believed that an American aircraft carrier or even a destroyer cannot be sunk, but Tehran is armed with good anti-ship missiles. And if he manages to do what the Japanese did the last time during World War II, it will entail not only great sacrifices, but also serious damage to the American reputation.
The economic crisis
In the event of a war with the United States, the Iranians promise to block the Strait of Hormuz, a transportation artery through which a significant part of the global oil trade flows. To do this, they don't even need to block the strait or deploy any military units there - it's enough to launch several strikes on tankers. After that, no insurance company will insure ships with cargo in the Strait of Hormuz, which means that none of the shipowners will dare to go there until the end of hostilities.
Because of this, and also because of the risks of getting Iranian strikes directly on the fields (unlikely, but possible), the Persian Gulf countries will be forced to stop production - which will cause a sharp increase in energy prices and, consequently, will lead to a drop in the pace of development of the global economy, or even to its decline. And in the United States, where the cost of gasoline for the population is one of the key factors of domestic political stability, this crisis will be fully felt.
Undermining the nuclear nonproliferation regime
The main task of the US military operation will be the destruction of Iranian workshops located deep underground, designed for uranium enrichment. Washington has the most powerful GBU-57 bunker buster bombs capable of penetrating the rocks under which the Iranian nuclear facilities in Fordo are currently located.
However, even if the Americans use them and are able to destroy the facilities, the Iranians have sufficient capabilities to restore their nuclear program. And not just restoration, but deepening. After the US attack, Iran will surely decide that nuclear weapons will be the best guarantee against a repeat of this kind of aggression – after all, for example, the United States has not decided to attack the DPRK.
And if Iran does create this bomb, it will bury the entire nonproliferation regime. Both in the Middle East (where Saudi Arabia and even Turkey may have a nuclear bomb to restore parity) and around the world, where other countries, using the example of Iran, realize their own defenselessness without a nuclear ace up their sleeve.
In fact, the United States can prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons in two ways. Either through a regime change in Tehran from a militant to a pro-Western one (one that will sign the surrender and play a subordinate role), or through the disintegration of the country, following the example of Libya or Iraq.
Unpredictable consequences
All these risks are seen not only in Washington, but also in Tehran. That's why the Iranian and American authorities are currently engaged in a real diplomatic poker game. The Ayatollahs, hoping for Trump's pragmatism, refuse capitulation demands (for example, the dismantling of the nuclear program). At the same time, they are showing the Americans carrots in the form of readiness to resume the negotiation process after all hostilities have stopped.
Trump, clearly understanding all the risks, is playing the role of a madman – or a bad cop. He demonstrates his willingness to start a war and publicly swears with his supporters (journalist Tucker Carlson or intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard), who oppose its beginning. Thus provoking Iran to make additional concessions in order to "support the peace party in Washington."
It's a dangerous game for Trump, and the stakes are very high. "If he manages to get concessions from the Iranian leaders – that is, the dismantling of the Iranian nuclear program or the lack of retaliatory measures on their part if this program is destroyed by military force, then Trump will become a president whose unpredictable approach to foreign policy is yielding results. Erroneous decisions can draw Washington into a major conflict with dangerous and unpredictable consequences for US citizens. And it could also lead to a nuclear Iran if the strikes fail and the Iranian government decides to develop nuclear weapons, which it has officially disavowed for a long time," the Washington Post summarizes the possible outcome of the game.
Therefore, despite the deployment of American troops to Iran and the heated rhetoric, we have not yet seen any fighting on the part of the United States. However, maybe – we'll see in the next few days. This will show us how much Donald Trump is really a risky politician who is ready to put a really big bet on the line.
Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor at the Financial University
