Between Preemptive Strikes and Diplomacy, Trump Wavers in Iran Standoff
Joseph Stepansky
U.S. President Donald Trump has sent mixed signals on Iran in the past week, threatening military escalation while expressing hope for a lasting ceasefire. Analysts say the 'madman' tactic reveals a strategic dilemma as the administration navigates a tense standoff with Tehran.
In a week that began with revelations that he was just an hour away from 'making a decision' to resume attacks on Iran, U.S. President Donald Trump has oscillated between hope for a lasting ceasefire and threats of military escalation.
Trump's contradictory messages came alongside a new round of diplomatic activity, as Iran said it had received and was reviewing Washington's response to Tehran's latest ceasefire proposal.
Meanwhile, Trump appeared to hint at a third option: a prolonged, war-of-attrition conflict. On Thursday, he shared an op-ed from the New York Post by Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the pro-Israel Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank that has backed military action against Tehran.
Headlined 'Here’s How to Crush Tehran in Three Steps,' the piece called for the U.S. to 'maintain the blockade and accompanying economic warfare,' 'remake the world in the image of American energy dominance,' and 'direct the U.S. military to force open the Strait of Hormuz to restore freedom of navigation on our terms, not Tehran’s.'
The move followed U.S. media reports that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a tense phone call on Tuesday about the future of the Iran war. Netanyahu is said to have pressed the U.S. to resume strikes, while Trump resisted new attacks, hoping for a deal.
Trump did not confirm the report, but when asked on Wednesday, he said of Netanyahu: 'He’s a very good man, he’ll do whatever I want him to do.'
What Trump said this week
The Trump administration has issued broad and sometimes contradictory messages on Iran, even before the war began. The U.S. and Israel launched strikes on February 28 amid ongoing U.S.-Iran talks on Tehran’s nuclear program.
The current truce, which began on April 8, came after Trump issued some of the conflict’s most belligerent threats, warning that 'a whole civilization will die' if no deal was reached.
Professor Sina Azodi, a Middle East politics expert at George Washington University, said: 'If you sit in Tehran, you’re not sure whether the president is actually serious about reaching an agreement, because every day, every few hours, the president shifts his stance, threatening Iranians with an attack.'
The unpredictability continued this week. On Sunday, Trump warned that 'time is running out' for Iran. But on Monday, he said new attacks were 'on hold' pending requests from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Trump said 'serious negotiations' were underway.
On Tuesday, Trump told reporters he was 'an hour away from making a decision' to resume strikes but instead agreed to give Iran a few 'days' to return to talks. 'It could be Friday, Saturday, Sunday—something—maybe early next week; a limited time,' he said.
On Wednesday, Trump again signaled the U.S. could go either way. 'We’re at the final stage on Iran. We’ll see what happens. Either there’s a deal, or we’ll do some pretty bad things, but hopefully that won’t happen,' he said.
Strategic dilemma
While Trump’s supporters describe the 'anything possible' approach as part of a broader 'madman' foreign policy, others see it as reflecting the president’s inherent dilemma as he seeks a decisive victory in the conflict.
Maintaining the status quo or escalating to new strikes risks ripple effects on the U.S. economy, eroding support for Trump’s handling of the war. Meanwhile, the administration may feel that any deal with Iran on the nuclear program must be seen as surpassing the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump pulled out of in 2018.
Omar Rahman, a scholar at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, said Tehran has found an 'extraordinary coercive tool' in its ability to control the Strait of Hormuz, boosting its negotiating leverage. 'In this impasse, the escalation trap is waiting,' Rahman wrote, 'offering the thin promise that applying more force could turn the tide in Trump’s favor.'
On Thursday, the deadlock appeared to persist, with Trump vowing to seize Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, a prospect Tehran has repeatedly called unacceptable. He also again rejected the possibility of Tehran imposing transit fees through the Strait of Hormuz, one of Iran’s earlier demands.
