In the world of Donald Trump, with himself as a protagonist, the conflict in Iran took place in three stages over a chaotic period of 48 hours.
On Saturday, it started with the American president ordering the B-2 bombers to drop bunker bombs On Iranian nuclear installationsSending the United States to the War of Israel with the Islamic Republic.
Sunday, Asset Floated the prospect of “regime change” in Tehran, delighting traditional hawks of republican foreign policy, but alarming its right -wing isolationist allies.
Then, on Monday, just when the 79-year-old president seemed to hide the United States with the neoconservant interventionist strategy of the Middle East of the George W Bush era, he said that the axes would be buried.
“Congratulations to everyone!” Trump said on Truth Social, announcing that Israel and Iran had agreed to a “complete and total ceasefire” which would start in a few hours. The end of the conflict, which he nicknamed “the 12 -day war”, would be greeted by the world.
The trigger for the abrupt and even surreal transition from Trump to reconciliation was the limited nature of the Iranian response to the bombing of the American weekend.
While Tehran pulled missiles at the great American military base in Qatar on Monday, he did it after giving Washington, “Trump said. Unlike the American strikes, which, according to him, had “completely destroyed” the nuclear sites of Iran, the Tehran dam left the American base – and its staff – unharmed.
Iran’s head courses have revealed once again how the American president alternates between windy threats, efforts to reduce agreements, extreme measures and sudden victory laps – even when important problems are at stake.
Trade negotiators and global investors are experiencing the search for Trump’s policy, while he has slapped high prices on many American business partners before making some of them. But on national security, the divided personality of the president brought it publicly desire For the Nobel Peace Prize at the launch of a direct assault against Iran.
The last change towards peace deserves caution. Evidence The fact that the American bombing stiffening destroyed Iran’s nuclear installations was not established on Monday and that Iran and Israel’s response to the ceasefire – or its durability – were also unknown.
But by planting the regime change seeds, experts in foreign policy in Washington said Trump had increased pressure on the supreme chief of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to make more concessions to the negotiation table and not pursue reprisals – or cope with a possible American effort to end his reign.
“”[Trump] It is said: “There is so much more that we could do to attack the tendons of the power of this regime and its main institutions. And if you retaliate in a way that gives us a reason to do more, you must be aware that this is where it goes, “said Dennis Ross, the former American envoy of the Middle East and peace negotiator.
Zineb Riboua of the Hudson Institute Center in the Middle East, said Iran’s air strikes on Iran this month had also shown Trump to what extent the country was “vulnerable”.
“I think [Trump] realizes that a collapse is a possible scenario, and it could also take credit. I think that’s where her head is, ”she said.
The signals of the administration on its intentions have been mixed from the American strikes. On Sunday morning, senior American officials, including vice-president JD Vance and defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, did everything possible to say that the United States did not seek the change of diet in Tehran. Their statements were undermined by Trump floating the possibility of a new Iranian leadership later during the day.
The White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the president’s comments on Monday,
“If the Iranian regime refuses to come to a peaceful diplomatic solution – in which the president is still interested in engaging – why should the Iranian people not carry the power of this incredibly violent regime?” Said Leavitt on Fox.
Maga Loyalists were angry with the transition to change of diet, but relieved the apparent result after Trump announced the ceasefire.
“Thank you, President Trump, for having continued peace!” wrote Marjorie Taylor Greene on X.
Trump’s strike and his comments on the Iranian leadership praised more neoconservative Republicans such as Nikki Haley, his presidential rival in 2024, and his former national security advisor John Bolton.
Some of his supporters tried to go back their faith in the president with his topping.
Charlie Kirk, the eminent host of the conservative and militant media of Maga, insisted that Trump was looking for a “ascending” revolution in Iran, rather than a change in government imposed by the United States. “President Trump talks about an organic uprising. America cannot be involved in an effort of energetic decapitation in Persia,” he wrote on X.
Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that Trump would still prefer “a negotiated end to this conflict, and a diplomatic solution that could include relief from the substantial sanction if Iran plays its cards correctly”.
Comparisons with the invasion of Iraq by Bush in 2003 were defective, he said, even if Israel – the American ally – began to attack certain pillars of the Iranian regime, such as his notorious prison of Evin.
“Even if he decides to target certain assets sensitive to the regime as the Israelis began to do so today, we are still far from the execution of the change of regime and to be responsible for the successor government as we were in Iraq in 2003,” said Satloff.
Meanwhile, Trump’s call has “no additional hatred” in the Middle East can still give way to another twist – and more climbing.
Rajan Menon, professor emeritus of political science at the City College of New York, said that Trump would believe that Iran weakened would now sign a nuclear agreement – but that was not guaranteed.
“To avoid diet changes, they must show that the diet is in control and is not rushing towards a foreign power.”
