The United States and Iran may face a confrontation soon after President-elect Donald Trump takes office. Officials around the world “expect Trump to face an Iran crisis in 2025,” said Axios.
Iran’s nuclear advances mean Trump will have to choose whether to “neutralize the threat” using diplomacy and pressure tactics — or whether to order a military strike. Trump arguably brought this situation upon himself: His decision in 2018 to abandon an Obama-era nuclear deal in favor of a so-called “maximum pressure” campaign “prompted Tehran to accelerate its nuclear program.” Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons, but its progress makes it a “nuclear threshold state,” said Axios.
Tehran is making preparations. Iran’s military has “nearly doubled” the number of winter training exercises to “project strength” ahead of Trump’s inauguration, said the Financial Times. The exercises feature “new weaponry and expanded participation of brigades engaged in realistic operations,” said Brigadier General Ali Mohammad Naeini, spokesman for Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. But Iran is under “mounting strain,” with its proxy forces in Lebanon and Syria suffering humiliating defeats since the Israel-Hamas war began in 2023, said FT.
What did the commentators say?
The second Trump administration should implement a “Maximum Pressure 2.0” campaign against Iran, said Janatan Sayeh and Saeed Ghasseminejad at The Washington Examiner. Such a pressure campaign would include “economic, diplomatic, military, intelligence, and political measures” — including cooperation with Israel’s covert campaigns inside Iran, as well as support for “antiregime Iranians” inside the country. Such efforts would build a foundation “for a future where a liberated Iran stands as a steadfast ally to the U.S.,” the duo said. Iran’s current weakness makes 2025 a “year of opportunity” for Trump.
Attacking Iran would be “wrong and illegal,” said Daniel Larison at his Eunomia Substack. Iran’s nuclear program has now advanced so far that an attack on its facilities “makes it more likely” that Tehran would make the final push to develop weapons, as a deterrent against outside forces. American leaders should “reject a military option that gives Iran an even bigger incentive to cross that line.” American policymakers have talked about attacking Iran “for decades,” Larison said. “The mindset that made the Iraq war possible is still very much with us.”
What next?
Some observers see Trump as uniquely positioned to strike a deal. “Only Trump can go to Iran,” said Sina Azodi at Foreign Policy. Trump is “widely known to be hawkish” where Iran is concerned, but has also claimed he is “not seeking a regime change.” In his second term, Trump no longer has hard-liners like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo around to urge toughness against Iran. That presents a “unique opportunity” to improve U.S.-Iran relations, Azodi said.
Iran, meanwhile, is “vulnerable but determined,” said David E. Sanger at The New York Times. Leaders in Tehran may be willing to make a “tactical retreat” on the nuclear program to avoid confrontation with the U.S., but they have “never been willing to shut down” all the country’s nuclear facilities. The question, then, is “how much risk Trump is willing to take to achieve that goal.”