OPINION | Ironically, Iran and Israel have the same aims, prolong the war. US is stuck

Trump and the US might be looking for an exit strategy

The war in the Middle East is third week, there is little to indicate that a resolution is in sight. It appears as though Israel, the US and Iran have dug in their heels. The killing of Ali Larijani is likely to further escalate the tensions.

As we look back at the three weeks of hostilities, it is increasingly clear that the parties involved in the conflict have differing objectives. For the US, as the war drags on, there is growing pressure on the Trump Administration to find an exit strategy. The Israelis on the other hand are more than happy to extend the fighting and weaken the Iranian regime further.

Meanwhile Iran has understood the growing pressures on the US to end the war and the economic fallout of blocking the Strait of Hormuz. They would be looking to hold on for a few more weeks, further increasing the pressure on the US. The coming sections will break down these objectives more closely.

US’ miscalculations

It is now safe to conclude that the US came into the war expecting a quick victory. The successful removal of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela led the Americans to believe that a similar operation could be replicated in Iran. On the first day of the conflict, when Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed, the US expected the regime to collapse. Instead, not only has the regime survived, it has struck back at US and Israeli interests across the Middle East. In fact, Iran has shown a willingness to expand the conflict, dragging in the US’ Middle Eastern allies into the battle.

The war has already gone on much longer than the US anticipated. Trump is well aware of the American public’s aversion to getting involved in protracted foreign conflicts. Adding to this, American public will soon feel the economic impact of the conflict through rising oil prices, which will push inflation northwards.

Trump is therefore in a dilemma. On the one hand, he wants to find an exit strategy quickly.  On the other hand, a hasty retreat, or a unilateral cease fire would be interpreted as a sign of defeat.

Trump would therefore be looking for an opportunity to ‘declare’ victory and then push for negotiations. The reports of US Amphibious Assault Ships moving towards the region is an indication of this. Trump could look to take control over Kharg Island, call a victory and then push for negotiations. Given its importance to Iran’s oil exports, taking control of Kharg Island or even damaging the oil infrastructure on it will help Trump claim victory and then push for negotiations.

Israel’s Long Game  

While Trump and the US would be looking for an exit strategy, Israel is clearly prepared for a longer battle. Behind the scenes there are growing differences between the Americans and Israelis over their war objectives. The resignation of Trump’s Counter Terrorism Chief Joe Kent, underscores this growing divergence. Unlike the US, Israel’s objectives are far more maximalist. Their longer-term goal is not just to enforce regime change but also to degrade Iran’s military and economic capabilities to such an extent that they cease to be a threat.

This is similar to what has happened in Syria, Lebanon or Iraq. Long drawn conflicts have weakened these adversaries to such an extent that none of them pose a meaningful threat. The Israelis would be looking to do something similar in Iran. Indications are that the Israelis would want to prolong this for a lot longer. Israel’s operation to take down Ali Larijani clearly highlights this objective. With Larijani gone, the likelihood of a negotiations in the short-term is less likely.

Iran is Playing for Time  

Iran had been wargaming this exact scenario since last year’s 12-day confrontation. For the Iranian regime mere survival, is a sign of victory. Two points are very clear to the Iranian Regime, and this is likely going to dictate their strategy. Firstly, they know that time is not on the US’ side. As discussed earlier, as the war drags on there will be growing pressure on Trump to find an exit strategy. Secondly, Iran is aware of the leverage they have on the global economic system. The Strait of Hormuz is a vital chock point. The longer it is blocked, the higher the global economic costs of the war.

Keeping both these factors in mind, Iran is clearly playing for time. The longer the current regime is able to survive, the stronger their position is going to be on the negotiating table. The actions and statements coming out of Iran clearly indicate this strategy. By attacking ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, they have virtually shut down the waterways. Iran has demonstrated that they have near total control over who can and cannot pass through the Strait of Hormuz. They have also pushed back against any US outreach of negotiations clearly indicating their willingness to drag the war on for longer and to increase the economic costs.

Keeping these diverging objectives in mind, it is clear why any attempt at negotiations or de-escalation has not yielded any results. There is a growing divide between the Americans and Israelis regarding the war objectives. By taking out Ali Larijani Israel is clearly pushing the US towards escalation. Iran for its part is playing for time, increasing the economic costs for everyone involved and waiting for the domestic pressure on Trump to escalate. At the moment, the question is who is likely to blink first?

(Sanjal Shastri, Assistant Professor of International Studies, FLAME University.)

Views are personal, and do not represent the stand of this publication.