Since the 1980s, a climate of military escalation between the United States and Iran has reigned constantly in the Middle East. Nothing new, except the context and motives for each spike in tension.
So we need to look at the scenarios and prospects for such escalation. This is not just because it is a recurring scenario. It’s also because it’s given the circumstances. The likelihood of military escalation is perhaps the lowest in the history of US-Iranian skirmishes.
Rationality and strategic calculations suggest that a spiral of military escalation is unlikely to lead to a direct confrontation between the United States and Iran, either all-out or limited. But, in an analytical spirit, another determining factor must be taken into account. This is almost the only common denominator between the two sides in this context. Both President Trump and the Iranian mullahs are living a tense internal situation.
This situation may outweigh the concern of both sides not to cross the dividing line that each side has drawn in this conflict, to stick to the brinkmanship policy and not to slide to the fringes of direct confrontation.
Both sides have proven their ability to master the repercussions of the crisis that accompanied the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, in an American attack in Iraq.
The mullahs did not react emotionally. They preferred a strategy of propaganda and media hype. And to avoid a more severe US Reaction, they have settled for a calculated missile response. Militarily, in all tactical, operational and psychological accounts, going to war at a time when the world is struggling with the scourge of coronavirus would be the worst option for the Trump administration.
It will only deepen the internal rift. It would set in motion a clash between the White House and the Democratic Congressionals. China and Russia, two countries that support Iran, would also be angry.
Such a plan would give the Iranian mullahs a trump card. It could discredit the US Around the world at a historic moment of fluctuating and nebulous international relations. Relations between transatlantic partners are not at their best these days.
Indeed, fears are now weighing on the future of NATO, as well as on the fate of many existing international blocs and alliances. They have not proven their ability to achieve their goals and to unite their members’ efforts to address the global health threat. Psychologically, it would be a challenge for US forces to mobilise under current conditions to launch an effective military strike against Iran.
For one thing, operational and combat readiness cannot be separated from the conditions resulting from the outbreak of the epidemic, the concern of US soldiers for their families and the readiness of US health facilities at home and abroad to care for potential casualties.
But I am convinced that the decisive factor in these possibilities is, above all, President Trump’s reasoning. With his negotiating skills, he knows how to exploit opportunities and make deals, leaving aside political and strategic considerations. He can manipulate any image to serve his political interest. He sat down with Taliban representatives to make a deal. He even praised their national struggle.
This kind of mentality will never risk a full-scale or limited military confrontation against Iran when the capabilities and resources of the global superpower do not seem at all willing to foot the bill for such an affront. Let us remember, the US economy is suffering as never before. More than 30 million Americans could join the ranks of the unemployed, bringing the unemployment rate to a level never seen before in the country’s history.
All this will not be solved by the news of a limited military victory over the Iranian regime, no matter how many tweets President Trump tweets his supporters. Nor should it be forgotten that the US Congress has made any resolution of war against Iran dependent on the prior consent of legislators.
A bipartisan bill was passed restricting President Trump’s ability to wage war against Iran without congressional approval. No doubt the mullahs’ regime is taking advantage of this to put pressure on President Trump and sap his popularity. There is also no doubt that this gamble by the mullahs, which translates mainly into causing petty maritime incidents in the waters of the Gulf, making them the focus of media attention to boost their morale and that of their supporters, is risky.
President Trump still has the power to order a military strike against Iranian installations. Such an order, in an emergency situation where the strategic interests of the United States are at stake, does not need to be approved by Congress.
The mullahs’ regime is overly betting on exploiting the American situation due to the coronavirus pandemic, which has had disastrous repercussions on the American economy, to push for the withdrawal of American forces from the Gulf region, believing that the United States will witness a moment of strategic retreat that could last for years to deal with the deterioration of its domestic situation and seize opportunities to widen Iran’s hegemony and influence in the Gulf waters.
It’s a risky gamble. Neither the Trump administration nor any other administration will make it happen as the strategic rivalry between the United States and China rages on.
