[Source/Observer Network Chen Sijia] Israel and Iran continue to clash, with the whole world watching whether US President Trump will intervene in this conflict and assist Israel in attacking Iran's key nuclear facilities. Global public opinion is focused on "What will happen if the US bombs Iran?"
In the opinion of analysts, direct American involvement in Israel's military action would almost certainly lead to Iranian retaliation. In the worst-case scenario, America's attack could escalate the conflict, potentially strengthening Iran's determination to protect its nuclear program, and might result in the closure of the strategically important oil shipping channel, the Strait of Hormuz, in the Gulf region. Analysts warn that if the situation develops to this point, it would not only be unfavorable for the Trump administration but also cause a sharp rise in international oil prices, having serious adverse effects on the global economy.
June 17, Tehran, Iran, was attacked by Israel. Visual China
"Military intervention may strengthen Iran's resolve"
On June 18 and 19, US "PoliticoNet" consulted eight foreign policy experts to discuss the possible impacts of US military intervention.
Ryan Crocker, a foreign and security expert at the RAND Corporation, said that if the US launches an attack directly, Iran may have two choices: return to the negotiation table to seek to retain uranium enrichment capabilities through negotiations, or retaliate by blocking the Strait of Hormuz, attacking energy infrastructure in the Gulf area, or attacking US military and diplomatic targets in the region.
He pointed out that although Israel's air strikes weakened Iran's military power, Iran still has the capability to retaliate.
Crocker, who served as the US ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria, Kuwait, and Lebanon, believes that the US will respond "on a large scale" to retaliatory measures, but it is unlikely that aerial power alone can destroy Iran's nuclear project, "They all know that neither Israel nor the US can kill all the nuclear scientists."
Crocker warned that the US might use military intervention to force Iran into an agreement to abandon uranium enrichment capabilities, but it could also lead to the escalation of conflicts, which in turn might strengthen Iran's determination to maintain its nuclear program.
"It depends on how targets are chosen"
Dennis Ross, a Middle East envoy of the Washington Near East Policy Institute, believes that the impact of the US bombing Iran mainly depends on the targets selected by the US and how they are publicly stated.
"If the president says that our strike is only aimed at Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons, and the US will not attack other locations, then the conflict may be contained," Ross said. "However, if the US decides on a wide-ranging bombardment or considers regime change, then the Iranian leadership may feel that they have nothing left to lose, and the best option is to show that they have the ability to make us pay a heavy price."
Ross pointed out that if the conflict escalates, Iran may block the Strait of Hormuz, which will push up oil prices, to the disadvantage of the Trump administration. He analyzed that Iran does not want to go to war with the US, "but if Trump considers launching a broad-scale attack on Iran, he needs to take into account the choices Iran can inflict pain on the US and deploy troops to deal with emergencies."
"Starting a war is easier than ending one"
Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group, a political risk consulting company, pointed out that so far, the Iranian leadership has shown great restraint, focusing on retaliating against Israel without taking actions to disrupt the passage of oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, attacking energy infrastructure in the Gulf region, or striking US military targets.
He believed that perhaps the conflict would not escalate if the US only participated in attacking the Fordo nuclear facility, but it is difficult to predict further developments. "What if radical factions within Iran's military leadership, which has been severely damaged, decide to act? Or, if Israel is not satisfied with destroying the Fordo nuclear facility and decides to attack Iran's leadership? Starting a war is much easier than ending it."
Fordo nuclear facility in Iran, IC Photo
"The core task of Iran's leadership is the survival of the regime"
Jonathon Panikoff, director of the Scowcroft Initiative on Middle East Security at the Atlantic Council and former official of the US National Intelligence Council, also believed that the intensity of Iran's retaliation would depend on the targets chosen by the US if the US intervenes.
But he pointed out that after Trump ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds Force, in 2020, Iran did not launch a large-scale attack as expected by the outside world. The retaliatory measures taken by Iran at that time did not result in the death of US personnel, and tensions quickly eased.
"Now, Iran's retaliatory capabilities are further restricted; their deadliest weapon inventories are nearly depleted, their most vital regional ally, Hezbollah in Lebanon, has been weakened, and the US is a more challenging opponent than Israel," Panikoff said. "Although the Supreme Leader of Iran needs to balance various factions, the leadership of Iran has a unified mission: the survival of the regime. They understand that retaliatory actions leading to significant deaths and destruction in the US will greatly increase risks."
Panikoff said that US assistance to Israel in attacking Iran's nuclear facilities could possibly reduce the threats facing Israel. "By then, Iran will have to decide whether to spend billions of dollars trying to rebuild something that will likely be lost again."
"There are reasons for the US to attack all leadership and military bases in Iran"
Regarding which targets the US might attack in Iran, Robert A. Pope, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, said that if the US intervenes in the conflict, it will certainly launch attacks on Iran's Fordo nuclear facility and Natanz nuclear facility at the first moment. These are the most critical targets; otherwise, the military intervention would be meaningless.
In Pope's view, to avoid Iran attacking US bases in the Middle East, the scope of the US attack might expand across Iran. "There are motives to attack all leadership in Iran, communication chains throughout the country, and Iran's missile and military bases."
"Bombing the Fordo nuclear facility will not be the end of the conflict"
Ray Takeyh, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, analyzed that over the past week, Israel has launched large-scale air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. However, the Fordo nuclear facility located in the mountains is beyond Israel's striking capability, and only the US has the ability to destroy this facility. However, bombing this facility might completely alter the trajectory of US-Iran relations.
Takeyh said that if the US gets involved militarily, it will confirm Iran's leadership's suspicion that the US covertly pushed Israel's recent attacks. Despite the current weakening of Iran's military strength, they may attack US embassies, personnel, and military bases in the future.
Takeyh said: "Any such loss will force the US president to respond, or face political consequences for inaction. This could trigger a cycle of attacks and counterattacks. The Trump administration needs to recognize that bombing Fordo will not be the last round of attacks in this conflict."
"The conflict cannot be resolved militarily; the US should learn from this lesson"
Robin Wright, a US foreign affairs analyst, believes that the Iran-Israel conflict cannot be resolved militarily. No matter what choice the US makes, it ultimately must lead to a peace agreement between Israel and Iran.
Wright said that neither the US nor Israel has specified their long-term strategy towards Iran, increasing the risk of conflict. Trump demanded "unconditional surrender," but he did not specify whether he meant Iran should completely abandon its nuclear program and ballistic missiles or "some form of political surrender." Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu called on Iranians to "oppose the government," which clearly implies "regime change."
She pointed out: "Iran's area is more than twice that of Texas. By comparison, Gaza is roughly the size of the Philadelphia metropolitan area, and after 20 months of conflict, Israel is still at an impasse in Gaza. Iran's area is twice that of Afghanistan, where the US fought its longest war. Iran's area is three times that of Iraq, where the US fought an eight-year war that gave rise to the extremist group 'Islamic State.'"
Wright warned that before deciding whether to intervene in the Iran-Israel conflict, the US government should take these historical lessons into account.
June 18, Tel Aviv, Israel, Israeli air defense systems intercept Iranian missiles, Visual China
"Iran may choose the diplomatic path"
Arash Azizi, a contributing writer for The Atlantic and a visiting scholar at Boston University's Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer Range Future, believes that Iran now faces two choices: to escalate the conflict by attacking US targets in the Middle East, or to negotiate an agreement - which Trump sees as "surrender".
Azizi said: "I think Tehran will ultimately choose the diplomatic path and reach an agreement, which aligns with Iran's goal of maintaining its regime and also fits the mood of the Iranian people. But Iran may persist longer, hoping to wear out Trump and Israel."
White House: Trump will make a decision in two weeks
In the midst of ongoing clashes between Israel and Iran, the international community is watching to see if the US will intervene in the conflict. According to a report by the British newspaper The Guardian on June 19, one of the key prerequisites for President Trump to make a decision to strike Iran is ensuring that the GBU-57 Massive Ordinance Penetrator can effectively destroy Iran's underground Fordo nuclear facility. However, he currently has little confidence in this.
Insiders revealed that Trump was told that dropping the GBU-57 Massive Ordinance Penetrator would effectively destroy the Fordo nuclear facility, but he seemed not fully convinced of this statement, so he has not authorized the attack. At the same time, Trump may also be using the possibility of direct US military involvement to pressure Iran to return to the negotiating table.
Bloomberg and other US media reported that Trump has recently been holding meetings with senior advisors in the White House Situation Room. On June 19, White House Press Secretary Carolyn Levitte read Trump's latest statement, saying that new negotiations with Iran may take place in the "near future," and whether to join Israel in attacking Iran will be decided "within the next two weeks."
Iranian officials warn: US intervention will plunge the region into "hell"
In response to the threat of US intervention in the Iran-Israel conflict, Iranian officials said last week that they were "seriously considering" blocking the Strait of Hormuz. On June 19, the Iraqi Shia armed organization "Asaib Ahl al-Haq" threatened that if the US intervened in the conflict between Israel and Iran, the organization would block the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
The Strait connects the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea and is an important maritime channel for oil transportation in the Gulf region, carrying about one-fifth of the world's total oil supply. This corridor is only 33 kilometers wide at its narrowest point and concentrates the energy exports of major Persian Gulf countries such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, Kuwait, and Iran.
Alex Younger, former head of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, told the BBC that his worst-case scenario prediction includes blocking this waterway: "Closing the Strait of Hormuz will have a huge impact on oil prices, causing serious economic problems."
Analysts pointed out that if Iran really blocks the strait, it may have a significant impact on international oil prices. Reuters reported that Citibank analysts said on June 20 that if hostilities between Iran and Israel escalate, leading to a daily interruption of 1.1 million barrels of Iran's oil exports, Brent crude oil prices may rise by 15% to 20% compared to pre-conflict levels.
Citibank analysts estimate that in the most extreme cases, oil prices may soar to $120 to $130 per barrel. Deutsche Bank noted that oil prices rising above $120 would trigger "slowing global economic growth."
The Financial Times of the UK said that data from Clarkson Research shows that rising tensions in the Middle East have doubled the cost of chartering large oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz. If the strait is blocked, oil tankers will have to divert to alternative routes, which will increase route and time costs, create tightness in crude oil supply, and further boost transportation costs due to market nervousness.
The US Energy Information Administration released a report on June 16 stating that 84% of crude oil and condensate transported through the Strait of Hormuz in 2024, as well as 83% of liquefied natural gas, are destined for Asian markets. Among them, China, India, Japan, and South Korea are major destinations, accounting for 69% of the total crude oil and condensate flow through the Strait of Hormuz in 2024. If the strait is blocked, these markets may be affected.
According to reports by Iran's Mehr News Agency, Ali Yazdi Khah, an Iranian member of parliament, warned on June 19 that Iran will temporarily not block the Strait of Hormuz. However, if the US and Western countries directly join Israel's attacks, "Tehran will close the strategic waterway channel, which is a simple and effective choice."
He pointed out that so far, Iran has not closed the strait because all regional countries and many others benefit from it. "Our enemies know that we have dozens of ways to make the Strait of Hormuz unsafe, and this option is feasible for us."
Hadi Bagherzadeh, Iran's deputy foreign minister, also said on June 19 that this is not America's war. If the US decides to intervene in the conflict and support Israel, the entire region will "plunge into hell." Bagherzadeh emphasized during an interview with the BBC that "diplomacy is the first choice," but no negotiations can be initiated during continuous bombings.
This article is an exclusive contribution by the Observer Network and unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7518037254791496226/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and comments are welcome below.