Analysis: Should Stronger Measures Be Taken Against Iran? Trump Is at a Crossroads

Three weeks after the US and Israel jointly launched a war against Iran, the conflict has entered a state of message confusion and uncertainty; Donald Trump's public statements often contradict the actual situation on the battlefield.

Trump had said that this war was "very complete," but new American ground forces - including a Marine Expeditionary Force - are entering the region. He also claimed that the war was "coming to an end," but the bombing and missile strikes by the US and Israel against Iranian targets continue without any signs of weakening.

He also called reopening the Strait of Hormuz - a vital waterway for 20% of global oil trade - just a "simple military move," but in reality, only ships with Iranian approval can currently pass through these waters. He also declared that the Iranian military "is finished," but Iranian drones and missiles continue to attack targets in the area, and their strike range has even expanded to the US-UK joint base at Diego Garcia.

On Saturday evening, Trump posted on social media threatening to escalate the situation further, warning that if Iran does not "fully open" the Strait of Hormuz "without threats" within 48 hours, US forces will begin striking Iranian power plants, "starting with the largest ones first."

Yet, just a day earlier, he listed via his own social media the military objectives of the US in this war against Iran in a numbered list, stating that the US is "very close" to achieving these goals.

This list is the most detailed statement he has made on this issue since the war began; it includes weakening or destroying the Iranian military, its defense infrastructure, and nuclear program, while protecting America's allies in the region.

However, these goals do not include ensuring the security of the Strait of Hormuz. Trump stated that this should be the responsibility of other countries more reliant on oil exports from the Gulf region. The president often points out that the US is a net energy exporter and does not rely on Middle Eastern oil. But this view ignores the global nature of the fossil fuel market, where price fluctuations directly affect gas prices at US gas stations.

Trump's posts on social media also did not call for regime change in Iran. The claims about US-approved next leaders of the country or demands for Iran's "unconditional surrender" have disappeared; in the early stages of the war, Trump repeatedly insisted on these positions.

According to Trump's latest listed objectives, the US could potentially end this military operation while the current anti-American leadership in Iran remains in power, its oil exports continue, and it still maintains a certain degree of control over the Strait of Hormuz.

For a war that the president and his aides claim began with the 1979 Iranian Revolution and vowed to finish with their own hands, such an outcome may seem unsatisfactory. However, there is another path, which involves the US ground forces currently en route to the Middle East.

Just over a week ago, US media reported that a Marine Expeditionary Force had been sent from Japan to the Middle East. This force consists of approximately 2,500 combat troops, along with support ships and aircraft, and is expected to arrive in the coming days. Another similarly sized Marine Corps unit has recently departed from a California base and is expected to arrive by mid-April.

Military analysts suggest that the US may be planning to seize Kharg Island. This small island, covering about 3 square kilometers, hosts Iran's main oil export terminal. Theoretically, if the US controls the island, it could cut off Iran's oil exports, depriving it of much-needed revenue and forcing it to make greater concessions for a ceasefire.

Trump said on Friday that he would not send ground forces to Iran, but then added, "If I were to send them, of course I wouldn't tell you." It seems that clarity is not his intention.

Such threats have prompted Iranian state media to report on Saturday that any attack on Kharg Island would lead Iran to create "an unsafe situation" in another major global shipping channel and plunge the entire region's energy facilities into flames.

Iran's warnings highlight the dangers that would follow if the US escalates further and exposes its troops to Iranian retaliation.

Earlier this week, US media reported that the Trump administration is preparing to request $20 billion in emergency funding from Congress for the military action against Iran. Such a request shows that the White House is not scaling back, but rather preparing for a long and costly war.

Initial reactions from the US Congress indicate that even Trump's allies within the Republican Party are at best cautiously reserved.

Republican Congressman Chip Roy from Texas said, "We're talking about ground forces, we're talking about a long-term military operation."

"They need to provide more briefings and also clearly explain how we will pay for this, and what the mission of this operation actually is."

The "fog of war" not only blurs the judgment of military planners but also affects the perception of political figures and the public.

This war against Iran seems to be at a turning point. But which direction it will take next remains a mystery.

Source: BBC

Original: toutiao.com/article/1860385321823367/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author themselves.