Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...
“Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon” has been Trump’s much-repeated message, and after last night’s bombing of the Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities, the president declared his mission accomplished. Declaring the operation a “spectacular military success,” he called for Iran’s leaders to return to negotiations. “Now is the time for peace,” he wrote on his Truth Social site. Americans must hold him to it.
Iran, of course, will have a say in what happens next. Tehran will inevitably retaliate. It has many options, including targeting U.S. military personnel in the region, disrupting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, or executing cyber or terror attacks in the Middle East or outside it. So far, Iran’s response has been moderate. Tehran has indicated that damage caused by U.S. strikes is reparable and limited. There are also reports that Washington gave Iran advanced warning that this was intended to be a limited strike. It is possible that Iran might calibrate its response to avoid American casualties.
As Iran’s leaders weigh their options, Trump should take clear and decisive steps now to encourage Iran toward deescalation, offering commitments that U.S. military action was indeed a “one-off” and not the start of a longer American campaign. First, Trump must back away from the “deal or bombs” threats he continues to make toward Iran, including in his triumphant speech to the nation following the strikes. After hitting Iran’s nuclear facilities and setting back its path to a nuclear weapon, there is no urgent threat to the United States that would require either a quick deal or additional U.S. military action. In fact, giving Iran ultimatums to return to negotiations only increases the risk of deeper U.S. military involvement because it will create political pressure on Trump to act if diplomacy fails—as is likely in the short term. After all, Iran has no reason now to believe that diplomacy will protect it from future airstrikes and little incentive to compromise in the near future.
Instead, Trump should reiterate the limited nature of the U.S. military action and declare clearly that, despite recent social media posts, the United States does not seek regime change in Iran. After twice undermining his own diplomatic outreach to Iran’s leaders—first by letting Israel strike Iran and then by authorizing U.S. bombs—Trump’s words may carry little weight. Still, his assertion that political change is not on the U.S. agenda could make a difference, especially when amplified by other U.S. political leaders. Trump might also enlist the assistance of regional partners like Saudi Arabia, allies in Europe, and even Russia to communicate the message that the United States will not interfere in Iran’s domestic politics.
Second, while immediately moving U.S. servicemembers out of the region might leave them vulnerable, Trump should immediately order recently surged fighter aircraft and air tankers back to their home bases and redirect the second carrier strike group back to Asia. He should also recommit to plans to withdraw forces from Syria and Iraq on their planned timeline and look for other opportunities to reduce U.S. military presence in the region as soon as it is safe to do so. This would reinforce his promise to the American people not to become embroiled in another endless Middle Eastern war and offer Iran assurances that the United States is not planning further military involvement.
Netanyahu and the neocons will not rest on their laurels for long. Washington’s “one-off” has only whetted their appetite. They are already discovering more secret nuclear facilities to target and still aiming for regime change. Trump’s preferred diplomatic pathway to a dismantled Iranian nuclear program has already been derailed by Israel’s unilateral attack and subsequent U.S. military action. Twice he has let his instincts for peace be overruled by calls for war. He must resist pressure to let it happen again.