Trump’s Reckless Gambit to ‘Make Iran Great Again’

The question now facing a nervous world is as simple as it is stark. Has Donald Trump ended or started something? Has Iran’s nuclear program been destroyed, or has Trump set the table for a wider regional war that will suck in the Americans?

Here in Canada the repercussions of Saturday’s surprise attack almost certainly are rattling relations between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump. Wherever they had arrived in their discussions of borders and tariffs, Carney’s response to bombing Iran isn’t likely to bring them closer.

As Trump assails anyone — even in his own Republican party — who dares question the attack, Carney urges immediate de-escalation.

“Canada calls on parties to return immediately to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis,” posted the PM early Sunday morning.

Later that day Trump was online, too, inviting the world to instead envision the outright replacement of Iran’s ruling regime.

Going all in

On Saturday, the U.S. Air Force dispatched six B-2 stealth bombers based in Missouri to bomb three of Iran’s nuclear sites. Those sites included Fordo, a nuclear installation buried so deep in a mountain that the Israelis could not reach it. For the first time, the United States used more than a dozen of its enormous bunker-busting bombs, each packing 30,000 pounds of explosives.

The U.S. attacks came as something of a surprise. Just days before the sophisticated bombing mission, which involved 124 aircraft, Trump seemed to suggest that the parties had two weeks to negotiate before he would act. The message seemed clear. Iran had to agree to get rid of its nuclear enrichment program or face the consequences. The president declared at the time that he preferred a negotiated solution to a military one.

Then, just days after giving that impression, the president unleashed his most deadly bombers on a mission halfway around the world.

This at a time when his own director of national intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency both concluded that Iran had not decided to build a nuclear weapon and was years away from doing so.

In a world-class example of self-humiliation, national intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard retracted her testimony before U.S. lawmakers. She posted that she now agreed with the president that Iran was within weeks of having a nuclear weapon.

With much chest-beating, the United States is claiming that the mission to destroy Iran’s nuclear program was a success. Iran, on the other hand, contends that it was not. You can blow up buildings and infrastructure, Iran claimed, but you can’t destroy “knowledge.”

Iran also said it had been deceived by the Americans and could no longer trust them. The attack against them came when they were expecting words, not bombs. That is one of the reasons that Iran is rejecting calls from leaders around the world, including Prime Minister Carney, to return to the negotiating table.

So back to that burning question. Has Donald Trump ended or started something? The answer to that question depends on what Iran does next.

Despite days of Israel’s bombing and assassination campaign in Iran, and now the United States’ extraordinary attack, Iran remains defiant. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has declared the country will never surrender. Not only has Iran denounced the U.S. attack, it has vowed to retaliate, declaring that every U.S. citizen and service member in the Middle East is a legitimate target.

Taking that revenge will not be easy. Israel has virtually decapitated the Iranian military leadership through targeted assassinations and severely damaged the country’s ability to build and launch missiles. It has even mused about taking out Khamenei.

Prior to Israel’s direct attack on Iran’s nuclear program, the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dealt severe blows to Iran’s proxy groups in the Middle East.

Hezbollah and Hamas are now shadows of their former selves. The same is true for the Houthi supporters of Iran in Yemen. Their ability to act for Tehran in the wake of the U.S. bombing has been seriously affected but not eliminated.

But that doesn’t mean Iran is toothless. The United States has 40,000 troops in bases and ships across the Middle East that are within the range of Iranian missiles. The last time the United States took action against the Iranian nuclear program, Iran-backed militants in turn attacked a U.S. military outpost, Tower 22 in Jordan, killing three U.S. service members. That sort of attack could be repeated.

There are multiple other ways Iran could strike back at the United States. If the vote of the Iranian parliament to shut down the Strait of Hormuz is approved by the nation’s Supreme Council, 20 per cent of the world’s oil supply could be affected. Militias in Iraq supportive of Iran could also launch attacks against U.S. forces in the region.

And then there is the ever-present danger of lone-wolf terror attacks against U.S. assets, allies and personnel. That could be hostage takings, assassinations or cyberattacks.

The U.S. government has acknowledged that there are Iranian sympathizers all around the world, including in the United States. The recent fatal shootings of two Israeli diplomats in Washington show how difficult it is to defend against that brand of terrorism.

Donald Trump has bet the farm, and regional stability in the Middle East, on his crystal-clear threat to Iran. Retaliation by Iran for the U.S. bombings of its nuclear facilities will lead, the president says, to more severe U.S. military action — a euphemism that could mean being bombed back into the Stone Age.

Just after dropping U.S. bombs, the only choice Trump offered Iran’s leaders was to come back to the negotiating table, capitulate and make “peace” on his terms. Then came the president’s Sunday afternoon post that seemed to snatch away even that option. The supposed master of the art of deal signalled to his opponents that their demise, not a new agreement, was his ultimate aim. On Truth Social he trumpeted “Regime Change” to “MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.”

A world of risks

Though there is no question who holds the military upper hand at this dangerous moment in world history, Trump’s act of war and reckless brinksmanship carry huge dangers.

World reaction to the bombing of Iran has generally not been positive. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said on social media that he was “gravely alarmed” about the direct threat to international security the strikes represent.

China and Russia both strongly condemned the U.S. strikes and called for an immediate ceasefire.

Russia said the U.S. bombings were a “gross violation of international law.” Chilean President Gabriel Boric said the attack was illegal under international law. Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil described the attack as an “illegal, unjustifiable and extremely dangerous act of aggression.”

No Arab country in the Middle East has endorsed the United States’ bombing of Iran. All of them have called for a de-escalation of this potentially disastrous confrontation. If the situation worsens, that will directly affect Trump’s ability to persuade countries like Saudi Arabia and others to “normalize” their relations with Israel.

And there are domestic problems for the president. Trump first came to power in 2016 largely because he promised war-weary Americans he would avoid disastrous foreign entanglements like Libya, Syria and Afghanistan.

Regime change and nation building in those countries turned into multi-trillion-dollar disasters. Now, if Tehran chooses to retaliate as it says it will, Iran could become Donald Trump’s Afghanistan.

There is already great concern in the United States that Trump has trampled on the constitution in his concerted effort to extend the powers of the executive branch. He has attacked Congress, the judiciary and the free press in his quest for unopposed power.

And now voices on both sides of the aisle say he has done it again. Only Congress has the power to declare war, but Trump ordered the bombing of Iran without consulting Congress.

That has led to bipartisan criticism of the bombing of Iran. It has also opened up the first crack in Trump’s MAGA base. That’s why so many Trump Kool-Aid drinkers, from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, have criticized the bombings. Greene went so far as to say such actions will ultimately lead to America’s destruction.

The more likely outcome in this latest U.S.-Iran confrontation is the demise of the supreme leader and regime change in Iran.

But before anyone celebrates that as a U.S. victory, consider this. If Iran becomes a failed state the result easily could be a civil war in a country of 92 million people, triggering a refugee exodus that could engulf not just the Middle East but Europe as well.

As the wise saying goes, be careful what you wish for.