Trump is talking tough on Iran, analysts doubt U.S. will strike
The prospect of a U.S. attack on Iran has roiled oil prices this year, but analysts tell CNBC a strike would require more military commitment and be more complicated, than the U.S. is prepared for.
Brent crude April futures
Tensions are high, and despite talks last week in Oman, both sides remain at an impasse. U.S. President Donald Trump’s pressure on the Iranian regime escalated after a brutal crackdown on anti-government protestors across the country last month.
Trump said this week he was considering sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East, even as Washington and Tehran prepare to resume talks. On Tuesday, he threatened Iran with “something very tough,” if it does not agree to Washington’s demands, which range from halting the country’s nuclear enrichment to cutting Tehran’s ballistic missile program.
The U.S. deployed the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group to the Middle East in January. This brought the number of missile destroyers in the region to six, but, analysts say, this still wouldn’t be enough to topple the regime. Following through on his “something tough” threat would mean a prolonged conflict in a region Trump is wary of.
“U.S. forces in the region are not adequate to support a significant long-term military operation in Iran which would be necessary to achieve any major military objective,” Alireza Ahmadi, executive fellow at the Geneva Center for Security Policy, told CNBC.
Trump has also dialed up his pressure on the Islamic Republic, applying financial pressure to an economy already crippled by sanctions. Just last month, he vowed to impose tariffs on any country that acquires any goods or services from Iran.
But it is unclear what could come next. “President Trump is notoriously unpredictable,” Ali Vaez, director of Iran Project at Crisis Group, told CNBC but added Trump is aware “the Iran problem set does not lend itself to clean and easy military options.”
Could the U.S. still attack Iran?
Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official and senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told CNBC that “the cost of not attacking Iran would be huge,” adding, if he doesn’t, “Trump’s legacy will be as the president who enabled Iran to go nuclear.”
“The President is in a jam, his options are not great and it’s a very risky moment at this point,” Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy Group, told CNBC’s Dan Murphy last week. McNally added the country’s ballistic missile program meant that “we’d have to go big, because Iran is quite formidable.”
What are Trump’s options?
Trump said last week that Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, should be “very worried.”
But targeting Iran’s leadership would not be an operation like the one that seized Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, analysts have warned.
“The Iranian government is not Venezuela,” Alireza Ahmadi said, adding that if the U.S. removed Khamenei, “a replacement would be chosen immediately and the military would effectively…
Read More: Trump is talking tough on Iran, analysts doubt U.S. will strike