When Will Trump Attack Iran? Four Possible Scenarios

SadaNews Economy - President Donald Trump faces what may be the biggest decision of his presidency, amid immense internal and global pressures pushing him in completely contradictory directions, which explains why no analyst on Earth predicted that the drama with Iran would last until mid-February, let alone reaching March.

This was stated in an article in the Israeli newspaper Jerusalem Post prepared by Israeli writer Yonah Jeremy Bob, who mentioned that there are generally four expected scenarios for when the next American war against Iran could begin if no agreement is reached.

Scenario One:

The American attack could occur in the next few days, potentially by Thursday, if Trump has indeed made up his mind to attack Tehran and is simply waiting for specific military units to arrive at their designated locations, or for a clear enough signal that negotiations with Iran will not yield sufficient results for him to reconsider his decision. The attack could happen on Thursday if Iran offers something on that day and Trump immediately rejects it.

Jeremy Bob noted that this first scenario seems less likely than the second scenario, for a simple reason: American officials stated that there would be an American-Iranian meeting on Thursday. It is likely that Trump would want some time to review Iran's latest offer.

Scenario Two:

The attack may be timed to early or mid-next week, which is the most probable option. Last week, Trump set a two-week deadline to reach an agreement, stating that he would launch an attack after that.

Since then, that deadline has fluctuated in his statements, and an American official indicated that Trump is rarely "scientific" about his deadlines, often using them as a guiding principle to get to where he wants when he wants.

If Trump decides to give Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei the full two-week deadline and takes some time to digest the new offer from Tehran next Thursday, and then ultimately decides that it is insufficient, he would likely launch the attack around that time.

Scenario Three:

The attack could occur directly after March 19, that is, after the end of Ramadan, because Trump might not want to ignite a regional war during the holiest month for Muslims, as this could harm the readiness of Muslim allies in the region to face expected strikes against them from Iran.

Furthermore, the author notes that the attack could serve Khamenei's narratives about a foreign force trying to invade the Middle East, which might distract from the "crimes" of the Iranian government against its people, and an attack during Ramadan could complicate Iranian public sentiment.

However, the second option, which is to attack during Ramadan, seems slightly more likely since the current confrontation has already lasted since late December, and the decision-making process has been unusually prolonged for Trump. Also, the costs of maintaining such a large number of American forces in the region are continuously increasing.

Scenario Four:

The attack may happen in the distant future. This is the least likely of the four options because keeping an aircraft carrier and more than 12 destroyers along with hundreds of other aircraft in the Middle East costs America billions of dollars.

These forces remain on alert to start a massive war at any moment, with some of these military units having arrived in the region in early January, some in mid-January, while the last elements will arrive in the coming days.

Jeremy Bob states that almost no analyst believes that Trump will keep such a large "fleet" in place after mid-March without using it for war or dismantling it upon reaching an agreement.

There are points the author urges to consider: all analysts predicted the attack would occur earlier and expected the alternative, which is that an agreement would be reached long before now. It is also noted that Iran is extremely skilled at prolonging negotiations and drawing them out longer.

The author added that Trump may continue to cling to the hope of a clearer and better solution appearing instead of a total war or reaching an agreement that could be interpreted as weakness.

Source: Jerusalem Post