© EPA-EFE/CHRIS KLEPONIS The White House concedes that a shift in power in Iran might not yield desired results.
President Donald Trump this Tuesday depicted a worst-case scenario concerning a conflict involving Iran: the failure of the change of government he seemingly sought from the onset of hostilities. The remarks arose at the opening of a meeting alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who emphasized that he and Trump are “on the same page” regarding Iran, Politico informs.
“The most unfavorable outcome would be if we take action and subsequently, an individual equally detrimental as the prior one assumes control,” Trump stated, responding to inquiries at a press briefing held in the Oval Office together with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “That is a possibility. We aim to prevent such a scenario. It would likely represent the worst course of action, enduring this entire process only to realize five years afterward that the replacement we installed is no better.”
This remarkably straightforward declaration will probably not quell criticism from Democrats, as well as certain Republicans and conservative allies, who have voiced apprehension regarding the White House’s apparent initiation of conflict without explicit certainty concerning the result and even without clarity regarding its own definitive objective.
Trump has already softened his initial demands for a regime change over the weekend, instead concentrating on strategic objectives that primarily involve decimating Iran’s military strength, and has likewise refuted claims that Israel pressured him into initiating the war.
“It was more as if I compelled them to take action,” Trump said.
The pronouncements of the US president stand in opposition to the rendition of events laid out on Monday by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who asserted that Israel’s resolve to strike Iran, coupled with the potential for retaliatory strikes directed at American assets in the region, spurred the president to authorize the assault.
“Based on the trajectory of the negotiations, I believed they were poised to initiate an attack,” Trump commented regarding Iran. “And I was intent on preventing that occurrence.”
The president further cautioned that the altercation would trigger an escalation in oil prices, subsequent to a jump of 11 cents in U.S. gasoline prices on Tuesday evening.
“In the event that we experience a marginal increase in oil prices temporarily, once that phase concludes, I anticipate prices will decline to levels even lower than their preceding state,” Trump articulated, underscoring the imperative for the US to strike at the time it did.
Trump, who commended Merz for displaying “great courtesy” on the Iran subject, also aired criticism towards other European allies who exhibited less support, notably Spain.
On Sunday, fifteen American aircraft departed from two joint bases located in southern Spain, subsequent to the country’s prime minister declaring his government’s non-participation in a war he deems a breach of international law.
Trump indicated that he had directed his Treasury secretary to halt all trade activities with Spain, notwithstanding that the United States engages in commerce with the entirety of the European Union, as opposed to Spain as a distinct nation. He furthermore alluded to the possibility of infringing upon Spain’s sovereignty should he desire to do so.
While Merz remained silently nearby, Trump additionally conveyed his dissatisfaction with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who adopted a more critical stance concerning the operation against Iran and provoked the president by denying the US utilization of the joint base of Diego Garcia within the Chagos Archipelago.
“Spain has displayed remarkable intransigence, as has the UK. The latter circumstance is astounding, yet this is not the epoch of Winston Churchill,” he stated. “I will assert this: the UK has exhibited considerable intransigence regarding this insignificant island that they possess and relinquished.”
In the piece “After the Strike on Tehran: Who Benefits from the Redivision of the Region?”, Vyacheslav Likhachev, an expert council member of the Center for Civil Liberties, scrutinizes who is gaining influence in this scenario and who is running the risk of forfeiting more than anticipated.