WASHINGTON, DC – Donald Trump says his goal in Iran is to “win.”
But analysts say there is no easy path for the U.S. president to win against an ideological Iranian system of governance fighting for survival.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Iran is likely to retaliate meaningfully for any attack on its central government, unlike its largely symbolic responses to the U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities in June and the assassination of Iranian supreme commander Qasem Soleimani in 2020.
A beheading attack that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and other senior officials may fail to topple the regime, potentially leading to further instability, and a prolonged U.S. war could be devastating and costly for Washington and the region.
“All the options are pretty bad,” said Barbara Slavin, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center think tank.
“It’s very difficult to know what would happen if we did ‘A’ or ‘B’. What would be the fallout? And especially if the regime feels that its back is against the wall, it could attack U.S. forces and allies in the region in really scary ways.”
Since the beginning of this year, as a wave of anti-government protests has swept across Iran, President Trump has threatened military intervention against the country if authorities kill protesters.
“If Iran (sic) shoots and violently kills peaceful protesters (as is their practice), the United States will come to their aid. We are locked, loaded and ready to go,” Trump said in a social media post on January 2.
Over the past two weeks, he has repeated that threat several times, calling on protesters to occupy state institutions and promising that “help is on the way.”
But activist groups say the government has led a deadly crackdown, with the death toll in the thousands. President Trump appears to have scaled back his position as Iranian authorities impose a total internet shutdown on the country.
On Wednesday, President Trump presented Tehran’s version of the situation, with armed protesters targeting security forces.
“They (Iranian officials) said people were shooting and they were shooting back,” Trump said. “That’s one of them, but they told me there would be no executions, so I hope that’s true.”
Two days later, President Trump expressed his “respect” and gratitude to Iran for canceling the execution of 800 people scheduled for Thursday.
“Venezuela Sugar High”
Some reports say the protests appear to be receding for now, although it is difficult to check the situation on the ground because Iranians do not have access to the internet.
But experts warn that the crisis is far from over and the situation could change quickly. Demonstrations may flare up again, but President Trump has not taken military options off the table.
Multiple US media outlets reported Friday that the Pentagon is beginning to surge military assets to the Middle East, including aircraft carrier strike groups.
President Trump has signaled a willingness to use U.S. military power to advance his policy goals.
He has boasted about the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in 2019, the assassination of Soleimani, and the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facility last year. Just this month, he ordered the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
But experts say it is unlikely that President Trump will achieve a quick operational victory in Iran.
“This is not Venezuela,” Slavin said of Iran.
“This is not a one-and-done thing, and given all the other crises he’s dealing with, many of them self-inflicted, such as Venezuela and his ridiculous efforts to take over Greenland, does he really want a major crisis in the Middle East after campaigning against this kind of adventure?”
Just two months ago, the Trump administration released a national security strategy outlining a push to shift foreign policy resources away from the Middle East. He said the past considerations that made the region so important to the United States – energy production and widespread conflict – “no longer apply.”
The document also asserted President Trump’s non-interventionist stance.
“We will pursue good relations and peaceful trade relations without imposing on the nations of the world democratic and other social changes that differ significantly from their traditions and histories,” it reads.
But given the Iranian government’s brutal crackdown on protests, Trump may have “cast himself as a humanitarian interventionist,” said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, a think tank focused on foreign affairs.
“He may be getting a sugar high in Venezuela, but he can’t replicate it in the same way in Iran, and that would require a huge military force,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.
How will Iran react?
After the June 2025 attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, the Iranian government’s response was relatively restrained. Iranian forces fired a volley of missiles at al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, where US forces are stationed, but there were no casualties.
But Parsi said Iranian authorities had come to the conclusion that they would no longer tolerate the attack to avoid a major confrontation with the United States.
“Of course, Trump’s measure of success and Iran’s measure of success may be very different, even if it’s very bad for them,” he said.
“Trump may need to defeat the entire nation. Iran cannot win the war, but it doesn’t need to. Just make sure to destroy Trump’s presidency before he loses a protracted war that lasts several weeks. Rising oil prices and rising inflation around the world, including in the United States, may be enough to destroy Trump’s presidency.”
Nathan Rafati, a senior Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group think tank, said Iranian officials were willing to condone both Soleimani’s assassination and the attack on its nuclear facilities because of the limited nature of the attack.
But the regime views anti-government protests as an existential threat, and even a limited U.S. attack could prompt a stronger response from Tehran.
“If the Iranians are convinced that this is the beginning of a broader campaign or that its impact on the ground will be enough of a stimulus to cause further escalation of protests, their desperate position could lead to rash decisions,” Rafati told Al Jazeera.
If Trump’s goal is to overthrow his regime, Rafferty believes Washington will ideally rely on the “synergy” of a critical mass of protesters and Iranians acting as boots on the ground, supported by U.S. air operations.
But he noted that President Trump tends to pursue swift and decisive military operations.
“And here we get into a potential scenario where the ending gets a little muddy,” Rafferty said.
“For example, what happens if we end up in a scenario where there is U.S. action, Iranian retaliation, and further U.S. response and escalation of the campaign?”
Iran is struggling
Despite the risks of military action with Iran, Iran’s adversaries, including many U.S. officials in the Trump administration, see it as a historic opportunity to bring down the Iranian regime.
Since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran has endured great hardship, surviving wars, sanctions, and domestic unrest.
The Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s lasted eight years and killed hundreds of thousands of people. But the regime endured and survived several waves of protests, an economic crisis, and feuds within the ruling class.
But analysts say the Islamic Republic is currently living through its most difficult period in its 47-year history.
The network of regional alliances that the Iranian government had cultivated over the decades, known as the “Axis of Resistance,” has all but collapsed.
Hamas and Hezbollah were severely weakened by Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza and its devastating 2024 campaign in Lebanon. Former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fell into the hands of rebel groups hostile to Tehran, which had since taken power.
In Venezuela, Iran also lost one of its last allies after Maduro’s arrest.
On the military front, Israel’s ability to deter Iranian attacks has significantly diminished since it removed its air defenses last June and asserted full control of the country’s skies.
Tehran’s nuclear program was also seriously damaged by the US attack, and Iran no longer enriches uranium, although it continues to emphasize its right to do so.
These external challenges are further exacerbated by the devastating economic downturn following years of sanctions. Iran’s currency, the rial, has lost more than 90 percent of its value and reached an all-time low.
And the protests, which have been met with harsh security responses, have now become a legitimacy crisis for the government.
“The ferocity of the state’s response over the past two weeks underscores the state’s deep vulnerabilities, both in terms of its domestic political legitimacy as well as its strategic position regionally and vis-à-vis the United States,” Rafferty said.
For war hardliners in Washington, Rafferty added, Iran’s current vulnerability is an opportunity to “break the great fallout of US regional policy over the past 47 years.”
diplomatic opportunity
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, who is close to President Trump, has argued that Iran is ripe for regime change and traveled to Israel this week to push for war.
But the interventionist voices around President Trump are balanced by geopolitical dynamics. The United States’ Gulf allies are wary of instability and regional violence and have warned of an attack on Iran.
Domestically, Trump will also have to face American voters, including large swaths of his “America First” base, who largely oppose war after the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, ahead of crucial 2026 midterm elections.
Mr. Parsi noted that although President Maduro’s abduction resulted in minimal casualties for the United States, public opinion polls show that Americans are not satisfied with military intervention in Venezuela.
“I don’t think his base is excited about this at all,” Parsi said.
“I think the base is wondering why he is so focused on foreign affairs and not on domestic issues, which they believe are far more important to their concerns.”
So is diplomacy still possible?
On Thursday, President Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said he was hopeful there would be a diplomatic solution.
He outlined a list of US demands for Iran, including giving up nuclear enrichment, handing over highly enriched uranium, reducing its missile program and ending support for “proxies” like Hezbollah.
“If they want to go back to the League of Nations, and we can resolve these four issues diplomatically, that would be a great solution. The alternative is a bad solution,” Witkoff said.
But Parsi said the United States wants Iran to surrender and move the goalposts.
“I don’t think diplomacy, at least in this scenario, has any chance of success unless there is a thorough recalibration of what the United States is actually trying to accomplish,” he said.
“I’m not particularly optimistic that the kind of diplomacy that the administration is currently envisioning will be successful.”
But Rafferty argued that although Iran currently has zero enrichment, the country has the right to enrich uranium to strengthen its defenses.
“Given that Iran’s position, particularly its position on enrichment, has been fairly consistent, (and) its position on missiles has been fairly consistent, it will have to recognize that Iran’s economic and political fortunes are not promising, and it will have to make a significant change in its position,” he said.
Iran has remained defiant throughout the ordeal, describing the protests as a conspiracy by the United States and Israel to spread chaos in the country. Iranian officials pointed to Israeli media reports that foreign agents were arming protesters to kill security forces and attack public institutions.
The Iranian government also promised strong retaliation against any external attack.
But Slavin said Iran could compromise on the nuclear issue and give up enriched uranium to get sanctions relief.
“It would be very controversial. Many would accuse President Trump of selling out the protesters, but I can imagine he might strike some kind of deal like that and call it a big victory,” she told Al Jazeera.
