While Washington strengthens its military presence in the Gulf with latest generation fighters and a second aircraft carrier on the way, the White House sets a ten-day ultimatum to Tehran: a nuclear agreement on the table or targeted raids that could pave the way for a regional escalation.
There White House is examining the possibility of limited military action against Iran to push Tehran to accept a nuclear deal on Washington’s terms. The hypothesis being studied according to the Wall Street Journal, does not envisage, at least in the first phase, a large-scale offensivebut a calibrated intervention, conceived as an instrument of pressure to obtain concessions without triggering an uncontrollable regional reaction. According to informed sources, if the presidential green light arrives, the operation could start within a few days and focus on military objectives or selected institutional locations. The signal would be unmistakable: yesand Iran will not stop uranium enrichment activities, The United States could significantly expand its reachhitting strategic infrastructures of the Iranian power system, with potentially destabilizing consequences for Tehran’s leadership. The option of a limited attack, which has so far remained in the background, indicates that Donald Trump does not exclude the use of force not only as a response to the lack of agreement, but also as a negotiating lever to impose a compromise more favorable to American interests. A source reports that the president is considering a progressive escalation: starting with punctual operations and, if necessary, intensifying the pressure until the nuclear program is dismantled or the regime is substantially weakened.
An armed action, even if contained, would however risk blocking the dialogue. An official from the Middle Eastern area underlines that Tehran could suspend negotiations for an extended periodjust as it is finalizing its formal response to US requests. It is not yet clear how concrete the military option is after weeks of internal consultations. The president’s closest collaborators have proposed it several times, but in the most recent discussions – according to government sources – attention was also focused on broader intervention scenarios. Trump announced that it will make a decision within ten days, later specifying that the maximum deadline could extend to two weeks. “An agreement will be reached, or we will get it another way,” he told reporters. The spokeswoman Anna Kelly he avoided providing operational details, reiterating that “only the president knows the options on the table and his intentions.” Alternatives being studied include a bombing campaign lasting a few days to force a change in the regime’s attitudeor a series of strikes targeted against government and military facilities. However, several analysts and American officials warn that any intervention could provoke an Iranian response, with the risk of dragging Washington into a broader conflict in the Middle East and exposing regional allies Israel, above all, to retaliation.
The comparison brings to mind what happened in 2018, during the first mandate of Trumpwhen the White House considered a limited pre-emptive strike against North Korea at the height of the crisis with Pyongyang. The goal was to demonstrate American determination to stop North Korea’s atomic program. In the end the diplomatic route prevailed, with three summits between Trump And Kim Jong Un which however did not lead to the dismantling of the arsenal. Even today the negotiations with Tehran appears fragile. This week, US emissaries met Iranian representatives to explore possible margins of agreement. Washington demands the cessation of the most sensitive nuclear activities, restrictions on the ballistic missile program and a halt to Iranian support for regional militias. THE’Iran it has rejected requests considered excessive, offering limited openings so far and reiterating that it has no military nuclear ambitions.
The diplomatic impasse, combined with the strengthening of the American military presence in the area, fuels the hypothesis of an intervention. In recent days the United States has moved in Middle East hunting F-35 and F-22; a second aircraft carrier with attack and electronic warfare aircraft is en route to the region. Command and control aircraft and additional air defense systems have also been positioned, key elements to support large-scale operations. Tehran he reacted with threatening statements. The Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei he claimed that Iranian forces would be able to hit American units hard, even evoking the sinking of a US aircraft carrier. Recent precedents contribute to making the climate even more tense. Last year Washington had indicated a deadline of two weeks to reach an agreement; a few days later, B-2 bombers and other platforms had hit three Iranian nuclear sites, slowing their activities. The new deadline set by the president brings the same question back to the center: is the military threat a negotiating weapon or the prelude to an escalation? The final decision, as the White House recalls, rests with the commander in chief.
