Will Trump abandon 'America First' to join Israel's war on Iran?

Marco Carnelos

20 June 2025

Amid objections from his Maga base, the US president's decision will be crucial to the trajectory of the conflict

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/trump-abandon-america-first-join-israel-war-iran-will

Two leaders obsessed by their political legacies, and one also by his own cult of personality, are escalating the already highly tense situation in the Middle East to dangerous new peaks.

Israel’s unprovoked attack on Iran this month marks the riskiest chapter yet of a dream that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been chasing for four decades: regime change in Tehran.

Israel seems determined to modify in its favour, once and for all, the overall strategic balance of the Middle East. Its ongoing quest to destroy Hamas and ethnically cleanse Gaza must be framed in this context, alongside the decapitation of Hezbollah’s political and military leadership in Lebanon. 

To a certain extent, the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria fits into the same strategy, even if the final chapter of the Syrian ordeal has not been written yet - and it may not necessarily be positive for Israel.

Now Netanyahu has decided to attack Iran - not with a ground invasion, which would be militarily impossible, but through precision air strikes to eliminate the nation’s military leadership and the capabilities that Israel deems most dangerous to its own existence, including nuclear and ballistic missile sites.

Israel’s attacks have so far killed more than 600 people in Iran, including more than 250 civilians, according to a US-based human rights group.

Tel Aviv’s primary stated purpose is to permanently prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon that could be deployed against Israel. Its secondary goal is to create a legitimacy crisis and stir internal dissent within Iran, aiming to bring about the collapse of the Islamic Republic. 

Its ideal outcome would be the installation of a pro-western regime that would bring Iran, together with Saudi Arabia, into the fold of the Abraham Accords for a period of “peace and development” according to terms and conditions conceived, imposed and enforced by American and Israeli hegemony

Perception of vulnerability

In this context, the future for Palestinians is deeply uncertain. At best, they could continue to be caged in their enclaves in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, constantly harassed (if not killed) by Israeli settlers and soldiers. At worst, they could be forcibly transferred elsewhere.

In line with his cult of personality, US President Donald Trump appears tempted to join this master plan, detecting that this time, it could succeed. With its regional allies severely degraded, Iran is perceived in both Washington and Tel Aviv as more vulnerable than ever before. Whether this perception is right or wrong is another matter.

Should Netanyahu’s dream become reality, Trump wants to be a part of it, and to take a large share of the credit for upending the Middle East’s political landscape. Netanyahu, meanwhile, would cement his role in power, skip the Israeli justice system, and potentially go down in history as the man who eliminated the key threats Israel has faced since its creation in 1948.

In previous weeks, the Trump administration had attempted to move ahead with the so-called Libya option, which would entail Iran’s voluntary relinquishment of its nuclear enrichment programme through a mediated deal. Of course, the Libya precedent must sound terrible to the Iranian leadership, having watched the fate that western nations ultimately meted out to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

The US initially hinted that Iran could keep its nuclear enrichment programme under strict international monitoring, provided that it dispose of its accumulated stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity. Then, as often happens, the White House backtracked and demanded zero enrichment, bending once again to the whims of Netanyahu.

At the time of writing, the international community was still waiting for Trump’s decision on whether to directly join the war on Iran. This is a crucial decision, because in order to credibly dismantle the Iranian nuclear programme and its alleged military dimensions, it will be necessary to destroy the Fordow facility, buried under a mountain. Only the US owns the “bunker buster” bombs that could do the job, and the planes to deliver such a high payload on target.

Massive deja vu

But Trump has a problem: his Maga constituency, to whom he promised “America First” and no more endless wars. Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon has issued a stern warning about joining the war against Iran - and to get a sense of how much the winds are shifting among the Maga base, just watch conservative commentator Tucker Carlson’s excoriating interview with Senator Ted Cruz, one of the more ardent Israel supporters in Congress.

The saddest element of all this, however, is the massive sense of deja vu arising from this latest chapter of US involvement in the Middle East.

All the issues related to Iran’s nuclear programme are purely speculative. This past March, Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, told Congress that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader [Ali] Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme he suspended in 2003”. In other words, no imminent threat, contrary to Israel’s assertions.

In 2003, the Bush administration claimed to have intelligence showing evidence of weapons of mass destruction to justify its invasion of Iraq. Within months, these claims were shown to be false. 

This time around, US intelligence agencies have reached the conclusion that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon - but apparently ignoring this assessment, the president might be sleepwalking into another war of choice that, in Bannon’s own words, could “tear the country apart”.

Trump’s support for Israel’s latest wave of aggression suggests that the real issue is not Iran’s nuclear programme, but Iran itself in the current political configuration. US military assets are being moved into position ahead of a possible attack, although no final decision has been taken.

In such cases, it would not be surprising to see a false flag operation, quickly attributed to Iran through clever spinning by complacent media, in order to push inexperienced, ignorant and impulsive leaders to take the “right” decision. Trump, unfortunately, perfectly fits this description.