Trump abandons ‘America First’ for Middle East quagmire

However fragile it may be, on Tuesday, Israel and Iran agreed to a “ceasefire” just three days after U.S. President Donald Trump ordered the bombing of three nuclear sites in Iran, which he claimed were “obliterated.”

Global markets welcomed this development and crude oil futures prices fell. Nevertheless, there are reasons to be skeptical about the prospects for a sustained ceasefire, which both sides already appear to have violated. The first is that the Iranian nuclear facilities might not have been “obliterated” as Trump claimed. In contradiction to the president, an initial U.S. intelligence report found that the bombings only delayed Tehran’s nuclear ambitions by a few months.

The second, more fundamental reason, to doubt Trump’s prospects for success in the Middle East is his growing inability to govern and lead as he becomes increasingly bogged down in quagmires both at home and abroad.

The first quagmire is the U.S. capital, the “swamp” he promised to drain. Despite his aversion to it, Trump seems to be becoming more and more “Washingtonized.” And counter to his “America First” policies and his longtime rejection of U.S. foreign involvement, he is now engaged in nothing less than an attempt to change the status quo in the Middle East through U.S. power. Isn’t this the very policy that the Republican Party’s foreign-policy hawks, or “neocons,” have been advocating for decades, and failed miserably in Iraq and Afghanistan?

The second quagmire is the potential for the U.S. to get bogged down, once again, in the Middle East. Where is Trump’s realpolitik? Where is the man who negotiated with the Taliban, established the framework for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and boasted that he would bring peace to the Middle East during his second term? Trump, long skeptical of foreign U.S. military intervention, has now succumbed to Israel’s artful temptations and carried out direct military attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities using B-2 bombers and massive “bunker busting” bombs — a tactic nearly identical to that of his predecessors.

Whether he is aware of it or not, Trump’s about-face is certainly no accident. The unpleasant political reality surrounding the incumbent U.S. president, both domestically and internationally, is a bottomless swamp that does not allow for Trump’s personal whims. Five months have passed since the start of his second term, which was supposed to be carefully prepared based on the lessons learned from his first term. But I’m not alone in fearing that Trump’s domestic — and foreign-policy methodologies have reached a turning point.

For example, Trump demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender” after ordering the “complete destruction” of its nuclear facilities; declared a “ceasefire,” and now chastises both sides for violating that ceasefire. Yet even if the ceasefire holds, there seems to be no solution to the problem of Iran’s nuclear development. On the contrary, the U.S. attack on Iran and the so-called Israel-Iran ceasefire are merely the beginning of a whole new — sadly, unwinnable — game.

Why unwinnable? Iran’s acceptance of the ceasefire is what in Japanese politics is called a “feigned death” tactic. If one thing is clear, Iran will never abandon its nuclear-development program, especially uranium enrichment. Even if Iran honors the ceasefire, it will not give up its nuclear ambitions for one simple reason: Its ultimate objective is for the Islamic Republic of Iran to survive. And its leaders know what North Korea’s Kim Jong Un knows but Iraq’s Saddam Hussein didn’t: A nuclear arsenal means survival.

If the ceasefire continues, Iran will use every political, economic and diplomatic means at its disposal to save its nuclear program. Unfortunately, just like the “ceasefire agreement” in Gaza between Israel and Hamas that was established just before the second Trump administration took office, it is likely only a matter of time before the ceasefire is violated for one reason or another.

For Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who is unpopular for his judicial reforms, facing allegations of corruption and the political responsibility for failing to prevent the October 2023 Hamas-led attack that killed more than 1,200 Israelis — the ultimate goal is regime change in Iran. Especially if Iran refuses to completely abandon its nuclear development program, Israel will not only seek to thoroughly destroy Iran’s military capabilities but may eventually be tempted to assassinate the Islamic Republic’s political and religious leaders.

In foreign affairs, it’s crucial to understand the difference between capability and will. Even if Israel were to completely destroy Iran’s nuclear “capability” through military force, it cannot destroy Iran’s “will” to pursue nuclear development. With the will to do so, the capability will eventually be restored. Especially given the significant resources Iran has invested in its nuclear program, it is unthinkable that Iran would abandon its will, even if its capabilities were destroyed.

Patience is also crucial. In my 27 years as a diplomat, particularly in the Middle East, I have learned that negotiations take time. In particular, Iranians are tough negotiators and negotiations naturally drag on. Sadly, Trump is not known for his patience. Yet his haste — setting a maximum two-week deadline for Iran to “unconditionally surrender” and then launching a military attack less than a week later — must have come as a shock to the seasoned Iranian negotiators.

Finally, whatever endgame Trump or Netanyahu imagine, a political solution is necessary. To effectively let Iran abandon its nuclear development, a new “nuclear agreement” is required. Given that the first Trump administration walked away in 2018 from the previous “nuclear agreement,” the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Tehran will likely refuse any further obligations under a new agreement.

In other words, unless Iran is bound by international law, it will most likely continue its nuclear development. If that is the case, the conflict between Iran and Israel will continue indefinitely. Meanwhile, Trump will likely become even more “Washingtonized” and further resemble his neocon predecessors, spurning multilateral cooperation and operating unilaterally.

Kuni Miyake, a former career diplomat, is president of the Foreign Policy Institute.