As a struggle between Iran and Israel GrowsThe administration of the United States President Donald Trump is giving a mixed signal on whether there is still a diplomatic settlement on Iran’s nuclear program.
Publicly, it has endorsed a negotiation agreement and plans to meet again this week by the US and Iranian negotiations. As a Thursday, recently, Trump Insisted Truth Social Post: “We are committed to a diplomatic resolution.”
But after 14 hours Israel started attacks on Iran, Trump Posted He had given the 60-day deadline to reach Iran to the contract-and the deadline was over. Sunday, was Trump Insisting “Israel and Iran should agree” and they will do it with his help.
On Monday, Trump agreed to leave a group of seven summit in Canada, his warning was more ominous: he Posted Iran may not have a nuclear weapon and “everyone should immediately get out of Tehran!” US President later rejected the guess that he returned to Washington, DC early to talk to war, Noting It was for something “much larger than”.
Trump’s suspicious statements have led to discussion in the Israeli-Iran conflict in analysts about the actual limit of the United States and the actual limit of intentions.
Debate over Trump’s eyes and in affidavit
Trump has rejected any US involvement in the strike. “The United States had nothing to do with the attack on Iran tonight.” He wrote Sunday.
Kelisi Devnport, director of the US-based weapons control association, said Trump’s message was clear. “I think that when the diplomacy is over, President Trump has become clear about the use of military forces against Iran. And while reporting it has been suggested that he (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) pushed back against Netanyahu.”
“Israel was worried that the diplomacy was a success, which means” this agreement will be “and” they do not match his interests and objectives related to Iran “.
Richard Putane, a professor of the School of International and Public Affairs of Colombia University, agreed that Trump had a continuous march towards Israel’s deal with a contract.
Putin, who served as Director of Iran at the US National Security Council under the leadership of the then President Barack Obama, “I think this is the problem with this consistency.”
But Ali Ansari, a professor of Iranian history at St Andrews University in Scotland, did not agree.
“The United States was aware.… Although they were surprised at a certain time, they may have been aware, so it is worthwhile with one eyes,” he told Al Jazir.
He said, “At the same time, the US opinion is that Israel should take the initiative and really do it on its own,” he said.
Can Trump absorb the conflict?
It is believed that Israel has destroyed the upper part of the uranium prosperity facility of Iran in Natanzan. This facility enriches uranium 60 per cent purity – over 3.67 The percentage is required Less than 90 percent purity required for nuclear energy but for nuclear bombs. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the decline in electricity in Natanz as a result of the Israeli strike can also be damaged in the underground conservation department in Natanz.
But in the IAEA evaluation, Israel did not damage the other uranium prosperity project in Iran in Fordo, which is buried inside the mountain and enriches uranium to 60 percent purity.
“Israel may need US support,” Davanport said, “If some of these underground facilities are to be taken,” Davanport pointed out to the largest traditional bomb in the United States.
“With that weapon, you can damage or destroy some of these facilities,” said Devnport, “Davanport said Washington” did not transfer the bomb to Israel “.
Barbara Slavin, a prestigious colleague at the Stimson Center, US-based Think Tank El Jazira told me Israel needs American weapons in order to destroy the Iran’s nuclear program.
The nephew, for one, for one, did not diminish the chances of doing it.
“We know (Trump) loves the winners. The extent he knows the Israeli as a winner right now, so he is keeping his position and I think we have eyes (Israel),” he said.
On Friday, the United States flew a large number of midiire-refueling aircraft to the Middle East and ordered the aircraft carrier to go there to the USS Nimitz. On Tuesday, they announced the sending of more warships in the region.
Ansari acknowledges that the initial success of the Israeli attacks can mean that “Trump is tempted to join just some glory,” but he feels that Iran can be forced to stand down.
Ansari said, “The United States can join the Ford’s attack, though I think the original threat of an American attack will bring the Iranian people to the table.” “They can confess to the United States with dignity; they are not possible for Israel, though they have no choice.”
Beware of American participation, the US Senate member Tim Caying Apply a resolution of war powers on Monday, for which the US Congress must authorize any military action against Iran.
“If the war is not very important to defend the United States, it is not our national security to go to war with Iran,” said Cain.
Diplomacy vs Force
Obama did not believe that the military settlement for the Iran’s nuclear program was attractive or viable, and in 2015, he chose a diplomatic process of a composite plan (JCPOA). The agreement demanded monitoring all Iran’s nuclear activities that uranium prosperity only reached the required level for energy generation.
According to Putin and Devport, Trump indirectly completed the military alternative when he pulled the United States out of JCPO in 2018 at Israel’s statement.
Two years later, Iran said it would enrich uranium. Percent. Percent percent of the purity and 2 percent of it sophisticated to 5 percent purity. In 23, the IAA said that it was enriched by 83.7 percent of the uranium particles in Fordo.
Trump did not give the JCPOA any option during his first presidential tenure, nor did the President Joe Biden do.
“It was a direct contribution to setting up (JCPO) where we are today,” the nephew said. To reduce the nuclear programs, finding military routes as a diplomat person, “contributes to the spreading path”, “because the country says,” If I go this path, I can protect myself. “
Davenport expert in Iran and North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs said that Netanyahu did not solve the problem even by changing the reign of Tehran.
She said, “Government change is not a definite non -proofing strategy.” If this stewardship is reduced, we do not know what will happen next in Iran. If it is a military occupation control, then the possibility of nuclear weapons may be high. But even if it is a more open democratic government, democratic nuclear weapons also choose. “
