Foreign Affairs: Any U.S. intervention against Iran would be disastrous for Washington

According to Saed News citing this influential American publication, Donald Trump announced on June 19 (Khordad 29) that within the next two weeks he would decide whether to join the regime’s aggression against Iran or not.

The publication states that if he decides to intervene in this conflict, the U.S. will enter a Middle Eastern war with unclear objectives based on a flawed strategy.

The author of this publication, recalling memories of the Iraq war that began in 2003, wrote: Trump, who claims to have opposed the Iraq war, is now, along with his allies, trying to focus on a possible military strike on the underground Fordow site; a target Israel alone cannot destroy.

The Foreign Affairs analyst pointed out the high risks of such a decision, discussing Iran’s options for retaliation, including targeting U.S. military facilities in the region, and how Iran’s possible choices could lead to a broader and longer war.

According to the Foreign Affairs author, even if a U.S. operation in Iran proceeds in a limited, planned manner without any Tehran retaliation, the decision to intervene in this conflict will make achieving a sustainable solution more difficult instead of ending Iran’s nuclear program.

Diagnosing U.S. Foreign Policy

Foreign Affairs further reviewed the most well-known diagnoses of U.S. foreign policy over the past century and, referring to statements by Washington and Tel Aviv regarding the ongoing conflict with Iran, explained: The first is that both sides believe they can use air power to achieve strategic goals.

The author of the report noted: Since Israel has repeatedly acknowledged it cannot alone destroy the Fordow nuclear facility, and the only way to destroy this underground site is using GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs delivered by B-2 bombers, it is believed Fordow would be destroyed this way. But this is an untested hypothesis. According to the U.S. military, this facility is located so deeply underground that multiple highly precise GBU-57 bombs would be necessary to penetrate it.

For this reason, Foreign Affairs described such a bet on the U.S. Air Force as “horrible” and added: Ignoring the possibility of failure in such a mission is unwise, and Trump should be prepared for that possibility as well. Moreover, failure to destroy Fordow would put Iran in a position to quickly rebuild its nuclear program.

The second diagnosis, from the author’s point of view, is misplaced confidence regarding the destruction of the Islamic Republic. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, who has long welcomed such a goal, has repeatedly claimed to seek the liberation of the Iranian people considering this possibility. However, after 46 years of the Islamic Republic of Iran, government institutions are well established, and such a hypothesis is incorrect.

The publication concluded by describing success in destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities as “illusory,” writing: Even in the best-case scenario where all centrifuges and other equipment and infrastructure related to the nuclear program are destroyed, Iranian scientists have the knowledge to rebuild. Moreover, since most of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpiles would likely survive such a conflict, Tehran would not need to restart its program from scratch.