- Статьи
- World
- A word is not a deed: the United States will continue strikes on Iran, contrary to statements about the imminent peace
A word is not a deed: the United States will continue strikes on Iran, contrary to statements about the imminent peace
The United States is moving towards de-escalation of the conflict with Iran at the level of rhetoric. Donald Trump has already allowed the operation to end "ahead of schedule," calling it "almost completed." A telephone conversation between Trump and Vladimir Putin, during which the Russian leader expressed his thoughts on the transition to a political and diplomatic format, could play a role in changing Washington's tone. At the same time, experts urge not to overestimate the statements of the White House: the real actions of the United States indicate the continuation of the military scenario.
Trump hinted at the end of the conflict with Iran
Despite Washington's initial statements about the long duration of the operation against Iran, the conflict may end much faster than expected. The head of the White House, Donald Trump, publicly said that the military operations were "almost over" and were "significantly ahead of schedule," although at the beginning of the month the Pentagon estimated the duration of the campaign at four to six weeks. The American leader also allowed the possibility of negotiations with Iran, according to media reports.
Global markets reacted instantly to these signals: the price of oil sharply adjusted down to $83 per barrel, although it had previously exceeded the $110 mark.
Trump's telephone conversation with Putin on March 9 also played an important role. The head of the White House noted Moscow's readiness to assist in resolving the situation in the Iranian direction. The Kremlin confirmed that Putin had expressed a number of specific considerations aimed at moving from military operations to a political and diplomatic format. Moscow's mediation role looks like a logical continuation of its strategy in the region.
— The contacts of the Russian side with the current authorities in Tehran show that the Kremlin has quite close and good relations with the Iranians. On the other hand, Moscow is in contact and enjoys special attention from Middle Eastern countries. In addition, contacts remain with Israel, in particular with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu," Murad Sadigzade, president of the Center for Middle East Studies, told Izvestia.
On March 10, Putin held telephone talks with Iranian President Maqsoud Peseshkian, and the Russian leader confirmed his principled position in favor of de-escalating the conflict as soon as possible. And Moscow has been making efforts to do this from the very beginning. The Kremlin has already held active consultations with key players in the Persian Gulf, including Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
As noted in the Russian Foreign Ministry, Moscow is ready to contribute to de-escalation with due regard for the security interests of Tehran and its neighbors in the region. Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharib-Abadi said that Russia, China and several other countries had approached Tehran with a proposal to cease fire and negotiate a truce. The conflict can be stopped, but it is important to rule out repeated aggression against Tehran. According to him, there is no point in stopping the fighting if a new attack on the country follows in six months.
Escalation in the war zone
Despite the public rhetoric, the reality "on earth" is still harsh. On the contrary, the United States and Israel de facto escalated their campaign against Iran, expanding attacks on energy infrastructure, including fuel storage facilities and oil sector facilities. Most likely, in the near future the conflict will flare up rather than subside, says orientalist Alexander Kargin.
— I would not focus too much on Trump's words. If we are talking about actions, then the Americans are clearly only increasing their military efforts: they are transferring new bombers and additional weapons there, and they are also supplying additional weapons to Israel," he said.
The human rights organization Human Rights Watch (recognized as undesirable in Russia) accused the Jewish state of using weapons with white phosphorus in attacks on Lebanon. These actions only indicate an escalation of the conflict in the region. European allies are trying to ignore this, although during the Syrian conflict, Damascus and the government of Bashar al-Assad were subjected to sanctions and harsh criticism, including for the use of such weapons.
According to Dmitry Yezhov, an associate professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Trump is trying to "keep a good face on a bad game" because the original US plan failed.
— Apparently, Trump and his administration assumed that the removal of Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei would lead to internal unrest, which could be used to change power. But this did not happen: the Iranian regime proved to be stable," Yezhov noted.
At the tactical level, the White House still has one goal — the destruction of installations from which missiles are launched, as well as reducing the activity of Iranian drones, Kargin stressed. According to him, this is what should deprive Tehran of the opportunity to effectively respond to strikes and complicate its actions in the Strait of Hormuz.
At the same time, if earlier contradictory signals were heard from Tehran about this artery, now the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps explicitly declares that it will not allow oil to be exported from the region until the US and Israeli strikes stop.
The United States was skeptical about the appointment and appointment of Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the deceased Ali Khamenei, as the new supreme leader of Iran. Such a step indicates the desire of the system to preserve continuity and gives the Iranian government an almost dynastic character, which, according to analysts, signals Washington's readiness to resist.
Losses from the conflict with Iran
Nevertheless, economic expediency is becoming a fairly weighty argument for the White House. The aggravation of the situation in the Strait of Hormuz and the threat of cutting off oil traffic create an extremely worrying background for the global economy, and the United States, as part of this economy, is bearing costs.
Rising global energy prices and disruptions in food supply chains are already hitting Trump's key election agenda — fighting inflation and protecting the American consumer.
"If the conflict in Iran becomes prolonged, it will certainly support chronically high energy prices, provoking not only inflation in countries dependent on oil and gas imports, but also consolidating inflationary expectations there and reducing consumer confidence," the head of the Department of World Economy and International Economics told Izvestia. relations of the State University of Management Evgeny Smirnov.
Trump now needs to end the acute phase of the conflict, otherwise the situation will start to spiral out of control, Sadigzade believes. Polarization is increasing within the United States, the allies are not actively supporting, and the Gulf countries are suffering greatly from attacks. In addition, there are dead American soldiers — we are talking about at least seven military personnel.
A group of Democratic senators has already initiated hearings on bypassing Congress at the start of Operation Epic Fury, demanding explanations from Pentagon Chief Pete Hegseth and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In addition, according to media reports, fears of political costs are forcing even presidential advisers to look for a safe way out of the conflict. The situation is complicated by the fact that there was no consensus within the Trump team: Vice President Jay D. Vance was initially skeptical about the idea of a large-scale attack on Iran, which the head of the White House himself unexpectedly admitted.
The US president is also facing political losses: part of the former MAGA electorate and a number of prominent figures from the right-wing camp have distanced themselves from him, Kargin stressed. However, according to him, Trump partially compensated for this by supporting the more traditional Republican wing. However, the general background remains unfavorable for him, since a significant part of American society does not support the current line on Iran, and the president's rating is declining.
— The main economic cost for Trump is that oil will become more expensive inside America, at gas stations. This means that prices will start to rise in the United States," the expert noted.
It is also worth considering the price that the United States is literally paying for the conflict in the Middle East. According to calculations by Izvestia, based on CENTCOM's open data, direct military spending by the United States in the first 10 days of the operation could amount to up to $8.9 billion. A key pillar in the calculations was the publication of the CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies) estimate, according to which the first 100 hours of the campaign could have cost about $3.7 billion.
The largest expense item is Patriot and THAAD interceptors to repel Iranian missile strikes and drone attacks. According to relevant experts, American air defense systems face serious difficulties when trying to withstand massive attacks by swarms of drones. Even though the intensity of the Iranian launches had decreased by 90% by mid-March, the daily cost of maintaining and protecting the deployed group remains enormous. This makes the continuation of the campaign a financially problematic project for the US budget.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
