Donald Trump has long positioned himself as a tough leader, but when it comes to Iran, his record reveals a consistent eagerness for military confrontation. During his first term, the only thing that arguably prevented a full-scale war was the presence of advisors in his cabinet who resisted his more aggressive impulses. Now, surrounded by more compliant hawks, Trump seems poised to escalate tensions as soon as he gives the order.
In April 2017, Trump ordered a missile strike on Syria's Shayrat Airbase following a chemical weapons attack attributed to the Assad regime. This marked the first direct U.S. military action against Syria in its civil war and was widely seen as a sharp escalation. There was no diplomacy, no negotiating table—it was a unilateral military move, overriding the caution urged by some within his administration (Wikipedia).
In 2018, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Iran Nuclear Deal, despite intelligence reports indicating the deal was working and that Iran was complying with inspections. Iran was not developing nuclear weapons, according to these assessments. Instead, Trump claimed that Israeli intelligence—which has long used the "weeks away" narrative for Iran’s nuclear capability—provided information suggesting Iran was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon (Politifact, Washington Post).
The escalation continued in January 2020, when Trump authorized a drone strike that killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad. This bold move brought U.S.-Iran tensions to a dangerous high, edging the region closer to conflict. The strike was justified under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, a legal rationale some critics say was stretched beyond its original purpose (Wikipedia).
Today, we seem to be witnessing a military déjà vu. Once again, Israel is providing intelligence that no other source seems privy to. Even Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s own former Director of National Intelligence, has publicly stated that Iran is not actively developing nuclear weapons. Trump’s dismissive response? “I don’t care what she says.” This is unsurprising: Trump has never been one to listen to dissenting voices—only his own word counts (The Guardian).
For Trump, conflict with Iran has become deeply personal. The Iranian regime allegedly planned two known attempts on his life, thwarted by the Biden administration, making negotiations off the table in his mind. With his popularity declining and increased scrutiny on controversial ICE raids, a new war in the Middle East could serve as a convenient distraction—classic authoritarian playbook: rally the country around a common enemy to consolidate power (Washington Post). the country and stay in power. The question now is, will the US fall for it again?