Trump’s fateful choice on Iran - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT商学院

Trump’s fateful choice on Iran

The US president may be dragged into another regime change folly in the Middle East
00:00

{"text":[[{"start":7.89,"text":"Donald Trump has been weighing one of the most fateful choices of his presidency. Without direct US military assistance, Israel’s strikes on Iran may be unable to destroy enough of the Islamic republic’s nuclear programme to prevent it from dashing for a bomb. Yet direct American involvement would risk sucking the US into what Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clearly sees as a quest for regime change in Iran. The consequences could be an escalating conflict that would destabilise the whole region — and beyond."}],[{"start":50.230000000000004,"text":"Trump’s comment on Wednesday that he “may or may not” order a strike left open the possibility that his earlier call for “unconditional surrender” by Tehran and the US military build-up were posturing intended to coerce Iran to submit to strict limits on its nuclear programme. But the dangers from Trump carrying out his threat to join Israel’s military gamble outweigh those of staying on the sidelines."}],[{"start":79.36,"text":"Few beyond Iranian regime hardliners would wish to see the nation achieve a nuclear weapon. Israel has long seen this as an existential threat. It would hand a devastating force to a theocratic regime that has been a malign influence across the Middle East. Netanyahu, who has long threatened to strike Iran, has sought to persuade Trump that the Islamic regime is already marching towards a bomb and much weakened by a year of Israeli attacks on its regional proxies — creating a unique opportunity to destroy its capabilities."}],[{"start":121.1,"text":"But the US president’s recent diplomatic efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear programme, with further talks due last weekend, were cut short without conclusion. Some have suggested these, too, may have been an elaborate bluff by the Trump administration; the recent shift in the president’s tone on Iran suggests he is tempted to associate himself with an Israeli mission that he thinks could succeed. If there is a win to be had, he wants part of it. Yet many would see US involvement in Iran now as joining a war of choice. And as in other areas of policy, the consequences may not have been fully understood in Washington."}],[{"start":164.93,"text":"Many of Trump’s Maga supporters would view it as a betrayal of his promises not to drag America into new conflicts. The president has derided, most recently in a speech in Riyadh, “neocons” and “nation-builders” who “wrecked far more nations than they built”."}],[{"start":185.33,"text":"US intervention would give Tehran a pretext to strike US energy assets and bases across the Middle East, potentially igniting the wider war that has been feared since the horrific Hamas assault on Israel on October 7 2023. This could trigger turmoil on a larger scale than the US-led debacle in Iraq two decades ago. The extent of Israeli strikes on Iran, including on state TV and senior officials, suggests Netanyahu’s aims extend beyond destroying Tehran’s nuclear capabilities to encompass regime change. Whatever limits the US might seek to put on its engagement, the danger of “mission creep” is clear."}],[{"start":236.06,"text":"Previous examples of regime change in the Middle East have miserably failed. And while many Iranians have no love for their leadership, the consequences of attempting to topple it through external force in a proud nation of 90mn people are unknowable."}],[{"start":254.01,"text":"The repercussions might go wider. Though Russia does not want a nuclear-armed Iran, Moscow in April ratified a strategic partnership with Tehran, which has been a significant weapons supplier to Russian forces in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin’s Kremlin has repeatedly used past US regime change efforts in the Middle East and elsewhere as part of its broader justification for Moscow’s 2022 invasion of its neighbour."}],[{"start":285.53999999999996,"text":"President Trump may already be set on a military course. But his best option would still be to use his leverage to secure a ceasefire, and a negotiated settlement to the problem of Iran’s nuclear ambitions — however remote that prospect may now seem."}],[{"start":311.86999999999995,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftmailbox.cn/album/a_1750296293_5438.mp3"}

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×