After Israel’s initial attacks on Iranian nuclear and missile sites achieved some success, a chorus of public commentators, Congressional leaders, and current and former political and military officials from Israel and the United States have called on Trump to join the fight and “finish the job.” Some argue that only American military participation can finally eliminate Iran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon. Others are openly advocating regime change.
Trump should resist pressure to involve the U.S. in what is likely to be a long and costly war and ignore those who tell him that the latest Middle East crisis can be resolved with “just a few airstrikes.” Attempts to physically destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities using airpower are almost certain to fail without a supporting ground force component. At the very least, ground raids would be needed to verify that enrichment capabilities were fully disabled and stockpiles of highly enriched uranium rendered inaccessible or unusable. U.S. military action would also probably result in retaliation against American troops in the region, which will require additional response from U.S. forces, creating a slippery slope to a protracted war.
Meanwhile, the track record of attempted regime-change in the Middle East speaks for itself. The successful installation of a new government in Tehran would likely require indefinite security support from U.S. military personnel as a new regime seeks to consolidate domestic control. A failed state, on the other hand, would result in ethnic and religious strife in a country of 90 million (roughly three times the size of Iraq, the site of the last U.S. nation-building failure), with repercussions ramifying across the entire region.
Read the full article on The American Conservative.
After Israel’s initial attacks on Iranian nuclear and missile sites achieved some success, a chorus of public commentators, Congressional leaders, and current and former political and military officials from Israel and the United States have called on Trump to join the fight and “finish the job.” Some argue that only American military participation can finally eliminate Iran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon. Others are openly advocating regime change.
Trump should resist pressure to involve the U.S. in what is likely to be a long and costly war and ignore those who tell him that the latest Middle East crisis can be resolved with “just a few airstrikes.” Attempts to physically destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities using airpower are almost certain to fail without a supporting ground force component. At the very least, ground raids would be needed to verify that enrichment capabilities were fully disabled and stockpiles of highly enriched uranium rendered inaccessible or unusable. U.S. military action would also probably result in retaliation against American troops in the region, which will require additional response from U.S. forces, creating a slippery slope to a protracted war.
Meanwhile, the track record of attempted regime-change in the Middle East speaks for itself. The successful installation of a new government in Tehran would likely require indefinite security support from U.S. military personnel as a new regime seeks to consolidate domestic control. A failed state, on the other hand, would result in ethnic and religious strife in a country of 90 million (roughly three times the size of Iraq, the site of the last U.S. nation-building failure), with repercussions ramifying across the entire region.
Read the full article on The American Conservative.
