The contradictory messages coming from US President Donald Trump and the Pentagon have left allies, lawmakers, and markets wondering how and when the conflict with Iran will end, writes Axios. Each week of war deepens the economic problems for both the US and the rest of the world, while also increasing the political risks for the Republican Party ahead of the midterm elections.
On March 9, Trump told Republicans that the US “has already won the war, but not enough”. This statement came a few hours after the president had stated in an interview for CBS News that the operation against Iran “is practically over”. Meanwhile, the US Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, announced the continuation of intense attacks.
Five scenarios for ending the conflict
1. Armistice and nuclear agreement negotiations
The destruction of the Iranian nuclear program was one of the main targets declared by Trump at the beginning of the “Epic Fury” operation. The US and Iran conducted three rounds of indirect negotiations in Geneva, a few days before the launch of the American attack, but Trump’s envoys considered that Tehran “is not treating the agreement seriously”.
Trump told Fox News that resuming negotiations is possible, although he is disappointed with the appointment of Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as supreme leader. A day before the operation, mediators from Oman stated that Iran had agreed not to accumulate enriched uranium. The impact of the war on future negotiations remains uncertain.
2. “The Venezuela Model”
Trump referred to Venezuela, where the US captured President Nicolas Maduro and established relations with Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, who took temporary leadership, as a model for Iran.
He argued that Iran “made a big mistake” by appointing Mojtaba Khamenei and suggested that the new supreme leader might not last long.
Experts, however, warn that Iran cannot be compared to Venezuela. The Islamic regime has survived 47 years of sanctions, wars, and internal revolts, consolidating its power through military, religious, and political structures.
For Iranian protesters who risked their lives demanding regime change, a leader supported by the US could be perceived as a betrayal, not as a “liberation”.
Read the full article HERE
