The Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA) argues that for Trump, the Iran issue is not merely a diplomatic matter, but a primary arena for defining American influence in the Middle East.
Since his first term, Trump has placed Iran at the heart of his Middle East policy, beginning with the 2015 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, followed by the reinstatement of comprehensive sanctions, reductions in Iranian oil revenues, and now direct military confrontation—all aimed at forcing Iran to accept US conditions.
The US now seeks far more than simply limiting Iran's nuclear program. The Trump administration has threatened to destroy Iran's missile capabilities, weaken its naval strength, and cut off Iran's support for regional organizations. This raises the question: Does the US want to change Iran's behavior, or its political structure?
If the target is merely the nuclear issue, why has the scope of attacks expanded to include Iran's missiles, navy, regional power, and military facilities? If the goal is to change Iran's behavior, why has the pressure escalated from sanctions to threats of full-scale war?
This contradictory question illustrates that the "Iranian threat" in the eyes of the US extends far beyond the nuclear issue. In recent years, Israel has successfully made the "Iranian threat" a significant part of US policy. Under this rhetoric, containing Iran's nuclear capabilities is not enough; its missile capabilities, regional influence, and even its political structure are also considered part of the problem.
The question is, what is Trump's ultimate goal? How will he define victory? Is the ultimate goal to halt uranium enrichment activities? To dismantle its missile capabilities? To have Iran withdraw from the region? Or to change its political system? If the answer is all of the above, then the Iran issue will extend far beyond the nuclear agreement, becoming a key factor in altering the balance of power in the Middle East.
The most dangerous scenario is that if the Trump administration believes it must "end" the Iran issue before the end of his presidency, then Trump may prefer a "scorched earth" policy to attempting a limited agreement: attacks on military and security centers, critical infrastructure, and remaining power centers could be part of a gradual weakening of the Iranian government's power. By severely crippling Iran's military capabilities and infrastructure, the goal is to remove the Iran issue from the next US president's table.
