info@businessghana.com
US President Donald Trump appears increasingly interested in finding an off-ramp with Iran, or what he calls "winding down" the war. But his exit strategy is unclear - and Trump's mixed messaging suggests he's still undecided about what would work best: ramping up the conflict to try to end it as quickly as possible, or pushing for a negotiated settlement with Tehran.
On Tuesday, Trump signalled the US may pursue both strategies at once. In a matter of hours, the Pentagon ordered ground troops to the region, and US negotiators sent the Iranian regime a new 15-point peace plan. By Wednesday, the White House was urging Iran to accept the deal while threatening to hit the country harder than ever if it didn't, stoking further confusion about Trump's intentions.
As the war escalates, there's growing concern inside the administration that Trump doesn't have a concrete plan for what comes next, according to former US officials and outside allies close to the White House, some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity.
"They're very uneasy because it's clear that Trump hasn't thought through all of this," said a former senior administration official who served under Trump in his first term in office, and who asked not to be named.
On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said: "President Trump does not bluff, and he is prepared to unleash hell." She added: "Iran should not miscalculate again."
Iran responded by rejecting the peace proposal, sparking questions about whether the two countries were actually engaged in serious diplomatic talks. The head-spinning developments typified Trump's approach to a war that has engulfed the Middle East, roiled the global economy, and driven a wedge between different factions of the Republican Party.
White House officials insist the US is dictating the course of events in Iran. But Iran's rejection of the peace plan underscored the reality that Trump can't fully control the direction of the conflict.
Beyond Trump's broader war aims, it's an open question how the US can secure the Strait of Hormuz, through which flows approximately 20 percent of global oil and gas exports. More than three weeks into the war, the US still has no answer for stopping Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the waterway that have sent prices soaring - and so far Trump's calls for Nato allies and others to help have gone unheeded.
"The problem for the president is the Strait of Hormuz. If he leaves it in Iranian hands, it's going to be hard for him to claim victory," said Stephen Hadley, who served as the national security adviser to President George W. Bush. Trump's failure to "consult with other countries is one of the reasons why the administration is having so much trouble getting allies on board to help," he added.
The uncertainty in Washington surrounding the next phase of the war was heightened on Wednesday as new details about the administration's proposed peace plan came into view.
House Speaker Mike Johnson echoed the White House's confidence when he told reporters on Capitol Hill he thinks the US is "wrapping up" the military operation. "And I think it'll be done in short order."
Some of his Republicans colleagues, however, started publicly sounding the alarm over news that Trump had ordered the deployment of more than 1,000 paratroopers to Iran. Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina criticised the troop deployment after defence officials held a closed-door briefing.
"Just walked out of a House Armed Services briefing on Iran. Let me repeat: I will not support troops on the ground in Iran, even more so after this briefing," Mace wrote in a post on X.
The rare rebuke from a Republican lawmaker highlighted the divide between anti-interventionist MAGA supporters and hawks in the party who back the war effort. Later on Wednesday, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told reporters that the Pentagon wasn't giving lawmakers enough details on the war, CBS News reported.
The subdued reaction to the US peace proposal among Republicans in Congress further underscored the anxiety that many in the party feel over the war heading into a challenging midterm election cycle.
The peace plan reportedly included demands for Iran to abandon its nuclear programme, limit its ballistic missiles and allow the Strait of Hormuz to reopen, among other conditions. It seemed to resemble the peace proposals that US negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner - who are leading the efforts with Iran - have used in peace talks in Gaza and Ukraine. Those plans also included multi-point proposals that were later changed as negotiations evolved.
The plan was leaked after Trump last week threatened to escalate the war in 48 hours if Iran did not agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Trump changed course on Monday, saying he decided to suspend the new attack for five days because Iran and the US were making "major progress" in reaching a deal to end the war.
But even before Iran responded, Middle East experts warned that the maximalist demands would be viewed as nonstarters by the regime in Tehran. The regime is said to be wary of US efforts to negotiate after the administration suspended talks over Iran's nuclear programme last month before launching the war days later.
When the Iranian response arrived, it made clear Tehran believes it has as much if not more control over the direction of the war than the US, despite Trump's insistence that the US has already won.
An Iranian official quoted anonymously on state TV dismissing the plan said Tehran had its own demands for a ceasefire deal. "Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its own conditions are met," the official said.
Speaking on state TV on Wednesday, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said there were no negotiations taking place between the two countries. Araghchi also said Iran did not plan to open the Strait of Hormuz to Western ships allied with the US.
"There is no reason to allow the ships of our enemies and their allies to pass," he said.
The White House may be betting that sending ground troops to Iran could pressure the regime to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and eventually lead it to surrender altogether. But it's unclear how a limited troop deployment by elements of the 82nd Airborne Division will impact the strait or change the broader course of the conflict.
Military experts said the force would likely focus on helping create the conditions to reopen the critical waterway. One potential scenario involves the US seizing control of Kharg Island, a small island in the Persian Gulf that serves as the main hub for Iranian oil exports.
"Sending ground troops would give the US major leverage and give us better control over" the Strait of Hormuz, said Miad Maleki, a former Treasury Department official who helped oversee the implementation of US sanctions on Iran's oil sector. But "it'll pose an increased threat to our forces, so that's a risk we'd be taking."
Escalating the war by sending in ground troops is further proof that the administration "has no articulated strategy" for the war, said Jason Campbell, a former US defence official during the Obama administration and Trump's first term in office.
"What we're seeing here is not the result of a long thought-out plan with clear objectives," he said. "It resembles more of a pick-up game of which units are available to me now?"
