Now Trump is urged to go “all in” on crushing Iran

It is now clear Mr Trump had advance warning. His foreign-policy team, torn between hawks and isolationists, gathered at Camp David on June 8th to discuss the looming Iran crisis. Mr Trump spoke to Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, on June 9th and 12th as well as on June 13th after the attacks. America’s embassy in Iraq was partially evacuated on June 11th. The Israeli preparations were taking place alongside American diplomacy, with the next round of Iran talks led by White House envoy Steve Witkoff, due on June 15th in Oman. Those talks had lost momentum. But Israel, hostile to an Iran deal, was still probably keen to act before any potential agreement. The success of the initial attacks led Mr Trump to endorse them fully retrospectively. “I think it’s been excellent. We gave them a chance and they didn’t take it," he told one interviewer. “I always knew the date," he boasted to another.

More on the war between Israel and Iran:

America’s military is already involved. Its air defence systems have helped shield Israel and on June 13th both ground-based batteries and a US Navy destroyer shot down Iranian projectiles. America’s Central Command (CENTCOM) is likely to be involved in helping Israel track Iranian ballistic missile launches, which can be spotted from American infra-red satellites. Yet in keeping with the picture of initial American ambivalence, the superpower is not set up for a full-scale war. In mid-May it removed one of its two aircraft-carriers in the region. The stealthy B-2 bombers deployed to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean were recently replaced with older B-52 aircraft. Mr Trump clearly holds out hope for diplomacy, posting on social media, “Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire". But the lines of communication with Iran may now be closing. According to reports on June 14th an Iranian official dismissed the US-Iran negotiations as “meaningless".

America may be drawn in further. It is rushing destroyers to the Middle East. The USS Nimitz, an aircraft-carrier in the Pacific, cancelled a visit to Vietnam, suggesting it might head west. America can also supply more real-time intelligence and refuel Israeli jets to give them more “dwell time" over Iran. Israel has thus far conducted limited attacks against Iranian nuclear sites. People familiar with planning for the scenario say that it probably lacks the capacity to destroy Fordow, the deeply buried enrichment plant, through traditional bombing, though it could block tunnel entrances and ventilation shafts. Israel may be calculating that America can be persuaded to join the campaign with its heavy bombers, which carry the 30,000lb bombs capable of burrowing deeper, rather than leave the job half-done.

America could also be pulled in by Iranian retaliation. Iran’s limited ability to strike at Israel may force it to consider other options. It could hit American targets in the region, hoping to spook Mr Trump. It could use its proxies to attack shipping in the Red Sea (as the Houthis have been doing), or it could close the Strait of Hormuz and attack energy facilities in the Gulf (raising oil prices). And if the Iranian regime is brought down by Israel’s efforts—an ambition that Mr Netanyahu raised explicitly on June 13th, saying that the strikes were “clearing the path" for its overthrow— the president may not be able to escape the resulting chaos, which could easily threaten America’s interests or its allies in the region.

Only a month ago when in Saudi Arabia Mr Trump articulated a different vision, of a Middle East “golden age" that was “defined by commerce, not chaos". He decried Western intervention in the region and said that henceforth American policy would be based on trade and investment. In one interpretation, joining Israel’s attack could create a transformative moment for the Middle East, hastening that goal by severely weakening or ending a decaying Iranian regime that has caused mayhem beyond its borders for decades. Yet as other American presidents have found, the region has a way of shattering utopian ideas.

At home Republicans are broadly supportive of Israel and American assistance for it. “Israel IS right—and has a right—to defend itself!" posted Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House, on June 13th. Yet the longer the campaign goes on the more a backlash may build among MAGA-movement members hostile to foreign interventions. Some are already sharing an old video clip of Mr Trump denouncing Barack Obama’s Iran policy: “Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate." The dilemma for the ever-ambivalent Mr Trump is acute: if he chooses to go “all in" in helping Israel destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, he could shorten the conflict. Yet by doing so he could also escalate it and expose America to another forever war.