US President Donald Trump’s most ambitious and aggressive statement to date on the Iran protests crisis is likely a new stage in the conflict.
Until now, Trump had made a variety of statements threatening to intervene if the Iranian regime started killing protesters, but had qualified those statements with other statements suggesting he might only intervene very late in the game, if it looked like he could help push the protesters over the top of the regime, and without taking the risk of intervening without a guaranteed “win.”
In some ways, it seemed like Trump was experimenting with how much he could impact the world after abducting Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, just by using the shock value of that action but without necessarily taking any concrete further action on other fronts.
But Trump’s latest statement indicates a greater and more sustained commitment.
Now, if he does not intervene in some substantial way, he and the US will lose face and some of their deterrent posture in other parts of the world whenever another conflict arises.
So what might he do?
First of all, the US is still the world’s greatest superpower and, using either airpower, naval long-range strikes, a ground invasion, or all of the above, it has the capability to take down the current regime.
That does not mean it could ensure a friendly new leadership, as the US found out in Iraq and Afghanistan, but doing the toppling itself is doable.
Still, presuming that Trump has not completely changed character and is not ready for a long war that could lead to many Americans dying and expending significant funds on the military campaign, it would be more likely that he will take a more measured approach in using American power.
One example could be targeted strikes against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and especially its Basij branch, which is at the center of oppressing protesters.
This could take the shape of either attacking their headquarters, supplies, and weapons, or attacking them on the streets when they come out to try to kill, arrest, and eliminate protesters from the streets.
In contrast, the Iranian military is often less involved, and Trump could carefully avoid attacking the military, particularly figures who might serve as future allies to help defeat the regime, along with the protesters.
Regarding the airstrikes option, it is notable that CENTCOM made a big announcement about expanding air and missile defense power at its base in Qatar, striking distance from Iran, and also a base that Iran tried to attack in the past.
In the same sentence and around the same time, Qatar posted an unusual warning that “catastrophe” would result if the Iran conflict expanded into a wider war.
Doha is doubtlessly concerned since after Trump bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities in June, Tehran attacked the US base in Qatar, causing fear and shock in the area, even if there were no deaths.
A spin-off of this would be trying to create free zones or no-fly zones in parts of Iran where the minorities are the majority and hate the regime.
This would leave the regime in control of most of the country, but would start a larger process of poking holes in its veneer of invincibility.
Trump ready to use cyber weapons
Trump has also shown he is more ready to publicly use cyber weapons for a massive attack than past US presidents.
He bragged loudly about having turned off all of the lights in Caracas, a city of more than three million.
The US could launch targeted cyberattacks against the IRGC, the Basij, and senior-level commanders of the regime to break down their ability to coordinate their efforts against protesters.
This could also lead to sabotaging some of their weapons.
In fact, America could do worse and send them false information to send IRGC and Basij personnel into traps or to the wrong locations, so that the protesters could proceed wherever they would actually be campaigning.
In addition, Trump could do more of what he is already doing.
His last message was an individualized threat to every Iranian who is going against protesters that he could face individual retribution for his role later from the US.
The more America engages in such campaigns, the more it may succeed in breaking down the morale of the IRGC and the Basij, either nationwide or at least in portions of the country.
If Iran loses control of even portions of the country, this will impact the broader trends over time.
Trump could also assassinate Ayatollah Ali Khamenei himself to cause Iran a new leadership crisis just at the moment that the regime is at its weakest.
He could also abduct Khamenei or pull some other magic trick out of a hat that harms the regime’s morale and which no one sees coming, as he did versus Maduro.
Whatever he does, he will be weighing the losses of American lives and money based on the expected Iranian response.
But it seems that he no longer has an option not to act without taking a major hit to his own credibility.