Will Trump abandon the war and drag the Gulf into it?

The premise of this article suggests that in its war against Iran, the US is trying to entangle the Gulf states alongside it, only to later abandon them. The question is: Could President Donald Trump walk away from the war with Iran, leave the region and abandon the Gulf countries to face Tehran on their own?

The short answer: Yes.

The longer answer: The possibility exists, but Trump is not currently under the kind of military or public pressure that would force him to consider withdrawing. Even if he were to pull out, it does not necessarily mean the fighting would shift to the Gulf countries, which have so far avoided entering the conflict.

Trump is in a strong position, with recent polling showing significant support. Ninety percent of his “Make America Great Again” base backs the war and that is all he needs. He is keen to maintain that support and personally conducts near-daily press conferences, interviews and briefings aimed at the American public to reinforce his stance and respond to critics.

However, if the conflict drags on and the president feels he has achieved some of his objectives, he may choose to stop and leave. Likewise, if it becomes clear that achieving those goals will come at too high a cost to his administration, it would not be surprising for him to pack up and leave.

Trump appears strong and composed despite Iran’s resilience and its continued missile and drone attacks on Gulf countries, as well as the oil shock caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has prevented the passage of about 20 million barrels per day.

He is aware of these losses. When asked, he said toppling Iran’s regime is more important than the price of oil, effectively gambling with his popularity and his party’s prospects as the US economy feels the impact of soaring prices. So far, Trump appears ready to continue the war until victory, with his forces carrying out daily strikes on vital regime targets.

Historically, the US has withdrawn when the human or material cost outweighs the expected gains. It pulled out of conflicts such as Vietnam, Lebanon and Afghanistan. In others, it completed its mission and prevailed, as in the liberation of Kuwait and the defeat of Serbian forces in the Bosnia war.

Earlier, it emerged victorious in the Second World War and held firm throughout the Cold War until the Soviet Union collapsed. And while it withdrew from Afghanistan and handed Kabul to the Taliban, its forces still defend Seoul and have been stationed there for more than 70 years in the face of North Korea. Every conflict has its own calculations.

Politics is ultimately about weighing up interests, gains and losses. Trump’s war against Iran is more consequential than George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and the toppling of Saddam Hussein. This war could settle a long-standing conflict between the two countries, making the likelihood of Trump withdrawing less probable, as he is seeking a victory that will secure his place in history.

Iran sees itself as being in a war for survival and its strategy is effectively suicidal. Its only bet is to prolong the conflict.

Abdulrahman Al-Rashed

Not all war objectives may be achieved and the conflict could stretch on for months in the worst-case scenario. In that case, US fleets might leave the region while the regime in Tehran remains in power.

After 18 days of war, Washington had already achieved a significant part of one of its goals: weakening Iran’s military capabilities.

A key question can also be directed at Iran’s leadership: Will its losses force it to abandon its aggressive regional policies and raise the white flag?

Iran sees itself as being in a war for survival and its strategy is effectively suicidal. Its only bet is to prolong the conflict, hoping for external support, while recognizing that surrender at this stage could lead to the regime’s collapse from within.

What, then, would be the position of the Gulf states under a withdrawal scenario?

Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries have refrained from entering the war because they were not parties to the conflict from the outset. They did not participate in the recent rounds of negotiations and were not consulted on the previous nuclear deal. In addition, Riyadh had already signed the Beijing Agreement, which reduced tensions between the two sides, even though Tehran has violated it with its recent attacks on Saudi territory.

The Gulf states are not eager to engage in wars unless absolutely necessary, even under pressure, such as the calls from Sen. Lindsey Graham urging them to join the fight.

As for Iran, despite launching thousands of missiles and drones at the Gulf countries, it has maintained a deliberately ambiguous diplomatic tone through its president and foreign minister, claiming it is targeting what it considers American facilities. This is false, as airports, civilian neighborhoods and economic infrastructure have all been struck. Still, Tehran appears to be laying the groundwork for a recalibration of relations in the postwar phase.

• Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a Saudi journalist and intellectual. He is the former general manager of Al-Arabiya news channel and former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, where this article was originally published. X: @aalrashed