Is it possible at this juncture of the Iran war to extrapolate out the domestic political consequences for the United States, particularly for President Donald Trump?
Let’s look at two possibilities.
The first is a muddled defeat for the US and Israel, with Iran keeping its Revolutionary Islamic regime structure in place with remaining capability to threaten its neighbours and the world’s energy markets.
Military defeats are not always an albatross for the responsible US president. The failed war in Vietnam had complex consequences for US politics. It surely led to an early end of Lyndon Johnson’s presidency but did not at all impair Richard Nixon’s. Nixon won a landslide victory in 1972 despite managing a losing and unpopular war.
In 2004, George W Bush won re-election despite a war of choice in Iraq that went well initially but was showing signs of bogging down. Four years later, Barack Obama defeated John McCain, who had been an enthusiastic supporter of the Iraq war. Obama, however, was a once-in-a-generation political talent who would have won regardless of the war.
Obama’s own war of choice in Libya in 2011 and the consequent murder of the US ambassador there and three members of his security detail produced no discernible political damage. Obama easily won reelection over Mitt Romney the next year.
Trump cannot run for re-election, but could a muddled defeat in Iran bring consequences for the Republican Party in November’s congressional election? Before the war started, Republicans were expected to lose their razor-thin majority in the House of Representatives while keeping a majority in the Senate. Achieving results any worse than that for Republicans would require some effort by Democrats.
The most important issue in any US election is the economy. The war is already driving gasoline prices higher, and if Democrats can tie muddled defeat in Iran directly to a bad domestic economy – inflation, depressed economic growth and a general sense of pessimism – then Republicans could lose the Senate as well. In fact, Democrats are already trying to make this direct linkage.
For Trump, total Democratic control of Congress would turn his final two years in office into a miserable and daily battle over subpoenas, investigations, oversight and possible impeachment proceedings.
Our second possible outcome is a limited US victory. This would result in: a more pliant government in Tehran that made verifiable commitments to ending its nuclear weapons program; implementation of restrictions on missile technology; and ending support for terrorist proxy organisations in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza. A limited US victory would also require secure passage of energy resources out of the region.
Such an outcome would transform the Middle East, leading to a real chance at stability and long-term economic growth across all sectarian divides in the world’s most volatile region. It would also bolster the defence of Western liberal democracies generally by pulling out a major pillar of the China-Russia-Iran de facto global alliance. Combined with changes in Venezuela and possibly Cuba, a defanged Iran would be a boon for freedom, individual liberties and accountable democratic government around the world.
These significant achievements would most directly affect Trump’s historical legacy. It would be impossible, even for his most ardent critics, to plausibly deny he had made the world a significantly better place while in office. Not many US presidents can make such a claim.
The bet here is that [Trump] would happily trade some domestic political turmoil for a win in Iran and a vastly more positive position for himself in US and world history.
Politically, however, these national-security achievements might offer far less benefit for Trump. A military victory does not automatically confer electoral success. Without a major economic up-tick, the Republican Party may still suffer at the polls this November. In 1992, Bill Clinton defeated incumbent president George H W Bush after Bush dramatically and convincingly won a war in Iraq. Clinton did so with the mantra "it’s the economy, stupid."
Further, Trump’s willingness to start a war in the Middle East has already energised the isolationist right in ways that could affect the Republican presidential primary contest in 2028.
Trump will be 80 this spring and has survived a nearly successful assassination attempt. His focus today is likely more on his legacy than the results of the next two US elections. The bet here is that he would happily trade some domestic political turmoil for a win in Iran and a vastly more positive position for himself in US and world history.